What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Farscape One]

Agreed.

I've always been of the mentality of 'agree to disagree' if neither side can convince the other.

I can still appreciate another perspective while not agreeing with it. I'll virtually always get a better understanding of whatever the subject is because of the disagreement.

But I won't agree with someone just to simply agree. Nor will I force someone to agree with me if I haven't actually made my opinion on something clear.

IDIC, folks. Vulcans summed it up best right there.

 

[Weyoun 251]

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.

This is near spot on to how I felt about it, and very well articulated.

Surely the trope of "kill your gays" is something set more in the 90s and early 00s when there were greater issues with representation in TV. Should we not be at a point where someone's sexuality doesn't provide a character shield, where someone dying is just someone dying.

I have no doubt that 90% of this board agree that Star Trek dropped the ball on representation and was well overdue for an LGBT+ character, but as far as I am concerned his sexuality was not the central/only part of his character, he was a doctor, a husband, a friend, a Starfleet officer.

It isn't even as if this was a particularly brutal death as far as TV deaths go. I understand some people not liking it featuring in the recap each episode after but surely that lends credence to the argument that it was planned to bring Culber back and was a key part of Stamets development also.

 

[Oddish]

I personally think that what happened to Culber was, wittingly or un, a very strong move, in terms of LGBT+ advocacy. I say that as a person who has observed the psychology of homophobia, including what strengthens it and what weakens it. And when Discovery shows Stamets and Culber in their quarters, brushing their teeth together, it gives homophobia a hard kick in the teeth. Without being preachy, it shows the viewer that same-sex couples are really just like any other in most ways. And when we see Stamets grieve and suffer at the loss of the person he loves, when we see the look of sadness mingled with pride in his eyes as he accepts Culber's medal, we get more of the same.

Where some see discrimination in Culber's fate, I see a brutal and devastating attack on it. YMMV.

 

[fireproof78]

IDIC, folks. Vulcans summed it up best right there.

Which is why a lot of them have the same hair cut...

 

[wayoung]

Which is why a lot of them have the same hair cut...

The Vulcans are so hypocritical. They preach IDIC but outside the main characters they are presented as a superior, ethnocentric, monocultural base with rampant specism. Even in the 24th century (the DS9 baseball game)....


Edit:. Not all that different from the Romulans in their attitudes that way, if you think about it

 

[Vger23]

The Vulcans are so hypocritical. They preach IDIC but outside the main characters they are presented as a superior, ethnocentric, monocultural base with rampant specism. Even in the 24th century (the DS9 baseball game)....


Edit:. Not all that different from the Romulans in their attitudes that way, if you think about it

Just because Spock was cool doesn't mean all Vulcans are cool. I had to tell myself that during ENT...!

I do think the newer shows have done a little better showing Vulcans as a more multi-cultural, multi-faceted race...but it's still just "Star Trek."

 

[Paul755]

Maybe this one qualifies, maybe not. But one of the live action Trek series should be moved from P+ to CBS proper for all debuts.

Maybe SNW as it seems most accessible for some one just picking it up now.

 

[Vger23]

Maybe this one qualifies, maybe not. But one of the live action Trek series should be moved from P+ to CBS proper for all debuts.

Maybe SNW as it seems most accessible for some one just picking it up now.

That's really not a bad idea. SNW seems to be far-and-away the most accessible Star Trek show in a very long time. You air that on CBS, even in a limited fashion, and it may get a lot more people interested or engaged in the franchise. Particularly if you market it correctly...that it's an episodic show that you don't need to be a Star Trek fan (meaning- immersed in all the backstory) to appreciate and enjoy. It's like picking up TOS 56 years ago all over again for the most part.

 

[Oddish]

The Vulcans are so hypocritical. They preach IDIC but outside the main characters they are presented as a superior, ethnocentric, monocultural base with rampant specism. Even in the 24th century (the DS9 baseball game)....

Vulcans are like any other species, with variation within themselves. Some Vulcans are pretty nice. Some are snooty, but inherently decent. And some are bigoted and hypocritical. The Logicians, or their leader anyway, was the latter type.

 

[Vger23]

The Logicians, or their leader anyway, was the latter type.

Yeah that one was a total dink.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah that one was a total dink.

But enough about his baseball game

 

[Farscape One]

Vulcans are like any other species, with variation within themselves. Some Vulcans are pretty nice. Some are snooty, but inherently decent. And some are bigoted and hypocritical. The Logicians, or their leader anyway, was the latter type.

Agreed. Solok was a douche.

 

[Mark 2000]

Anything else you are implying or inferring from what I’ve said and how I’ve said it is honestly entirely on you.

Or, maybe, it’s you and in your desire to defend something you like you ignore how it effects and even hurts others. That happens a lot around here too. Just food for thought. No need to write another essay. Believe me, I understand where you’re coming from perfectly well.

 

[at Quark's]

Solok was a jerk, but very different from, say, Sakonna. So I agree that DS9 mostly showed Vulcans as individuals.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Even Spock is kind of a dick... If I actually had to work with him on the bridge then I think I'd mutter some expletive into my console every few days.

Spock is a funny man and a nice man, but when he decides to verbally burn you then he is absolutely merciless.

 

[1001001]

Early Spock had a Sheldon-like disregard for other people’s feelings. He stated facts bluntly and without tact.

As the character developed, he became warmer, softer. Very endearing.

Nimoy evolved Spock wonderfully over the decades, in a way that seemed genuine and organic.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Nimoy was very clever. When Spock meets a guest character in TOS then Spock always goes through a mental process of whether or not he should:

a) Show that person respect.

or

b) Patronise the fuck out of them.

Nimoy adopts a very different tone and set of mannerisms when flitting between the two. Respectful Spock is quite stiff and formal while Patronising Spock is comparatively jaunty and more than a little arch. When Spock is talking down to someone then on some level it's kind of fun for him.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Early Spock had a Sheldon-like disregard for other people’s feelings. He stated facts bluntly and without tact.

Much like first season Troi, who was originally supposed to be the Spock of TNG, according to some early press from Marina Sirtis. And it shows. Troi holds herself in a very Spock-like, clinical manner. And her look is much cooler in that season.

 

[Vale]

Much like first season Troi, who was originally supposed to be the Spock of TNG, according to some early press from Marina Sirtis. And it shows. Troi holds herself in a very Spock-like, clinical manner. And her look is much cooler in that season.

Surely Data was always supposed to be the Spock of TNG? Very early Troi was far too emotional, if anything.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Surely Data was always supposed to be the Spock of TNG? Very early Troi was far too emotional, if anything.

First season Troi is mostly emotional when she's sensing other beings, much like Spock. Or when she's emotionally compromised by a virus.

She's very direct and calls out the characters a lot on what they're really feeling versus what they're saying. Example: Troi basically tells Yar in front of the away team that she's horny for her kidnapper in "Code of Honor."

Troi was supposed to be the brain of the show. But as Sirtis puts it, the more cleavage Troi got the less brains she had. When she got the full uniform, Troi's brain returned. Suddenly she's an expert on Romulans and their tech, for instance.