What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

Yes, quite so.

 

Like when Spock was clearly upset that Kirk and Bones would be overly pleased with themselves.

 

Largely because Nimoy said he played Spock as someone who always kept his emotions under extreme control, not emotionless.

 

I knew Spiner was aware of this.

 

TNG: Nemesis is not that bad(I don't say it's great, just not THAT bad). Troi should be treated better and she should be with Tom Riker(another character who deserve better).
DS9: I just don't like Sisko. He isn't in my top 3 captain list and I never like Brooks's acting. But I still like all other DS9 characters.

Haven't seen other series for a long time so I can't recall any opinion of them.

 

Well I don't like most of the Kurtzman produced Star Trek. That gets me in a lot of trouble on facebook when I say so. Most well verse Trek fans I know share this opinion, but harsh backlash in some platforms seems to make it count as a controversial opinion.

 

Which ones are Kurtzman's?

 

Being a thousand light years away from Starfleet Command has its privileges.

 

Rules in Starfleet are frequently bent if no flag officers are nearby. Kirk lived much of his career by the maxim "What Starfleet Command doesn't see or read in my log entries won't hurt me or my crew."

 

That's ok. Most people give me grief for liking it.

 

Yeah, a thousand light-years, yet we're supposed to believe that Archer's Enterprise got there in a couple of days...

 

my point
He was not a rule breaker in the series
somewhat in the flicks
That eventually becomes his rep in the future.

I was trying to make the point that I don't think the characters in the movies are all that similar to how they are in the series. TNG Picard is far more different, granted. One could argue all the others stay pretty similar to how they were in the series, though. TNG

 

TOS Movie Kirk is very different from TOS Kirk. One could say he's the most like his TOS self in Star Trek V and have a good point but he's pretty much middle age/midlife crisis Kirk by the time he's in his fifties and heading for the age of 60.

 

I think it's a natural progression for Kirk. We are all a bit different at different points in our life.

At the time of the movies, Kirk is a lot older, and I've noticed that the older people get, the less they give a damn about rules if it's for a good cause. (I've observed this in not just other people, but myself, as well.)

 

Starfleet Academy Kirk(circa 2252): Grim, by the book, dedicated to his studies.
TOS Kirk: More freewheeling and prone to bend if not break the rules if the greater good demands he do so.
TOS Movie Kirk: increasingly more cynical and grouchy but still retaining sparks from his thirties and early years as a Captain, ready to listen even if he's reluctant to change his mind about something.

 

For me, the episode also falls apart when Picard is so horrible at basic survival techniques that he can't even get a campfire going without help.

Scotty in particular is ill-served by the movies. TOS Scotty is the ultimate professional, cool under pressure and just gets the job done when others are losing their heads. Movie Scotty just gets broader and sillier from TSFS on.

 

Here's a controversial Star Trek opinion I've developed over the last year or so of rewatching TOS and DS9 on the H&I network: Avery Brooks' line deliveries could get a LOT odder than William Shatner's ever did, particularly when he went big.

 

Brooks is a good actor. WAY bettter than William Shatner, though? Increasingly debatable. Both are broad. Same with Kate Mulgrew. All three are on roughly the same levels of performance quality.

 

Regarding Picard not being able to start a fire...

In "BASICS, PART II", the crew had a hard time starting a fire. Janeway said it was likely the composition of what they had on hand. Maybe something like that happened on El-Adrel, but Captain Dathon knew ahead of time and had the proper kindling to make it work quickly.