Does it count if the plan was always resurrection and to create a chance for Stamets to have to become more open emotionally with the crew?
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Does it count if the plan was always resurrection and to create a chance for Stamets to have to become more open emotionally with the crew?
See, I love that stuff. That's probably more controversial.
That felt like back-peddling at the time when the producers went on The Ready Room to reassure everyone he'd be back.
I'm glad they resurrected Culber and brought back my Trek crush Wilson Cruz. That they did doesn't negate what I feel was an egregious mistake in the first place, especially at the time it aired. And that the "previously on" kept showing the neck snap... yeah no.
Strong disagree.
Tuvix was a transporter accident. Splitting him up was no more morally wrong than taking Dax from Verad even though Verad Dax wanted to remain Verad Dax.
Same. The weird religious stuff was probably the part of Battlestar Galactica I liked the most.
the back peddling was bringing his character back. There was so much they could have done storyline wise, but instead they decided to play it safe and fall back on a classic sci fi trope.
ENT season 2 wasn't great, but it was better than ENT seasons 1, 3, and 4.
Yes! I loved the enchanted forest of sporestuff and would love to go back
I disagree completely with this. They killed him off knowing they were going to return him later. It was built as a character/relationship arc for Culber and Stamets, and it worked out beautifully.
Culber is currently my favorite DSC character, and Wilson Cruz's performance in early S2 when they rescued him from the realm of the mycelium network is amongst his absolute best work as an actor. I think the arc brought visibility to the character (really both him and Paul), allowed the actor to shine, and cemented Culber and Stamets as one of Trek's most well-portrayed relationships across the entire franchise.
The result of that arc, and everything that came with it, elevated Culber to my most appreciated character on the show.
There's absolutely no evidence of that. The evidence that we have in hand is that the arc was always planned. And, even during S1 before Culber was killed, he and Stamets were described as being in a "star-crossed lovers" arc....which further supports the intent.
Just because it was emotional and it sucked when he was killed doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do or that it shouldn't have been done. Looking back over the arc and the effect it had on the two characters, it was clearly a good development, no matter what we / I / You may have thought at the time.
Last edited:
I don't know why but I find Star Trek titles in Latin to be mildly irritating. I find it pretentious.
Inter Arma Forum Posting Awkward.
I don't know why it bugs me. I remember a smattering of Latin from 25 years ago in High School, but if a title has to be Googled to find out what the Hell it means, to me it has failed as a good title. It becomes a barrier rather than an enticement.
Star Trek? Pretentious? Well, I never...
Who Mourns for Title Structure?
Yeah I know...
As I said, it's just a mild irritation. A bugbear if you will.
For The Titles Are Hollow And I Am A Massive Dickhead.
The sheer fucking hubris of this franchise
Agreed. It was ridiculous.
I actually don't mind the latin titles. In fact, I kind of like it. As a kid, if I didn't know what it meant, I looked it up. I learned something new.
If anything, the writers should be applauded for doing something that gets people curious enough to learn something.
If anything, the writers should be applauded for doing something that gets people curious enough to learn something.
For the Title Is Long and I Have Touched Its Structure
The Title on The Edge of A Run-On Sentence
Similar threads
- Locked
