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 24Leonard Nimoy Talks About Star Trek XII and Watching New Movie with Shatner0
Nov 23J.J. Abrams and Chris Pine Talk How Gratifying That Star Trek was Well Received, Working with Leonard Nimoy and Star Trek XII1
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
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: Jadzia-Dax (Odo's file, contact) @ 17:24:00 on Jul 25, 2004

Quote:
LOL you really like to go off and write essay's don't you ;-)

Sure. So you know exactly where I'm coming from and why. ;-)

I'm afraid I'm not from the sound-bite generation. ;-)

Quote:

I know what you were saying, I just wasn't sure where it fit in with my quote.


I see.

Quote:

Quote:Indeed. Many people here disagree and hurl epithets daily about her. So why bother with any more as any new ones will be similarly lynched?

Hey Rosa Parks, just get out of that bus seat, I mean why bother?...


Exactly. Now you're getting it. ;-) And next time, check how many are forced to go to court to USE the various Civil Rights laws to seek remedy for discrimination - whether for race or sex or whatever - with many of these "laws" STILL REQUIRING PERIODIC RENEWAL. Why is that Congress has to "renew" something that should have been guaranteed in the Constitution?

Quote:

Quote:Yet the B-plot in a TOS "Balance of Terror", where a Lt. Stiles rants and raves about Spock, DOES "fit"? Or was THAT marvelous revelation a COMMENTARY on how things haven't completely changed yet, even by the 23rd century?

Personal prejudice maybe.


HUH??? What is "sexism" but personal prejudice against a woman?

Quote:

But I still stand by what I said. Starfleet not allowing female captains goes against Gene's own Star Trek utopia IMO. Disagree with me, that's your right.


I disagree on the principle that I am trying to make clear here about the TIMES and how Star Trek didn't just show the "happy future", but was ALSO a reflection of the current times and some of the issues that we Humans deal with daily.

Quote:

Quote: miss the satire of the entire thing? It's amazing.

You were arguing over my use of the word "they" for cryin' ou loud. I know Gene wrote it. I used "they" instead of he, there is no conspiracy here....Or is there?


You only "knew" because I just told you. And so if you "knew", then it would make no sense to say "Gene Roddenberry wrote a story against Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future".

Quote:

What the Hell? I didn't understand your wording, now that you re-phrased it I get what you are saying.


And people wonder why I have to be verbose here. ;-) And am I detecting a bit of "emotion" out of the normally "calm" MaxPower"? Did I shoot a bit too many volts down your wire? Image

Quote:

Quote:Sheesh and I offered what Shatner noted on my Sci Fi SE tape about the whole production of the episode. ;-) And I'll put some of it here:

It was just a theory I put down. I don't care if I'm wrong about that. Good lordy.


Wow. You ARE hitting a "spike" there. Better have that circuit breaker ready! Or do you use fuses instead? Image

Quote:

Quote:So what do YOU see in the above picture Maxie?

Hmmmm, I hate these things. Looks like an Eagle, maybe Sam Donaldson. But then I see Sam Donaldson almost everywhere I go, I can't get that bastard out of my head.


That's a DAMN shame. Howdy Doody redux. heh

Quote:

Quote:And the presence of one will no doubt generate massive rejection by the same people who rejected a Janeway for 7 years so why bother?

I doubt "Massive rejection",


OHHHHHH.... you just wait. Make her "fun and sexy" and she'll be torn apart while her boobs are put on display and she competes with T'Pol for how many "ass crack" shots they each get. Or make her "Ripley", like that ENT MACO "Amanda Cole", and then people will start talking about how "fat" she is and other such wonderfully predicatable crap that is posted here about women.

Mark my words. ;-) NOTHING CHANGES.

Quote:

but if they do then screw them. I mean, don't do something because it might be rejected? Puhleese.


They are in the "do" or "die" scenario right now, and to introduce more controversy, even if they think they mean right, will make things MORE difficult. And mainly because they have effectively discredited most of the women they have featured on this show.

Quote:

I hope you arent trying to suggest I am sexist here.


Oh now don't be like O.Deus and hop on a pedestal so that you can go through some sort of self-imolation ritual. ;-)

Most of what I have said in this thread regarding this issue, has been in "exposition" fashion, not naming "names". So if you want to self-label, then be my guest. But it won't come from ME.

Quote:

I know what you are saying about "Turnabout intruder", you obviously have put a lot of thought into it! LOL.


Actually, not at all. Spacebeluga started a thread on the episode, and after many subliminal hints from him, I went on and watched it. But I did so with the benefit of having the commentary and interview snippets due to the version I have. And it got me thinking because there were a number of things, not just what I listed above, that were really "off kilter" and hadn't really been emphasized before in TOS. For example, there were a number of instances where dialog was given to the character to refer to "Star Fleet" as "Headquarters" or "HQ". And I haven't rewatched all of the episodes yet, but I don't recall them EVER using that term before - they generally would just call it "Star Fleet Command" or just "Star Fleet". But in THIS ep, not only did they call it "HQ", but along with that, they also said things like "You know how HQ would feel" and whatnot... Which again, to me, was unusual.

And all of a sudden, I started watching more closely - ie., I stopped it and started over again, so I could confirm what I thought was going on and that's where I'm gettng this from. ;-)

I mean, how many times has it been told to fans about how the number "47" seems to show up in Star Trek episodes? It's THAT kind of stuff that really IS going on. ;-)

Quote:

But whatever Gene's reasons for this episode, IMO he stepped over his own utopia to get there and therefore I have no continuity concerns with ENT having a female captain. That's really the only point I wanted to make.


It's funny how people wlill simply DECLARE aired episodes "non canon" when they feel like it, but then argue against others doing the same to ENT.

So I declare that ENT is NON CANON! Now there!

--------

"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 @ 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
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.