Daedalus

My first review of a Star Trek Enterprise episode. In fact, after 50+ years of watching Star Trek in all its incarnations, this is my only review of ANY Star Trek series episode. Just felt like it was time. I'm an original series fan, along with Next Generation and what I consider to be the best of the Star Trek universe, Deep Space Nine. Never thought much of ST Voyager. Sorry Voyager fans.

After viewing most of Enterprise 4 seasons back when it was originally broadcast, I came away unimpressed. For the last month or so I've been binge watching this specific ST series on Hulu. It seems the second time around, 15 years later, I came away slightly more impressed. Just not totally convinced it was really worth my time. (ha,ha) And especially after binge watching Deep Space Nine over the holidays. Oh well. Season 1 of Enterprise was good. Season 2 was okay. Season 3 was fun to watch but seemed like a bad rip off of Deep Space Nine. And now we have season 4.

Daedalus was a bad episode all around. One thing I finally figured out and the main reason for this review. Captain Archer is unstable. He lost it early in season 3 and never fully recovered. He acts like a man not in control of his emotions. At times, he's totally whacked out! Archer definitely was not made in the mold off Kirk, Picard, Sisko or even Janeway. This has hurt the Enterprise series overall.

After Archer has shown so much good judgment lately, he now reverts because of his own selfishness. There are some absolutes. I know others would disagree, but when the nutcase old friend who has been obsessed with the death of his son commandeers the Enterprise, that should have been it. The young man was Archer's childhood friend and this man like a father. If anything, this conflict of interest is at the center. When the crew member dies because of the old guy's self-interest, we now have a different equation. This is an aberration from the development of the type of things needed for the explorers to move into space.

When Dr. Emory Erickson, the inventor of Transporter technology comes aboard the Enterprise to test his latest idea which, if it works, will make it possible to transport people over inter-planetary distances Trip is keen to meet him. As the work starts however it seems as if something isn't quite right; he is insistent that only he can do the required work and won't even let Trip take a look at his notes. When they enter an empty area of space where they are due to carry out the experiment something strange happens, some sort of entity appears on board and when it comes into contact with a crewman that man dies. It soon becomes clear that the experiment was just an excuse to get Enterprise to that part of space; Dr Erickson lost his son in a transporter accident fifteen years before and he believes that because of the properties of space in that area it will be possible to rematerialise him.

After several multi-part action packed episodes this one felt a little slow. It seemed a little too obvious that the great Dr Erickson wouldn't be quite as great as everybody thought. I was a bit surprised when Captain Archer agreed to continue with Dr Erickson's plan even though he'd lied to him and it has already caused the death of one crewman. The ending wasn't quite as I expected and that is a good thing, although I won't spoil it I think the way it ended was right.

Others have already mentioned the basic plot of this episode, and you've likely already seen it so I won't go into it again.

This is one of the most boring and ridiculous episodes of the entire show. I tape and the shows on my DVR regularly on H&I and everytime this episode comes up, I just delete it right away which I don't do with any of the other episodes.. Oh.. Other than the HORRIBLE series finale that is. What an absolutely horrible way to end the show. There was a lot of lazy writing in this series it seems and to a lesser degree, Voyager to.

What really aggravated me about Archer was that he was quite mentally unstable. I don't know WHOSE idea it was too play the character that way. Was that the way the character was written..? If so then it was terrible writing. But I'm much more inclined to believe that this is simply how Bakula chose to play the character, for he and God only knows what reasons. Regardless, the result is that I believe most Star trek fans are in agreement that Archer was the WORST Star Trek Captain of them all!

And I don't just mean so the leading captains of the series, but any Captain in Star Fleet period. He should have never even made it to ensign with his terrible attitude, being Soo QUICK to anger, quick to raise his voice, right away getting it your face all the time, being constantly belligerent, arrogant, argumentative, selfish and always more concerned with being in control and getting his way than anything else.

The only time it was good that he had those traits was against the Xindi where those traits helped them to perservere and get the job done. Otherwise, he can barely go back and forth in any conversation two or three times before he starts to raise his voice, get an attitude, run up in your face and act like he's so tough.

Such traits are very unbecoming of a Star fleet officer let alone a captain and ass someone else said, I don't know how he remained in Star fleet as long as he did.

It brings back something that Janeway once said when she first encountered the Borg I believe it was. She was talking about Kirk and how things were back in those days. She mentioned how their ships were twice and fast as they were in Kirk's time, said some other comment and then said that the whole lot of them would have been kicked out of Star Fleet if they acted that way today. I guess this is an indication that in the early days of Star Fleet and the federation, they had to be far more tolerant and let people get away with much more than they ever would later on, probably because people weren't exactly clamoring to join you at that time and even once the federation got going and started exploring the Galaxy, they needed everyone they could get.

Still, Kirk could be just as tough, strong and determined when needed but he was far more mature, in control and could hold a Civil conversation as the norm, something that Archer only seems to be able to do when he's watching his water polo lol.

At the end of the last season (or the first of this one?) they were so solemn about the death of 23(?) crewpersons. Now someone dies and Archer doesn't care. That was disgusting.

There's no reason for it. If the writers aren't going to use the full impact of the death, then don't kill him. The writers should have only injured the first victim. Phlox would say that "Another cm to the left and it would have killed him." Then Archer would know the danger and debate if it is worth continuing.

Then, on top of that, the crewperson died because of the deception of the visiting engineer Dr. Erickson, yet no-one even yells at Dr. Erickson. Perhaps it could be resolved with "the damage is done, we now know the risk and how to mitigate it, so we will continue" rather than Archer flying off the handle.

I completely agree with the other reviewers who say that Archer is a horrible captain. He rarely convinces people of things, he mostly uses anger, threats and, of course, rank.