What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Orphalesion]

Diane Duane did the Zora thing decades ago in her novels, she named the classic Enterprise's computer Moira. That's the Enterprise's personality.

But the novels aren't canon, so "Moira" is irrelevant for a discussion about the Enterprise in the shows.
In canon, Zora is the first example in actual canon, unless you want to count that "puppy" A.I. from that one episode of DS9 that was forgotten about by the next episode.

 

[Paul755]

I'm changing my definitions of Old Trek and New Trek.

Up until recently, I thought of Old Trek as 1966-2005 and New Trek as 2009+. Now I think of Old Trek as 1966-2016 and New Trek as 2017+.

The JJ Abrams Films starring Chris Pine as Kirk aren't coming back. There's not going to be a Star Trek 4. If it hasn't happened by now, it's not going to happen. I think there'll be another Star Trek movie someday, but it'll be something else, with someone else, by someone else.

I’ve always thought of the JJ-films as their own thing despite the presence of Classic Spock.

I tend to go with it like this, Classic Trek is TOS thru Enterprise, including the movies. Nu-Trek is Discovery thru SNW and then whatever comes after, Section 31, Starfleet Academy, Star Trek Voyager 2: We Really Love Janeway, etc…

And Alt-Trek is the Kelvin/JJ verse.

the JJ stuff is just so disconnected from everything else. And that’s not to say I dislike it. I actually think Beyond is the best of the Kelvin verse movies and better than Final Frontier, Insurrection and Nemesis.

 

[cooleddie74]

There are only two truly good Trek movies since FC. 2009 and BEY.

 

[Lord Garth]

The 2009 Film is okay, and did have some truly great moments, but -- as an overall two-hour package -- not something I'm in a hurry to revisit. Clearly better than Insurrection and Nemesis, and it gave me what I wanted: someone besides Rick Berman at the top. So I liked it more at the time than I do now, looking at it from a distance. The thing I appreciate about it the most is that it gave us a 21st Century version of Kirk's crew.

I thought Into Darkness was complete shit when I saw it the first time. I (finally) watched it a second time last year. I don't think it's complete shit now, but there's no way in Hell I'm watching it next to TWOK.

I remember liking Beyond, but not much more than that. I've only seen it once. So if it didn't leave any more of an impression on me than it did, then I file it under, "I guess it was okay." My anticipation of Discovery had already eclipsed Beyond even as the movie was released.

 

[cooleddie74]

INS is a film I don't dislike but it doesn't rank high in my list of Trek films. It's essentially a big-budget TNG two-parter with F. Murray Abraham in it and the message is one I like even if the logical loopholes in the story get bigger as the years pass. I can watch it without much trouble and the soundtrack is beautiful.

"Ba'ku Village" is truly one of Jerry Goldsmith's Trek triumphs.

 

[Qonundrum]

INS is a film I don't dislike but it doesn't rank high in my list of Trek films. It's essentially a big-budget TNG two-parter with F. Murray Abraham in it and the message is one I like even if the logical loopholes in the story get bigger as the years pass. I can watch it without much trouble and the soundtrack is beautiful.

"Ba'ku Village" is truly one of Jerry Goldsmith's Trek triumphs.

One thing is certain - the movie may or may not be rock-solid, but Jerry Goldsmith is somehow always about to look at the script, watch the footage, and know precisely what music needs to be layered on. Except comedy, even the (misguided attempts at) comedy in STV couldn't be elevated... but incidental music for comedy isn't exactly easy to do... he's done better than others, and far better than anyone using out-of-the-box corny tunes.

The right guest cast also helps; V and IX both easily get elevated for their casting of the baddies alone.

 

[cooleddie74]

Sybok basically helps redeem TFF and Ru'afo is the best thing about INS. Donna Murphy's Anij is solid and has her moments but that film is the F. Murray Abraham show.

 

[fireproof78]

TNG never did films well, and I would revist the Kelvin films 5 times before watching a single frame of TNG. INS suffers from a complete lack of investment in the outcome. Abraham's acting is just not something I enjoy and the badmiral of the week is not interesting.

I actually liked Nemesis when it first came out, but that has shifted due to really weird action set pieces that were entertaining at first and now quite tiresome, if not outright questionable in terms of character motivation. FC is a mixed bag that isn't fun with the Borg. Generations is a slog.

 

[JesterFace]

TNG never did films well, and I would revist the Kelvin films 5 times before watching a single frame of TNG.

As much as I love STNG, these days I don't revisit the films, at all.
STNG = from 'Encounter at Farpoint' to 'All Good Things...'

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I'd say in general, Star Trek films don't work well. The concept of Trek as a whole rarely translates satisfyingly to a movie style format.

 

[fireproof78]

I'd say in general, Star Trek films don't work well. The concept of Trek as a whole rarely translates 100% successfully to a movie style format.

I was thinking a similar thing. Honestly, to me a Trek series works great as a series and should largely be left as a series. If you are going to do a Trek film it benefits to do a wholly new crew and set up, rather than relying upon the series format.

 

[JesterFace]

TNG never did films well, and I would revist the Kelvin films 5 times before watching a single frame of TNG.

With single frame do you mean the STNG films or any episode?

I'd say in general, Star Trek films don't work well. The concept of Trek as a whole rarely translates satisfyingly to a movie style format.

This. Star Trek, especially TNG, works well as episodic stories but for some reason it doesn't translate well into movies.
Although, something like 'All Good Things...' is a hour and a half episode, almost like a movie.... Maybe the movies just have a crappy story.

 

[fireproof78]

With single frame do you mean the STNG films or any episode?

Ha. I meant the TNG films. There are some aspects of TNG I like, but Kelvin trumps most with the characters for me.

 

[WarpTenLizard]

Decades ago, I used to have fanficcy ideas for a sentient far-future Enterprise. For some reason, its hologram avatar was male, and Romulan. No idea where that came from.

I love that idea! Maybe the idea of the Romulan appearance was that by this century, the Romulans have joined the Federation and are integrated enough to represent it in holo-form. In any case, that concept sounds light-years more interesting than Zora.

 

[Sci]

1. I don't like Spock anymore. He babbles on and on about peace and logic but Vulcan is a society that fell into a rather despotic military rule government.

... so the fact that Vulcan was under the control of a military dictatorship seventy-five years before he was even born means that he's not allowed to advocate for peace and logic? Spain was under the control of a fascist dictatorship until 47 years ago -- are Spaniards not allowed to advocate for democracy?

I take it Spock is a Siranite. He seems to be a Fundamentalist Surakian. He sees himself as an Apostle to the Romulans

Well, no. The TOS films made it clear that Spock has rejected the Vulcan belief in complete eradication of one's emotions; he is not a Kohlinar-ist, so to speak. As he said to Valeris in TUC: "Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end." TNG "Unification II" made it clear that he is spreading some of Vulcan teachings as part of a movement to reject Romulan chauvinism and militarism, but that doesn't mean he's advocating for Romulans to reject their culture and adopt Vulcan culture entirely. It seems to me, based on his arc in the TOS movies, his line in TUC, and his lines in "Unification II," that Spock is advocating for a middle path between Vulcan and Romulan cultures.

and now SNW has turned him into another Space Jesus.

No, that's Captain Sisko. It was DIS's "Unification III" that established that Spock was the leader whose advocacy did the most to ensure the reunification of Vulcan and Romulan cultures and the migration of the Romulans back to Vulcan/Ni'Var. But "Unification III" also made it clear that neither Vulcans nor Romulans had abandoned their respective cultures; both were changed by the presence of the other, and there are tensions, but they're also making this new joint project that is Ni'Var work.

Anyway, SNW hasn't made him Space Jesus. It just reaffirmed what TNG "Unification II" heavily implied and DIS "Unification III" made explicit: That Spock's leadership in reuniting Vulcans and Romulans would be historically significant.

Spock advocates for demilitarizing Starfleet and this was a huge mistake. They were not prepared for the Borg or the Dominion.

I think you're confusing Spock Prime with the Mirror Universe Spock. Spock Prime never advocated for the end of Starfleet's military defense role.

The Federation, according to an episode in Voyager, has the ability to read the memories being imprinted on your brain. They have the ability to change them. Earth is being held together by this kind of manipulation to keep the population content while they are ruled from above. They brag about no nation states which means to me that Culture custom and tradition are now frowned on. The elites rule from the top down to the masses instead of government rising from the grass roots. It seems to be for now a benevolent Police State.

I mean, okay, but that's not an opinion about the canon, that's just you making stuff up to add to your headcanon.

 

[Lord Garth]

It seems to me, based on his arc in the TOS movies, his line in TUC, and his lines in "Unification II," that Spock is advocating for a middle path between Vulcan and Romulan cultures.

Which ultimately is what leads to Ni'Var being possible where Vulcans and Romulans cohabit the same planet again.

I think the kernel of the idea of Vulcans and Romulans being able to come together and see each other as people goes back to "The Enterprise Incident". Even though Spock was on a spy mission, it seems like there was something there between him and the Romulan Commander. She was legitimately hurt when she found out Spock wasn't going to surrender the Enterprise to the Romulans and that he knew Kirk had infiltrated their ship. Spock and the Romulan Commander were both talking about how one day they hoped Vulcans and Romulans wouldn't have to be separate peoples or have to observe any restrictions with each other.

"Military Secrets are the most fleeting of all. I hope what you and I shared was something more permanent." I'm paraphrasing here but that's what was said by Spock at the end of the episode.

The idea that Vulcans and Romulans could unite again one day was there since the 1960s. The same as when in "Errand of Mercy", the Organians tell Kirk and Kor that one day the Federation and Klingons would become friends.

 

[Henoch]

If the Romulan culture is based on the military duty seen in Balance of Terror, then military failure usually results in death of the commander, most likely during combat, but also by suicide as shown in the episode. I believe the fate of the Romulan Commander in The Enterprise Incident will be the same after she returns to Romulus. One good debrief, then...

 

[Orphalesion]

I love that idea! Maybe the idea of the Romulan appearance was that by this century, the Romulans have joined the Federation and are integrated enough to represent it in holo-form. In any case, that concept sounds light-years more interesting than Zora.

I cannot even begin to tell how disappointed I was of the 32nd century as depicted in DISC as a whole. It ended up being so pedestrian and samey. With the burn and all I had expected a lot more.

 

[WarpTenLizard]

I cannot even begin to tell how disappointed I was of the 32nd century as depicted in DISC as a whole. It ended up being so pedestrian and samey. With the burn and all I had expected a lot more.

Aside from the wall-banging reveal about the Burn, I like the developments of the 32nd Century. I wish the show spent more time developing that, and less time on characters standing around talking about redundant sh-t.

 

[MAGolding]

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.

I'v eonly watched a tiny bit of Supernatural, so when readying that "Baby" was an impala, I assumed it was someone's pet Aepyceros melampus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impala

That shows how much I know or care about cars.