• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

I think the reason why Kirk does it is that in "Space Seed" the characterization of Khan is supposed to be more nuanced than how he is described later. He's not talked about like he's a genetically engineered Hitler. It's not until you get to Wrath of Khan and arguably most decidedly in Into Darkness that they make him a tyrant that is said to have perpetrated genocide.

Before things go off the rails in "Space Seed," both Scotty and Kirk speak of Khan with a degree of admiration (although, that admittedly shocks Spock), where they think of him as a relic of a backwards time, but recognize his abilities and leadership.

One can say that's possibly indicative of being made in the 1960s, where maybe the recognition of colonialism and the more problematic aspects of American (and world) history weren't exactly at the forefront (e.g., Star Trek was on-the-air at the same time a lot of westerns were putting white actors in some brown face paint and calling them "Indians," while not exactly sweating the issues that had affected indigenous peoples in the Americas).

For example, if you switched out Khan for someone like Winston Churchill, and just imagined him being woken up in the 23rd century, there's a lot to admire. But he was also a politician that oversaw an empire that committed a whole lot of massacres and exploited multiple peoples and countries.

I think that was the kind of nuance they originally were going for with Khan.
Doesn't change his actions against Kirk. This isn't a question of nuance but of consequence for recent behavior. Admiration should not factor in to it.
 
I'm watching Space Seed not sure if this counts but McGiver should have been in the brig at the end awaiting her court martial. Khan should have been in the brig waiting to be charged with multiple counts of attempted murder etc
That's how it should have ended
That's certainly how the law as written lays it out. However, Starship captains have the power to disregard those regulations if they choose, which is also in keeping with the law!

KIRK: This hearing is now in session. Under the authority vested in me by Starfleet Command, I declare all charges and specifications in this matter have been dropped.​
MCCOY: Jim. Agreed you have the authority
 
For example, if you switched out Khan for someone like Winston Churchill, and just imagined him being woken up in the 23rd century, there's a lot to admire. But he was also a politician that oversaw an empire that committed a whole lot of massacres and exploited multiple peoples and countries.

Imagine they'd done that (and mentioned that aspect of history). It'd easily have been the most controversial episode in the history of Trek, ever.
 
DAMN STRAIGHT. And according to production stories she was actually considered. But things didn't work out. Joan Collins was brought up at one point but soon discounted as a cameo.
 
About Kirk grieving Edith.
Maybe it's like Knight Rider wiper blades in Futurama, they were evil but it didn't come across in the show.
So Kirk was grieving but didn't let anyone notice?
If you don't know what the Knight Rider wiper blade thing is, shame on you, watch the episode. =)
 
I always felt Kirk's Nexus fantasy should have been him aboard the Enterprise, in the captain's chair, with the TOS crew. To exist in a fantasy where he's still in charge of a starship AND knows David is alive and well.

I realize that was probably not possible, since Nimoy and other cast members had made it clear they were either not going to show up for something that amounted to a short cameo or they felt they were done after The Undiscovered Country.

The mountain cabin and woman upstairs waiting for him to bring breakfast never felt right for the character.

I don't think the movies leads one to believe Kirk was obsessing about the "one who got away" or may have secretly desired or wanted a family. I don't get the feeling he came to regret the choice of a life in Starfleet. If anything, I think everything leads one to believe that Kirk is only really happy when he's allowed to be in his "first, best destiny."

I always wondered if there's anything to be taken from the way leadership and the captain role is usually written in Star Trek that only 2 of the Trek series show captains in committed relationships or marriages (i.e., DS9 and DSC with Michael, Saru, and Sisko)? Kirk, Picard, Archer, Janeway, etc., are shown to be "in love" with their roles and the purpose it gives them, to the point that they've sacrificed the idea of having significant others in their day-to-day life.
 
Archer was romantically involved with Columbia Captain Erika Hernandez for a short period after the Xindi Crisis, but yeah, that didn't last long and he's still single when the NX-01 is decommissioned in 2161.
 
I always felt Kirk's Nexus fantasy should have been him aboard the Enterprise, in the captain's chair, with the TOS crew. To exist in a fantasy where he's still in charge of a starship AND knows David is alive and well.

I realize that was probably not possible, since Nimoy and other cast members had made it clear they were either not going to show up for something that amounted to a short cameo or they felt they were done after The Undiscovered Country.

The mountain cabin and woman upstairs waiting for him to bring breakfast never felt right for the character.

I don't think the movies leads one to believe Kirk was obsessing about the "one who got away" or may have secretly desired or wanted a family. I don't get the feeling he came to regret the choice of a life in Starfleet. If anything, I think everything leads one to believe that Kirk is only really happy when he's allowed to be in his "first, best destiny."

I always wondered if there's anything to be taken from the way leadership and the captain role is usually written in Star Trek that only 2 of the Trek series show captains in committed relationships or marriages (i.e., DS9 and DSC with Michael, Saru, and Sisko)? Kirk, Picard, Archer, Janeway, etc., are shown to be "in love" with their roles and the purpose it gives them, to the point that they've sacrificed the idea of having significant others in their day-to-day life.

This exactly - in my version, it ends with him willingly, by choice, re-entering that world, rejoining his friends and family.
 
I always wondered if there's anything to be taken from the way leadership and the captain role is usually written in Star Trek that only 2 of the Trek series show captains in committed relationships or marriages (i.e., DS9 and DSC with Michael, Saru, and Sisko)? Kirk, Picard, Archer, Janeway, etc., are shown to be "in love" with their roles and the purpose it gives them, to the point that they've sacrificed the idea of having significant others in their day-to-day life.

I think the main takeaway from that is that Trek owes a large portion of its conceptual ideas about fleet existence to Horatio Hornblower and the old timey Royal Navy genre of tales in general.
 
I always wondered if there's anything to be taken from the way leadership and the captain role is usually written in Star Trek that only 2 of the Trek series show captains in committed relationships or marriages (i.e., DS9 and DSC with Michael, Saru, and Sisko)? Kirk, Picard, Archer, Janeway, etc., are shown to be "in love" with their roles and the purpose it gives them, to the point that they've sacrificed the idea of having significant others in their day-to-day life.
I think the main takeaway from that is that Trek owes a large portion of its conceptual ideas about fleet existence to Horatio Hornblower and the old timey Royal Navy genre of tales in general.
But Horatio was married twice and had three kids...
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top