What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Have you seen "The Omega Glory," written by Gene Roddenberry, climaxing with a literal Star-Spangled Banner and touting the literal American Constitution as the foundation of a free society? How in God's green Earth does this episode, set in an allegorical war between Yankees and Communists, an allegory explicitly decoded on screen by Kirk and Spock in case it's not heavy-handed enough and there's any doubt, not embody the blatant pushing of a political agenda? And how is it not heavy on both action and spectacle, with a run-and-shoot street fight in the middle and a ritual knife duel at the climax? How does its story not revolve around gratuitous violence, both with the wanton disintegration of Galloway on screen when he could have been just stunned and off screen with the slaughter of thousands of Kohms by an insane starship captain? A candidate for the second pilot, this episode represents Gene's Vision™ at its purest.
Have you seen "A Private Little War," teleplay by Gene Roddenberry? This episodes contains an explicit argument in favor of American intervention in Vietnam. How does that not represent the blatant pushing of a political agenda? There's also plenty of action, spectacle, and a good old fashioned summary execution war crime by knife and one on-screen, at the climax. (Full discloser: This episode is one of my favorite TOS episodes, for reasons I've described elsewhere before, but that does not change the factual matter of what the episode has going on in it.)
What about "Bread and Circuses," cowritten by Gene Roddenberry? Have you seen that one? It's the episode that blatantly pushes the message that Christianity is the definitive path to higher civilization beyond the savagery of the Roman Empire, even on other planets. There's also plenty of action, violence, and spectacle to go around.
If Gene Roddenberry were alive today, I'm of the opinion that his favorite current Star Trek series would be Strange New Worlds. Even though he would've preferred setting it after everything else, it's the closest in concept to what he wanted to do of the five. It's basically TOS with some different characters, a bigger budget, and made in the 2020s. Similarly, the first two seasons of TNG were basically TOS with different characters, a bigger budget, and made in the 1980s.
Picard is too similar to the TOS Movies. That wouldn't be to his liking. And PIC violates his "no conflict (especially among the crew)" rule Big Time. As a notorious misogynist, he wouldn't like Discovery. Based on how he treated TAS after Star Trek returned to live-action production, he would look dimly upon Lower Decks and Prodigy. Sure, he died before the '90s animation renaissance took off, but he seemed pretty set in his ways after a certain point.
For older Trek made after he died: I think he wouldn't like DS9 (due to it being too dark) or Voyager (due to him being sexist). I do think he might've liked Enterprise. I think he would cut ENT more slack, given that it's set closer to our time. He might have some comments about how the Vulcans were portrayed, however. He'd regard the Abrams Films as "good guys vs. bad guys" shoot-'em ups. So he wouldn't like the Abrams Films. While we're at it, I don't think he would've liked the TNG Films any more than the TOS Films.
I think keeping Canon totally consistent wouldn't bother him. If there was a conflict between TOS and TNG, he'd go with TNG every time. His definition of what counted was selective. In the end it was: TOS Seasons 1-2 (except where it conflicted with TNG), TMP, and especially TNG.
To sum it up:
I think he would like SNW.
I think he would mostly like ENT.
I think he would ignore LD and PRO.
I think he wouldn't like VOY and DSC.
I think he would hate DS9 and PIC.
Let's not even get into the Movies...
That work for a Controversial Opinion? I essentially all but tried to contact Gene Roddenberry through a Ouija Board.
Picard is too similar to the TOS Movies. That wouldn't be to his liking. And PIC violates his "no conflict (especially among the crew)" rule Big Time. As a notorious misogynist, he wouldn't like Discovery. Based on how he treated TAS after Star Trek returned to live-action production, he would look dimly upon Lower Decks and Prodigy. Sure, he died before the '90s animation renaissance took off, but he seemed pretty set in his ways after a certain point.
For older Trek made after he died: I think he wouldn't like DS9 (due to it being too dark) or Voyager (due to him being sexist). I do think he might've liked Enterprise. I think he would cut ENT more slack, given that it's set closer to our time. He might have some comments about how the Vulcans were portrayed, however. He'd regard the Abrams Films as "good guys vs. bad guys" shoot-'em ups. So he wouldn't like the Abrams Films. While we're at it, I don't think he would've liked the TNG Films any more than the TOS Films.
I think keeping Canon totally consistent wouldn't bother him. If there was a conflict between TOS and TNG, he'd go with TNG every time. His definition of what counted was selective. In the end it was: TOS Seasons 1-2 (except where it conflicted with TNG), TMP, and especially TNG.
To sum it up:
I think he would like SNW.
I think he would mostly like ENT.
I think he would ignore LD and PRO.
I think he wouldn't like VOY and DSC.
I think he would hate DS9 and PIC.
Let's not even get into the Movies...
That work for a Controversial Opinion? I essentially all but tried to contact Gene Roddenberry through a Ouija Board.
Last edited:
Have you seen "The Omega Glory," written by Gene Roddenberry, climaxing with a literal Star-Spangled Banner and touting the literal American Constitution as the foundation of a free society? How in God's green Earth does this episode, set in an allegorical war between Yankees and Communists, an allegory explicitly decoded on screen by Kirk and Spock in case it's not heavy-handed enough and there's any doubt, not embody the blatant pushing of a political agenda? And how is it not heavy on both action and spectacle, with a run-and-shoot street fight in the middle and a ritual knife duel at the climax? How does its story not revolve around gratuitous violence, both with the wanton disintegration of Galloway on screen when he could have been just stunned and off screen with the slaughter of thousands of Kohms by an insane starship captain? A candidate for the second pilot, this episode represents Gene's Vision™ at its purest.
Have you seen "A Private Little War," teleplay by Gene Roddenberry? This episodes contains an explicit argument in favor of American intervention in Vietnam. How does that not represent the blatant pushing of a political agenda? There's also plenty of action, spectacle, and a good old fashioned summary execution war crime by knife and one on-screen, at the climax. (Full discloser: This episode is one of my favorite TOS episodes, for reasons I've described elsewhere before, but that does not change the factual matter of what the episode has going on in it.)
What about "Bread and Circuses," cowritten by Gene Roddenberry? Have you seen that one? It's the episode that blatantly pushes the message that Christianity is the definitive path to higher civilization beyond the savagery of the Roman Empire, even on other planets. There's also plenty of action, violence, and spectacle to go around.
For that matter, there's also "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield," which in addition to being about how Racism Is Silly and Bad, is also about how people who fight too hard for equal rights for marginalized people are also bad. It might as well be entitled, "Both Sides IN SPACE: Sheriff Bull Connor and Malcolm X Are Both Wrong."
To be clear, I was limiting the episodes I was mentioning to those with a writing credit going to Roddenberry, to directly rebut false ideas of what constitutes Gene's Vision™. But yes, indeed, "Let That Be..." is probably the most well known and glaring example of TOS pushing a political agenda, although it's often misinterpreted as just an antiracism episode. As you say, in addition to pointing out the absurdity of racism, its story revolves around both-siding the issue.
Interesting... I always thought of "LET THAT BE YOUR LAST BATTLEFIELD" as a very overt way of showing that racism is bad. Because it IS bad. And if racism didn't exist, there wouldn't be a need to fight for marginalized people because there would be no marginalized people to begin with.
The climax of "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" is the characters' realization that, at least on Cheron, the fight against oppression led to Armageddon. The episode says more than simply that racism is bad.
I always saw that as racism led to their extinction, not fighting for oppression. If there's no racism, there's no need for the fight to begin with.
It's a theme used many times in scifi.
It's a theme used many times in scifi.
I said the fight against oppression, not the fight for it. The episode summarizes the scenario by Kirk calling the aliens "two of a kind." As an allegory, it's applicable to the real world only when both sides are equally bad.
That's what I meant... if there was no racism, there would be no need for the fight against oppression to begin with.
My wording wasn't clear that time, apologies.
"There's no dealing with these people!" I believe Strange New Worlds has revisited this theme.
He would like it all, once the royalties hit his bank account, if he was entitled to any.If Gene Roddenberry were alive today, I'm of the opinion that his favorite current Star Trek series would be Strange New Worlds. Even though he would've preferred setting it after everything else, it's the closest in concept to what he wanted to do of the five. It's basically TOS with some different characters, a bigger budget, and made in the 2020s. Similarly, the first two seasons of TNG were basically TOS with different characters, a bigger budget, and made in the 1980s.
Picard is too similar to the TOS Movies. That wouldn't be to his liking. And PIC violates his "no conflict (especially among the crew)" rule Big Time. As a notorious misogynist, he wouldn't like Discovery. Based on how he treated TAS after Star Trek returned to live-action production, he would look dimly upon Lower Decks and Prodigy. Sure, he died before the '90s animation renaissance took off, but he seemed pretty set in his ways after a certain point.
For older Trek made after he died: I think he wouldn't like DS9 (due to it being too dark) or Voyager (due to him being sexist). I do think he might've liked Enterprise. I think he would cut ENT more slack, given that it's set closer to our time. He might have some comments about how the Vulcans were portrayed, however. He'd regard the Abrams Films as "good guys vs. bad guys" shoot-'em ups. So he wouldn't like the Abrams Films. While we're at it, I don't think he would've liked the TNG Films any more than the TOS Films.
I think keeping Canon totally consistent wouldn't bother him. If there was a conflict between TOS and TNG, he'd go with TNG every time. His definition of what counted was selective. In the end it was: TOS Seasons 1-2 (except where it conflicted with TNG), TMP, and especially TNG.
To sum it up:
I think he would like SNW.
I think he would mostly like ENT.
I think he would ignore LD and PRO.
I think he wouldn't like VOY and DSC.
I think he would hate DS9 and PIC.
Let's not even get into the Movies...
That work for a Controversial Opinion? I essentially all but tried to contact Gene Roddenberry through a Ouija Board.
My advice to Paramount, ignore the fans, do your thing, you will never please us all, cos fans are not a monolith
Last edited:
Agreed. And "pleasing the fans" is a nonstarter and becomes trying to write Trek by committee which never works out.
Depends on if any of the money would go to his ex-wife.
Agreed. I thought the stasis weapon was cool.
Similar threads
- Locked
