RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,344
Posts: 5,353,762
Members: 24,619
Currently online: 613
Newest member: nmatos2005

TrekToday headlines

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 25 2013, 12:08 PM   #16
Bry_Sinclair
Commodore
 
Bry_Sinclair's Avatar
 
Location: Along the border of Talarian space
Re: The Son'a

Some interesting discussions here that I'd never really considered before, especially about the fact that both the Ba'ku and Son'a have legitimate claims to the planet and the healing rings, the only thing that makes one seem "unworthy" is their startling similarity to Jocelyn Wildenstein (that and none of the Son'a seem willing to bang Picard).

On paper the Son'a look like a decent enough villan (excusing their Ba'ku roots), its just such a shame they never really lived up to their potential. But I did like their ships, its a shame we never saw them in DS9 since the Son'a were said to be involved with the Dominion--the species concept could've been redeemed somewhat.
__________________
Avatar: Captain Susanna Leijten, U.S.S. Silverfin NCC-4470, Border Service Third Cutter Squadron
Manip by: FltCpt. Bossco (STPMA)
Bry_Sinclair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 12:37 PM   #17
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: Way back of nowhere
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: The Son'a

As a Star Trek fan I would prefer Picard to have been inspired by what happened in "Journey's End" to not repeat forced relocation of colonists only to see at the end that the PD was right and that the Federation should have not have interfered with internal politics.

However I can see why the general public might just prefer to see Picard winning over a very attractive woman instead of understanding the PD. And I believe that INS made a decent enough profit at least to support another TNG movie.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 03:48 PM   #18
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: The Son'a

I wonder whether TPTB were intending for this to be a morally complicated situation where Our Heroes aren't necessarily very heroic, or whether they intended it to be a fairly straightforward scenario.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 04:05 PM   #19
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: The Son'a

DonIago wrote: View Post
I wonder whether TPTB were intending for this to be a morally complicated situation where Our Heroes aren't necessarily very heroic, or whether they intended it to be a fairly straightforward scenario.

no, T'Girl and others are giving the writer(there was only one) too much credit. Piller wasn't trying to create a dilemma, he was making a simple morality play. Unfortunately, he couldn't write a decent one.(incidentally, some members of the cast, like Brent Spiner, objected to the premise and brought it up a few times during the filming.)
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 06:19 PM   #20
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: The Son'a

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
As a Star Trek fan I would prefer Picard to have been inspired by what happened in "Journey's End" to not repeat forced relocation of colonists only to see at the end that the PD was right and that the Federation should have not have interfered with internal politics.
It would be easy to see the events of Jouney's End being a prime factor in Picard's thinking during Insurrection. Add to that the fact that Picard obviously found the Baku lifestyle to be personally appealing.

If Insurrection had taken place prior to Journey's End, combined with the Baku being a group of people that Picard could not (for some reason) personally identify with, Picard just might have assisted in the Baku's removal.

sonak wrote: View Post
[T'Girl and others are giving the writer (there was only one) too much credit.
All right then, I like the way it accidently turn out.

What "the writer intended" has never been very important to me personally, for me what actually arrives on screen is what I go off.



T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 06:53 PM   #21
Khan444
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: The Son'a

The problem is that there is even MORE reason to move the Ba'ku than there was in Journey's End. First of all, they are not native to the planet and its controlled by the Federation. The Federation has the legal right to remove them. Second, there's a full scale war going on against the Dominion and many people have already died. Hundreds of billions of lives are at stake, but Picard's going to fight for 600 people who want to live forever, I don't buy that he would do that. Many more lives were at stake here than in Journey's End. Spock said it best "the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." I also don't see the ENTIRE crew supporting him.
Khan444 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 07:55 PM   #22
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The Son'a

Khan444 wrote: View Post
I also don't see the ENTIRE crew supporting him.
I wouldn't have. I don't get how no one at all said, "Uh, sir... are you sure it's a good idea to defy Federation orders and deny us this super medical technology which will save millions of lives? Which would be kinda helpful since we're engaged in a life or death struggle... not to mention we don't wanna piss these Son'a guys off and add another enemy to our list... especially since they're producing ketracel white which our enemy finds slightly useful."
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 11:18 PM   #23
TheGoodStuff
Lieutenant Commander
 
TheGoodStuff's Avatar
 
Location: Scotland
Re: The Son'a

The problem with the Ba'ku and thus the Son'a, for me, is actually very simple.

We can spend all day here debating the morality and ethics of each side, the pro's and con's....but for me the REAL, underlying issue with Insurrection's bizarre plot is that it is completely lacking one sentence that could have helped the film make a lot more sense...

"We asked the Ba'ku to leave the planet, or give us a continent the size of Australia while they kept the rest, so that we could build a vast medical facility....they refused."

That's it for me. YES the film has a zillion plot holes but they are all built upon this unanswered question. Was it asked? Did the Ba'ku give a reason? It makes everyone, from Ba'ku to Son'a to Picard look like idiots.

I actually LIKE the bumbled philosophical question that "Is it ever right to forcefully relocate anyone?". The execution, however, is dismal.

The Son'a, Bak'u and Picard all look like idiots. The Bak'u are what? 600 strong?

SIX HUNDRED. My University holds ten times that ammount. My city, about a hundred times. What the hell is stopping the Son'a....just landing on another continent? What are the Bak'u planning on doing? Shelving their farms and bringing out some old school weapons that they have denounced?

Imagine 600 people living in Ireland on Earth.....why would you not just land your people in China? Japan? Australia? Brazil? The sheer ratio of landmass to Bak'u is staggering. I really dont see what the problem actually is and the film DOESN'T ACTUALLY TELL US. At no point is it made completely clear that the Bak'u aren't willing to hand over a huge swathe of land for medical use.

Sorry for the lecture guys but it has always bothered me.
__________________
#1. DS9 #2. TNG #3. VOY #4.ENT #5.TOS
We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing, all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes. - Gene Roddenberry
TheGoodStuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 01:08 AM   #24
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: The Son'a

TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
What the hell is stopping the Son'a....just landing on another continent? What are the Bak'u planning on doing? Shelving their farms and bringing out some old school weapons that they have denounced?
There a few problems with this, to start the Sona couldn't just live on the planet to obtain the cure, because the cure would have effected them too slowly, they would have died.

There also the fact that they didn't really want to live there. It would be like you TheGoodStuff quitting your job, selling your house, saying goodbye to your friends, and having to moving next to the pharmaceutical facility that produces the drugs that keep you alive.

Better to have the drugs sent to you, and for the Sona (and the Federation) to have the magic particles distributed to their many planets.

And you also need to consider that the Baku were able to force the Sona off the planet once before, they probably still could.

"We asked the Ba'ku to leave the planet, or give us a continent the size of Australia while they kept the rest, so that we could build a vast medical facility....they refused."
In a interesting scene cut from the movie, a Ferengi (Quark) shows up and say that he was going to build a medical spa on the planet, Picard said that he wouldn't permit the construction of such medical facilities on the planet.

So much for that idea,

And instead of asking the Baku if they would willingly leave the planet, the Federation should have openly approached them and simply informed them of the harvesting of the particles, explain the effect of the harvest upon the planet (rendered uninhabitable for generations), and direct told the Baku to get their things together.

They were leaving.

R. Star wrote: View Post
Khan444 wrote: View Post
I also don't see the ENTIRE crew supporting him.
I wouldn't have. I don't get how no one at all said, "Uh, sir... "
Look at the episode Pen Pals, there was debate among the senior officers as to the course of action that should be taken. The officers disagreed as to whether or not the prime directive applied.

This type of discussion was absent from Insurrection, no one disagreed with Picard, no one voiced opposition.

T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 02:59 AM   #25
The Overlord
Captain
 
Re: The Son'a

T'Girl wrote: View Post
The Overlord wrote: View Post
so they end being completely bland and generic
One of the reasons I like Insurrection (more so than most) is that it is more complex than the average Trek movie, Who the good guys are, and who the bad guys are isn't as obvious as it would first seem. The plot isn't black and white.

The movie could have been made simplistic but it wasn't, straight forward things like who the planet belongs too could have been easy by making the Baku indigenous to the planet instead of interstellar immigrants.

Soon after the Baku figured out the planet's special properties, they could have used their warp ships to spread the word to the galaxy, they didn't.

What's the morality of moving several hundred people in order to help multiple billions?

Instead of spoon feeding the audience, we're allowed to pick sides on our own. based on our own thoughts and beliefs. I like that.

None of that makes Son'a particularly interesting villains, especially since Ru'afo barely does anything during the film.

The movie can't seem to decide whether this is a gray conflict or black and white conflict. If this a gray conflict, the Son'a should have been made more sympathetic to reflect the gray nature of the conflict, if the conflict was more black and white, some of the crew should have disagreed with Picard.

The problem is, the Son'a greatest evil acts occur entirely off screen, so in a debate where one side is represented by drug dealing slavers, then one side is not well represented, but since the Son'a barely did anything menacing on screen, they are not very threatening either.

So the Son'a fail at being sympathetic and they fail at being scary, threatening villains. That's why making them "a little bit evil and little bit sympathetic" didn't work, because they were not sympathetic enough to be relatable and they were not evil enough to be menacing, so they were just bland. That is not the mark of a good villain, they are most forgettable villains to appear in a Star Trek movie.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 03:30 AM   #26
Khan444
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: The Son'a

You know another question that's never asked of the Ba'ku "are you people really going to put your own immortality and principles above the lives of hundreds of billions of people?" Do you know why it wasn't asked, because there is no answer that the Ba'ku could have given that DIDN'T make them look like selfish assholes.
Khan444 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 03:36 AM   #27
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The Son'a

T'Girl wrote: View Post
R. Star wrote: View Post
Khan444 wrote: View Post
I also don't see the ENTIRE crew supporting him.
I wouldn't have. I don't get how no one at all said, "Uh, sir... "
Look at the episode Pen Pals, there was debate among the senior officers as to the course of action that should be taken. The officers disagreed as to whether or not the prime directive applied.

This type of discussion was absent from Insurrection, no one disagreed with Picard, no one voiced opposition.

That would've made the movie way more interesting. Heck you could have the dissenters be the one sent back with the Enterprise to inform Earth too. The TNG crew largely lacked conflict which ironically was their biggest flaw from an entertainment standpoint.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 05:30 AM   #28
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: The Son'a

Khan444 wrote: View Post
You know another question that's never asked of the Ba'ku "are you people really going to put your own immortality and principles above the lives of hundreds of billions of people?" Do you know why it wasn't asked, because there is no answer that the Ba'ku could have given that DIDN'T make them look like selfish assholes.

yep, this point gets brought up again and again, and there's really no answer to it.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 26 2013, 09:09 PM   #29
HaventGotALife
Fleet Captain
 
HaventGotALife's Avatar
 
Re: The Son'a

Khan444 wrote: View Post
You know another question that's never asked of the Ba'ku "are you people really going to put your own immortality and principles above the lives of hundreds of billions of people?" Do you know why it wasn't asked, because there is no answer that the Ba'ku could have given that DIDN'T make them look like selfish assholes.
They don't believe in technology. There's your answer. And it's beside the point--they were never asked; the Federation was just going to move them without telling the Ba'ku. Think about that. It's not just moving. It's dying--condemning 600 people to die--that would ordinarily be immortal. They chose the planet before they knew what it would do to them. They weren't selfish.

Was it right to destroy black neighborhoods in order to build the interstate system? Was it right to move the Indians off their reservations, breaking a treaty, in order to build the Transcontinental highway?

This is a Star Trek movie, not Star Wars. The stakes are the Federation, facing extinction, has abandoned all that Picard has fought for through active participation in the culture, and defense of it from the Borg or the Romulans. We are there to seek out new lives and new civilizations. We are to do this peacefull, to build relationships with peoples of the universe to better understand our place in that universe and to seek out cooperation. That is the driving force of humanity. They do this, and every person who benefits has blood on their hands.

Picard asked an interesting question in this movie: "How many people does it take before it becomes wrong?" So ask yourself that when thinking about this. 1 million people have to die where they wouldn't have before. 10 million people. 1 billion people. Why does the number matter?

And another question, why does killing one of the crew, say Data, more objectionable then if we kill 600 people?

Ru'Afo is cuddly? He kills Admiral Dougherty. He is five minutes from killing Picard and all the members of his parent's community. What needs to happen, are you so enthralled with violence in movies, that you would rather see him be less relatable?

What is Star Trek? Or more importantly, what makes Star Trek unique to other Science Fiction? When are they breaking new ground?

The fact is, Star Trek stories about the complexity of human civilization through the prism of what we would find in space, are where it breaks ground. It imagines, rather brilliantly, what would happen if we got our wish. "Apprenticing for 30 years."

I would like an answer from those that dislike Insurrection about what makes Star Trek unique. Because I think this movie is imaginative, the best of TNG and Trek, and I think it takes risks that other Trek films failed to do. I will elaborate further if you wish, but I am done typing for now.
HaventGotALife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 27 2013, 01:33 AM   #30
The Overlord
Captain
 
Re: The Son'a

HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
Khan444 wrote: View Post
You know another question that's never asked of the Ba'ku "are you people really going to put your own immortality and principles above the lives of hundreds of billions of people?" Do you know why it wasn't asked, because there is no answer that the Ba'ku could have given that DIDN'T make them look like selfish assholes.
They don't believe in technology. There's your answer. And it's beside the point--they were never asked; the Federation was just going to move them without telling the Ba'ku. Think about that. It's not just moving. It's dying--condemning 600 people to die--that would ordinarily be immortal. They chose the planet before they knew what it would do to them. They weren't selfish.

Was it right to destroy black neighborhoods in order to build the interstate system? Was it right to move the Indians off their reservations, breaking a treaty, in order to build the Transcontinental highway?

This is a Star Trek movie, not Star Wars. The stakes are the Federation, facing extinction, has abandoned all that Picard has fought for through active participation in the culture, and defense of it from the Borg or the Romulans. We are there to seek out new lives and new civilizations. We are to do this peacefull, to build relationships with peoples of the universe to better understand our place in that universe and to seek out cooperation. That is the driving force of humanity. They do this, and every person who benefits has blood on their hands.

Picard asked an interesting question in this movie: "How many people does it take before it becomes wrong?" So ask yourself that when thinking about this. 1 million people have to die where they wouldn't have before. 10 million people. 1 billion people. Why does the number matter?

And another question, why does killing one of the crew, say Data, more objectionable then if we kill 600 people?

Ru'Afo is cuddly? He kills Admiral Dougherty. He is five minutes from killing Picard and all the members of his parent's community. What needs to happen, are you so enthralled with violence in movies, that you would rather see him be less relatable?

What is Star Trek? Or more importantly, what makes Star Trek unique to other Science Fiction? When are they breaking new ground?

The fact is, Star Trek stories about the complexity of human civilization through the prism of what we would find in space, are where it breaks ground. It imagines, rather brilliantly, what would happen if we got our wish. "Apprenticing for 30 years."

I would like an answer from those that dislike Insurrection about what makes Star Trek unique. Because I think this movie is imaginative, the best of TNG and Trek, and I think it takes risks that other Trek films failed to do. I will elaborate further if you wish, but I am done typing for now.
Again, its not necessarily the concept of the film that is bad, its the execution.

The concept could have made for a good film, but the way it was executed didn't work.

What makes the Ba'ku's claim to the planet better then the Son'a claim to the planet? Why is it wrong for the Son'a to force the Ba'ku off the planet, but okay for the Ba'ku to force the Son'a off the planet? How were the Luddite and pacifist Ba'ku able to force the more aggressive and tech savey Son'a off the planet? After losing the battle with the Ba'ku why didn't the Son'a simply establish a colony on the other side of the planet? How did the Ba'ku banish the Son'a if they had no technology?

Really the more you think about the Ba'ku and the Son'a, the less sense they make.

And here is the biggest question, is the conflict in this movie supposed to be a gray moral dilemma or a simple black and white morality tale, because the movie can't seem to decide that and it makes the message muddled. If its supposed to be a gray situation, the Son'a should have been more sympathetic, if its a simple black and white situation, the Son'a should have been far more evil and not native to the planet at all. As it stands now, the Son'a are just bland and forgettable villains, Ru'afo barely did anything in this movie.
The Overlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.