NOW WE'RE COOKING WITH FRESH WARP PLASMA.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
I'll show you to the door.
So are many adults in the modern age.
Probably not Henoch’s point.
And never really deeply committed to those relationships.
He was married because that's what gentlemen were supposed to do.
Season three of TOS isn't that bad. It has some clunkers and lack of energy from the cast compared to previous seasons (of course that may just be me projecting since I knew this was the last season), but for me, most of the not-good episodes were just meh. The only truly bad one in my book was Way to Eden.
Also, the first two seasons over-used a singular idea. Season one used all-powerful villains, and season two used the prime directive not being followed and that leading to planets that mimicked certain Earth periods and cultures. Season three didn't do that. It re-uses some ideas from other seasons to ill effect, but it doesn't get lazy and follow one idea.
Basically, I think season three in unfairly picked on to an extent.
Also, the first two seasons over-used a singular idea. Season one used all-powerful villains, and season two used the prime directive not being followed and that leading to planets that mimicked certain Earth periods and cultures. Season three didn't do that. It re-uses some ideas from other seasons to ill effect, but it doesn't get lazy and follow one idea.
Basically, I think season three in unfairly picked on to an extent.
Last edited:
I don't know about shipping, but "slash" certainly did.
Welcome to the jungle.
Exactly. Despite the "superior ambition" born of his genetic engineering, some of Khan's aspirations were no different than that of centuries of colonial powers (who, by the way, still do no apologize for any generational harm caused, particularly if the ruling class & ideologues still benefit from it). This is part of what Kirk zeroed in on in Khan's ambition in "Space Seed", which is not to be lumped in with the completely bitter, murderous, version he would become after the disastrous events of his exile, so some heavy-handed misapplication of the law may not necessarily be justified in the case of TOS Khan.
We have a more relevant version within the proper timeline in the form of Kodos the Executioner, who arbitrarily slaughtered colonists in a barbaric lottery played within his own mind, and it was this kind of criminal Kirk did seek to bring to proper justice.
Indeed.
Agreed.
Doesn't matter Khan's historic crimes.
He comitted crimes against Kirk, under his authority. He was also the victim and should have delayed prosecution of the case to a supervisor, unbiased, officer.
It was not justice.
He comitted crimes against Kirk, under his authority. He was also the victim and should have delayed prosecution of the case to a supervisor, unbiased, officer.
It was not justice.
We do not know how long after TCOTEOF the season finale takes place in real time. Further, Kirk was not going to roll around in the floor crying in front of his shipmates, or even discussing it, since some people do hide their grief from others--its the one bit on "control" some will ever have over the situation (read: death) they cannot control.
I would never go that far about TOS/TAS/TOS-Movies Spock. that said, I would not go overboard butt-smooching & slobbering over him in the way certain YouTube episode review channel hosts do, and often for reasons showing how much they do not understand what Spock represented in TOS.
AND WE'VE BEEN REASSEMBLED .0009 OUT OF PHASE!NOW WE'RE COOKING WITH FRESH WARP PLASMA.
I hated it at first but now...
ST:ID's transwarp beaming into Kronos/Q'onos should be the norm by then and not something controversial.
ST:ID's transwarp beaming into Kronos/Q'onos should be the norm by then and not something controversial.
From Earth in the 23rd century?
I’ve always hated it as a concept, the same way I hate the 32nd century personal transporters, because it removes a limit on the transporters that makes it more believable as a tool. And it creates more problems for the narrative than it answers.
Why would you build startships to explore space if you can just beam people (or drones) to different planets light-years away?
Because you can't transport to outer space to explore.
People moving might want to move together so ships provide that.
Ships offer far more flexibility than just transporting.
Why do people go on long road trips when they can just fly? It's about the journey.
Beaming to other planets would basically be Stargate, but you can only beam to planets you already know are there. To find whatever might be out there that isn’t observable from your starting point — the surprises— you’re still going to need either a ship or a probe.
It's also about having a better chance of survival if an accident/crash happens. You've got far better odds of living after a car accident than a plane falling from the sky.
And for some reason they still built ships in Stargate.
Probably to reverse the polarity or some such thing.
Similar threads
- Locked
