Unpopular Trek Opinions — What Are Yours?

Star Trek The Motion Picture is not a boring film and is under rated along with Star Trek Insurrection.

Star Trek Generations is a decent film

Neelix didn't irritate me all the time

Would have preferred if Kes remained on Voyager and Seven of Nine had just made a guest appearance in a two part Borg story.

Star Trek Deep Space Nine is my favorite Trek series yet I was introduced to Star Trek through The Next Generation.

Captain Picard is a superior captain than Kirk.

 

You're preaching to the converted here (check out my rant about costumes on the BSG Board) I've said almost exactly the same thing.

I'm not including quotes from my post in this post as it gets too confusing to edit. But didn't I say (or write that it would be an unending task - AND that the suggestion to do so was a joke in the first place???)

No danger there, I only sweat large stuff - RE: previous paragraph - Questions of Reality and Existance = large; difference between canon and continuity = small.

 

You never know. People are still watching TOS 40 years from its first showing. As to the why - as with TOS for fun, enjoyment, drama, perspectives on the future, the characters. It might even be on future education syllabuses.

I don't know, DS9 just seems to attract people with ideas about foretelling the future - it's probably quantum.

 

Not really...

 

In terms of politics, DS9 is not very futuristic, IMO. It's just a history lesson of human politics up to the 20thC. The cardassians and the bajorans represent the Arabs and the Jews. Aliens might have very different politics.

TOS is still being watched 'cos some of the science fiction concepts in it are still good. It is a sort of Shakespeare in SF in regard to the concepts. A lot of thought and sweat went into thinking far ahead. And, the characters are appealing.

 

Hence the "Unpopular" part of "Unpopular Trek Opinions".

 

I lot of thought (and sitting in your own sweat - I know, I'm writing at the moment), and I'm not lessening TOS in any way by pointing out some of the things I've noted about all the TREK series. I wish people wouldn't get so Klingon, I've had one drive-by already about TOS, and the topic hadn't even been about it.

Far from being merely a history lesson, I think 'Homefront' and 'Paradise Lost' have a lot to say about the current 'war on terror' (21st Century) even though they were first aired in 1996.

As for who and if the Cardassian-Bajoran situation is about on ole 20-21st century Terra I couldn't say. It really depends on who you think the Bajorians represent and who the Cardassians, just as your politics will determine who and if you favour one side or the other in the middle eastern situation.
I know in Northern Ireland that the two sides of the divide there are known to fly either Palestinean or Isrealie flags next to their own in 'sympathy' with whatever side they identify with.

I personally wouldn't declare which I thought was which (if either and until it was brought up, it had never occurred to me) as regards comparisons and I wouldn't recommend anybody else do either. Its too inflammatory and it'll reveal too much...

 

Well, ONE of us must have a malfunctioning Universal Translator...

 

I believe that Kirk and crew within the Original Series is being mysteriously pulled or guided into finding planets that keep mimicking Earth in some way by a super powerful being like the Q or Trelane to help strengthen the human race thru out the galaxy.

 

So get it fixed.

 

Ohh Miaow!!!

bored now - think I'll ignore all cats from now on...

 

Really?

I believe it was by a cosmic ray based on an as yet uncharted heavy element, or dead aliens or something
Maybe the same one that affected the crew of a later Enterprise some 90 years after, causing them, for the first year or so of their mission, to have remarkably similar adventures to those early pioneers.

After the first year, it kind of mysteriously went away or something.

Maybe we should establish a religion - any thoughts on a name?

 

What, that some species can force another to evolve?

That species evolve?

That IS an unpopular ST opinion! Darwin will be spinning in his grave!

 

How wude!

 

• 
  That's a sentence I never thought I'd see written without a smiley
  
  
  Now that I have the time to write an answer to your lengthy VOY/ENT post:
  
  
  Yes. Seriously.
  
  It's not even such an uncommon opinion as you seem to think. You really never heard/saw anyone state it before?! Now, if it was someone saying that ENT was better than TOS, or TNG, or DS9, then I could understand your surprise, because those are uncommon opinions, but you'll find a few people on Trek BBS with those opinions.
  
  
  #10 - T'Pol was no more in the spotlight than Archer and Trip, and you could say in the same way that this is what makes her similar to Spock, Data or Odo. Aliens, robots and outsiders in general tend to be in the spotlight on Trek shows.
  
  For #9 - oh please. Now a forced mind meld is the same thing as being assimilated by the Borg? Pretty much every character on Trek was violated in some way. Picard was assimilated by the Borg (which means he has more in common with Seven in that respect than T'Pol does), Riker was mentally violated in Frame of Mind,Troi was actually mentally raped a few times, O'Brien was mentally violated through being made to believe he spent 20 years in prison and killed his friend, Valeris had a mind meld forced on her (that would actually be the same as what happened to T'Pol... hell, Dukat had a forced meld attempted against him, so he has more in common with T'Pol than Seven in that respect), Uhura and Rand were sexually assaulted, ...
  
  #7 is meaningless since the same applies to a bunch of other crewmembers on any crew in Trek - Spock, McCoy, Crusher, Guinan, Dax, Chakotay, Tuvok...
  
  #8 - Spock, Data, Worf, Odo...
  
  #2 and 6 are about the same thing and neither of those make Seven "the first of the kind", since Spock, Data and Tuvok all came before her. So - by your logic, isn't Seven just a ripoff from Spock and Data?
  
  So basically, the only thing you can name as the characteristic that is common for Seven and T'Pol only is that they were hawt, big-breasted chicks in catsuits whose sex appeal was meant to boost the ratings. Do you really think that this was such a unique concept that it made Seven "the first of her kind"? The only thing there that is a little more specific and hasn't been featured on 95% of TV shows out there is the catsuit - and it's blatantly obvious that they had nothing to do with the characterization and didn't make any sense for either of the characters in-universe; the catsuits were there just because of B&B's penchant for them.
  
  If you were going to argue that T'Pol is a ripoff from an earlier Trek character, it would make more sense to argue that she's a ripoff from Spock: she is a reserved logical Vulcan, the only one on a ship full of humans, she argues the logical perspective, tends to be (in earlier seasons) arrogant and contemptuous towards humans for their emotional behavior, but becomes loyal to the captain and over time develops close relationships with him and an other overly-emotional human, they often try to make her loosen up, she has very strong emotions and passions beneath the icy exterior. And the trio of Archer, T'Pol and Trip was obviously modeled on the TOS trio of Kirk, Spock and McCoy (though how successful they were in it is debatable, and many would argue that the show should have focused more on the other members of the crew). Basically, it seems like TPTB thought "Hey, how about we replicate the TOS trio, but we make the Spock-like character female? She'll be exotic, mysterious, simmering beneath the cold exterior - all those things that made Spock a major sex symbol for the female fans - and she'll be a hot chick in a catsuit! Guys will go wild for her!.. And we can have something like Kirk/Spock and Spock/McCoy slash, but this time we can actually put it on the show, since it's not gay now..."
  
  However, I think that she is also an interesting character in her own right, and there are significant differences between her and Spock, so I'm not calling her a ripoff. While Spock is Starfleet from the start, had already served with humans for years, and had known Kirk and Spock for some time in TOS, T'Pol is from the time when the relations between Vulcans and humans were not yet co cozy, she starts off antagonistic to Archer and his crew, and develops loyalty and friendships to them over time. Spock is half-human, and has spent a lot of his life among humans (not to mention that he has grown up with a human mother), and human ways are actually something he is very familiar with; T'Pol has spent some time on Earth but being surrounded by humans is a new experience for her, and only starts learning more about human nature and behavior during the show. Spock is obviously ashamed of his half-human ancestry, was an outsider on Vulcan, and embraces Vulcan traditions and heritage while trying to deny his human side - which is a huge contradiction, since, just like T'Pol, he chose to serve with humans rather than live among Vulcans; maybe being an outsider among humans has made him cling to his Vulcan heritage even more strongly. Spock is essentially a mixed race child trying to find his place in the world; T'Pol is a full Vulcan (at least in canon), raised among Vulcans only, but is drawn to the forbidden fruit and feels a need to rebel againt her upbringing and explore her emotions. T'Pol was allowed to develop and change during the show, while Spock could only do that in the movies.
  
  
  
  That means nothing. A TV show should show these things, or at least have a character mention them. If they don't, it's bad storytelling.
  
  
  In other words, they took the premise of a ship lost in the Delta Quadrant and desperate to get home, and turned it into another TNG (only not as good). What's the point of the premise, if what you get is another happy crew exploring 'strange new worlds' (which aren't even all that strange or different from any other aliens we've seen before) and fooling around on the holodeck?
  
  
  
  
  
  Are you serious?
  
  Minor things? Like, the writers not being able to decide whether Janeway is desperate to get her crew home (there was even an episode where Tuvok goes on about how guilty she feels about stranding them in the Delta Quadrant - which, surprise, surprise, we never saw a slightest hint of before or after), or to explore anything she encounters along the way? One moment she is determined to cling to her Starfleet principles, the next she says "We're in the Delta Quadrant, different rules apply here" and does things like make alliances with the Borg. One moment she says that they will always be explorers, then after Carey was killed she says that exploration is not worth the loss of lives... which should mean that she's rethinking all that she used to believe in, but in fact there's no indication that this is an important moment, and is quickly forgotten.
  
  In an episode (Nothing Human) everyone is outraged at the idea of using valuable medical data to save lives, because they were obtained through unsavory anbd criminal means (Crell Moset's experiments), but they have no problems using Borg technology all the time?
  
  Seven's nanoprobes can resurrect Neelix? Then why can't VOY crew used them to resurrect anyone else? Why is this forgotten after the episode? This is HUGE! Did they bring the technology to Earth? Are murder and accident victims being resurrected all the time after the VOY finale? I want to know!
  
  Janeway says she cares about her entire crew, but in the finale, she obviously only cares for some people (Seven, Chakotay, maybe Tuvok) and is willing to change history to prevent Seven being killed - but why doesn't she go back to prevent the death of Carey, or Ballard, or people who died in Caretaker? If you can go back and change history like Admiral Janeway did, why not, for instance, go back even further back and stop Borg before they assimilated Picard? Imagine how many lives would be saved there. How does time travel work in VOY, anyway? The Borg Queen said in Endgame that, when Captain Janeway dies, there will be no old Admiral Janeway to come back do hurt the Borg... but what she doesn't say is that then Captain Janeway won't die, and... Paradox!!! Alternate timelines would make more sense... but in this case, VOY's ending did not happen in the prime timeline!
  
  And don't get me started on the holograms! One moment the crew treat the Doctor as a person, next they treat him as just a program, because the plot demands it because the episode is built on the Doctor wanting his rights to be recognized (Latent Image)... It's clear however that we're supposed to think of The Doctor as sentient being, a person, who is very different from his creator, Lewis Zimmerman. But then the Doctor creates a Crell Moset hologram, and everyone starts treating the Moset hologram as if he was Moset himself, and responsible for Moset's crimes that he couldn't even know of - because he was created by the Doctor himself, based on the partial data in Starfleet records, which did not include any information about Moset's crimes and unethical practices! The Doctor sure liked what he saw there, or else he wouldn't have chosen Moset as a basis for his holographic assistant. (Not to mention the idiocy of the whole problem of B'Elanna rejecting the treatment because the hologram looked Cardassian, when all the Doc had to do was say "Computer, change appearance parameters to Human.") Then the Moset hologam starts expressing some ideas that the Doctor doesn't like, and the Doctor deletes him. If Moset hologram was sentient, then what the Doctor did was MURDER! And if he was not, then the only person to blame for him not being ethical enough was the Doctor for creating him in the first place.
  
  I could go on. VOY is full of contradictions, its internal continuity is horrible, the characterization and ethics are terribly inconsistent, way too many storylines don't make sense.
  
  What are those canon breaches on ENT that are "really important" and how are they worse than what VOY did? The worst discontinuity issue on ENT I can think of was the Vulcan mind-meld issue in Fusion and Stigma, and this was fixed in season 4 by smart writers who found a way to correct the earlier mistakes of B&B.
  
  
  I don't agree, and I wouldn't.
  
  
  Yes way. T'Pol had real character development, so did Archer, so did Trip, and even Soval.
  
  
  You'll find that other people might disagree with you on chemistry. As for Trip/T'Pol, their relationship wasn't handled the best way in season 3, but there were good moments and potential in season 1 (see Breaking the Ice) and the ending to their story in Terra Prime was good. (Then B&B tried to undo it with TATV, but I'm not counting that, as it was just a holodeck simulation. )
  
  
  Evangeline Lilly and Katee Sackhoff complained (and rightfully so) about bad storylines for their characters on Lost and BSG respectfully, I suppose that means that those shows were worse than VOY.
  
  
  Um... because they were, in the final episode. I'm certainly not denying that. Most of the ENT fans hate TATV with a passion, as well.
  
  
  I could say that the only worthwhile relationship on VOY was between Janeway and her cups of coffee. Doesn't make it true.
  
  
  The point is that a show getting canceled is hardly a proof of its lack of quality. In fact, it usually has very little to do with quality. The factors that do matter are ratings, costs of making the show, the channel it is on, and the executives that decide on its fate. There are lots of good shows that get canceled and a lot of garbage that goes on and on for years. And ratings are not a proof of quality or lack of it, either. Unless you believe that Big Brother, American Idol and telenovelas are the pinnacle of human achievement in the field of TV production.
  
  
  Um... no. I know what a circular argument is, and that was not a circular argument. That was me expressing my opinion. Just like you are expressing yours without any evidence to back it up.
  
  
  How do you know? And how do you know that the people on VOY would have hung out with each other if they met "in the real world"?
  
  
  Again - evidence? Examples?
  
  
  And you did see it on VOY?
  
  
  What the what?
  Archer and Hoshi were quite close for a captain and a crewmember and had a lot of respect for each other.
  
  
  Well, let's see: The Doctor/Seven had lots of potential and got a lot of screentime, but in the end it remained one-sided in every way, since we only learned how The Doc felt about Seven, but never really learned what Seven thought of the Doc. It wasn't a relationship as much as it was Seven just passively reacting to the Doctor trying to mentor her. (Kes/The Doctor friendship was much better as both of them actually participated in it, but as we know, Kes got booted off the show unceremoniously and then was brought back in an awful storyline, only to leave again. Though, on the positive side, Neelix became much more tolerable when he wasn't around her.) Janeway/Chakotay was played with for 7 seasons, and then, after having pined for the captain for years, Chakotay starts an out of the blue romance with Seven, someone he never seemed the slightest bit interested in for 4 years she'd been on the ship - which, I guess, solidifies his role as background furniture who can be used any way the writers seem fit, having no real personality. The only relationship that seems intact (other than Paris/Torres, which, as I said, was an exception as it was really well developed) is Janeway/Seven... although that opens a whole other can of worms, as old Janeway's actions in Endgame seem rather selfish (see my thoughts about old Janeway's actions in Endgame).

 

(cont.)

Which are just some of the reasons why Endgame is almost as bad a finale as TATV. But what makes TATV worse is that it shits all over the show itself and its characters and its fans. It's like "this show is crap anyway, let's talk about TNG instead." Endgame at least seems to be trying to be the finale of VOY. And in a way, it is a fitting finale, in the sense that it is no different than most of the show itself: full of plotholes and contradictions (the time travel paradox), poor continuity (has nothing to do with the Caretaker, Suspiria, the Pathfinder, or anything that had happened in the previous episodes - we get a last-minute solution instead), a poor use of Borg who seem easy to defeat, a forced plot that comes out of nowhere (the Seven/Chakotay romance, with cheesy scenes that lack any chemistry), failure to use the potential of the premise (we don't see the homecoming, Admiral Paris and Barclay are wasted in their roles), taking the easy way out and letting Janeway and crew have their cake and eat it, instead of presenting a really hard moral choice... Which all pretty much describes the show as a whole.

I don't understand the Dominion War reference. As for 1) lizard-like aliens, or 2) silly looking aliens... um, you sure you did watch VOY? The Hirogen, the dinosaur-descended aliens from Distant Origin... and as for silly looking, the Kazon, and pretty much every bumpy headed alien race they met along the way.

Well, I guess it would be better if they were a race from TNG or DS9... sure, you'd know exactly what happens to them later and there would be no mystery about them at all, but hey, who needs mystery, right?

Why come up with any new races? It's much better to re-use previous villains, say, Borg over and over...

After all, the Federation consists of only 180 worlds, the rest of the galaxy features... how many planets? And how many planets and races from the Alpha Quadrant did we see and learn about in TOS, TNG, and DS9? Then substract who had the first contact with humans only in TOS and TNG... Yes, it is absolutely logical to feature only known races in a prequel set 100 years before.

The Xindi themselves were so-so, my least favorite part of the storyline. I didn't like the one-dimensional villainy of Golim and the Xindi-lizards, or that there wasn't more diversity shown within each of the species (though we only saw one or two people from each) and while Degra was a great character, I disliked the fact that it was the more-human like Xindi who were "good" while those who were uglier by human standards and resembled species that humans dislike, like lizards and insects, were the "bad" ones.

But the storyline overall was a great idea, it revitalized the show, brought suspense and urgency and an opportunity for a season-long storyarc that would push the characters to their limits, physically, psychologically and ethically. This is what VOY might and should have done with the Year of Hell. After playing safe for 2 seasons, the show finally took some risks in season 3, which is more than VOY ever did. See Azati Prime/Damage: we saw the ship get REALLY wrecked, and the main characters at lowest point: T'Pol with her addiction to Trelium-D, and Archer crossing the ethical line more than ever before and becoming what he despised, pirating a ship of explorers who were similar to what he used to be, and despising himself for it. And, amazingly for someone who's watched all of VOY, none of this was forgotten in the very next episode.

It's also funny that there was more conflict and tension between the Starfleet an the MACOs than there ever was between the Starfleet and the Maquis on VOY. And the anomalies that the crew encountered really looked strange and dangerous, and we got to see their effects - it wasn't just "oh look - there's an anomaly, let's see what it is".

Why should they tie them to the other series? It happened 100 years before Kirk and 200 years before Picard and the rest.

Who says you have to like them? I'm more interested in conflict than in everyone being nice and getting along. Though I can't think of a show where Vulcans were nice and sweet. They were arrogant and beholden to barbaric old traditions on TOS, almost non-existent on TNG, assholes, murderers and terrorists on their rare appearances on DS9, and represented on VOY by one grumpy sod with suppressed violent urges, and one wuss who tried to force his fellow officer to have sex with him when he had Pon-Farr.

Really? All I can say is that there are many, many people who completely disagree. ENT made Andorians one of my favorite races in Trek.

Well, there is no accounting for tastes.

Yes, as a TNG episode it is bad. But as an ENT episode it is horrible. It doesn't even make sense as a TNG episode as it contradicts The Pegasus. But while it is technically an ENT episode, it doesn't make sense if you look at it that way. If it's an ENT episode, who are those two strangely dressed people, and why am I watching a lengthy scene of the two of them discussing some problem of theirs that has never been mentioned in this show? As someone who's watched TNG, of course I know who Riker and Troi are (and I know that their conversation doesn't make sense in the context of season 7 TNG, though it's trying to tie to it), but why should one assume that every ENT viewer should know Riker and Troi, or care about them? And even if they do, this is not what ENT finale should be about. If I want to watch Riker and Troi and their issues, I'll watch TNG or the TNG movies.

But they made the entire ENT finale a holodeck diversion of Riker and Troi, and while they may say it was an homage to Trek in general, it wasn't. It was an homage to TNG through and through - with lines like "All good things...", "Here's to the next generation..." Now that could work as an episode in the middle of the season, but as a finale?

And what we saw happen with the ENT crew just didn't make sense, Trip's death was stupid and made him and the crew look stupid, the plot with Shran and his daughter and some random aliens out of nowhere wasn't a story for the finale, and worst of all - the characterization was awful, it was as if B&B were determined to 1) negate any development the characters had gotten previously, and 2) prove that there isn't and shouldn't be any such thing as character development. We're to believe that 6 years had passed, but nobody has even gotten a promotion? Nobody's progressed in any way since Terra Prime, and T'Pol seems to have even regressed, being as confused, sad and out of touch with her emotions like she was halfway through the show; and we learn that Trip and T'Pol's relationship had ended 6 years ago - so does that mean that the last scene in Terra Prime was the end of their relationship? It seemed the opposite.

Terra Prime should have been the finale of ENT. It featured a good villain and a real threat that the crew had to deal with - and appropriately, the final threat came from humans, who embodied the xenophobia that the main characters were guilty of at the beginning of the show. The stage was set for the future birth of the Federation - contrary to what B&B seemed to have thought, it wasn't even necessary to actually see it come to pass a few years later - Archer showed that he has finally learned to give good speeches and the last scene implied the hope that Trip and T'Pol could overcome their issues and differences, and could try to start anew.

Some of the VOY characters were entertaining enough (except for Chakotay and Kim, who were just dull), but I didn't relate to them or feel that emotionally attached to any of them as I did to at least some of the characters on other Trek shows.

I can see why some people don't like ENT characters. There are no larger-than-life characters on ENT. There are no androids who want to become human, or sentient holograms, or people from a proud warrior race, none of the archetypes that may be iconic to an SF audience. The humans on the show are not the enlightened, perfect 24th century humans. The captain is more flawed and human and fallible and without the presence of the other lead Trek captains. The resident Vulcan is more low-key than Spock or other outsider characters like Data or Odo, and even the doctor, who at first glance seems to fill the role of the wacky comic alien, is actually very down-to-earth, and believable as someone who would actually serve as a doctor on a starship. By contrast, The Doctor from VOY is a great character, but he is so flamboyant and OTT that he seems like a sitcom character. (A great sitcom character, though. Like someone from Frasier. The others on VOY are more like characters from average or bad sitcoms.) The ENT crew are all more 'ordinary', more flawed and human and more like people you might meet in real life, and the acting is more realistic. This may be why I care about them. In comparison, the VOY crew seem like sitcom characters, there's the OTT main comedian in the Doctor, there's Neelix as a comic relief whose role on VOY is completely unbelievable (why is he on away missions? why is he in senior staff meetings?), there's the captain whose only consistent character trait is that she's, like, totally badass, there's the "spiritual Indian" stereotype, there's the good-natured jock who always has a ready cool one-liner and hangs out with a nerd who's unlucky in love...

All in all, both shows had lots of flaws, but ENT took some risks, and ended up with really good seasons 3 and 4, before being canceled and not getting a chance to show what its next seasons would have been like, while VOY always played it safe and was mediocre throughout its 7 seasons.

 

One of my favorite parts of the whole Xindi storyline was when Dolim was interrogating Archer in 'Azati Prime'. Archer just keeps goading the guy and making him even more pissed off, and you can almost feel Dolim's blood boil 'cuz he's getting so white hot angry at the human.

 

The plots of TOS are all about humans and human problems, and current human politics (the Cold War, the Vietnam War, the 60s subcultures). And those references are as blatant as possible.

DS9, on the other hand, has no one on one direct parallels. It's about the things that have happened many times - occupations, wars, war crimes, racism - but you can't just say "X is this, and Y is this", the way you can easily identify TOS Klingon Empire as the Soviet Union, or Private Little War as the Vietnam War. Honestly, I don't get your Jews and Arabs parallel. How does that work? Many people have compared the Bajorans to Palestinians after Ensign Ro (which would make the Cardassians the Israelis, right?), and many people have compared Bajorans to Jews and Cardassia to Nazi Germany in Duet (though the parallel doesn't work for the Occupation in general as the Cardassians were not practicing a mass scale genocide or trying to kill all Bajorans, or the number would have been much higher than 10 million in 50 years). So how do you combine those two? And then Dukat's whole White Man's Burden attitude to Bajorans doesn't make sense for either, but could work for any number of colonial powers and their attitude to the "backward" natives. Someone on this forum compared his attitude to the Bajorans to a white slave-owner's attitude to his black slaves. The Bajoran caste system makes one think of India. The differences between various terrorist factions in Past Prologue made someone, as far as I remember, note that it's a bit like various factions of IRA. And so on. I've heard all sorts of comparisons - and it's because DS9 borrows inspiration from all sorts of real life sources, but is ultimately about universal issues rather than any current situation.

Also, the characters on DS9 are more appealing than those on TOS, or at least there are more appealing characters on DS9 than on TOS. Mostly because TOS never bothered to flesh out more than 3 or 4 characters, and even they were never allowed to change and develop on the show. They had to wait for the movies.

 

Voyager is a smashing solid series that has no errors or flaws. It is a smashing adrenaline rush ride that doesn't stop. It smashes puny Enterprise. It smashes all illogical statements against it. It has a smashing sexy crew that blows my mind sideways. It is so smashingly well written, it is like almost real. It is just a smashing good show.