menuBarBack
Beam Up News | Join | Your Account
Home
Advanced Search
boxBottom
News Tribblets
boxBottom
Stardates Calendar
News Story

Features

'T'Pol' Faces New Challenge at "Home", Plus the Newest NX Ship - First Plot Details (SPOILERS)

Features

By Steve Krutzler / 19:48, 23 July 2004 / Enterprise

Jolene Blalock let the cat out of the bag during this week's fall press tour: 'T'Pol' may be getting married. In fact, TrekWeb has received the first information on the third episode of the season in which the big event might occur, entitled simply "Home."

In the episode, slated to begin production August 4th under the direction of Allan Kroeker (who is also directing the season premiere "Storm Front, Part 1", credits), T'Pol will face her mother 'T'Las', who along with another family has arranged a Vulcan marriage for the Enterprise science officer. Producers are reportedly looking for an actress in her 60s are are open to "stunt" casting for the role.

UPN president Dawn Ostroff said earlier this week that the network would like to land popular performers in ENTERPRISE guest roles this season; TNG's Brent Spiner is already onboard for a three-part stint, and Shatner talks is omnipresent.

T'Pol's husband-to-be goes by the name of 'Koss' and looks in his late 30s by human standards. Koss is reminiscient of 'Spock', tall and imposing. But T'Pol -- as you can probably imagine -- is unsure whether to go through with the betrothal. Both T'Las and Koss could appear in later episodes.

In addition, we'll also meet the newest NX-class member of the fleet in "Home." The commemoratively-named Starship Columbia is captained by 'Erika Hernandez', a sexy Latin former colleague of 'Archer's from Starfleet's command school.

Rick Berman stated this week that the third episode of the season would be a standalone before launching into the three-part storyline focusing on Spiner as 'Arik Soong', the great-great-grandfather of 'Noonien Soong' (Data's creator) who attempts to continue the work of geneticists with embryos left over from the Eugenics Wars (story).

Until this information if confirmed by Paramount (or blurted out by one of the producers), it should be treated as rumor. "Home" will air in October.



More Top StoriesComments
Nov 23J.J. Abrams and Chris Pine Talk How Gratifying That Star Trek was Well Received, Working with Leonard Nimoy and Star Trek XII0
Nov 23Chuck returns to NBC with a special two-hour show on Sunday, Jan 10, 2010, before returning to its regular time slot, Mondays at 8pm on the following night. It's return to prime time television can be attributed to a successful fan renewnal campaign last year. CHUCK is a one-hour, action-comedy series that follows Chuck Bartowski (Zachary Levi, "Less Than Perfect") -- a computer geek who is catapulted into a new career as the government's most vital secret agent. This upcoming season will include some special guest stars, including Brandon Routh of "Superman Returns" who will play CIA agent Daniel Shaw in an episode, and the addition of SUBWAY restaurant as a major advertiser to the show. Chuck averaged a 4.0/6 rating last season, about eight percent better than the recently cancelled "Trauma". Ratings-challenged Heroes moves back an hour when Chuck returns on Monday nights. STAR TREK VOYAGER's Robert Duncan McNeill serves Chuck as a supervising producer and director.0
Nov 235-Page Preview of Third Issue of Galactica 1980 Comic Book  0
Nov 22Quinto, Urban, Saldana, Cho and Greenwood on Their Hopes for Star Trek XII3
Nov 22Exclusive Digital Content Now Available With New Star Trek Movie on iTunes
1
Story Archives...Browse:   
ENTERPRISE Mission Schedule | Logs by Season: 1 2 3 4
Episode Number Title Airdate

Talkback

70 comments Post New | Help
View:

RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. | Report this post to moderator
By: rumandchocolate (Odo's file, contact) @ 16:28:05 on Jul 25, 2004

On the other hand... wasn't the claim about no female starship captains made by Janice Lester, who was... I dunno... CRAZY? I mean, can we really take her word at face value?

Granted, no one disputed the notion with her, but then plenty of people ignore the assertions made by schizophrenics in order to not antagonize them.

Or am I completely off base and some other character made the claim?

Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
Parent
Parent
Talkback Top
Top

RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. | Report this post to moderator
By: TRexx (Odo's file, contact) @ 18:01:24 on Jul 24, 2004 | Edit History (1)

Quote from Darth Brooks:
All it takes to explain how there are female starship captains in the mid-22nd century but not in the mid-23rd is a little imagination.


No explanation is needed to tell a good story, and that's what ENT needs more than jumping through canon hoops just to put some Latin booty in the NX-02 captain's chair.

The "no woman captain" rule was changed, sometime after TOS Turnaround Intruder. It isn't a "problem" that needs to be "fixed" by ENT or any other pre-Janice Lester incarnation of Star Trek. It's as much a part of canon as is the timeframe of the Eugenics Wars noted in TOS Space Seed.

If B&B^Coto don't like it, they should just "not deal with it" -- and that means not changing Trek history.


--------------
Classic TOS Phaser 1 + 2
Image

Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
Parent
Parent
Talkback Top
Top

RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. | Report this post to moderator
By: PokeTrek (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 17:45:38 on Jul 24, 2004

Whoa. There goes my NX-03 command idea.

--------

"I'm astounded that your organization [the MSHSAA] tries to regulate what these kids do in their free time. Would you tell them they couldn't watch Star Trek or eat potato chips?"
-Missouri State Rep. Bryan Stevenson, R-Joplin

Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
Parent
Parent
Talkback Top
Top

RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. | Report this post to moderator
By: Jadzia-Dax (Odo's file, contact) @ 17:31:36 on Jul 24, 2004

Quote:
Make no mistake - we're trying to explain an ideoligical difference between the 1960's and the 2000's within the context of two TV shows that both take place in the future... but my policy has always been: rather than throw my hands up in the air over minor continuity matters like this, if I can come up with one reasonable explanation as to how the continuity break can make sense, it's one I can forgive.

I think it's great what you proposed because it could eventually show how Humanity must deal with not only gender differences outside of Earth but even the existence of multi-gendered and/or non-gendered species and how they deal with Humanity and its 2 main physiological genders (let alone any selected genders not related to physiology).

But I do want to point out to you and others, that despite so many here claiming that THAT was "then" and THIS is "now", I'm sorry to tell you that the NOW isn't even CLOSE to being perfect either.

And I refuse to NOT speak out when so many here (and obviously mostly men) wish to sweep the fact that women are STILL being discriminated against, TODAY, under the rug and why the topic as a reflection on our society TODAY within a Star Trek should be no different than back in the '60s.

I ask, what "ideological" differences are there really NOW when compared to 35+ years ago other than there being laws in place only recently (the 80s and 90s)? Despite the fact that women STILL have to claw and grab and smash at the barriers and at the ceiling to get where they can manage to get, yet with the additional burden of being forced to pay high-priced lawyers to get the damn laws enforced?

Do you really think that these laws actually legislate everyone's behavior so much that the problem has suddenly become a non sequitur for some reason? Because don't let me get started on what I have seen in THIS show with respect to the overt exploitation and disrespect of women FOR RATINGS.

YES ENTERPRISE.

It boggles my mind that people on THIS SITE in one breath, DEMAND an "imperfect and struggling and gritty and dark" Earth and crew for ENT, yet when it comes to something like THIS, they want to play the "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" monkeys, turning their heads away to not see what is happening in the world today with respect to the gender issue. And that's pretty damn hypocritical and sad actually.

Is it better today than 1966? Hell yeah. But are women "there" yet? HELL NO, when there is STILL a wage gap between men and women, even in the same positions in the U.S. And THAT is pathetic.

But again, I appreciate your plausible explanation which would probably be easier to pawn off without appearing to be a hammer over the head morality issue.

--------

"I think the show talked to people through the characters. They're stories that speak to the heart. They talk about love, they talk about friendship, they talk about loyalty, they talk about patriotism, exploration, curiosity, reaching out... And I think all those things still touch people. Even when you look at a 30-year old show, it still has something to say." - D.C. Fontana, Sci Fi Channel Special Edition TOS 1998
----
"If the season finale involves the re-built USS Reliant coming back in time to the 21st Century crewed by Moogie, Dr. Selar, Morn, Transporter Chief Kyle, and the Salt Vampire, then we'll know that Coto has gone too far." - tomba1701

Reply
Reply
Quote
Quote
Parent
Parent
Talkback Top
Top
RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by MaxPower @ 20:56:12 on Jul 24
    RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 23:18:56 on Jul 24
       RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by MaxPower @ 03:02:41 on Jul 25
          RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 09:29:52 on Jul 25
             RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by MaxPower @ 13:26:28 on Jul 25
                RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 17:24:00 on Jul 25
                   RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by MaxPower @ 18:15:51 on Jul 25
                      RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 19:19:56 on Jul 25
                         RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by MaxPower @ 19:34:31 on Jul 25
                            RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 19:39:20 on Jul 25
RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Darth Brooks @ 18:59:37 on Jul 24
    RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 20:41:42 on Jul 24
       RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Darth Brooks @ 05:56:27 on Jul 25
          RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 09:38:33 on Jul 25
RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by falcon @ 18:40:07 on Jul 24
    RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 20:33:27 on Jul 24
       RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by falcon @ 20:45:14 on Jul 25
          RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 06:40:59 on Jul 26
             RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by falcon @ 19:39:48 on Jul 26
                RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 21:03:04 on Jul 26
                   RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by falcon @ 21:47:00 on Jul 27
                      RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by Jadzia-Dax @ 07:29:29 on Aug 04
                         RE: Explaining the "No Female Captains" thing. by falcon @ 09:38:32 on Aug 05
Promenade










TrekWeb Merchants
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk
Amazon.ca
Amazon.de
Barnes & Noble

Get Firefox!
Privacy Policy | About Us | Legal Notice | Contact Us | | Get Firefox!
© 1996-2009 TrekWeb.com and Steve Krutzler. All rights reserved.