Re: Did Picard make the right decision with the Son'a/Baku
the premise was rather poorly thought out-possibly the most poorly thought out of all of the Trek movies.
-A small village of non-technological pacifists somehow defeats a group of technology-embracing rebel militants. How? We don't know.
-for some reason, the Son'a agree to go into exile. They build a respectable empire, but never return to conquer the Baku and retake the planet.
-the central "dilemma" of the movie shouldn't exist-if the planet's legally a Federation planet, then the scenario's no different than "journey's end," and there's no reason for Picard to interfere. If it's NOT, then the Son'a were free to go in anytime to retake the planet themselves. Ru'afo didn't need the Federation at all.
-Ru'afo decides to deceive Dougherty about the Baku, making the whole situation harder. Even after Picard and Dougherty both learn that the Baku aren't primitives, neither simply suggests negotiating with the Baku and explaining the situation.
It's a stupid premise that falls apart when exposed to logic, and it's why the movie doesn't lend itself IMHO to a lot of re-watch value.
This is one of the reaons I liked the original idea. Especially since the moral dilemma wasn't going to mean crap anyway. I mean does anyone really think the Federation was going to actually get their hands on the fountain of youth? That would be too much of a game changer for the people running trek at the time. Hell they weren't even allowed to keep Genesis for peat's sake and that time they didn't even need to worry about two spin offs that were running at the time.
I remember thinking that the original premise was good, but what was it again? Something about a rogue admiral down on the planet with the inhabitants or something?
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"