• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

Chakotay should have been played by a Native American actor, and his culture should have been accurately based on one particular tribe instead of being this weird mishmash.

Kor

I agree that an Amerindian should be played by one. I don't like whitewashing. (John Wayne as Genghis Khan, worse example.)

However, for the opposing view some tribes are so...damaged that piecing them back together is an impossible task. The tribes of California for example. This is a future where the indigenous people of North American have melded into one for survival as an identity. It is a valid, if not terribly optimistic projection.
 
I agree that an Amerindian should be played by one. I don't like whitewashing. (John Wayne as Genghis Khan, worse example.)

However, for the opposing view some tribes are so...damaged that piecing them back together is an impossible task. The tribes of California for example. This is a future where the indigenous people of North American have melded into one for survival as an identity. It is a valid, if not terribly optimistic projection.
Which is why Chakotay identified with a South American Indian tribe?
 
To be fair, Robert Beltran is of Mexican heritage, so not whitewashing.

And there has been a lot of intermarrying between Indians and other cultures, including many Latin ones, so it's very plausible in Chakotay's case to not be fully American Indian. (In "BASICS, PART I", a vision of his father told him that a direct ancestor of his was born from a European raping his mother. Whether that is Spain, Britain, France, etc. we don't know, but given history it's certainly possible to be Indian and Latin.)

While I agree that a true Indian would have been a better choice for several reasons, with so much intermarrying and children born of two or more cultures happening already (I don't like to use the term 'race'... the only race is human. Ethnicity, culture... okay. Race implies a different species, which is totally false.) that by the 24th century, who is really a pure 'insert culture/ethnicity here'?
 
I prefer Robin Curtis’s portrayal of Saavik over Kirstie Alley’s. She just lands the Vulcan-ness a lot better, IMO.
 
Chakotay should have been played by a Native American actor, and his culture should have been accurately based on one particular tribe instead of being this weird mishmash.

Kor

Chakotay is to native Americans what Latka from Taxi is to central Europe.
 
Robin Curtis IS the better Saavik. She was more Vulcan in behavior, looked more Vulcan thanks to having actual Vulcan eyebrows and had a good rapport with Merritt Butrick's David Marcus. I can't say for certain she's the overall better actress but when I think of the Saavik that impressed me most I don't think of Kirstie Alley.
 
Robin Curtis IS the better Saavik. She was more Vulcan in behavior, looked more Vulcan thanks to having actual Vulcan eyebrows and had a good rapport with Merritt Butrick's David Marcus. I can't say for certain she's the overall better actress but when I think of the Saavik that impressed me most I don't think of Kirstie Alley.

Right. It’s helped a lot by the fact that there’s a whole subplot led by Saavik in TSFS. While her and Kirstie Alley probably share close to the same amount of screen time, combined, Saavik’s role is more prominent in TSFS. In TWOK she’s just kind of there as an additional crew member, but, isn’t making a substantial contribution to the plot other than just being a new character.
 
I think at least some of the differences in expressiveness/emotiveness between the two Saaviks can be attributed to director's intent. It's been said that Nimoy directed Curtis to play the character as "full Vulcan" or more Vulcan-like, or something like that, to differentiate Curtis's portrayal. I think that's a bit odd, considering all the great things that Nimoy said about Alley's performance and presence.

Kor
 
I think at least some of the differences in expressiveness/emotiveness between the two Saaviks can be attributed to director's intent. It's been said that Nimoy directed Curtis to play the character as "full Vulcan" or more Vulcan-like, or something like that, to differentiate Curtis's portrayal. I think that's a bit odd, considering all the great things that Nimoy said about Alley's performance and presence.

Kor

If you recall, there were deleted scenes in TWOK that established Saavik had some Romulan in her as well and Allley's portrayal may be accounting for that aspect of it. Because the dialogue establishing this was dropped, technically it's not canon and she could be portrayed as a full Vulcan in the next film without there being any continuity issues.
 
And then a fourth in STIV:TUC, instead of this new character of Valeris showing up out of nowhere. :shifty:

Kor

She was the bad girl. I imagine they did not want to sully Savik. There is also the fan theory that her dealing with the resurrected Spock's Pon Far had...consequences. She stayed on Vulcan to deal with that.

It's the bible, we're all created from dirt or mud which when you think about it is essentially true.

I prefer Sagan's Stardust. Far more romantic.
 
I believe I have read the not-sullying-Saavik idea before.

The part-Romulan but makes little sense, as they're the same genome, basically, just didn't embrace logic. It's not like you'd be biologically more ? what, passionate? If anything, Vulcans are said to have been crazy hotheaded in the past.

The whole "my ____ half" trope in Trek . . . I just hate it.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top