Thread: Terra Prime
View Single Post
Old April 21 2013, 06:30 PM   #31
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Terra Prime

horatio83 wrote: View Post
Good points, the Terra Prime folks have been a minority as they would have been able to influence politics otherwise.

I think Samuels is basically the character that R. Star wants. Sure, the time frame (Samuels already learned his lessons when the story beings) doesn't match but it is again a question of atmosphere and not of stupid literal reading. Samuels' biography mirrors the story of the species. There are some demons from our past who sometimes reemerge (think about the fictional historical WWII/eugenics background that influences this episode, Khan, TNG's pilot, Bashir and so on; sometimes the historical toilet comes up) but for the time being we defeat them.
So... first you insult, then you just plainly put words in my mouth? Did you not even read my first post? Or do you just cherry pick what you read? First sentence of my initial post I said it was one of the better stories in season 4. Just because it is, doesn't mean it's perfect or is free from criticism of some obvious flaws. There is middle ground between good and terrible believe it or not. But when your argument is to insult a point of view that's different from yours then just put words in their mouth when they don't say things you like... well how serious can one take you?

Samuels? We don't know a lot about him admittedly. We have only his word that he reformed. His actions are he was part of Terra Prime, then tried to stop them to the point he had no problem killing Archer and company to do it. Viewpoints can change, but with politics there are always ulterior motives so it's hard to take things at face value. I'd be willing to say if Paxton won, Samuels would suddenly "see the light" in Terra Prime again. Politicians so often position themselves to land on their feet no matter the political landscape.

To the protesters. Sure it could be a vocal minority. It could be the majority. We don't know, it was never addressed and no sort of resolution was reached on it. That's my main nitpick with the episode. They bring it up, simply to lend weight to the threat of the bad guy, that he's threatening the whole founding of the Federation, then don't bother to explain it or resolve it because it proves inconvenient to the apparent desire for a happy ending. It's like if Archer shot lightning bolts out of his hands to beat Paxton. He never did this before, no explanation is given for it, and he never does it again. It'd be silly. This is the same way.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote