What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[knightgrace]

Off the wall controversial opinion: using the 'Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology' dating and James Blish's comment in his story treatment of 'Space Seed', Star Trek's five year mission, began in 2218...

Why? Because the author of said book appears to have timed it based on comments in 'Tomorrow is Yesterday'.

Furthermore, 'Star Trek: Strange New Worlds' is in error for having too much damage to the Enterprise. For it presumes incompetence on the part of 'Star Fleet' after 200 years or so. This contradicts the premise of Galaxy travel being "Perfected".

Currently watching disk 3 of season 3 of SNW...

 

[Tallguy]

Words words words words words...

 

[Nerys Myk]

Off the wall controversial opinion: using the 'Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology' dating and James Blish's comment in his story treatment of 'Space Seed', Star Trek's five year mission, began in 2218...

Why? Because the author of said book appears to have timed it based on comments in 'Tomorrow is Yesterday'.

Furthermore, 'Star Trek: Strange New Worlds' is in error for having too much damage to the Enterprise. For it presumes incompetence on the part of 'Star Fleet' after 200 years or so. This contradicts the premise of Galaxy travel being "Perfected".

Currently watching disk 3 of season 3 of SNW...

I'm sure the builders of the Titanic thought ocean liner travel was "perfected" too.

The Enterprise takes damage all of the time in TOS. In the second pilot it had to limp to a lithium cracking station to jury rig repairs. Seriously, do you ever watch the actual show rather than just read the ancillary materials?

 

[cooleddie74]

Yep. We just didn't see a lot of the visual damage because of special effects constraints and weekly budgets in the mid-to-late 1960s. It wasn't until TWOK in 1982 that we got to see starships really torn a new one onscreen.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yep. We just didn't see a lot of the visual damage because of special effects constraints and weekly budgets in the mid-to-late 1960s. It wasn't until TWOK in 1982 that we got to see starships really torn a new one onscreen.

Commodore Decker is sad.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Yep. We just didn't see a lot of the visual damage because of special effects constraints and weekly budgets in the mid-to-late 1960s. It wasn't until TWOK in 1982 that we got to see starships really torn a new one onscreen.

Taking it one step further, actually preserving the battle damage on Enterprise's hull as she was coming home in TSFS and throughout the film's entirety, as opposed to a reset button-enabled spit-shine finish like what >ahem< Voyager experienced nearly every episode, unless it somehow strictly served the plot to have broken shit hanging off it.

 

[cooleddie74]

The NX-01 in the Delphic Expanse was another example of a ship that carried damage from week to week and wasn't just a one-off. The ship was still royally dinged up and marked full of gaping holes when she got back to Earth. Easier in the era of all-CGI wireframe models, but also a welcome sight given that the ship was supposed to have spent the better part of a whole year in the middle of one run-in or outright battle after another.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Commodore Decker is sad.

Good point. TOS' Constellation exterior was severely damaged, arguably more than the 1701 from TWOK/TSFS.

Taking it one step further, actually preserving the battle damage on Enterprise's hull as she was coming home in TSFS and throughout the film's entirety, as opposed to a reset button-enabled spit-shine finish like what >ahem< Voyager experienced nearly every episode, unless it somehow strictly served the plot to have broken shit hanging off it.

True.

 

[Shawnster]

Words words words words words...

You know better than this. The line is

Blah, blah, blah.

 

[korblborp]

You know better than this. The line is

Blah, blah, blah.

yadda, yadda, yadda...

 

[The Salt Umpire]

 

[DarrenTR1970]

Hell, the original Space Cruiser Yamato perfected the art of a ship being magically repaired at the beginning of the next episode now matter how much damage the Yamato took.
The new series has attempted to address this by giving the Yamato a force shield as well as salvaged parts from Gamelon vessels.

 

[CoveTom]

But good words. That's where ideas begin.

 

[Starflight]

Might be a controversial opinion in itself but I actually like how the Enterprise/Voyager repairs magically between episodes. Of all the story conventions that collapse if you treat Star Trek as being literal and bound by real-world logic, it's one of the least offensive, especially in the 24th century when they can presumably replicate repair materials.

 

[fireproof78]

Might be a controversial opinion in itself but I actually like how the Enterprise/Voyager repairs magically between episodes. Of all the story conventions that collapse if you treat Star Trek as being literal and bound by real-world logic, it's one of the least offensive, especially in the 24th century when they can presumably replicate repair materials.

Voyager is harder to take because the premise is isolation of the ship.

 

[Starflight]

Voyager is harder to take because the premise is isolation of the ship.

True but the NCC-1701 is also ostensibly on a five year mission into unknown space (even if they routinely pop up at Earth or a starbase when the plot demands).

I think I read somewhere that the Intrepid-class was designed specifically for long-term missions into unknown space, and the warp core could run for three years without refueling. Voyager was ultimately out there for seven years; I wonder if they actually made it back within the timeframe the ship was intended to survive alone in space.

 

[knightgrace]

Words words words words words...

So, the SNW Enterprise deflectors fail easily? After two centuries of improvements? And the computer control isn't that great?

Very, very, very unlikely.

The Enterprise NX-01, has far more of an excuse due to Earth having had interstellar flight for one hundred years.

As to the Constellation, the damage was done by an unknown weapon making use of pure antiproton beams.

We aren't talking newbies here folks.

 

[cooleddie74]

Technology fails. TVs today are vastly more sophisticated and reliable than a cathode ray tube model from 1965 but modern HD flatscreens still go bad and have technical problems.

We ARE talking the wear and tear of everyday use and imperfect technology (which all technologies are) here.

 

[Starflight]

So, the SNW Enterprise deflectors fail easily? After two centuries of improvements? And the computer control isn't that great?

Very, very, very unlikely.

The tech fails if it makes the plot more interesting, same as how there's always some randomly-chosen reason in the 90s shows for why the tractor beam, which could solve most problems in four seconds, can't be used.

 

[FredH]

STIV: TVH is the Galactica 1980 of Star Trek. Bumbling about in 80's America is trite compared to high adventure in outer space. I prefer STV: TFF.

IV was in fact the first Trek film I didn’t like at the time, though I’ve since mellowed on it. I just didn’t feel that a previously sturm-und-drang trilogy should end with something in the vein of a 70s Disney movie.