What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Farscape One]

I will agree that "FOR THE WORLD IS HOLLOW AND I HAVE TOUCHED THE SKY" is an exceedingly long title. (Still holds the record as longest episode title.)

While some may think it's poetic, and I can see why they would say that, it's just too much. It could have easily been changed into "THE HOLLOW WORLD" or "TO TOUCH THE SKY".

But if they want a contest for lengthy title, let's play...

"FOR THE WORLD IS HOLLOW AND I HAVE TOUCHED THE SKY SINCE I AM INSIDE A SHIP THAT GIVES ME THE ILLUSION OF LIVING ON A WORLD THAT IS RUN BY A COMPUTER THAT FORCES US TO IMPLANT RED DOTS IN OUR SKULLS AND PUNISHES US FOR SAYING OR THINKING THE WRONG THING ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE BUT WE MUST DO AS WE ARE TOLD FOR WE ARE THE DESCENDANTS OF A LONG DEAD CIVILIZATION THAT HAD A CURE TO AT LEAST ONE TERMINAL ILLNESS"

 

[Richard S. Ta]

See, I don't like Latin titles, but I do rather like those cumbersome TOS titles.

I'd (maybe controversially) say For The World Is Hollow And I Have Touched The Sky is a brilliant title.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

See, I don't like Latin titles, but I do rather like those cumbersome TOS titles.

I'd (maybe controversially) say For The World Is Hollow And I Have Touched The Sky is a brilliant title.

I like it fine, actually. It's one of the examples of a title that deserved a better episode under it.

But let's be honest. It is a pretentious title, isn't it?

 

[at Quark's]

So, what should a good Star Trek episode title actually do ? Make people curious to watch the episode? Anything beyond that?

 

[Farscape One]

My wife and I both agree that the title of something (movie, series, episode, etc.) should be a hook.

For example, LOST GIRL was a show I really enjoyed. It was fun, and had a lot of heart. But she thought the title of the show was just absurd. And looking back, I can understand why she said that, despite Bo being a rather lost person for the first part of the series.

BITTEN is one with a really bad title. That show should have been named something else... it would have been a better hook.

FARSCAPE is a great one. It's mysterious and it shows you right there that you are not watching something from your local neighborhood.

Episodes work the same way. "IN THE PALE MOONLIGHT" is a superb title that lets you know exactly what's going on without actually telling you what's going on.

 

[wayoung]

The only people who look at episode titles are super nerds who were going to watch the episode anyway. General audience isn't going to watch an episode of a TV show because of the episode title....

 

[Farscape One]

Actually, I don't know if this is a controversial opinion or not, but I truly miss having episode titles appear on screen.

As strange as this may sound, it's really helpful in knowing what I'm watching. It's one of the reasons why I can never separate episodes from DISCO or PICARD.

 

[cooleddie74]

For the Title Is Long And I Have Written An Even Longer Name, Part I.

 

[at Quark's]

For This Episode Is Hollow and This Pretentious Title Touches On That, Part II

 

[Orphalesion]

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.

We are not going to agree with this. So it's pointless to discuss it, especially since it likely runs into some aspects of high-concept philosophy.

To me Tuvix was an independent individual and splitting him up was murder in my opinion.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I like it fine, actually. It's one of the examples of a title that deserved a better episode under it.

But let's be honest. It is a pretentious title, isn't it?

Utterly.

That's why I like it.

Conversely, that's exactly why I dislike the Latin ones.

It's irrational I know, but... humans gonna be humans I guess? I'm not always rational.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Tuvix was a transporter accident.

Yep. If I'm going to get in that thing, I want to know that the transporter operators and their commanders have my back and aren't just going to abandon and refuse to save me because a changeling that takes my place gives them the feels. (That's changeling in the sense of a fairy "left in place of a human stolen by the fairies", like the space probe Nomad, not in the sense of a shapeshifter, like Odo.)

 

[Mark 2000]

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.

Whatever came out of it, I found Culber's murder graphic and exploitive. And it was used over and over again in the "previously" segments. My twitter consists almost exclusively of LGBT trekkies and I have never seen anyone of them feel anything but incensed by that incident. If you want to call an entire community too sensitive that's your prerogative. To me, it's an incredibly bad look for the first gay couple in the franchise. Bad optics. Bad judgement. Bad everything. It wasn't worth the supposed payoff.

 

[Tango]

See, I don't like Latin titles, but I do rather like those cumbersome TOS titles.

I'd (maybe controversially) say For The World Is Hollow And I Have Touched The Sky is a brilliant title.

Mundus enim cavus est et ego tetigisse caelum

 

[fireproof78]

Utterly.

That's why I like it.

Conversely, that's exactly why I dislike the Latin ones.

It's irrational I know, but... humans gonna be humans I guess? I'm not always rational.

Right there with you. And I love Latin and have studied it in school.

 

[Farscape One]

You know what would be an interesting twist?

Have an entire season of episode titles in different languages. For example, season 1 would be in latin, season 2 would be in Klingon, season 3 would be Vulcan, and so on.

Since the streaming shows only do 10-13 episodes a year, this can be done without it being a headache.

 

[Vger23]

Whatever came out of it, I found Culber's murder graphic and exploitive. And it was used over and over again in the "previously" segments. My twitter consists almost exclusively of LGBT trekkies and I have never seen anyone of them feel anything but incensed by that incident. If you want to call an entire community too sensitive that's your prerogative. To me, it's an incredibly bad look for the first gay couple in the franchise. Bad optics. Bad judgement. Bad everything. It wasn't worth the supposed payoff.

Where did I say or even imply that an entire community of people were too sensitive? I'd appreciate you not putting words in my mouth, especially on such an inflammatory subject. That's irresponsible and completely uncalled for, and I genuinely don't appreciate it.

I was simply stating to @Ryan Thomas Riddle who Iike and respect, my personal perspective on the development. It wasn't a challenge or a slap to him, you, or any other community of people. It was simply my opinion and my take on how I perceived the incident. It may be a different take or reaction than others had...

Let's not look for conflict and divide when there's absolutely no reason to do that. That is not at all what I was going for. Culber is my favorite character in DSC...and part of that is because I love the journey he went on. I think that's reason enough for me to state an opinion that might cause folks to think why that plot development may have been ultimately ok, no matter how tough it was at the time.

Thanks.

 

[Mark 2000]

Where did I say or even imply that an entire community of people were too sensitive?

This line speaks in objective terms and feels really dismissive to me.

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.

It’s not that it was “emotional”, which is definitely comment on sensitivity. It’s that it was a slap in the face to a portion of the fanbase that worked very hard for that representation since the 70s just to see it brutally murdered in an extremely graphic and exploitive way. It was done purely for shock value and it was shown over and over again. If you’re telling everyone who is still upset that it happened that it was objectively for some narrative greater good that they just don’t get you are being dismissive of their view.

 

[Vger23]

This line speaks in objective terms and feels really dismissive to me.



It’s not that it was “emotional”, which is definitely comment on sensitivity. It’s that it was a slap in the face to a portion of the fanbase that worked very hard for that representation since the 70s just to see it brutally murdered in an extremely graphic and exploitive. It was done purely for shock value and it was shown over and over again. If you’re telling everyone who is still upset that it happened that it was objectively for some narrative greater good that they just don’t get you are being dismissive of their view.

I’m not being dismissive of any view. Disagreeing isn’t being dismissive. I’m saying that I personally appreciated the arc as it played out because it solidified Hugh Culber as my favorite character in DSC and re-ignited my appreciation for the acting talent of Wilson Cruz. I’m saying that is why the way it played out did not ultimately bother me. I understand why it would have bothered others and I see that point of view. I just don’t agree or share that feeling, because I’m pleased with the final results. It’s just different than how you feel. And it sure as hell isn’t personal. I just thought it would be valuable to explain a different view.

And his death was most certainly emotional. I found it intensely emotional. It’s not “definitely a comment on sensitivity.” It’s a normal human reaction to the death of a beloved character. And I haven’t said anything was done for any objective reason. I’m talking about my feelings and opinions. There isn’t anything objective about that. I never once said that anyone who doesn’t see it my way “doesn’t get it.”

I thought there would be value, actually POSITIVE value in explaining how I felt about Culber’s death and resurrection and why I view it that way. I see I was mistaken in this case.

Anything else you are implying or inferring from what I’ve said and how I’ve said it is honestly entirely on you. There is literally nothing else to what I’m saying, no matter what your interpretation is. I can’t be any more clear than that. I don’t even know what we’re arguing about, other than you are reacting to the fact that we have a difference of opinion on a topic you are passionate about, and I have expressed it in strong terms, and you’ve inferred a tremendous amount of intent that simply isn’t there.

Hey, it happens every 7.3 min on TrekBBS.

 

[Oddish]

Believe it or not, a person can have strong feelings about a subject and still be fine with another person feeling otherwise.