The Coffee Nebula Board is for the discussion of Star Trek: Voyager and other sci-fi/cult shows. This is its Archive of episode discussions, top ten lists, fan fiction, and other miscellaneous musings.



:tv: Enterprise's Minefield :agree:
Eric -- 2 Oct 2002, 22:37 EST

Quicktake : This could have been the best Enterprise so far! And Romulans are just THAT cool! :D


SPOILERS that can cloak :












This is EXACTLY what my boy Reed needed! He needed to be an OFFICER again. I was very disapointed in the Frat Boy Reed we saw in the Risa episode with Trip.

This was like a Shuttlepod One for Archer and Reed and like SP-1 both characters emerged on the other side MUCH stronger.

I like this season's Archer, i like this seasons greater intensity and concentration on the characters and i like this season's Enterprise.

But Minefield was more then just a character piece, it raised the stakes of the show. We have just kicked off the path that leads to the Romulan War, the war that gives birth to the Federation, the whole mandate for the show in the first place.

This is what the show has needed. Last season was nice with the stand alone shows, but now we need to start telling the story. Minefield helped that very nicely.

Minefield joins Cold Front, Dear Doctor and Shockwave as the best that Enterprise has done. More like this and Enterprise will be able to stand proaud with the other Treks we have had.


You got all that from "Minefield," Eric? :disagree:
Mindy -- 3 Oct 2002, 14:33 EST

I thought it was boring and slow and it completely lost my attention. Go to and check out the review of "Minefield." The reviewer brings up really good points, especially about cloaking's supposed to be a big dark secret and one that the Federation hasn't cracked in Kirk and Spock's time, but we're seeing it all over the place on ENTERPRISE. Seems everybody has it except the Vulcans and Starfleet....

I thought "Shuttlepod One" (is that the right title of the episode?) was much better in revealing stuff about Reed...and that was my problem with last night...AGAIN with the fatalism?

However, I did like that it did address the problems some of the crew (and viewers) are having with Archer.


OK, but I liked last week?s better.
D -- 3 Oct 2002, 14:54 EST

So far, so good, on not messing up too much on continuity. In last season?s encounter with the Ferengi no one learned what they called themselves. Here the Romulans are heard but not seen, except their ships. A friend tells me the ships are all wrong, and I don?t know enough about the ?history? to comment on that or whether or not their ships should have cloaks at this point, though with the Temporal Cold War anything is possible. As for the cloaked mines and being able to see them I think someone on the Bridge said something about them being Suliban, which is why the beacon worked. I guess when, and if, they do the Earth/Romulan War we?ll see the Romulans but the Starfleet people won?t.

T?Pol seemed to be selective in what she said about the Romulans. The Vulcans may not have seen Romulans either but how much do they know about them at this point, is their common origin generally known on Vulcan? In TOS when they finally appeared on the view screen Spock was prepared for their appearance and told Kirk the history. It did seem odd that Hoshi needed an hour to translate a reply. Even without knowing the actual relationship between Vulcans and Romulans I would have expected her to hear some similarities. But that probably would have raised a bunch of questions the writers don?t want to have to deal with.

Nits: A bit too convenient that Reed knew how to disable the mine.

How are they going to fix all the damage without replicators or starbases? May be the set up for next week?s stop at a space station.

What?s with the phobias ? Hoshi is claustrophobic, now we hear Reed is aqua phobic (if that?s even a real term; its not in my Webster?s College Edition). Reed and Archer are really polar opposites: laid back, sports loving Captain who played water polo v. by the book, loner weapons expert who?s afrad of the water.

Personally I had one big problem with "Shuttlepod One".
Jules -- 3 Oct 2002, 16:19 EST

The major thing about Reed that it revealed to me was that TPTB were capable of writing him as a complete idiot.

If Eric says that Reed behaves like a grown-up in this one, then that gives it at least a few points in its favour from me. ;-)

I have to agree with your friend...
Fliteman -- 3 Oct 2002, 17:16 EST

Okay, I missed the first 35 minutes due to Charter Cable Television being OUT for it's 14 of 24 hours in a day. (We're investigating Satellite alternatives...)


I'm grabbing all this from the TOS episode "Balance of Terror" - in which Spock kinda outlines the history of human/Romulan contacts. He tells about a story of battles being fought with primitive ships, using old atomic weapons. The Cloaking device was new in Kirk's time - they shouldn't have it in Archer's. Also, Spock & Co. weren't sure about the identity of the ship - if it was, in fact, Romulan or not - Spock (using sensors) declares it a new and unknown Romulan design. The ships Archer sees shouldn't be like those in Kirk's time.

And... I don't have any evidence... but I don't think the Romulans should've *seen* warp drive. They created their new weapon unleashed in Kirk's time to be sub-light; it would blow the stations set on those asteroids to smithereens, but it would have trouble inflicting damage on a warp-capable ship. I woulda thought if the Rommies had seen Archer's Enterprise speed away to safety, then they would've been thinking about that for the 100 years or so to when they encountered Kirk's Enterprise, and allowed for high-warp attacks...

I wish these writers would simply give me a call... I'd straighten 'em out!

And, again... I missed the guts of the episode, and only saw the last few minutes. I *did* like seeing part of the Enterprise exposed to space - nice effects, there. I'm not sure how I feel about detachable hull plating. Seems to me... I dunno... I'd want it PERMANENTLY attached. But, that's just me.


Mindy, im curious about how the ep did this.
david g -- 3 Oct 2002, 17:51 EST

i havent been watching this season--im curious how the ep treated frustration w/Archer?

I agree with all you said, except about Reed, D,....
Mike D -- 3 Oct 2002, 18:24 EST

...mainly I liked the F/X and also thought Archer was in top form. You hit on the problems I had with this one, D.

I liked it overall, if I try not to knitpick it to death. I can't believe those make shift shields could actually protect Archer and Reed from a blast like that :). Must have been some ride on the shock wave.

I do agree with the inconsistencies others have mentioned, especially about advanced cloaking technology this early in the game.

Oh and, D, in all fairness, it turned out that Reed didn't know how to disarm the mine after all, so it wasn't that convenient he knew how. If you get what I mean ;). The thing finally blew.


I could probably copy and paste CJ Carter's review...
D'Alaire -- 3 Oct 2002, 18:31 EST here. ( )

Veeeeeeery dull. Seeing where it was going, I geared myself down to "quiet show" mode. But even then, I think I had more excitement discovering that I had some melted lint on the flat of my iron and trying to get it off by rubbing it on an old sheet after upping the temp to the "linen" setting.

At least I got my ironing done. Problem is, it took less time than the ep did. (smirk)

As one reviewer elsewhere said, I did like the FX, and the scenery was wonderful. I didn't quite gel logically with the "surf" sequence, though it looked good. But most of my interest ended there. The acting was bland on top of an unsuspenseful plot and, yes, no real chemistry that I could feel between Archer and Reed. I will say I liked Trip this week, though, all nice and scrungy and staying that way. Hoshi stayed filthy, too. At least that much felt right in their situation.

There was a lot of potential for interesting blurbs of action/tension, but it seemed to get cut short (if it got so far) at every turn--no one getting killed in the saucer section, Hoshi waking up and able to do some effective work away from her desk, Trip stablizing the engine room, Mayweather--did he speak? Blink and you missed any potential insight, there (and was I the only one thinking about Tommy in Galaxy Quest when he was moving them through the field? ;) )

...Heck, Reed getting the Phlox Special TM painkiller took away from something that might have been.

The Romulan presence (however much "continuity sidestepping" TIIC pretentiously did with them) was pretty useless. Just another AOTW, but without even the dignity of being anything but an inside joke, so to speak--not that they could or should have been anything more than that.

My problem with Archer still stands. As Carter put it so well, and as has been stated here many times:

With Captains Kirk, Picard, and Janeway, there was never any doubt who was in command. They had a presence and a gravity that spoke to the fact that they were in charge. And Sisko? He was a more New Age-y captain. While he could always assert himself, his style was more subtle. You always sensed a slyness to him that gave him an edge.

Archer still hasn't found his way into the pantheon of Star Trek captains. He's folksy and improvisational -- something that would be better in a ship's doctor (or even a first officer) than its captain. Perhaps, with more experience as a leader, Archer will season, but it's not happened yet.

I can't help but wonder if it'll ever happen, though I'm still waiting to be surprised.

Ah well.

Next week: RD's back on the director's chair! Let us pray the writing holds up. Good promo, though.

Reed's actions didn't match his words.
Terry -- 3 Oct 2002, 19:00 EST

He criticized Archer at one point for letting the bridge crew talk too much and continually offer their opinions to the captain. And he stated his preference for a commander who would just give orders and subordinates who would follow them.

Then he proceeded to volunteer his opinions, criticize Archer's decisions and command style, argue when given orders not to his liking, and then disobey orders at one point. Which disobedience involved trying to reverse Archer's command decision about the ship's safety.

Re: Webster's ;-)
Deb47 -- 3 Oct 2002, 19:42 EST

Close, D... but I believe the word you're looking for is "Hydrophobic".


Well put, Terry. :agree:
Nina -- 3 Oct 2002, 19:45 EST

Not that I paid all the attention I should have in order to comment, but - yeah - I noticed that. I sure did!

:agree: :agree: !! YEP!!!! (nim)
Mindy -- 3 Oct 2002, 20:21 EST

D'Alaire, :agree: :agree: on Trip's scruffiness.
Mindy -- 3 Oct 2002, 20:24 EST

What is it about men with a couple of days of beard and dirt? :-)


A little smudge here, a little rip in the uniform there...
D'Alaire -- 3 Oct 2002, 20:39 EST

...and I'm diverted.

Yeah, that was nice, for more reasons than the stab at realism. When he's not acting like a jack@ss, I do like his character, and last night's ep was an example of it. :)

That makes more sense
D -- 4 Oct 2002, 09:39 EST

I thought I heard Reed say aqua phobic, which is why I made that comment. I'll try to catch that scene in Sunday's re-run.

He might well have said it as you thought, D :-P
Nina -- 4 Oct 2002, 09:45 EST

because he also said that he needed to use the bathroom. What would an old Navy man have said, really? But I don't blame the script writers; the audience for which they're aiming would not have known what he meant by needing to use the "head."

Any more than they would have understood Voyager characters talking about the ship's "compartments," so they scripted it as "rooms" instead. I'm grateful, always, when I at least hear "port" and "starboard" instead of "left" and "right." :rolleyes:

Not that "aquaphobic" really is in the same class with the Naval misspeak I've ranted about (with tongue in cheek) above. I'm just happily petting one of my peeves, that's all. :-)

*signed* Down East Fisherman's Daughter and WWI Navy Vet's Granddaughter

Actually, I prefer aquaphobic to hydrophobic.
Terry -- 4 Oct 2002, 10:02 EST

Because of the more general meaning of the words "hydrophobic" and "hydrophobia". Which while in nearly all dictionaries can mean "fearful of water" and "fear of water", the preferred definition is just as often "insoluble in water" and "rabies in a human being". "Hydrophobia" in the rabies sense refers to the associated spasms caused by seeing or drinking water.

Whereas "aquaphobia" is unambiguous. Admittedly, it is found only in newer, quirky dictionaries but it always means simply "fear of drowning". The mixing of Latin and Greek roots is only a slight blemish IMO.

All that being said, I believe that Reed called himself hydrophobic.

:)About scuffy looking men, now that you and Mindy mention it, D'A....
Mike D -- 4 Oct 2002, 11:18 EST

...I do find my wife takes "notice of me" when I come in dirty after working in the yard or on my cars in my old worn out work clothes. The ripped clothes I use for working around the house. She, shall we say "finds me more irresistible" like that than when I'm all cleaned up in a nice suit and tie.

What is it with that anyway? Maybe we guys should be smudging grease on in stratigic places instead of cologne for those romantic evenings ;).

Hmmmm there may be money to be made with this idea! ...Mr. Clean never was that popular with the ladies :D. Must be like that badboy thing girls like.

Mike - I think I'll smear some dirt on me before I come home from work's cheaper than wine ;)

:D Remember the Voyager men in Year of Hell! (NIM)
CAM -- 4 Oct 2002, 15:42 EST

Maybe it's a collective consciousness thing, Mike :D:
Mindy -- 4 Oct 2002, 20:00 EST

You know, some buried memory from humanity's time in the cave...the men come back to the cave from a day of hunting, and the one who was the most bloodied, the dirties, the scruffiest, was the one who was the primary killer (and therefore bringer of) the meat...thus the women react to him as the best candidate for keeping them safe and well-fed and for breeding strong children.



You really think the audience wouldn't know...
Mindy -- 4 Oct 2002, 20:03 EST

..the Naval meaning of "head" is, Nina? Or "compartments?" I think they would...or they would get it from inference.

Hmm...ST writers underestimating the intelligence of their audience. Not exactly a new concept these days, is it?


The audience they think they're aiming for wouldn't, Mindy.
Nina -- 4 Oct 2002, 22:48 EST

Now, the audience they've actually got - US - well, of course we would understand! :-)

Re: :)About scuffy looking men, now that you and Mindy mention it, D'A....
Mrs. Mac -- 5 Oct 2002, 00:10 EST

...I do find my wife takes "notice of me" when I come in dirty after working in the yard or on my cars....

She's just wondering if the neighbors saw you. :D

And even dear little Harry Kim in "Drive"
Anna -- 5 Oct 2002, 07:52 EST

and when he's trying to expand the holodecks in "The Killing Game". Worryingly, I can't think of any other characters who get really dirty! The Grease Effect has so much more impact on us when we're watching Trek, because there's so much less dirty equipment around. For an engineer, B'Elanna never gets very grubby!

I missed part of it. :-(
TKS -- 5 Oct 2002, 08:12 EST

I caught the last half of the episode. I fell asleep with the TV on and failed to tape the entire episode. I did see Reed talk of the Royal Navy, and the different command style of the British. Archer does seem a little loose in his command style. To be fair to Archer, he constantly says that the Enterprise is a ship of exploration.

I didn't realize that this episode had anything to do with the romulans till the end, and we saw the ships. I love my rommies. I collect episodes dealing with the Romulans. So I'll have to see the repeat on Sunday to catch the beginning.

I have had my speculations concerning Vulcans and Romulans from the beginning, and not because of Spock's cryptic statement.


Re: Actually, I prefer aquaphobic to hydrophobic.
CAM -- 5 Oct 2002, 17:37 EST

Hydrophobic does not just mean insoluble in water, it means repels water. On Teflon and polyethylene small drops of water become spheres trying to minimise their contact with the polymer surface. In the rabies sense I remember reading about "hydrophoby dawgs".

Re: Grubby B'Elanna... 8-)
Deb47 -- 5 Oct 2002, 20:05 EST

Well, except for "Disease"... the ep where Harry falls in love wth the Xenophobic alien.

In fact, IIRC not only was B'Elanna grubby, so were Janeway and Tommy...

Poor Harry was singularily UNgrubby... a fact not lost upon his holodeck playing partner!



Re: Grubby B'Elanna... 8-)
Malcom -- 5 Oct 2002, 23:53 EST

If I recall, Jim Wright said it looked as though Janeway had been under Tom's Camaro. Yes, they all looked better grubby. Year of Hell or the beginning of The Disease. Less sanitized.

You may be right about those primal instincts, Mindy!....
Mike D -- 7 Oct 2002, 14:05 EST

And here I thought it was the guys that drove the most expensive cars who attracted the women! Instead it's the guys who look like they can bring home the bacon by killing it, not buying it ;)

Hmmmmmm...maybe men like scuffy looking women for the same primal reason? It shows they spent more time *gathering* than the other ladies ;).

I still can't explain the "tough Girls with Guns' turn on :confused:. Like Janeway in 'Microcosm' or what ever the name of that Voyager was where she was sweaty in the t-top caring a big gun [sigh].


Re. Tough girls and guns
Anna -- 7 Oct 2002, 16:21 EST

:D That's easy! Girls with guns look mean and tough, like their man wouldn't have to lift a finger against the marauding sabre-toothed tigers. Eg. Rene Russo's fight scene in Lethal Weapon (3?).

So, it's a laziness thing!! A man sees a tough girl cleaning her plasma rifle and realises that not only will she protect him from the wild beasties while he sleeps, a select cut of said Wild Beastie will be waiting for him, perfectly seasoned, when he wakes up! 8)

:agree: LOL ! I believe you're right, Anna!!! ....
Mike D -- 7 Oct 2002, 16:35 EST

...but I refuse to say it's cause we're lazy...I'm not saying it's not true, I'm just saying I refuse to admit it :D.

BTW-I'm pretty sure it was a guy's idea to invent the first remote control after his wife said "Change the $%^&ing channel yourself!"

Mike - where IS that $%^& remote control anyway

How do we feel about the DISEASE?
david g -- 7 Oct 2002, 22:54 EST

ive never known what to make of this ep...i like the P-K friendship scenes. as for the rest i just dont know. o i do like the PREMISE of the interlocking generational ship.

this wasnt a terribly good ep but i dont think it's horrible, just sorta...there.

Well, being tired and silly just now... :rolleyes:
Nina -- 7 Oct 2002, 23:09 EST

I could say that I especially liked the way Harry rolled his eyes in amazement at his - ahem - alien friend's - ah - ministrations. That still cracks me up every time I see the scene, although I suspect it's not quite how I'm supposed to be reacting to it. :-P

I, too, really liked see a generational ship. I wished we'd seen it sooner, though, in the series; because by the time this episode came out, Captain Janeway saying that she could see one of Voyager's possible futures in that ship no longer had much resonance for me as a fan. They'd made too many long homeward jumps by then, and we just KNEW the series would be ending with their return to Earth.

But still, it was a cool thing to introduce at last. I got annoyed by the sudden appearance (as a handy plot device) of that "get medical officer's permission before having sex with aliens" rule that everyone in Starfleet seems to have violated at one time or another...not that such a rule wouldn't make sense. But having it come out of nowhere, just so Janeway could slap poor Harry down, jolted me quite mercilessly. As did her decision to treat him harshly on purpose, which I found out of character for her. Lest I have any doubt that was what she meant to do, she told Chakotay so over that intimate little lunch sans jacket...I liked that part despite the lines. :-)

"The Disease" is OK overall. I guess we're on the same page about that!

Hydrophobia, aguaphobia, and rabies.
TKS -- 8 Oct 2002, 16:25 EST

Aguaphobia would be understood by most viewers as fear of water, but what audience are they expecting to attract. They must know that some of us know about hydrophobia. Using medical term it litterally means "fear of water" Hydr-o-phobia.

As for rabies, the virus forms negre bodies in the brain, Little black spots. The person or animal is actually afraid of light, photophobic. Think of the light inside the bowl or glass.


Oh, now you've done it
Vickie -- 8 Oct 2002, 17:19 EST

You've triggered the "old lady school teacher" that lives in the back of my brain...and that's not good. :-)

hydro = water, from greek

aqua = water, from latin

phobia = fear, from new latin, from late latin, from greek

So, technically speaking, either aquaphobia or hydrophobia would be correct and mean, literally, "fear of water"

Hydrophobia, in the context of rabies, means fear of water associated with the severe and painful spasms of the throat that occur when the victim attempts to drink or sees fluids.

Hydrophobic in the chemistry sense is generally used to mean insoluble in water or repelling water molecules and is a property of nonionic/nonpolar substances.

Sorry. I try to keep her under control and quiet, but sometimes she just slips out. :rolleyes:

Speaking for myself, I'm with Terry - I prefer "aquaphobic," simply because of the many other gradations of meaning that are attached to "hydrophobic."


We already know we're not the target audience ;)
D -- 8 Oct 2002, 19:39 EST

I doubt many other viewers would have even noticed that Reed used a non-standard English term, or that other Trek discussions would veer off into a linguistics discussion.

I'm tempted to send the aqua/hydra issue to the Sunday NY Times "On Language" e-mail; its the sort of thing that those essays discuss.

Thanks, Nina
david g -- 8 Oct 2002, 21:12 EST

you outlined and clarified my own likes/dislikes. hope you are doing well.