- MA files from this episode (20) • MA remastered files from this episode (0)
- Template:Titles/The Enemy yields The Enemy (TNG 3x07)
For general discussion on this episode, visit the TNG forum at The Trek BBS.
Watching this in syndication, at no point does Geordi refer to the Romulan as Ensign, only as Commodore. Is this a result of the editing for time that sometimes occurs for syndication, or is the article mistaken?
I am watching this episode on DVD right now. They do not find a dead Romulan. The first Romulan they find is the one that attacks Worf. He then hits the Romulan and incapitates him. They return to the ship with that Romulan, however Geordi fell down into some hole in the ground, and Riker cannot find him in time for the scheduled beam out. After he climbs out of the hole, he sees a stationary neutrino beacon coming from a probe the Enterprise launched to the planet as a marker for him to see. As Geordi is heading to the beam, he is attacked by the second Romulan...
- I believe it is stated that it was in an early draft of the script that he was referred to as ensign, then commodore.
Isn't Bochra referred to as "she" by Tomalak at the end?
The Commodore ThingEdit
It was likely sarcasm on La Forge's part as Bochra is clearly too young to hold a flag rank equivalent to Admiral in Starfleet. There is no indication that Commodore is an active rank in the Romulan fleet or Starfleet in the 2360s.
Isn't that a bit of an asumption? For all we know, Romulan ranking works in a completely different way to Starfleet, and so young people may very well hold higher titles. Similarly, who is to say that Bochra is young at first glance? Being non-human, he could be any age. Also, while indeed there is no indication at all of the Starfleet Commodore rank being active in the 2360s, is there anything in the episode to say that it's not? --Mada101 02:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed the following nits:
- When La Forge falls into the pit his visor lands to the right of him, but in the next scene he clearly picks it up from the left side.
- At the end of the episode the Romulan and Federation starships depart Galorndon Core in opposite directions, despite Captain Picard having insisted on escorting the Romulan Warbird back to the Neutral Zone.
While both true, there are also factors present or not present that the viewer is not aware of that could very well fully explain these occurrences. Out side of that observation, as an encyclopedia, the inclusion of such material has previously been deemed unnecessary. --Alan del Beccio 20:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with the removal of the first. I'm not so sure about the second, though; it is an interesting point. Then again, it is a nit. So... eh, nevermind. Just... musing. Or something akin, anyway. --From Andoria with Love 06:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Interestingly, Phil Farrand's Nitpicker's Guide for Next Generation Trekkers (1993) chalked up no nits for this show. Volume II 2 years later had loads, e.g. Riker's hand changing from left to right repeatedly as he questions Patahk.--Archer4real (talk) 16:54, April 10, 2013 (UTC)
Picard proposes to return Bochra to his ship and then escort the Romulans back to the Neutral Zone, to which Tomalak agrees. However, at the end of the episode, the Enterprise and the Romulan ship are shown flying away in opposite directions. This ist not really an inconsistency since after escorting the Romulans, Tomalak's ship would head for Romulan space and the Enterprise for their next mission. The part of the Enterprise escorting the romulan ship can be regarded as cut out. What do you think?
- They go in separate directions directly from planetary orbit. That means there was no escorting, cut or otherwise. Not saying the note should stay, since I hate nitpicks, but it is accurate. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
- The ships meet bow to bow and one ship has to turn in order for an escort to happen. And if you look closely the romulan shop banks just as it leaves frame. --Rambris 20:14, 2 Septempber 2009 (CET)
- Removed the nitpick. If it is a mistake, it's a production error, which we do not include here. If it isn't a mistake, then it shouldn't be there anyway. (Btw, why does Rambris's signature say he wrote it in 2009?!) – Saphsaph 03:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- Given his name isn't a link and September isn't spelt correctly I'd speculate that he didn't sign his post with four tildes but rather wrote it manually. It's likely therefore that 2009 is just a typo. CleverAndKnowsIt 06:23, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
- La Forge repeatedly refers to Centurion Bochra as "commodore" before he is informed of his real rank. It was likely sarcasm on La Forge's part as Bochra is clearly too young to hold a flag rank equivalent to admiral in Starfleet. There is no firm indication that commodore is an active rank in the Romulan fleet or Starfleet in the 2360s, but it cannot be entirely ruled out. The shooting script has La Forge first calls him "ensign" and then "commodore", as if goading Bochra into revealing his rank.
- Although it seems reasonable, reasonable speculation is still speculation. Unless it can be cited somewhere with some source saying that the intent is to "goad Botchra" or that it's intended to show "sarcasm", it should be removed, since then it would be guesswork. The second part with the script difference a nitpick, and since not shot, non-canon. – Saphsaph 03:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Federation-Klingon War Edit
As I recall, Riker mentions a war between the Federation and the Klingons that ended only a few years ago. Shouldn't there be mention of that somewhere in Continuity? - Mitchz95 04:30, November 21, 2011 (UTC)
- "A few years ago" is very non-specific. --OuroborosCobra talk 05:45, November 21, 2011 (UTC)
Riker: "That's what your people said a few years ago about Humans. Think how many died on both sides in that war."
It does sound like Riker's referring to a war (or at least, a major battle) between Humans and Klingons. - Mitchz95 16:30, November 21, 2011 (UTC)
- "A few years ago" relative to Federation history (the point Riker was making) is a greater amount of time that you are assuming. It's like saying "A few years ago Germans and Americans were at war" when talking about WWII. It doesn't mean recently; that statement is relative to the long period of American history.--31dot 22:35, November 21, 2011 (UTC)
Beverly's Hair Edit
Beverly Crusher (Gates McFadden) has very long hair in this episode. It is the only episode I know of in season 3 where she has long hair. The season 3 episodes before this one she has much shorter hair. The episodes afterwards appear to be filmed in order because in each later episode her hair slowly gets longer. She keeps the same flat hairstyle through "The Best Of Both Worlds" and in season 4, "The Best Of Both Worlds" part two her hair is still flat but is longer. None of these episodes are consistent with "The Enemy".
The only thing that makes sense is that "The Enemy" was produced first in season 3. But I read somewhere that "The Ensigns Of Command" was the first produced episode. In Correct 11:01, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
- Apart from "Evolution" and "The Ensigns of Command" being swapped at the beginning, as far as I'm aware all episodes in Season 3 were aired in production order. See the production numbers on TNG Season 3.–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 23:31, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
- See also this analysis (scroll down to "Human hairstyle secrets" about a third of the way).–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 23:40, April 10, 2012 (UTC)
- That's it. For some reason, they tried out another wig in that episode. --Jörg 10:31, April 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Interesting read, but a bit inaccurate. Gates didn't wear a wig in season one, that was her hair. She started wearing wigs in season three because apparently her hair was really thick and unruly (like a true redhead), and they were sick of having to constantly fix her hair, so putting her in a wig just made everyone's life easier (according to Gates in an interview. Joan Rivers, I think). No clue why they thought they could slip her in a long wig for this one episode and no one would notice. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk). 21:13, June 18, 2013 (UTC)