What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Richard S. Ta]

I’m not sure how you think people plan things before coming up with a solid, concrete plan. But in the real world, it usually involves discussion.

They were planning a crossover, even if it was rather informal.

I know you have zero respect for me, but stop with the lies already.

‘We’ talked about it, as I remember from the original report at the time, meant RTD, Julie Gardner and Phil Colinson, the then producers and executive producers of Doctor Who.

It went no further than that, because as RTD says in the quote, before it could go further, ENT was cancelled.

Nobody at Paramount was ever contacted. Nothing was planned. Not even informally.

We’ve heard plenty of talk from the Paramount side over the years about what ENT season 5 would have potentially looked like. Don’t you think it’s strange that nobody from the Star Trek side of things have ever talked about a potential Who crossover?

They were never contacted.

It was a discussion between RTD and his execs. I’m not in a position to say how serious that conversation was, but certainly no ‘plan’ was made and nobody stateside was contacted.

Sorry, just reporting the facts.

 

[Enterprise is Great]

Even TOS did that too. So, yes, while I think there are legitimate complaints, i.e. not connecting, the one episode problem isn't one I find very persuasive.

Season 2 of CSI: Vegas did an episode about a one off character that left me in tears. Her story was heartbreaking. So was Airiam’s. That was enough for me. I’ve seen it done plenty of times in other shows.

 

[Unicron]

re:Airiam

we didn’t even know she had been an actual flesh and blood person until that episode where she dies right? I mean that’s part of the issue right there. I always assumed she was some sort of Android or robut. But yeah, trying to cram all that backstory in (and still not finding out exactly what happened to her) and then trying to make us feel bad that she died…eh… It was just poorly executed.

like I’d get it if they had done that to Tilly or even Detmer ok, I get it. Airiam was just set dressing.

I too wish Airiam had been better handled, and it didn't help that the revelation she was originally human and had been badly injured, necessitating her more robotic form, opened up other questions as well. If Airiam was severely burned (as I recall, I might be misremembering) and rebuilt that way, why wouldn't the same option be available for Pike? Why would he be destined to be stuck in the beep beep chair?

(I admit, I'm now tempted to use that term regularly )

 

[Nerys Myk]

I too wish Airiam had been better handled, and it didn't help that the revelation she was originally human and had been badly injured, necessitating her more robotic form, opened up other questions as well. If Airiam was severely burned (as I recall, I might be misremembering) and rebuilt that way, why wouldn't the same option be available for Pike? Why would he be destined to be stuck in the beep beep chair?

(I admit, I'm now tempted to use that term regularly )

Different people in different accidents with different injuries.

 

[Citiprime]

Curious. How many people use bland in such a fashion?

I just read a review for Barbie where the article describes the "lameness" of Michael Cera's character Allan as a positive that explains his appeal to the audience. If you don't like the word "bland," how about "safe" or "vanilla" instead? All of those words can be read as a negative in certain contexts to describe someone or something, but also have positive connotations.

To me, Saru would not work if he wasn't grounded to a degree where he is in some ways bland. He functions within Discovery as the rational center that tempers Burnham wanting to charge in where angels fear to tread. Saru is the leader that reassures everyone that everything is going to be ok, while everyone else is out running and gunning with the action. And it's a testament to Doug Jones that he's able to give such an outwardly "alien" character that normality.

From an online review of Discovery, season 3 episode 2:

"Where Georgiou is the boss from hell that so many of us in the real world have dealt with, Saru is the ideal leader who encourages and doesn’t denigrate. His pep talk to Tilly about being the best first impression to the future brought me to tears. Saru can be bland as a character at times, but moments like this cement the reason why he’s such a valuable part of this show."​

I honestly don't even know what your description of Rios even has to do with this entire conversation at all. Picard and Seven being disappointed by Starfleet and taking different, sadder lives may not have been what everyone wanted to see but there was nothing inexplicable about it. Picard just didn't know what to do with himself without Starfleet and Seven just found a different way to make a difference.

All of the characters in Picard, Rios and Jurati included, are former Starfleet officers (or Starfleet adjacent in Seven of Nine's case at that point) that at one time or another had moments in their lives where everything they believed was challenged. And some of them took turns where from someone on the outside looking in made no sense, but it does if you come from the idea that it's all based in an unease or dissatisfaction with their choices or being boxed in with bad choices. The entire backstory of how Rios ended up on that freighter talking to holographic versions of himself is based in him going through a situation where he was forced into a predicament with no good choices.

When you look at season 3...

Spoiler

.... Beverly's decision to run off on her own, according to Gates McFadden, is based in feeling that in knowing Picard (and even getting inside his head during TNG's "Attached") that he a) didn't want a family, and b) would never give up Starfleet in order to get out of the way of being a target, which left her feeling like she didn't have good options.

VARIETY: So how did you resolve your feelings about Crusher’s choice about Jack?

GATES MCFADDEN: I think if we hadn’t had the episode “Attached,” I would have had more of a problem. We had this episode where we were totally connected with each other’s deepest thoughts. I feel that’s why they basically broke up, or it never really went anywhere. Because she didn’t want this on-and-off relationship; she wanted a family. And he very clearly from the deepest instincts did not.

VARIETY: On “TNG,” Crusher was often a character who was unafraid to go off alone on her own path if she felt it was the right thing to do, rules be damned. Her decision to cut off all her friends and not tell Picard about his son is the most extreme version of that, but I see how people had mixed reactions.

MCFADDEN: It’s interesting because she didn’t choose to have an abortion. She really wanted to be a mother. And if you’ve just been recently listening to Picard’s deepest thoughts — “no, I would never want a baby, absolutely no, no, no” — I think you have to base it on what she knew then. And I think she hopes that later the child would reunite with Picard, and it’s a shock when her son doesn’t want to. And perhaps she had an instinct, when the child was crying all the time at night, that this child needed protection, and was perhaps a little different. Obviously, there’s going to be people who disagree with [her decision]; I understand that. I just feel also people should then try to focus on maybe the good of why that happened.

 

[fireproof78]

If you don't like the word "bland," how about "safe" or "vanilla" instead? All of those words can be read as a negative in certain contexts to describe someone or something, but also have positive connotations.

None work for Saru.

To me, Saru would not work if he wasn't grounded to a degree where he is in some ways bland. He functions within Discovery as the rational center that tempers Burnham wanting to charge in where angels fear to tread. Saru is the leader that reassures everyone that everything is going to be ok, while everyone else is out running and gunning with the action. And it's a testament to Doug Jones that he's able to give such an outwardly "alien" character that

This ignores his growth and development and assumes he was always there as this stable character. His dynamic nature and building in to his strength of that cool and resolved person is as much part of his intrigue as his capable leadership in the future.

 

[Macintosh]

I too wish Airiam had been better handled, and it didn't help that the revelation she was originally human and had been badly injured, necessitating her more robotic form, opened up other questions as well. If Airiam was severely burned (as I recall, I might be misremembering) and rebuilt that way, why wouldn't the same option be available for Pike? Why would he be destined to be stuck in the beep beep chair?

I interpreted quite a lot of DIS S2 as demonstrating Pike's disdain for a lot of what we might think of from a production viewpoint as the anachronistically advanced technology shown in DIS S1 (the holo-communicators and so on), which is why it exists in DIS in the 2250s but we don't see it in TOS in the 2260s. Given what happens to Airiam it's entirely plausible to me that he refuses to be augmented in a similar way and risk losing his autonomy. It also occurred to me that this fear of losing one's autonomy, of having one's own mind used against yourself and your friends, colleagues, and comrades, is very similar to the experience of Picard when assimilated by the Borg.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

1. Looking forward to Legacy.

Zero interest in that.

2. Looking forward to the Section 31 TV Movie.

Many things can be said about "sci-fi" or TV writers in general trying to write about anything connected to intelligence agencies..and most of it is not good.

5. PIC Season 3 is awesome.

Permaban for you!

8. TOS Season 3 is good.

...and superior to most ST TV series following it, with characters feeling like real people as opposed to what would become the standard: soulless, speech-spewing characters sounding like the kind of people who occupy seats on certain cable news channels.

10. "The Omega Glory" is a good episode if you forget about the last part.

"The Omega Glory" was excellent from start to finish, starting off with horror, then a strong political conflict actually feeling dangerous to the series leads, and of course, Tracey, one of the most formidable, manipulative villains, and the beauty of it all is that he was a Starfleet captain--one of the so-called "good guys", yet he was as much of a snake as any of TOS' best villains. Once again, we see Starfleet or by extension the organization it serves was no paradise in space. (so much for the "peaceful optimistic future" crap Gene dreamed up in the 70s convention era).

 

[Grendelsbayne]

All of the characters in Picard, Rios and Jurati included, are former Starfleet officers (or Starfleet adjacent in Seven of Nine's case at that point) that at one time or another had moments in their lives where everything they believed was challenged. And some of them took turns where from someone on the outside looking in made no sense, but it does if you come from the idea that it's all based in an unease or dissatisfaction with their choices or being boxed in with bad choices. The entire backstory of how Rios ended up on that freighter talking to holographic versions of himself is based in him going through a situation where he was forced into a predicament with no good choices.

None of their choices are even the slightest bit hard to understand. The fact that they had bad choices available to them doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with contrived writing.

When you look at season 3...

Spoiler

.... Beverly's decision to run off on her own, according to Gates McFadden, is based in feeling that in knowing Picard (and even getting inside his head during TNG's "Attached") that he a) didn't want a family, and b) would never give up Starfleet in order to get out of the way of being a target, which left her feeling like she didn't have good options.

VARIETY: So how did you resolve your feelings about Crusher’s choice about Jack?

GATES MCFADDEN: I think if we hadn’t had the episode “Attached,” I would have had more of a problem. We had this episode where we were totally connected with each other’s deepest thoughts. I feel that’s why they basically broke up, or it never really went anywhere. Because she didn’t want this on-and-off relationship; she wanted a family. And he very clearly from the deepest instincts did not.

VARIETY: On “TNG,” Crusher was often a character who was unafraid to go off alone on her own path if she felt it was the right thing to do, rules be damned. Her decision to cut off all her friends and not tell Picard about his son is the most extreme version of that, but I see how people had mixed reactions.

MCFADDEN: It’s interesting because she didn’t choose to have an abortion. She really wanted to be a mother. And if you’ve just been recently listening to Picard’s deepest thoughts — “no, I would never want a baby, absolutely no, no, no” — I think you have to base it on what she knew then. And I think she hopes that later the child would reunite with Picard, and it’s a shock when her son doesn’t want to. And perhaps she had an instinct, when the child was crying all the time at night, that this child needed protection, and was perhaps a little different. Obviously, there’s going to be people who disagree with [her decision]; I understand that. I just feel also people should then try to focus on maybe the good of why that happened.

Spoiler

Nothing about that makes it in any way logical for her to blow up her entire life, nor for her to pretend that Picard's life is so vastly dangerous when it clearly isn't. Hell, he literally spent the last decade *not* in Starfleet, but that apparently did nothing to change her mind, either. And all of this will still never look good next to her laughable decision to raise Jack alone in a tiny starship on the dangerous edges of Federation space while *deliberately* getting herself (and him) involved with criminals. If she were just straight up lying about why she left, then maybe that wouldn't be so bad, but if she truly left for *Jack's safety* - which the show most certainly seems to say - then that contrast is absolutely idiotic. The literal definition of contrived writing.

Plus, nothing you say here does anything whatsoever to counter examples like the writers *choosing* to insert 'No Starfleet' into a message only for the characters to immediately decide to bring an entire starship. And that was hardly the last such example of contrived writing in the season.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Spoiler

Nothing about that makes it in any way logical for her to blow up her entire life, nor for her to pretend that Picard's life is so vastly dangerous when it clearly isn't. Hell, he literally spent the last decade *not* in Starfleet, but that apparently did nothing to change her mind, either. And all of this will still never look good next to her laughable decision to raise Jack alone in a tiny starship on the dangerous edges of Federation space while *deliberately* getting herself (and him) involved with criminals. If she were just straight up lying about why she left, then maybe that wouldn't be so bad, but if she truly left for *Jack's safety* - which the show most certainly seems to say - then that contrast is absolutely idiotic. The literal definition of contrived writing.

Plus, nothing you say here does anything whatsoever to counter examples like the writers *choosing* to insert 'No Starfleet' into a message only for the characters to immediately decide to bring an entire starship. And that was hardly the last such example of contrived writing in the season.

To me, it doesn't feel like contrived writing.

Spoiler: PIC S3 Spoilers

I can understand Beverly's decisions and how she justified it given her knowledge of the situation at the time.

My bigger issue is that Wesley doesn't seem to come by more often to visit his mom.

He's a freaking "Traveler", he has all that power, but no time to visit his mom?

The fact that he has a "Half-Brother", wouldn't that make him want to come by and spend time with him? Watch him grow up, spend extra time to make sure that Mom & Little Brother is ok?

 

[fireproof78]

None of their choices are even the slightest bit hard to understand. The fact that they had bad choices available to them doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with contrived writing.

Spoiler

Nothing about that makes it in any way logical for her to blow up her entire life, nor for her to pretend that Picard's life is so vastly dangerous when it clearly isn't. Hell, he literally spent the last decade *not* in Starfleet, but that apparently did nothing to change her mind, either. And all of this will still never look good next to her laughable decision to raise Jack alone in a tiny starship on the dangerous edges of Federation space while *deliberately* getting herself (and him) involved with criminals. If she were just straight up lying about why she left, then maybe that wouldn't be so bad, but if she truly left for *Jack's safety* - which the show most certainly seems to say - then that contrast is absolutely idiotic. The literal definition of contrived writing.

Plus, nothing you say here does anything whatsoever to counter examples like the writers *choosing* to insert 'No Starfleet' into a message only for the characters to immediately decide to bring an entire starship. And that was hardly the last such example of contrived writing in the season.

Spoiler: Picard S3

Yes, it feels contrived but not over Picard. Yes, I get that she feels like Picard's life wouldn't allow for kids, too dangerous, whatever. Fine, that works in a way because they get together, and then he ends up dealing with a Romulan Crisis and a Mars' attack.

No, as you say, the idiot part of the plot is that "Jack can't be safe" and then living far, far away from safety. Like, that's like going "I don't want my child to see crime here in New York City so I'll move to Mexico and deal with cartels for supplies," type logic.

Yeah, sorry, Beverly's decision makes no sense in light of her character.

 

[ananta]

That’s just one example, for me, of the clunky writing in P3. Gates Mcfadden really worked hard to sell it, but I couldn’t accept the character motivation. It was entirely and absolutely a matter of plot convenience. Like so many little details that felt off.

 

[Vger23]

Complaining about Ariam’s death being “lame” because we didn’t know enough about the character is like complaining Tomlinson’s death in “Balance of Terror” is lame.

 

[Vger23]

"The Omega Glory" was excellent from start to finish, starting off with horror, then a strong political conflict actually feeling dangerous to the series leads, and of course, Tracey, one of the most formidable, manipulative villains, and the beauty of it all is that he was a Starfleet captain--one of the so-called "good guys", yet he was as much of a snake as any of TOS' best villains. Once again, we see Starfleet or by extension the organization it serves was no paradise in space. (so much for the "peaceful optimistic future" crap Gene dreamed up in the 70s convention era).

I love “The Omega Glory.” I always have. I didn’t know I was supposed to hate it until the internet.

 

[Paul755]

Complaining about Ariam’s death being “lame” because we didn’t know enough about the character is like complaining Tomlinson’s death in “Balance of Terror” is lame.

Yeah but aside from his fiancé nobody made a huge deal about him dying. They made it out like Ariam dying was one of the great tragedy’s in the history of Starfleet.

 

[Vger23]

Yeah but aside from his fiancé nobody made a huge deal about him dying. They made it out like Ariam dying was one of the great tragedy’s in the history of Starfleet.

Ariam was a crew member shown to be respected and loved by her colleagues and someone who had lived a very tragic life. Spreading that out over 1 episode or 15 episodes doesn’t really affect me in terms of its impact. The impact is derived, as it is with Tomlinson, from effectively putting yourself in the place of those who loved and will miss the character.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah but aside from his fiancé nobody made a huge deal about him dying. They made it out like Ariam dying was one of the great tragedy’s in the history of Starfleet.

Kirk and McCoy did. The coda of the episode is tragedy.

Same with Ariam. Most important in Starfleet history? Please. It's s personal tragedy for this crew. And if I can feel that pathos in the crew for Tomlinson in my first episode of Trek I watch then I sure can with Ariam.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Complaining about Ariam’s death being “lame” because we didn’t know enough about the character is like complaining Tomlinson’s death in “Balance of Terror” is lame.

Yeah but aside from his fiancé nobody made a huge deal about him dying. They made it out like Ariam dying was one of the great tragedy’s in the history of Starfleet.

Yeah.

And also, it just felt really weird for a show like DSC to try to shove that entire story arc into a single episode. The whole point of DSC was that it *wasn't* bound by the old episodic limitations which forced shows like TOS to confine this kind of story to a single episode with no build up and never to be referenced again. For them to do it that way anyway is just a bizarre decision which completely takes me out of the show and also damages the pacing of the season as a whole.

 

[ananta]

You want controversial? While I agree it was very cheap packing Airiam’s backstory exclusively into the very episode she died, I still think the death of this extra (which is essentially what she was) packed more emotion than some of Trek’s BIG death scenes (I’m thinking Data’s death in Nemesis and Kirk’s in Generations—I love both characters but their death scenes were utter shit and I didn’t feel the slightest swell of emotion; just anger that their exits had been botched through such unforgivably weak writing and directing).

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Controversial Opinion:

The Voyage Home is a gazillion times better than The Wrath of Khan. I prefer it in every way, including the jingly theme.