Ummm, citing one more use does not exactly refute the point of it being overused.
The Orville is a good show in many ways, but nobody would accuse it of being original.
Children Of Mars Question.
- Thread starter Gingerbread Demon
- Start date
Ummm, citing one more use does not exactly refute the point of it being overused.
The Orville is a good show in many ways, but nobody would accuse it of being original.
Who cares if it's not original? Or how many examples I need to cite? If it works in the context of the story, that's all that matters.
I thought that whole story was one of the highlights of season 2 of The Orville, cliched or not. I wasn't sure about how they ended that season though, the whole alternate timeline thing and all.
Haven't watched if there is a season 3 so can't comment on that as I prefer physical media and I don't think there is one for that if it is out.
There is a season 3. And I won't spoil it for you, but there is an episode that delves into the origins of the Kaylon.
And we can disagree respectfully on whether it would work. If you're gonna pitch a story, you have to expect it to be challenged. That's how the process works -- there's going to be discussion and debate over the idea's merits, because it's not going to be the only idea on the table. But there's no reason that debate can't be civil. It's a healthy and constructive part of the process, after all.
I said that it worked fine for The Orville, despite it not being an original concept. I'm not sure what else needs to be said about it.
The thing is I think it did work in The Orville but it might not have worked so well in a Star Trek show. That's all I want to say on this. I had my own ideas for how they could have done this. But very fun discussion all the same.
This dialogue from "Measure of a Man" has always intrigued me:
To me, this was the perfect setup for what could have been the premise of PIC season 1. But they did something else entirely, despite the fact that Maddox was even in the show, and it opens with tons of 'disposable people' doing 'the work that no one else wants to do because it's too difficult, or too hazardous.' I mean, it couldn't have been a better setup!
If the Synths had legit rebelled, then the ban would probably never get lifted and you could kiss your season 3 Data revival goodbye.
In the long run would that have been so bad?
If the Synths had legit rebelled, then the ban would probably never get lifted and you could kiss your season 3 Data revival goodbye.
But the synth ban was only a thing from the Zhat Vash storyline where they infiltrated Starfleet. If the synths had legit rebelled, there would have been no need for the Romulan/Zhat Vash plot, because their rebellion would have had nothing to do with the Romulans (other than that they willfully and knowingly destroyed the fleet that was meant to rescue the Romulans before the supernova.)
I know, I wasn't attempting to deconstruct the season, I was simply saying that if the Synth story did not involve the Romulans, then the ban would continue on indefinitely. By having the Romulans cause it, the show could then (believably?) lift the ban.
Meh, Lord Terry would have ignored it like he did everything else he didn't like from the first two seasons.If the Synths had legit rebelled, then the ban would probably never get lifted and you could kiss your season 3 Data revival goodbye.
Understandable, since Stocker was never in the command track and was never trained in starship operations. He couldn't be expected to know anything about how such things worked.
Last edited:
Isn't that the meaning of incompetent? He did not have the skills to do the job.
I know, I know...as you say, the word does carry baggage the way it's typically used.
"Incompetent" is a loaded word. It implies that Stocker was trained for command but was BAD at it. If he was never trained in that way to begin with, then logically speaking, he can't be incompetent.
It's like saying that a guy who's worked all his life as a grocery store manager is an incompetent doctor. There's no correlation at all.
You can't expect someone to be good at a job if they were never trained for that job. And Stocker definitely was not. He served behind a desk for his entire career, so he could not be expected to be good at command. Calling him "incompetent" would be grossly unfair.
And you'll notice that even when the aging disease was running rampant throughout the ship, Stocker did everything he could to get Spock to take command first. So it's not like Stocker was jonesing for the center seat...
It's like saying that a guy who's worked all his life as a grocery store manager is an incompetent doctor. There's no correlation at all.
You can't expect someone to be good at a job if they were never trained for that job. And Stocker definitely was not. He served behind a desk for his entire career, so he could not be expected to be good at command. Calling him "incompetent" would be grossly unfair.
And you'll notice that even when the aging disease was running rampant throughout the ship, Stocker did everything he could to get Spock to take command first. So it's not like Stocker was jonesing for the center seat...
Last edited:
I doubt that. Political winds shift, and the policies put in place by one generation are often overturned by the next. I'd certainly like to think that the majority of the Federation's citizens would have eventually come to their senses and realized the ban had been an overreaction and an injustice.
And should not have taken command.
I suppose he could have turned over command to Sulu, who would not be at risk for the aging disease.
