What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Grendelsbayne]

Probably, but Picard shouldn't go on away missions as a Captain (so less options of him getting in mortal danger), and Data's memories are probably just strings of 1's and 0's

But the away mission/mortal danger is just a choice. No reason at all you even need it to do a clip show. And the same thing is true about framing the whole thing as a character just remembering things.

 

[at Quark's]

^true, I was just being a bit facetious. In reality, of course they could have done a clip show with either Data or Picard, and written a story around it to fit that.

 

[Farscape One]

The only reason they chose that format was because they only had 3 days to film the entire episode. As comparison, a typical episode was shot 6-7 days. You'll notice there are only three sets used... Sick Bay, Transporter Room, and the planet. Not even the full cast was there... Worf and Wesley weren't in it. Pulaski and O'Brien are the only two non-regulars there with any speaking roles. (Pulaski wasn't in the main titles.)

Even "Where Silence Has Lease", which had a vast majority of it set on the bridge, was shot in 5 days. (At least, all the bridge scenes.)

I give "Shades Of Gray" more slack for multiple reasons, not the least of which there are worse episodes... even within TNG.

(Plus, it ends the season as showing how dangerous space travel really is... a recurring theme that was present throughout season 2.)

 

[Forbin]

Controversial Opinion: "Shades of Gray" wasn't THAT bad. Clip shows were a thing in the ‘80s. Some of us still didn’t have VCRs yet. I didn’t have one until 1990. So, clip shows were the only way for us to re-experience older episodes of anything, if they weren't strip-syndicated. Even though I wasn't watching TNG back then, I remember what it was like at the time, so I go easier on "Shades of Gray" than other people.

I asked my father for MONTHS to get us a VCR. Then he took me to Sears one day, showed me a VCR, and he said, "Do you know how expensive VCRs are?!" Then he pointed to one with a $300 price tag. $300 in 1990. That would be over $700 today. I couldn't understand it back then, but now I can understand my father's position. Today, I wouldn't want to just drop $700 willy-nilly. But anyway...

I get why they did clip-shows. Too many people just didn't want to spring for VCRs, and TNG wasn't being shown every day at the time. Clip-shows were like a "best of", except TNG didn't have enough "best of" material to justify it. That's as far as I'll go.

I actually had a VCR that cost $700 even back then! And I got it 2nd hand from a friend who must have paid $1k for it. Very high-end VHS, IIRC.

 

[James Cole]

I asked my father for MONTHS to get us a VCR. Then he took me to Sears one day, showed me a VCR, and he said, "Do you know how expensive VCRs are?!" Then he pointed to one with a $300 price tag. $300 in 1990. That would be over $700 today. I couldn't understand it back then, but now I can understand my father's position. Today, I wouldn't want to just drop $700 willy-nilly. But anyway...

Kinda crazy to consider the generational boundary line between young Gen X and elder millennials. TOS and TNG really do have strip syndication to thank for being so broadly popular.

 

[Frontis]

I have controversial opinions about ENT.
The finale episode "These are the Voyages.." is for me the worst and most disappointing Star Trek episode I've ver seen. They should have canceled it, the prior episode "Terra Prime" was actually a good finale imo.
The season 2 episode "Regeneration" is one of my all time favorite Star Trek episodes. A thrilling story about the first contact with Borg and my favorite Borg episode at all.
ENT is not my favorite Trek but it had a lot of potential and was canceled too soon.

 

[fireproof78]

he finale episode "These are the Voyages.." is for me the worst and most disappointing Star Trek episode I've ver seen. They should have canceled it, the prior episode "Terra Prime" was actually a good finale imo.

I agree on this point and this is were I stop watching Enterprise if I do rewatch it (rare). Actually, Demons and Terra Prime are my favorite ENT episodes, followed by "In a Mirror, Darkly."

 

[at Quark's]

I agree on this point and this is were I stop watching Enterprise if I do rewatch it (rare).

Well, it's not as if there is much Enterprise material left to watch after skipping that episode anyway.

While I agree Terra Prime would have made for a better finale, I don't think the episode was that bad as an episode. It just sucked as a series finale in my opinion.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, it's not as if there is much Enterprise material left to watch after skipping that episode anyway.

While I agree Terra Prime would have made for a better finale, I don't think the episode was that bad as an episode. It just sucked as a series finale in my opinion.

Looking at the transcript, I could edit it to be a very solid series finale.

As it stands, ok, it needs work. But not much to be a fantastic series finale and still a stirring episode in its own right. I'd rather have that as the end.

 

[Forbin]

I have controversial opinions about ENT.
The finale episode "These are the Voyages.." is for me the worst and most disappointing Star Trek episode I've ver seen. They should have canceled it, the prior episode "Terra Prime" was actually a good finale imo.

I don't think that's controversial at all. A lot of people feel that way (including, IIRC, Jolene Blalock!)

 

[FredH]

Just about every time fans hate, hate, HATE an element added to Star Trek, that element either is an excellent story-generator (Section 31), or would be if writers didn’t subsequently ignore it (the Omega Directive).

 

[Frontis]

I don't think that's controversial at all. A lot of people feel that way (including, IIRC, Jolene Blalock!)

Yes, i read that Jolene and other actors have not been happy with that finale. No wonder...

 

[at Quark's]

Just about every time fans hate, hate, HATE an element added to Star Trek, that element either is an excellent story-generator (Section 31), or would be if writers didn’t subsequently ignore it (the Omega Directive).

Well, I don't think the Omega Directive is a bad story idea in itself. I simply don't like that they made it 'primer than the prime directive' just to tell a one-off story. With a little thought and care, it might have been possible to tell the same story without making the Omega Directive override the prime directive.

Also shows how 'evolved' the Federation really is - protecting lesser developed species is all good and well - unless something they do has the risk of making warp travel impossible in the sector. In that case- screw them.

 

[Citiprime]

Also shows how 'evolved' the Federation really is - protecting lesser developed species is all good and well - unless something they do has the risk of making warp travel impossible in the sector. In that case- screw them.

Beyond just that, Star Trek: Insurrection indicated the Federation Council has the power to override the Prime Directive, or at the very least if you're being generous has a team of lawyers that can "reinterpret" it, since they find "reasons" for why the forced relocation of a planet's population without their consent is "ok" if they need the planet's resources.

For example, in Insurrection, the loophole the Federation Council seemed to have latched onto is the Prime Directive didn't apply to the Ba'ku because they weren't originally native to the planet.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Just about every time fans hate, hate, HATE an element added to Star Trek, that element either is an excellent story-generator (Section 31), or would be if writers didn’t subsequently ignore it (the Omega Directive).

The trouble with Section 31 is that their philosophy of 'Star Trek morality isn't enough to keep the Federation intact' is pretty harmful to Star Trek unless it's continually proven wrong, but the allure of dark spy adventures is too strong for producers to just let them be a small conspiracy of bad admirals that needs to be opposed.

I'm happy with how the Omega Directive was handled though. We don't need an Omega Directive II, we already got a story about the crew breaking the Prime Directive to save the sector/quadrant from forbidden science. If Omega experiments were more common, someone somewhere would've already ruined warp travel by now, so I'm fine with it being a one-off problem.

 

[fireproof78]

The trouble with Section 31 is that their philosophy of 'Star Trek morality isn't enough to keep the Federation intact' is pretty harmful to Star Trek unless it's continually proven wrong, but the allure of dark spy adventures is too strong for producers to just let them be a small conspiracy of bad admirals that needs to be opposed.

It's hardly small if we see it with almost every flag officer in TNG forward. At least 31 offers a better option than just "power corrupts."
I think all the bad admirals in Trek does more harm to Trek's supposed morality than 31 ever did.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

It's hardly small if we see it with almost every flag officer in TNG forward.

I don't think it's that bad, but it's bad enough. And yeah we've got more than enough bad admirals as well. I love the Drumhead and The Pegasus and Homefront and Star Trek VI... I'm even a big fan of Star Trek Into Darkness, but they've become a running joke.

The good thing about badmirals though, is that they fail and then they're gone. Section 31 is still there and now that Sisko's gone no one seems interested in destroying them.

 

[Lord Garth]

Just about every time fans hate, hate, HATE an element added to Star Trek, that element either is an excellent story-generator (Section 31), or would be if writers didn’t subsequently ignore it (the Omega Directive).

100% agree. The more I look forward to something, the more resistance it's met with on here. It's a mathematical formula.

Section 31
Legacy

Spoiler

A Calypso follow-up

The list is growing.

If they did an Assignment: Earth series set in Present Day, I'd actually look forward to that too. Cue people who'd scream, "NOOO!!!!!!!"

 

[at Quark's]

The trouble with Section 31 is that their philosophy of 'Star Trek morality isn't enough to keep the Federation intact' is pretty harmful to Star Trek unless it's continually proven wrong, but the allure of dark spy adventures is too strong for producers to just let them be a small conspiracy of bad admirals that needs to be opposed.

I do think it's simply the truth, though. I think it's simply impossible to be a major power facing opponents that are willing to play it dirty, and always keep your own hands entirely clean, and you'll need some people to do the dirty work. But section 31 went too far in that.

 

[1001001]

I'm happy with how the Omega Directive was handled though. We don't need an Omega Directive II, we already got a story about the crew breaking the Prime Directive to save the sector/quadrant from forbidden science.

I loved The Omega Directive.

Think about all the ramifications of people stuck where they were forever. Families split apart, trade ruined.

The Prime Directive would be meaningless in a warp-free Federation.