Here's a question about a scene that I think that, if they were doing it today, they might handle it differently because it might be controversial in the way it exists now ...
Is the Spock-Valeris mind-meld scene in The Undiscovered Country tantamount to a rape scene?
The way it's depicted, Spock definitely forces himself on Valeris and there's a weird awkwardness in their reactions both during it and afterwards. It's a mix of anger and disappointment, but also guilt and shame as well. Not only from Valeris for her crimes, but also I think in Nimoy's portrayal in that he shows Spock almost seeming, for the lack of a better word, "dirty" for having to do it.
You can call it rape. I wouldn't just because we need to keep that word for rape. ("Rape rape" as Whoopi might have said.) It's forced coercion. It might even be torture. It's extreme, it's bad, and it costs Spock something. That's the intention. The stakes are interstellar war.
It's bad enough that J.M. Dillard essentially re-wrote it as something like "Spock mind melded with Valeris and made her see what was good and necessary". That doesn't explain Nimoy's performance. (I haven't read it in 30+ years. It was OK but it was no Wrath of Khan / Search for Spock.)
It's an incredibly moving scene and kudos to both of them.
Controversial Opinion -
All fan films are shit. All of them. I have never watched one for more than a minute without just walking away due to either bad:
1. Acting
2. Directing
3. Writing
4. VFX
1 - Usually. 2 - Usually. 3 - Ehhhh. Sometimes. 4 - HEY! Actually this might be where there is the widest range. You have pros that are slumming, you have talented amateurs who in some cases manage to work their way up, and you have, of course, hacks.
Sorry about the rant, I have just really come to dislike this constant Klingon fanboying in Berman Trek over the years.
Hold my sci-fi beverage. (OK, it's decaf from a Keurig. Leave me my dreams!)
I've been stewing about this all day: I hate Errand of Mercy. I hate it even more because it's an awesome episode. It's exciting, the script is great, the performances are wonderful. But at the end of the day it is possibly (probably?) morally repugnant.
It takes the point of view that the Klingon War (whatever it's called) is just One of Those Things. Silly Earthmen just can't get along with anybody. "Curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want."
Kirk and Spock go to Organia. When Kirk tries to tell the locals that really bad news is headed their way he is condescendingly told "What you're saying, Captain, is that we seem to have a choice between dealing with you or your enemies." Well... Yeah. Maybe it's a bad break. But it's also just a fact. Kirk and the Feds ARE offering an alternative. Before the Klingons show up Kirk and Spock seem willing to leave after they've said their piece. (Compared with Ambassador Fox who would not take No for an answer.)
I'm going from the point of view that the Organians are
not impervious to Klingons or at least with the assumption that there
are lots of
other planets that are not impervious to Klingons. And that there are such planets that Klingons treated as they treated Organia. I'll trust that James T. Kirk is a reliable source on these matters.
I'm also assuming that the Organian threat is only held in the condition of the Federation and the Klingons conflicting each other. In other words it would not be the dissolution of the Empire. (Obviously the Organian embargo was phased out / ignored in later seasons. Some of the books paid attention to it. DC comics found a way to do away with it.)
We don't know what this war was about. And from the point of view of the episode that scarcely matters. War, HUH, what is it good for? A Taste of Armageddon does the same thing.
Which got me to thinking: What would be the outcome of arbitrarily halting other wars? World War Two? The American Civil War? Pick whatever one suits your fancy. The reader may have wars that they felt should have been halted and all sides told to go back to their corners. I THINK World War One might have been skipped but I bet there are historians (people that know stuff) that might disagree. Fair enough. In the case of the Klingon Federation Dispute of Stardate 3198 we have no idea. Maybe just ending the conflict
is the best outcome. Or maybe it leaves a solar system or two under the Klingon Empire that would not have been.
Star Trek does not speak with one voice, not even TOS within itself. A few episodes later City on the Edge of Forever will take a very different point of view. But A Taste of Armageddon will not. (Ahhhh, Gene Coon. We love you.) A Savage Curtain takes a more nuanced (stop laughing!) point of view of war being a terrible thing but if you have it, you have it and something has to be done about it.
So, yeah. Maybe Kirk isn't some blood thirsty bigot after all, eh Mr. Meyer?