6276c5e3   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv   
   From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   In article   
   , Ed   
   Stasiak  wrote:   
   > > YourN...@YourISP.com (Your Name)   
   > >   
   > > Once you ignore the silly holodeck episodes and the irrtating   
   > > singing episodes, there wasn't much wrong with Voyager as   
   > > a show that (mostly) fitted with what was established. The   
   > > same can be said of Deep Space Nine (you also have to   
   > > ignore the stupid quasi-religious mumbo-jumbo episodes)   
   > > and The Next Generation.   
   >   
   > Agreed, thou I'd include ENT along with TNG, DS9 and VOY,   
   > as all maintained the same format, style and level of quality   
   > throughout all four series.   
   >   
   > Each series may have had different ships, crews, locations, etc.   
   > but one can look at them as one very large series of 624 hour   
   > long tv episodes and 10 theatrical movies.   
   >   
   > That's a lot of sci-fi and most of it was pretty good.   
      
   Unfortunately Enterprise peed all over some established facts, although it   
   tried to fake it's way through (for example, Archer not actually seeing   
   the Ferengi) ... partly because Beavis & Butthead didn't actually know nor   
   care anything about Star Trek, and partly because it was an attempt at an   
   idiotic "reboot" (also why "Star Trek" was left out of the title).   
      
   Deep Space Nine used a different direction by "stranding" the stoylines on   
   a stationery space station, but it did still fit. Voyager tried to get   
   things back onto the same storyline as the first two series (TOS and TNG)   
   by having a ship travelling through space visiting different places.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)