most "wrong" episode...

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

What really matters in the episode is that the focus isn't on what we think of evolution, the Menk, or the Valakians. What matters is what the characters think, and the conflict that arises between them, and how they handle the dilemma. We don't have to agree with them to know that this episode was an important one for Phl;ox and Archer and their development as characters...

 

[BillJ]

Let's say you're right, that Phlox was wrong. Our hero characters don't have to be right for an episode to be good. They don't to be right on the science.

I think when you put up those types of stakes, it helps for the script to be as tight as possible. It helps if the actions we see on screen don't contradict the dialogue spoken by the stories expert.

Archer decides to let billions die on Phlox's word. Yet the determination Phlox comes to doesn't really match the conditions we see on the planet.

 

[BillJ]

What really matters in the episode is that the focus isn't on what we think of evolution, the Menk, or the Valakians. What matters is what the characters think, and the conflict that arises between them, and how they handle the dilemma. We don't have to agree with them to know that this episode was an important one for Phl;ox and Archer and their development as characters...

It's all about suspension of disbelief. If I don't believe in the macguffin then the characters growth really means nothing.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

What really matters in the episode is that the focus isn't on what we think of evolution, the Menk, or the Valakians. What matters is what the characters think, and the conflict that arises between them, and how they handle the dilemma. We don't have to agree with them to know that this episode was an important one for Phl;ox and Archer and their development as characters...

It's all about suspension of disbelief. If I don't believe in the macguffin then the characters growth really means nothing.

And topedos exist that can turn lifelss moons into habitable planets...

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'll write more about this episode later (I have to leave for a bit) but take this tidbit from Jammer's review.

"Dear Doctor" is evidence that television absolutely does not have to pander to the lowest common denominator or hit us over the head with obvious dialog to get our attention. This episode earns our attention by simply telling a good story. "Dear Doctor" is, I fear, a rarer treasure than we might at first give it credit for. This episode stops and listens. It hears. It observes. It has a true understanding of human nature. It has perspectives of a kind that I want to see more of. And it believes in an audience that is interested in the true spirit of Star Trek and exploration rather than selling out in the name of being the hip flavor of the week.
This is a real story.

 

[BillJ]

I'll write more about this episode later (I have to leave for a bit) but take this tidbit from Jammer's review.

"Dear Doctor" is evidence that television absolutely does not have to pander to the lowest common denominator or hit us over the head with obvious dialog to get our attention. This episode earns our attention by simply telling a good story. "Dear Doctor" is, I fear, a rarer treasure than we might at first give it credit for. This episode stops and listens. It hears. It observes. It has a true understanding of human nature. It has perspectives of a kind that I want to see more of. And it believes in an audience that is interested in the true spirit of Star Trek and exploration rather than selling out in the name of being the hip flavor of the week.
This is a real story.

Now go look up the SciFi Debris review of the same episode...

http://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/e113.asp

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'll write more about this episode later (I have to leave for a bit) but take this tidbit from Jammer's review.

"Dear Doctor" is evidence that television absolutely does not have to pander to the lowest common denominator or hit us over the head with obvious dialog to get our attention. This episode earns our attention by simply telling a good story. "Dear Doctor" is, I fear, a rarer treasure than we might at first give it credit for. This episode stops and listens. It hears. It observes. It has a true understanding of human nature. It has perspectives of a kind that I want to see more of. And it believes in an audience that is interested in the true spirit of Star Trek and exploration rather than selling out in the name of being the hip flavor of the week.
This is a real story.

Now go look up the SciFi Debris review of the same episode...

http://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/e113.asp

Yeah I did see it... and guess what, I agree with many points in it...

particularly points about evolution..

And isn't that what makes it great, that there can be something to talk about.

But I'll admit that often storytelling... how it's told... is just as important as the story itself. The episode is very calm, very moving in it's own unhurried way. The characters might be wrong, but they try to be right, and plot itself isn't contrived to make the episode fulfill a ratings quotient.

Again, I reiterate my first point: I like the controversy. Makes it a strong episode!

 

[BillJ]

...and plot itself isn't contrived to make the episode fulfill a ratings quotient.

I don't even know what this means?

Again, I reiterate my first point: I like the controversy. Makes it a strong episode!

I wouldn't mind the controversy if the science made the least bit of sense and that Phlox's dialogue matched what we see on the planet.

Those two things sink it down into Insurrection territory for me. YMMV.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

the science made the least bit of sense and that Phlox's dialogue matched what we see on the planet.

I haven't watched the episode in a while. From what I remember it does fly in the face of what we know about evolution. But maybe not. We only have one data set (life on this planet) from which to judge how evolution works.. it's certainly not unlikely, particularly in the Star Trek universe, for two sentient humanoids to evolve separately on the same planet.

I'm going to watch it again, but even if the science was failed, what's more important are the issues and the characters. Most of Star Trek's science doesn't match reality, but the producers of Trek always try to encourage their writers to come up with how the plot affects "our characters."

The episode was subdued, quiet and reflective, and, whether they made the wrong judgment calls or not, the characters thought deeply about the decisions they wound up making. I would rather have a thousand episodes like this than "Profit and Lace" or even "Dark Territory."

 

[Lady Conqueror]

The episode was subdued, quiet and reflective, and, whether they made the wrong judgment calls or not, the characters thought deeply about the decisions they wound up making.

Except that we didn't really see them think deeply about it. One minute Archer was in favour of giving them the cure and then in the next scene he says, "Oh i slept on it and decided you were right and let's not give them the cure" - A little scene showing Archer talking to someone else and/or thinking about his decision changing might have improved the episode more instead of the rapid 180 degree turnaround we got.

For the Uniform takes the cake for me - ugh "let's just use WMD for petty revenge and then laugh about it on the bridge afterwards" but I guess because they got lucky and nobody actually died Starfleet gave them a free pass.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Later Kirk escapes from them, calls a truce, gives them aid, calls them friend and sets course back for home without any mention of bringing the aliens up on charges.

You seem to forget the Kelvans still have an impressive tech edge over the Federation. I doubt the Federation could really keep them locked up if it came right down to it.

If he hadn't done this, they would crushed the entire crew.

And, one could also say that, in the episode Kirk and his rew taught them about the vulnerabilities of humanity, and that if they had known that before, they might not have done what they did.

Sure everyone agrees that killing the female redshirt was wrong,but you can't impose consequences as normal to this race. I kind of compare it to the way Picard had no way to adequately punish Kevin Uxbridge in "The Survivors."

All this is true, but it makes for a bad statement about the value of life, particularly when they are the unknown Red Shirts.

Kirk could have told them that what they did was considered immoral and their victim deserved justice (Just to see what they would do, as they managed to get the best of them later).

In the end, it was all about the Kelvan's enjoyment and pleasure seeking. No apologies for what they've done earlier. So much for the female crew man.

'Hey, here's a nice planet, you've got human bodies, why don't you go on staying here and explore your new erotic, physical sensations together?'

You'd be surprised at the number of episodes where Red Shirts get wacked or something serious happened and later, the crew is cracking jokes like they have short term memory syndrome or something.

 

[Dale Sams]

If he hadn't done this, they would crushed the entire crew.

And, one could also say that, in the episode Kirk and his rew taught them about the vulnerabilities of humanity, and that if they had known that before, they might not have done what they did.

Sure everyone agrees that killing the female redshirt was wrong,but you can't impose consequences as normal to this race. I kind of compare it to the way Picard had no way to adequately punish Kevin Uxbridge in "The Survivors."

Later Kirk escapes from them, calls a truce, gives them aid, calls them friend and sets course back for home without any mention of bringing the aliens up on charges.

You seem to forget the Kelvans still have an impressive tech edge over the Federation. I doubt the Federation could really keep them locked up if it came right down to it.

All this is true, but it makes for a bad statement about the value of life, particularly when they are the unknown Red Shirts.

Kirk could have told them that what they did was considered immoral and their victim deserved justice (Just to see what they would do, they did managed to get the best of them).

In the end, it was all about the Kelvan's enjoyment and pleasure seeking. No apologies for what they've done earlier. So much for the female crew man.

'Hey, here's a nice planet, you've got human bodies, why don't you go on staying here and explore your new erotic, physical sensations together?'

You'd be surprised at the number of episodes where a Red Shirts gets wacked or something serious happened and later, the crew is cracking jokes like they have short term memory syndrome or something.

We should all collaborate on a TOS Star Trek book called "5 minutes later". 79 very short chapters detailing what happened five minutes after each episode.

BY ANY OTHER NAME

"Mr...Spock. Have all the Kelvans beamed down?"
"Affirmative Captain."

"Excellent.... Mr. Sulu, lock photon torpedoes on their encampment and....fire. (Peww pewww) FIRE!! (Peww peww peww!)"

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Except that we didn't really see them think deeply about it. One minute Archer was in favour of giving them the cure and then in the next scene he says, "Oh i slept on it and decided you were right and let's not give them the cure" - A little scene showing Archer talking to someone else and/or thinking about his decision changing might have improved the episode more instead of the rapid 180 degree turnaround we got.

I didn't know this, but the ending was originally very different, as stated near the bottom of the Memory Alpha entry

Aside from the controversy here, the episode is excellent as just an exploration of the doctor as a member of the crew. I think his interactions with both Cutler and Hoshi make this episode a winner as well.

I also think the music used during the narration gives this episode a unique feel.

 

[Dale Sams]

that the Menk are supposed to survive, and will only be allowed to properly evolve and prosper if they are not tied to the Valakians. Phlox explains that the "disease" is actually an inherent flaw in Valakian DNA; they've reached an evolutionary dead end. Archer demands a cure for the Valakians, saying he doesn't agree with Phlox's point of view. Phlox reveals that he already has a cure.
The next day, Archer enters the medical facilities. Phlox tries to again state that he does not believe that they should interfere with the natural pace of events on the planet. Archer cuts him off, and makes the statement that he has reconsidered the matter, and that he agrees that the Enterprise and the human race did not go to the stars to play god for other species

1. So Phlox *isn't* playing God by saying 'one race can only evolve and prosper if the other dies out'? Please. You could justify human diseases too by saying "they prey on human DNA weaknesses. How TF are several species on Earth supposed to evolve when the top species on the food chain is killing off other species will nilly. Let humans die out !!"

2. Phlox's race doesn't have a Hippocratic Oath? REALLY? Can his ass. I don't want my life jeoperdized by the moral whims of my Chief Medical Officer.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Yet the Prime Directive, still unformed, still applies. Don't interfere with the natural course of evolution with a species.

But the other thing is... we don't have to like the ending, but if it makes us think, why condemn a well-made episode for that?

 

[barnaclelapse]

Tuvix-You know the episode where Janeway murders someone? Yeah I'll go with that.

But at the same time she saves Tuvok and Neelix.

By murdering an innocent man.

That's one of the few VOY episodes I like. It definitely doesn't make things easy for the viewer, and it does that in the best way possible.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Because of this thread, I am watching Dear Doctor again after many years of not watching it. My comments about its merits remain unchanged. All the comments I made above are still valid in my book.

Yet, the episode still leaves me unsettled. Very rare do films or shows leave me with that feeling. I'm not sure I agree with the decision, but I'm thankful that the episode brings up the dilemma. I think sometimes the best dramas should leave leave us stirred and unsettled.

 

[Dale Sams]

Because of this thread, I am watching Dear Doctor again after many years of not watching it. My comments about its merits remain unchanged. All the comments I made above are still valid in my book.

Yet, the episode still leaves me unsettled. Very rare do films or shows leave me with that feeling. I'm not sure I agree with the decision, but I'm thankful that the episode brings up the dilemma. I think sometimes the best dramas should leave leave us stirred and unsettled.

Well, the OP is 'what ep most made you go..."what the hell are you guys doing??" So yes, the ep certainly has merit.

As for the original question, I would thing the final episode of Voyager, featuring Admiral Kathryn "Shatterer of Worlds" Janeway would be the winner.

 

[commanderkai]

I liked Dear Doctor and For the Uniform because I don't mind the controversy.

I just can't stand Profit and Lace...

Controversy is alright if there are consequences to it, I find. In The Pale Moonlight is an amazing episode because you see Sisko feeling conflicted and guilty for being involved in the murders of a Romulan Senator, a criminal Holoprogrammer, and the senator's guards, in order to bring the Romulans into the war. That's some amazing television.

For the Uniform lacked any consequences for Sisko. It would have been interesting if Starfleet came close to tossing him out of the service for such an appalling action, but stop due to the political considerations involving the Bajorans. That, or have some Maquis remnant attempt to assassinate him out of anger.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I still don't remember anything from it. Perhaps I'll watch it later or tomorrow. But from what little I gather from the thread, Phlox acted correctly.

The whole point of non interference is meant to ensure Starfleet's footprint on the galaxy is as small as possible and that any involvement or action maintain transparency. In other words, treat everyone and anything as if you were never there in the first place. It's like when you go camping and the ranger tells you to leave your site exactly the way you found it.

The problem is, people confuse enlightenment with morality and justice. They are not the same. Phlox's actions May not have been moral. They may not have even been just. But they were enlightened.

To play devil's advocate let me pose this hypothetical:

Say it's 1519 and some Vulcan scientist is in the Sol system doing a survey. He starts having engine trouble and has to land. He ends up smack dab in the middle of Tenochtitlan.

It's right after La Noche Triste and Montezuma has just won his decisive battle and Cortez is retreating. However, the first bodies have already started falling and Smallpox has infected a good portion of the city's population.

Back in his shuttle, the Vulcan has enough hypos to inoculate the entire city and surrounding tribes. Does he do it? Does he have the right to, and if so, should he be obligated?

Remember, if it wasn't for the smallpox, Montezuma probably would have chased after Cortez and annihilated his army--or at least decimated it to the point they had not other option but to retreat back to Spain.

In the meantime, all those surrounding tribes who had long hated the Aztec had started to realize they had a grave common enemy. In the months it would have taken more Spanish armies to return, they could have allied. This would have had massive implications on the long-term evolution and progress of Western culture.

Of course, the Vulcan doesn't know any of this. All he has is his logic and what he sees in front of him.

What does he do?