What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Commander Troi]

We rewatched Star Trek: Beyond yesterday, and I have some possibly-controversial opinions.

1. It's a good movie. I found it engaging and enjoyable. I was never bored and was never tossed out of my suspension of disbelief.

2. Chris Pine makes a great Kirk.

3. Watching *any* Enterprise get ripped into pieces and destroyed is painful.

For those with access to deleted scenes, is there a fuller explanation for why Jaylah speaks English?

 

[drt]

For those with access to deleted scenes, is there a fuller explanation for why Jaylah speaks English?

I don’t think there’s anything more than was stated in the movie.

I suppose one could believe that she bothered to learn English to better figure out how to potentially repair/fly it away from Altmid; she may have wanted to understand what the “shouting” meant in the music, too.

 

[Vger23]

We rewatched Star Trek: Beyond yesterday, and I have some possibly-controversial opinions.

1. It's a good movie. I found it engaging and enjoyable. I was never bored and was never tossed out of my suspension of disbelief.

2. Chris Pine makes a great Kirk.

3. Watching *any* Enterprise get ripped into pieces and destroyed is painful.

For those with access to deleted scenes, is there a fuller explanation for why Jaylah speaks English?

I thought it was said or implied somewhere that she learned it from being aboard the Franklin all that time. I may be wrong…it’s been a while since I’ve seen the film.

 

[drt]

I thought it was said or implied somewhere that she learned it from being aboard the Franklin all that time. I may be wrong…it’s been a while since I’ve seen the film.

Yeah, that’s what’s in the movie, I assumed @Commander Troi was asking if there was more detail in behind the scenes material.

 

[Tallguy]

We rewatched Star Trek: Beyond yesterday, and I have some possibly-controversial opinions.

1. It's a good movie. I found it engaging and enjoyable. I was never bored and was never tossed out of my suspension of disbelief.

2. Chris Pine makes a great Kirk.

3. Watching *any* Enterprise get ripped into pieces and destroyed is painful.

None of those things are controversial. And I will crawl over broken glass to see Pine play Kirk again.

The Beyond destruction of the Enterprise is the only time that a) it was an extended plot point and b) we really got to mourn her. It's almost an homage to Enterprise!

While I have problems with Beyond (not every bad guy has to be "Of the Federation's Own Making". What is this, Mission: Impossible?) it's probably my favorite of the three. And it isn't Into Darkness.(Go to 4:30.)

 

[Richard S. Ta]

We rewatched Star Trek: Beyond yesterday, and I have some possibly-controversial opinions.

1. It's a good movie. I found it engaging and enjoyable. I was never bored and was never tossed out of my suspension of disbelief.

2. Chris Pine makes a great Kirk.

3. Watching *any* Enterprise get ripped into pieces and destroyed is painful.

For those with access to deleted scenes, is there a fuller explanation for why Jaylah speaks English?

Best Kelvin movie. By far. And I like all of them.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Gonna come in hot here: I disagree with Picard's decision to not infect the Borg with an M.C. Escher painting in the episode "I, Borg."

Here's why: the Borg are not people. They used to be, but assimilation is repeatedly described in Trek as a removal of individuality and "humanity," for lack of a less Earth-centric term. When one is assimilated, one becomes an instrument of the collective, just as a fingernail or skin cell is part of the larger collective. Shooting a Borg drone is no different than clipping a fingernail or trimming a hair.

Taking a Borg on-board, nursing it back to health, and giving it a pet name was a completely unnecessary risk, and it was disappointing how quickly Picard folded after talking to Dr. Crusher's pet Borg.

I know I'm ignoring the moral/meaning of the episode, but you'd think that the man whose very soul was ripped from him would choose to prevent countless others across the galaxy from having to go through what he went through.

 

[Tallguy]

Yeah, I get twitchy when people refer to wiping out the Borg as genocide. Or a bad idea.

 

[Sci]

Gonna come in hot here: I disagree with Picard's decision to not infect the Borg with an M.C. Escher painting in the episode "I, Borg."

Here's why: the Borg are not people. They used to be, but assimilation is repeatedly described in Trek as a removal of individuality and "humanity," for lack of a less Earth-centric term. When one is assimilated, one becomes an instrument of the collective, just as a fingernail or skin cell is part of the larger collective. Shooting a Borg drone is no different than clipping a fingernail or trimming a hair.

Taking a Borg on-board, nursing it back to health, and giving it a pet name was a completely unnecessary risk, and it was disappointing how quickly Picard folded after talking to Dr. Crusher's pet Borg.

I know I'm ignoring the moral/meaning of the episode, but you'd think that the man whose very soul was ripped from him would choose to prevent countless others across the galaxy from having to go through what he went through.

And that justifies killing trillions of enslaved sentient lifeforms?

 

[at Quark's]

Evidence suggests that individuality is not irreversibly lost, not even after decades of assimilation. See Picard, Seven of Nine, the ex-drones from Unity, or the three drones of Survival Instinct as examples. After they were liberated from the collective, they returned to their former identities. Sometimes it even surfaces while assimilated, see Unimatrix Zero.

So even when one accepts that 'borg are not people' as an argument for killing them all, the fact remains that these zombies still have their individualities, just repressed.

 

[flandry84]

What about the potential enslaved/assimilated trillions?
Actually assimilation is far far worse than enslavement.

 

[eschaton]

Trek has been extremely inconsistent in how it depicted the Borg.

Just like everything else.

 

[Orphalesion]

Evidence suggests that individuality is not irreversibly lost, not even after decades of assimilation. See Picard, Seven of Nine, the ex-drones from Unity, or the three drones of Survival Instinct as examples. After they were liberated from the collective, they returned to their former identities. Sometimes it even surfaces while assimilated, see Unimatrix Zero.

So even when one accepts that 'borg are not people' as an argument for killing them all, the fact remains that these zombies still have their individualities, just repressed.

Yeah and while people sit around and try to figure out how to "de-assimilate" people billions more get victimized in the most brutal way possible.
So, no, if they stumbled upon a way to end the Borg fast and definitely, they should use it.

I'm also in favour of destroying as many Crystalline Entities as possible.

There is just a point, in my opinion, where a threat has such proportions that it should be ended.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Yeah and while people sit around and figure out how to "de-assimilate" people billions more get victimized in the most brutal way possible.
So, no, if they stumbled upon a way to end the Borg fast and definitely, they should use it.

The Borg exist at the expense of all other intelligent life. There's no such thing as peaceful coexistence with them. Heck, even the kinder, gentler Borg Cooperative started by Riley Frazier in the Voyager episode "Unity" reverted to form and chose to make Chakotay into a drone when it became convenient to do so.

There's a story about scorpions and frogs that comes to mind, but I can't recall the details...

 

[at Quark's]

Yeah and while people sit around and try to figure out how to "de-assimilate" people billions more get victimized in the most brutal way possible.
So, no, if they stumbled upon a way to end the Borg fast and definitely, they should use it.

^ I'm not saying they shouldn't do that if there is no other solution, I simply do not like the 'Borg aren't people' rationalization to make it easy on themselves.

Instead, they should acknowledge that they're going to kill trillions of enslaved people that had their individualities suppressed but that still exist somewhere, be fully aware of the atrocity they're going to commit to prevent still greater horrors from happening in the future, be prepared to live with that moral responsibility for the rest of their lifes , and then push the button. But 'We haven't really killed people' doesn't do it for me. They have, in my book, even if there was a good reason for it.

 

[Sci]

I'm also in favour of destroying as many Crystalline Entities as possible.

Are you generally in favor of exterminating all members of any wild animal species who maybe possibly hypothetically could one day maybe possibly hypothetically kill people?

Because, seriously. It's pretty clear that by 2381, the Federation has developed the capacity to handle Crystalline Entities. You're talking about what would, at best, be the extermination of a species of wild animal who can be safely managed, and at worst would be the genocide of an entire species of sentient entities who could be reasoned with.

 

[Unicron]

Instead, they should acknowledge that they're going to kill trillions of enslaved people that had their individualities suppressed but that still exist somewhere, be fully aware of the atrocity they're going to commit to prevent still greater horrors from happening in the future, be prepared to live with that moral responsibility for the rest of their lifes , and then push the button. But 'We haven't really killed people' doesn't do it for me. They have, in my book, even if there was a good reason for it.

Indeed, and that argument was one of the core discussions in "I, Borg." Guinan lost most of her race to the Borg, and carried much the same hatred that Picard did, yet she also recognized that Hugh was developing the potential to regain or acquire individuality. There's no easy answer to that question, as there are still Starfleet officers who blame Picard for what he was forced to do as Locutus. That he suffered greatly in the process isn't something they fully understand, or in some cases care about.

One could just as easily argue that characters like Worf, Odo and Garak should be blamed for atrocities committed by their home states, regardless of whether they agree with or had a role in those actions individually (Garak's kind of a unique case there ).

There's also the possibility that even if Picard had chosen to go through with the infection, it wouldn't have had the catastrophic effective on the Collective that was assumed. Several species the Voyager encountered (like Icheb's race) had successfully used viral warfare against the Borg, but those victories tended to be limited to individual ships. Once the Collective learned of the problem, they just cut those vessels off and blocked the spread.

 

[flandry84]

Yeah it’s reasonable to assume that in the decades?centuries? that the rolling obscenity that is the Borg collective has been going that they would have met and bested civilisations more advanced than the UFP,so the virus might not have been too successful.That said they had to try.
The episode was primarily a writers and actors exercise in Trek-y moralising.But..if you are to create an enemy as implacably evil as the Borg you have a moral responsibility to your main characters to have them take this threat seriously.Picards decision to ..I dunno have Hugh watch some Flotter stories and release him back to the collective to ‘think happy thoughts’at them was IMO a betrayal of Picards previous experiences.The guy sits in the big chair for a reason.
The Borg are beyond an extinction level threat.It behooves the writers to treat them thus.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Yeah it’s reasonable to assume that in the decades?centuries? that the rolling obscenity that is the Borg collective has been going that they would have met and bested civilisations more advanced than the UFP,so the virus might not have been too successful.That said they had to try.
The episode was primarily a writers and actors exercise in Trek-y moralising.But..if you are to create an enemy as implacably evil as the Borg you have a moral responsibility to your main characters to have them take this threat seriously.Picards decision to ..I dunno have Hugh watch some Flotter stories and release him back to the collective to ‘think happy thoughts’at them was IMO a betrayal of Picards previous experiences.The guy sits in the big chair for a reason.
The Borg are beyond an extinction level threat.It behooves the writers to treat them thus.

I feel like the Borg is a rogue AI run amok.

Whatever the "Core AI" that runs 'The Borg Collective', it seems to control it via 'The Borg Queen'.

Maybe if we can destroy the unifying factor or AI controller that forces the Assimilation factor, then maybe we can break the "Assimilation Directive" forced upon all the Borg Drones.

Imagine what the Borg would be like if they all had individuality, feelings, and used tactics / strategy.

That would be similar to a real Borg Cooperative that one can only dream about.

One that doesn't violate individual rights of sentience and accepts volunteers into the Borg Cooperative.

Look at Queen Jurati, she's over 400 years old, she effectively gained Immortality by becoming a Borg.

 

[thewanderingjack]

Okay, I’ve tried giving everyone a wide berth. This is an interesting discussion, but we’re pretty far afield from Star Trek at this point. Anything further on these points needs to go in Misc. or TNZ.

Let’s move on.

Thanks

Talking about a Star Trek character is far afield?

No, please, don't waste your precious time rationalizing that, it's utterly unnecessary. I very much get what you're saying.

Thanks for the "wide berth," very magnanimous of you.