One of the odder things TFF gave us was a pop song as part of a Star Trek movie soundtrack. Uhura's fan dance is much worse than the song to which she's dancing.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
I was a witness to the phenomena and the change in the movies that came out. Star Wars got us the Trek films, and TNG. T^he success of Wars jump started the morbid Trek franchise.
How exactly is Leia using the Force to telekinetically pull herself back to the ship any different from Luke using the Force to telekinetically pull a lightsaber into his hand?
And why wouldn't you want to see Leia use the Force to do something awesome like pull herself back onto a ship in her last moments of consciousness after being ejected into space? It's a chance to finally see Leia use the Force!
Yeah, this was the first time we've seen her use Force powers on any screen unless we count her sensing that Luke made it off the second Death Star alive at the end of Episode VI. She's a Skywalker and Anakin's daughter. She SHOULD be able to do more than just fire a weapon and lead people.
Exactly my point. It's the first time we see her use Force powers of any kind, at least physical manifestations of its use. She had NO training at all, but was able to pull herself from the vacuum of space back to an airlock????
Luke telekinetically grabbing a lightsaber is vastly different than moving yourself in the airless vacuum of space.
We have never seen anything like that before. It completely defied belief.
The Force is basically magic, and I can accept that, but that's a bridge too far.
Luke telekinetically grabbing a lightsaber is vastly different than moving yourself in the airless vacuum of space.
We have never seen anything like that before. It completely defied belief.
The Force is basically magic, and I can accept that, but that's a bridge too far.
Star Trek controversial opinion: if the Enterprise is a character then it can be recast by different CGI models.
ETA: Here's a TLJ film thread for people to moan about that film some more in...
ETA: Here's a TLJ film thread for people to moan about that film some more in...
Whoa, whoa... them's fightin' words, son.
*looks up definition of controversial* Yes...I believe that is implicit in my remarks...
And that IS very controversial, since our hero ships ARE characters.
I very much disagree here. When you swap out different CGI models, you change the essence and flavor of the ship. It's like changing Doctors or James Bonds... some basic traits are there, but each one is different and unique.
They therefore become different characters.
I very much disagree here. When you swap out different CGI models, you change the essence and flavor of the ship. It's like changing Doctors or James Bonds... some basic traits are there, but each one is different and unique.
They therefore become different characters.
At the risk of derailing things further, we see flashbacks to her Jedi training in Rise of the Skywalker.
Back on topic, disillusioned Picard from season one of his own show is the best version of the character.
Which is where I disagree. I don't regard ships as characters. And even if they are characters can be recast and still be in continuity.
I'll take your word for it.
Yeah I never regarded the ships as "characters" either. They are locations.
What did I just say?
I tell people to take it to the Star Wars forum, and then right after that, you three post Star Wars content with no relation to Star Trek at all?
There is an entire forum dedicated to Star Wars. Take it there.
THE END
In much the same way Baby is a character on SUPERNATURAL (for those unaware, 'Baby' is the Impala), starships are characters. They are a part of the family.
They are not just locations. They are our traveling companions that take us to all those strange new worlds.
It's a thing. They are a vehicle to the action. They don't feel, they don't have emotions, they are not characters. Sorry, I cannot treat them as characters. Telling me that "Baby is a character" on Supernatural is meaningless. I've never watched the show, and I have less regard for cars than I do for starships as characters.
But, even so, if they are characters they can be recast. No continuity violation.
Sybok is less morally compromised than Sarek. Sybok did take Paradise City on Nimbus III hostage and he did hijack the Enterprise-A but he didn't go along with a plan to detonate a huge bomb at the center of Qo'noS to destroy the Klingon Homeworld and thus win a war. He was a religious zealot sure of his beliefs but at the end of the day the number of innocent lives he put at risk were far fewer.
And I disagree with that. The Starships don't have a personality or motivations, or relationships. You write this like the Enterprise or the other ships had any aspirations and opinions, but they don't.
Now there can be locations in fiction that have a lot of presence and influence on the actual characters and the plot (Gormengast, for example, or Lorien in the LOTR) but they are still not characters.
Unless the alien escaped.
Yeah who knows what that alien would have done if he got out.
“Search for God, find the Devil.”
If he was a Cytherian - and that's just theory - then he would have had at least enough power to do what the other Cytherian did to Barclay in TNG. And that was risky enough. So yeah, had he escaped things could have gotten dicey.
But at least Sybok didn't intend to harm anyone.
But at least Sybok didn't intend to harm anyone.
Similar threads
- Locked
