• 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!

Project: Potemkin "Doctor's Orders"

Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

My basic issue comes down fanfilms' tendency to have professional characters acting in an unprofessional manner. Its something I worked very hard to squash in my work for Exeter. You can have conflict, characters can even be abrasive and sometimes rude, but there are situations where it feels appropriate and believable, and situations where it just comes off as callous and abusive.

The Doctor in the film as completed is totally out of line, and her behavior (including critiquing the Captain in front of inferiors, etc.) would get her drummed out of a business, and severely reprimanded in a military chain of command.

Gruff but likeable characters are tricky. Skipper never picked on Gilligan for who he was, but rather for the dumb things he'd do. Bones is not rude to Spock unless he thinks Spock has it coming to him. Dr. Lazarus is gruff to the Sheriff but she doesn't demean him in front of other people. Theirs is a private snarkiness.

My opinion, naturally.
 
Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

I beg to differ, Maurice. You can see some really "unprofessional" behavior in McCoy in "The Galileo Seven." And some equally unprofessional behavior from Spock in the teaser of "I, Mudd." Certain situations give arise to what they are.
 
Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

Yea, but this wasn't an extroidinary or desperate situation. This shouldn't be taken personally. I can see where you were going with it. It's good writing. We love to be super critical with our objective perspective but I can only assume you're not justifying her behaviour and there will or would have been some repercussions.
 
Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

Potemkin_Prod said:
I beg to differ, Maurice. You can see some really "unprofessional" behavior in McCoy in "The Galileo Seven." And some equally unprofessional behavior from Spock in the teaser of "I, Mudd." Certain situations give arise to what they are.
Click to expand...
I disagree that your examples are the same thing.

In The Galileo Seven they are in a life of death pressure cooker situation. Bones tends to blow up at anyone when he feels they are being unreasonable.

Spock gets in one private dig at McCoy in the I Mudd teaser, after finding McCoy's critique of Norman an "argument strewn with gaping defects in logic". The jab is one line ("He's probably terrified of your beads and rattles,") based on an established relationship and not played out as a public spectacle, but in a private discussion.
 
Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

One of the things that always annoys me is when these exchanges become public and disruptive of discipline during a crisis or in the command center, etc. The obvious "inspiration" is McCoy in the first production episode of TOS, "The Corbomite Manuever," but in that case it's treated as an unexpected transgression of Kirk's authority.
 
Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

It is what it is. I'm comfortable with it, and with our future plans for the character of Dr. Drake. Sorry you guys aren't.
 
Re: Project: Potemin "Doctor's Orders"

My Name Is Legion said:
One of the things that always annoys me is when these exchanges become public and disruptive of discipline during a crisis or in the command center, etc. The obvious "inspiration" is McCoy in the first production episode of TOS, "The Corbomite Manuever," but in that case it's treated as an unexpected transgression of Kirk's authority.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And in Corbomite McCoy is sotto voce with his objections to the Captain, not speaking them for the whole bridge to hear. It's when Kirk snaps back that everyone becomes aware.

Potemkin_Prod said:
It is what it is. I'm comfortable with it, and with our future plans for the character of Dr. Drake. Sorry you guys aren't.
Click to expand...
We're simply informing you of what some members of your audience think about the work. Whether or not you care to take such reactions into account is, naturally, entirely up to you. Personally, I find fair critiques more interesting and useful than praise.
 
In this case it seems to be a directorial problem and just simply improper cueing and motivation preperation, etc..
 
Maurice Navidad said:
We're simply informing you of what some members of your audience think about the work. Whether or not you care to take such reactions into account is, naturally, entirely up to you. Personally, I find fair critiques more interesting and useful than praise.
Click to expand...

I find fair critiques absolutely invaluable. I've acknowledged your point of view has some validity, and I've explained our position with regards to the character. I just don't understand your need to repeat them over and over. :)

xortex said:
In this case it seems to be a directorial problem and just simply improper cueing and motivation preperation, etc..
Click to expand...

Nope, it's that we're doing something with the character, taking her in a direction that we've planned to from the beginning. I don't know what you mean by "improper cueing and motivation preperation" or why you're now trying to blame the director for something you don't like, and I don't think that's fair to him.
 
Potemkin_Prod said:
Maurice Navidad said:
We're simply informing you of what some members of your audience think about the work. Whether or not you care to take such reactions into account is, naturally, entirely up to you. Personally, I find fair critiques more interesting and useful than praise.
Click to expand...

I find fair critiques absolutely invaluable. I've acknowledged your point of view has some validity, and I've explained our position with regards to the character. I just don't understand your need to repeat them over and over. :)
Click to expand...
This is a discussion board, and people reply to and agree/disagree with one another's comments. You can paint that as repetitive or redundant all you like, but that doesn't make the arguments or the discussion invalid.
 
If I was the navigator, I would have notified the Captain and gotten verbal confirmation to leave my post. She seemed to be overstepping her authority. Unless the Captain wasn't aboard and they were docked at a space station. And even then.
 
Maurice Navidad said:
This is a discussion board, and people reply to and agree/disagree with one another's comments. You can paint that as repetitive or redundant all you like, but that doesn't make the arguments or the discussion invalid.
Click to expand...

No, but it certainly does lessen the impact of such an argument and increases the likelihood that the argument will be disregarded or ignored completely.

xortex said:
If I was the navigator, I would have notified the Captain and gotten verbal confirmation to leave my post. She seemed to be overstepping her authority. Unless the Captain wasn't aboard and they were docked at a space station. And even then.
Click to expand...

That would not be in accordance with what we've seen. She is not overstepping her authority; she's being rude and dismissive, but she is correct that it was the captain who disregarded protocols to place this new officer on the bridge without having him first cleared by the medical staff.
 
She reminds me of Dr. House. But the trick will be to make her entertaining enough that the audience finds her endearing despite her abrasiveness.

To be honest, I really wasn't sold on this until the exchange in the turbolift. That bit flipped it from uncomfortable to charming in my mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top