I actually preferred Dr. Pulaski. Diana Muldaur was better at portraying a convincing doctor.
Dr. Pulaski is also the better character.
I actually preferred Dr. Pulaski. Diana Muldaur was better at portraying a convincing doctor.
Nope. She was a great ripoff of McCoy and I really wish she'd stuck around.Pulaski was just a bad ripoff of McCoy. Right down to the fact she hated transporters.
TNG movie era suffered due to the exclusive focus on Picard and Dara. We could have had some great odd number movies if the focus had been shifted to others in the ensemble. Imagine a Worf focused movie...
Nope. She was a great ripoff of McCoy and I really wish she'd stuck around.
And just an unenjoyable character.Pulaski was just a bad ripoff of McCoy. Right down to the fact she hated transporters.
Not as much as Crusher didYeah, Pulaski sucked.
Well, she was saved by a transporter once so maybe that reconciled her with the thing.Pulaski was just a bad ripoff of McCoy. Right down to the fact she hated transporters.
Crusher was awful. I used to call her Beverlump. "I need to run more tests!" was pretty much her contribution to the show.
The episode where she kinda had ghost sex is one of those ones so outrageous and awful it becomes brilliant and legend, tho.
Ambassador Lwaxana Troi was a great character..so what if she fancied Picard?
Middle age woman chases man close to her own age..shock horror!
Old middle aged man has affairs/secret love for much younger woman....(Picard/Crusher, Picard/Vash) ......I can hear the crickets.
Given the recent discussion apparently not so controversial.The thread is for controversial opinions and that is mine.
Dr. Pulaski > Dr. Crusher
Crusher was undeveloped as a lead character but I'd hardly call her "awful." Diana Muldaur is the stronger actress but her own character was hamstrung by just one season of episodes and being little more than a female Leonard McCoy to provide a foil for Data.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.