• 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?

Here is a controversial opinion. Wesley Crusher was not that bad of a character. His most annoying moments come in season 1 before the show really found itself. He has been the lead in several episodes I like, though two of them I do have to admit happened after he was no longer a series regular.
Wesley Crusher became a better character after he was no longer in every episode, and they only brought him in when he had something important to do.
 
Did someone mention the M-5?

Let's look at the Antares, versus the Enterprise.

The Antares had a crew of twenty.

Attached various points along TOS, various crew sizes were mentioned - 203, 428, 430...why?

The Antares is described as a transport, a survey ship, and a science probe...

The Constitution is described as a space cruiser, a heavy cruiser, and an exploration and research vessel.

Why?

Simple automation should be able to do most jobs. Smart automation, would be able to handle far more. Defining 'smart' as able to make use of sensor data to modify programmed behavior.

Larry Niven, anticipated a set circumstances where smart systems would fail in some unanticipated ways (A Gift From Earth)

So, a level of true Artificial Intelligence is required.

Problem: not the M-5, but Nomad. As is: where did a Nomad type Artificial Intelligence fail?

Answer: it didn't. It just wasn't fast enough to run at the speed required.

Why?

In a moment of time, far, far briefer, than a straight up Nomad could handle, and therefore far simpler in its independent logic, was now permitted. Speed equals simplicity. Smaller required database.
Nomad got its brains all scrambled with the Others... mixed up the two missions.

The odd thing about "The Ultimate Computer" is that the M-5 was well-programmed in combat, if a bit fuzzy on who the enemy was, but we didn't see anything about how it could handle exploration tasks and lab work. For first contact I'm thinking lots of new civilizations would rather meet a representative face-to-face instead of one of its computers. To break new ground in lab work you need someone doing creative thought. Taking a bunch of data, sure, but you need someone to make sense of what the data means.

Part of the Enterprise's large crew was to provide a lot of subject matter experts as they were exploring. Part was also for companionship as the ship was on a five-year mission; you'd need more than a few people just to avoid driving each other crazy.

For a pure warship, you'd want something more like the Defiant. Hits hard, the ship is as small as possible so that it's maneuverable, the crew is small and not expected to be out for months without crew rotation or lengthy leave at a pleasant base or shore leave somewhere.
 
Here is a controversial opinion. Wesley Crusher was not that bad of a character. His most annoying moments come in season 1 before the show really found itself. He has been the lead in several episodes I like, though two of them I do have to admit happened after he was no longer a series regular.
I agree. In fact, I never knew he was so loathed until the past few years.
 
Controversial Trek opinion (since I helped derail the thread): I prefer the SNW theme to the original TOS one. 😳
Finally, this thread lives up to its name.
kirk-surprised.gif
 
By television standards, twelve to fourteen days to do one episode is downright luxurious.
Precisely why I find the shorter seasons ridiculous. Taking nearly twice as much time to film an episode as the Berman era and making less than half the episodes a season? Even taking time for post production effects, it's still insane it takes so damn long between seasons.
 
Precisely why I find the shorter seasons ridiculous. Taking nearly twice as much time to film an episode as the Berman era and making less than half the episodes a season? Even taking time for post production effects, it's still insane it takes so damn long between seasons.
I suspect two factors are largely at play—cost and the desire of the cast/crew to do other things in the year. The latter represents a degree of freedom far less available (or even imagined) in earlier times but something the current and future generations are unlikely to want to abandon. As a viewer I would like more episodes of things I like but I can also understand the desire for variety among performing artists.
 
Last edited:
I suspect two factors are largely at play—cost and the desire of the cast/crew to do other things in the year. The latter represents a degree of freedom far less available (or even imagined) in earlier times but something the current and future generations are unlikely to want to abandon. As a viewer I would like more episodes of things I like but I can’t also understand the desire for variety among performing artists.
Except they are still working about the same amount of days.

Berman era: 26 episodes x 6 day shoots = 156 shooting days

Now: 10 episodes x 14 day shoots = 140 shooting days


I get the flexibility for actors argument, but there is not a huge difference in amount of shooting days between them.

(Cost argument, I can see that.)
 
My
Except they are still working about the same amount of days.

Berman era: 26 episodes x 6 day shoots = 156 shooting days

Now: 10 episodes x 14 day shoots = 140 shooting days


I get the flexibility for actors argument, but there is not a huge difference in amount of shooting days between them.

(Cost argument, I can see that.)
They are working shorter days then the Berman era, getting less over time. Main filming is not the full week. They make fewer episodes. And they don't reliably film annually.

Michelle Hurd basically said that actors are now making a lot less money.
 
My

They are working shorter days then the Berman era, getting less over time. Main filming is not the full week. They make fewer episodes. And they don't reliably film annually.

Michelle Hurd basically said that actors are now making a lot less money.
Yeah, I've heard multiple actors say the same thing.

Steady work is a near impossibility in this era.

Kind of a 'careful what you wish for' scenario... they wanted less working hours, and they end up with far fewer working opportunities.
 
I am more of a Cowboys fan. America's Team. Back in the day though I loved the Broncos. I loved their Orange Uniforms and John Elway. My all time favorite NFL player though was Barry Sanders with the LIons. I forgave him for going to Oklahoma State instead of Oklahoma. He was so fun to watch.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top