I'd wonder how well you deal with things if you had 0 practical experience, and encountered a new culture every week, while flying a undergunned ship.

I am pretty sure you wouldn do the least better.

You would be surprised how many officers and senior non-commissioned officers in the real military are exactly like that. I'm not kidding.

But in this case I blame the writing. They hired crappy writers for most of the show's run, and the writers didn't play to the actors' strengths for pretty much the entire series.

I personally liked Archer. Sure, he could have been done a bit better, but I can't really look at how a lot of him was done and say "No, he's a terrible captain!" He knew his crew, his ship, his all important fancy new warp drive, and he knew about as much military tactics and what the galaxy was like as most humans did, which is to say not a great deal. Humanity hasn't been in much of a fight for some time, and pretty well never in space beyond a freighter fending off some pirates. This is all uncharted waters with no guidelines to follow. Mistakes are going to be made so that they know what to put in the book later. Yes, he had to get saved by his crew. Though, shouldn't a crew of 83 (minus 1 or so) be more capable of being able to work out some particular problem than just one guy?

One of the biggest complaints about Voyager for me was that Janeway was a Mary Sue extraordinar. Warp drive broken? Don't worry chief engineer, the captain can fix it! Fight breaking out? Tour captain will simultaneously beat them all up in hand to hand, snipe the guy over there and negoiate a ceasefire! Feel like playing pool? Not to worry, your captain will win the game in two shots. Playing with time for the 8th time in 12 episodes? Your captain has it all under control, since she apparently majored in temporal mechanics. Not to mention everything else. After all, they never established which area of science she studied, so it was apparently all of them. Sure, I might be exaggerating just a touch, but she was still a poorly written character. She was the Wesley of Voyager, just had at least gone through the Academy (where Boothby brought her roses every day).

So Enterprise went against that, and made the captain do what a captain actually does. Rely on their crew. Not for everything, but for their areas. Besides, there's a good reason why in the future the Captain doesn't go on any away missions with knowing what they're all walking into or for good reason Well, that is unless you're Captain Mary Sue.

If anything screwed up the whole trek storyline regarding the Borg, it was Voyager. Even before that though, the Borg sent a lone cube to a distant location of space.... why? The Federation-Romulan Neutral Zone is far from their established territory, and the Borg aren't the kind to send out exploratory cubes. As far as we know, they've only sent them in one direction. Pre-Voyager, you could explain it as the Borg were simply a handful of ships, scattered around the galaxy assimilating whatever if you didn't like the idea of them having a centralised base of operations. Perhaps they were even scattered by something else. Not so after Voyager.

Enterprise gave an excellent reason for why the collective would equip and sent out a Borg cube directly towards Federation space. They received a decayed subspace message sent directly to them with a set of coordinates, and by all appearances, it's from themselves. There shouldn't be any Borg out there, so they want to know why. Equip a cube with the necessary infrastructure to maintain a coherent collective far away from Borg territory and the unimatrix infrastructure, and now everything makes more sense. It also reinforces something that a lot of people forget about in TNG. Q didn't hasten the Federation's encounter with the Borg, the Borg already knew about the Federation by the end of Season 1. Q was giving the Federation warning about what was coming their way. Even still, some things just never really fit, the USS Raven for example never really meshed in well. It was just an excuse for why Seven was there after all.

As for STO, the first 10 movies and the latest movie, like it's already been said, they're separate realities, not simply time travel. The JJ movie is not earlier movies or STO's past, STO is how the universe that Spock left behind ends up. Hence STO's Vulcan is perfectly fine.

The USS Kelvin for example is very different to a prime universe ship, even though that was built long before the Narada showed up. A pretty clear indication of being a separate reality. Not to mention Starfleet being so undermanned that they'd give their flagship (now the Enterprise instead of whatever it was in the prime universe) to a bunch of recruits barely and/or not even out of the academy. Being a separate reality also means that there's no paradoxes and that Temporal Integrity Commission wouldn't be able to intervene.

I agree that Archer is, in my opinion a very likeable Captain compared to the others. The only one I remotely enjoyed other then Archer was Sisko.

As for the Borg Episode I thought it was a pretty sound storyline. Its not that far-fetched that when Picard destroyed the Sphere. Something of it was left behind. Including Drones. And to better explain the timeline involving the latest movie. Just look at Back To The Future 2. Alternate timeline, not the original.

You should watch a few episodes close together. Archer's only command style is petulant anger. In one episode the crew has to mutiny because he isn't acting himself. He is angry at everyone and starts relieving them of their duties. I couldn't tell how they knew he wasn't acting himself.

I don't know if it was Bakula's acting or how he was directed, but Admiral Forrest should have spanked his whiny butt.

See, here are the problems I have with this. First there were centuries of naval traditions for command and diplomacy to draw on. And second, it was rarely the crew that got in trouble, it was always Archer, and usually because he was too ridged, angry, whiny, or just plain stupid. It was always the crew that got him out of trouble.

Bakula's character as it was portrayed in the show would have been more convincing as an EXO, not the captain, with a calmer more mature behaving individual in the center seat. Bakula may have received a bum deal due to the sloppy writing of the show, but his character never had "command presence".

Your forgetting about the character Whoopie Goldberg (don't know don't care if thats the correct spelling for he name) played in the next gen, Her entire race was wiped out by the Borg with a history and all.

The problem I have with a Borg episode in Archers time is the tech level between then and when Q re-introduced the Federation to the Borg, they would have had borg tech to fight them with. You can't tell me Starfleet would have just left the borg stuff and never poked at it as that just does not fit into Starfleets profile.

You can say their separate realities to justify the mess but its not the case, the last Star Trek movie is supposed to be about to how Kirk became Captain of the Enterprise not some alternate reality and it can't be an alternate reality anyway cause you have the Spok we know as well as the new one so it has directly got to do with temporal time travel.

If you have ever seen the original pilot episode of the original Star Trek with Captain Pike you would see how hypercritical the whole Star Trek story line has become and there is another Episode with Kirk returning Pike to the planet it all started with but the new movie completely wrecked that whole story.

People who lash out at Scott Bakula, as being a comedic actor, or that he's a joke, are usually the same people who have never watched the likes of 'Quantum Leap'. Pitiful.

Enterprise had it's fair share of issues (as did EVERY... SINGLE... ONE... of the other shows). Scott Bakula as Captain, was the least of it's problems.

Thats just it. He played Archer as if he still was the guy from quantum leap. Same exact personality and boy scout mentality.


Personally I would've chose Michael Ironside as Archer.

He's got the attitude, the acting skills and would've been great for the role.