It's not supposed to be significant to Kirk.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Well I'm sure everyone agrees it's great writing, when the hook of your story has no significance to the main character.
It actually is a reflection of Kirk's growth and change as a character. The hook is Marcus, and how his choices have unintended consequences, while being a dark mirror of what Kirk could become, existing outside the rules in the name of his own fear. In this scene, Khan shifts from MacGuffin to antagonist.
It also reflects the use of a name as power, reflecting Kirk's claim in 09, and Khan reasserting his power.
Great writing? No, put thematically powerful regardless.
Except ... that's not what happened.
Who Kirk is at the beginning of Into Darkness is exactly who Kirk is at the end. The idea that the Kirk who breaks the rules to save Spock grows through Marcus's deception is a very generous read that I just don't agree with.
If Kirk had to do it again, and Spock was in that volcano about to die, Kirk would go "outside the rules" to save him. He would. No matter what the unintended consequences. He would find a way.
If anything, the end of the movie is Spock realizing why Kirk would do such a thing and in Kirk's death seeing what their connection means.
But at the end of the film, Kirk is still unsure he's right to be on the bridge (which is repeated again in Beyond as a theme of Pine's Kirk constantly questioning whether he deserves to be in the captain's chair), which is why he turns things over to Spock, and before that we repeat every beat of 2009:
- The daddy issues of a father-figure murdered by the antagonist (Kirk's father/Pike)
- Friction between Spock and Kirk where they're not really friends or partners, and struggle to get on the same page
- An antagonist seeking vengeance against the Federation because they feel wronged, slighted or used
Wrath of Khan is both Moby Dick and A Tale of Two Cities. Khan's story comes from Ahab, while Kirk's is thematically about consequences. The consequences of fatherhood. The consequences of leaving Khan on Ceti Alpha V. And ultimately the consequences of Spock's death. The Kirk who doesn't believe in the "no win scenario" becomes a humbled tragic figure at the end of the film and realizes he's never really faced death, even after all of his travels.
Now contrast that to the Kelvin Universe Kirk from where Into Darkness starts to where it ends. There's no f-ing way you'll ever convince me that he would do anything differently in the way he handles what happens on Nibiru. He would violate the Prime Directive again. He would raise the Enterprise out of that ocean ... again. Because, as Spock learned, he could not let him die. If anything, at best Into Darkness is a movie where Spock learns something.
Last edited:
I think that would've saved a lot of hassle in the long run.
Strongly disagree. He is definitely not the same, and if you do think that he would then we won't ever.
Then you and I do not see things the same.
Again, much stronger disagree.
Because the name is power. You're looking at this sideways completely and it skews the meaning. Khan's dialog shows exactly were he is going. "John Harrison was a fiction created by your admiral Marcus the moment I woke up." "My name is Khan" is him reclaiming that identity and moving him to a different role in the narrative.
Compare to TWOK all you like. I refuse to and take the film as far better because of it.
Again, if that's all you got out of the film no wonder you're dissatisfied. It definitely is not beat for beat of 09 in the same character sense. Kirk is far more overconfident, arrogantly so, to the point that he just goes off doing whatever he feels he can do, while attempting to cheat death, like not letting Spock die, the natives die, and his crew die. In the end, he has to face death and sacrifice himself, both ego, and pride, in the name of his crew. The lesson that Spock alluded to in 09.
At the end of the film, there is no question to Kirk on being in the chair, and he is able to welcome Carol onboard as a member of the crew. His relationship with her changes throughout the film too.
Sorry, but all across the board this analysis of the two films reads as surface level, scant, and ignoring subtext. Strong disagree at every point. Mostly because there is no "f-ing way" I'll ever convince you otherwise.
There are several things that should be said about my post last night regarding the canonicity of the kelvin timeline. This was my first post and I certainly did not intend to create quite a stir. As I go through my 14 day probation period, I will do my best to be less provocative. That said I do stand by my specific comments about canonicity. I really enjoyed all 3 of the JJ Abrams films. I do understand the huge impact of the Kelvin timeline films. The casting was excellent. The writing was on par with the other franchises, and they were all fun adventure films. If we look at the television series of the franchise, much more attention was paid a morale message behind the action. We saw this develop over time as each iteration often tackled the topics of the day. My only issue with the kelvin timeline, is it separates itself from the others. The Neo-treks that were birthed from this alternate timeline, have worked very hard to maintain the cannon as it is applied to the TV series. Of course this is only my opinion, and I did not mean to offend anyone by expressing my thoughts to the original question posed in the thread. Thanks for your feedback.
It's called "What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?" for a reason. You're allowed to be provocative and create a stir. (with in the board rules)
Hey, we love controversial opinions. Hence the reason this thread has been going on for so long. Don't apologize for jumping in feet first and hopefully it brings about some wonderful discussion.
Which is the big difference between a film and a TV series. Balance of Terror is one of my favorite Star Trek episodes out of the whole bunch. It has a decent moral to it, though not that deep as others would insist Trek is. To me, the Kelvin films are deeper than they are given credit for, but will not fully broach the TV series levels because its two different formats.
In my opinion.
And your opinion is welcome
Almost done re-watching Seasons 4-7 of Voyager. I'm up to "Endgame", which I haven't put on yet. Seasons 1-3 will follow. This is kind of like when I re-watched TNG and I put on Seasons 2-7 before going to Season 1. Yup, I've been finishing what I started with TNG five years ago, and watching VOY and then DS9 in preparation for when Legacy happens. (Controversial Opinion!) I figured I'd start with the seasons Seven of Nine was in since she's the Captain. Why not? It's my re-watch. 
Except I skipped over "The Disease", "Fury", and the last 10 minutes of "Course: Oblivion"! So, I'm thinking to myself: Do I put on "Endgame" or do I watch those episodes I skipped over? Well...
This goes against my religion (even though I'm Agnostic!), but I'm about to do some Hate-Watching! Yup, you read that right. I'm finishing up "Course: Oblivion"... and then I'm watching "The Disease" and "Fury" back-to-back!
Someone said PIC Season 2 is the worst-of-the-worst and that the worst episodes of VOY are better. So, I'm going to put this to the test! I already know I like PIC S2 better (Controversial Opinion!), but I'm putting "The Disease" and "Fury" on anyway! Let's see how great this hate-watching thing is. Have I been missing out? Let's see!
Except I skipped over "The Disease", "Fury", and the last 10 minutes of "Course: Oblivion"! So, I'm thinking to myself: Do I put on "Endgame" or do I watch those episodes I skipped over? Well...
This goes against my religion (even though I'm Agnostic!), but I'm about to do some Hate-Watching! Yup, you read that right. I'm finishing up "Course: Oblivion"... and then I'm watching "The Disease" and "Fury" back-to-back!
Someone said PIC Season 2 is the worst-of-the-worst and that the worst episodes of VOY are better. So, I'm going to put this to the test! I already know I like PIC S2 better (Controversial Opinion!), but I'm putting "The Disease" and "Fury" on anyway! Let's see how great this hate-watching thing is. Have I been missing out? Let's see!
Last edited:
I think "COURSE: OBLIVION" was a really, really good one.
"THE DISEASE" is pretty bad... only thing I liked was Musetta Vander (she's very easy on the eyes) and the idea of that generational ship.
"FURY"... until recently, I considered it the very worst of VOY. Now it's second only to "UNIMATRIX ZERO".
"ENDGAME"... meh.
Good luck to you!
"THE DISEASE" is pretty bad... only thing I liked was Musetta Vander (she's very easy on the eyes) and the idea of that generational ship.
"FURY"... until recently, I considered it the very worst of VOY. Now it's second only to "UNIMATRIX ZERO".
"ENDGAME"... meh.
Good luck to you!
The "Equinox" 2-parter of seasons 5 and 6 are probably my favorite pair of episodes with Voyager, since it has elements of what I think would have made the show more interesting if they had turned into them just a little bit more. I don't think the show should have been Battlestar Galactica dark. BUT... I think there's a line where Voyager could have become a ship that has to find a "third-way" of doing things to survive, and the show (in a similar way to Deep Space Nine) could have deconstructed the Roddenberry values for Star Trek while showing a split, disparate crew trying to survive while encountering various alien weirdness on their way home.
The actions of Ransom and his crew are horrific. But I thought the scene where Ransom explains his reasoning to Janeway, that it's easy for her to sit in judgment of him while he was the captain of a starving crew in a damaged, collapsing ship, which was never intended to be in deep space to begin with and had little hope of survival, is the most interesting moment in the two episodes. Because the nuances of that argument is the edge Voyager lost once you put all the Maquis in Starfleet uniforms and decided they would just be Starfleet-adjacent officers with different insignias on their collars.
Also, the conflict between Janeway and Chakotay in those two episodes, and the Jack Bauer-esque means Janeway goes to in order to hunt down Ransom and his crew, should have lasting consequences for the relationship between those two characters. But by episode 2 of season 6, we're back to one big happy crew.
The actions of Ransom and his crew are horrific. But I thought the scene where Ransom explains his reasoning to Janeway, that it's easy for her to sit in judgment of him while he was the captain of a starving crew in a damaged, collapsing ship, which was never intended to be in deep space to begin with and had little hope of survival, is the most interesting moment in the two episodes. Because the nuances of that argument is the edge Voyager lost once you put all the Maquis in Starfleet uniforms and decided they would just be Starfleet-adjacent officers with different insignias on their collars.
Also, the conflict between Janeway and Chakotay in those two episodes, and the Jack Bauer-esque means Janeway goes to in order to hunt down Ransom and his crew, should have lasting consequences for the relationship between those two characters. But by episode 2 of season 6, we're back to one big happy crew.
I see the potential in deconstructing Roddenberry Values, but I don't think two series should've been doing it at the same time. In a line from Most-Roddenberrian to Least-Roddenberrian, I think it should go: TNG --> VOY --> DS9 --> BSG
I'm about to put on "Fury".
A few moments with Kim in "The Disease" were too cringy to look at. The rest were just painful. In Jammer's review, he said something about this being like Bill Clinton and the whole Monica Lewinsky scandal. I didn't make that connection back in '99 but, looking at it again, I should've.
I'm about to put on "Fury".
A few moments with Kim in "The Disease" were too cringy to look at. The rest were just painful. In Jammer's review, he said something about this being like Bill Clinton and the whole Monica Lewinsky scandal. I didn't make that connection back in '99 but, looking at it again, I should've.
The "EQUINOX" two-parter was really good, but there is another thing about it that basically makes this two-parter the best representation of what VOY was during its run.
Untapped potential and inconsistancy with characters.
The untapped potential is obvious. The inconsistancy with characters... look at part two with Janeway. She went from going full Ahab on Ransom to the point of relieving Chakotay, putting Lessing up as bait, and threatening to relieve Tuvok (her close friends for years before the show even began) when he was starting to question her decision... and then does a complete turn on Ransom at the end saying, "He forgot he was a Starfleet captain, but he remembers now." (Or words to that effect.) That kind of extreme change gave me whiplash, but it shows just how inconsistant they were with Janeway during the show. Honestly, Mulgrew's performance really elevated the material she was given, and in the hands of a less skilled actress, Janeway would have come off far worse as captain.
Season 6 of VOY would have been the perfect time to do it, then... VOY became the lone franchise series airing when "EQUINOX, PART II" first aired.
The first look at the Borg in VOY, and with a handful of exceptions it was a downhill slide after that.
I generally enjoyed their take on the Borg. One of the few things the show did really well, IMO.
It was a good episode. Robert Duncan McNeill directed that one really, really well.
I've got a Controversial Opinion and for once it doesn't have anything to do with New Trek.
"Fury". I understand people reacting negatively to Old Kes guess being the Bad Guy and trying to sabotage Voyager to help get Young Kes back home. But I also understand Old Kes feeling alone, upset, like she's lost her way, and that she doesn't belong anymore. All a recipe for anti-social behavior; and someone with nothing left to lose will go to any extreme. Then, in the end, Janeway gets through to Old Kes and she decides to return to Ocampa.
I think the reaction to "Fury" was more about Old Kes lashing out and Kes' story ending with her going back to Ocampa. I can understand both of those story elements so, while it's not what I would've done, I can't say I had a problem with it.
Everything else in the episode feels like Voyager as usual. The highlight was Janeway wishing Tuvok a happy birthday.
So, I can say -- Controversial Opinion -- that I don't think "Fury" is a bad episode. Like with everything, the Internet blew it up out of proportion.
"The Disease" isn't so lucky. I can still say I think that's a piece-of-shit episode. It makes Kim look like he's in high school and it contradicts so much of what we've seen in Star Trek before and since. How many times has Kirk had a romantic or sexual encounter of the week with an alien? Rhetorical question, don't answer that.
"Fury". I understand people reacting negatively to Old Kes guess being the Bad Guy and trying to sabotage Voyager to help get Young Kes back home. But I also understand Old Kes feeling alone, upset, like she's lost her way, and that she doesn't belong anymore. All a recipe for anti-social behavior; and someone with nothing left to lose will go to any extreme. Then, in the end, Janeway gets through to Old Kes and she decides to return to Ocampa.
I think the reaction to "Fury" was more about Old Kes lashing out and Kes' story ending with her going back to Ocampa. I can understand both of those story elements so, while it's not what I would've done, I can't say I had a problem with it.
Everything else in the episode feels like Voyager as usual. The highlight was Janeway wishing Tuvok a happy birthday.
So, I can say -- Controversial Opinion -- that I don't think "Fury" is a bad episode. Like with everything, the Internet blew it up out of proportion.
"The Disease" isn't so lucky. I can still say I think that's a piece-of-shit episode. It makes Kim look like he's in high school and it contradicts so much of what we've seen in Star Trek before and since. How many times has Kirk had a romantic or sexual encounter of the week with an alien? Rhetorical question, don't answer that.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
