What do you HATE about Star Trek?

[USS Triumphant]

I was just thinking (there was smoke. Honest!), and the only thing I can think of that really irks me is the exploding consoles. Did circuit breakers and disconnects go out of fashion, or maybe the technology was lost when they were building the gigaquad computers?

Oh, also, seatbelts. They're in space.

Agreed about the circuit breakers.

I really have no problem with the lack of seat belts, though, because you would think that inertial dampeners capable of keeping the crew from becoming a fine mostly pink mist against the back wall of whatever compartment they are in when the ship goes to warp would be MORE than capable of buffering the internal environment when they are hit by something - and if those dampeners went offline, the crew would have a much bigger problem than just getting tossed about. My problem is that they don't seem to do that. But, I guess it wouldn't be very good for screen drama if everyone was just like "yep, that was a pretty big explosion" while just sitting there.

 

[BigJake]

I'll tell you what I miss. I miss the days in the 70s when there wasn't so much Trek that people felt like they could pee all over the stuff they didn't like because there was always more coming down the road.

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtqvMCP8GNE[/yt]

 

[Maxillius]

What I dislike most about Trek is the lack of realism, especially involving Kirk.

-He cheats to beat a combat simulation and gets a commendation (prime universe). They half-ass try to fix this in the NuUniverse, but what's Pike do? Promotes a raw cadet to first officer who is, in turn, under another freshly minted officer with zero command experience. Really??

-Kirk disobeys orders to go after the corpse of his dead friend in a no-fly zone. And he does so by stealing a (albeit beat-up) heavy cruiser he formerly commanded. Even in a society that doesn't use money, those things can't be cheap. And how is he punished? Ohhh, Starfleet gives him COMMAND OF ANOTHER FRIGGIN STARSHIP! Nevermind the time travel, nevermind his inability to follow orders, lets give him another ship.

-Voyager. I really shouldn't have to say more than this. What happened on Equinox is closer to what should've happened to Voyager, but as I watched the end of the Xindi arc on Enterprise I thought, "This is what Voyager should've been, a ship that's beat to hell barely limping home." But no, not only did Voyager make it back with not a scratch on her hull, but she had some nifty future shields fully deployed for all to see.

At least DS9 addressed the realism problem. Sisko got properly seasoned fairly quickly.

 

[USS Triumphant]

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtqvMCP8GNE[/yt]

"Suddenly, I'm bowling on the Starship Enterprise."

 

[Maurice]

What I dislike most about Trek is the lack of realism, especially involving Kirk...

That's the Trek movies. Kirk on the TV show wasn't really portrayed that way.

 

[Maxillius]

What I dislike most about Trek is the lack of realism, especially involving Kirk...

That's the Trek movies. Kirk on the TV show wasn't really portrayed that way.

True, TOS Kirk was a badass without being over the top or cheesy in any way. He wasn't even that much of a womanizer. They just sort of stuck to him like dog hair to black pants.

 

[The Wormhole]

-Voyager. I really shouldn't have to say more than this. What happened on Equinox is closer to what should've happened to Voyager, but as I watched the end of the Xindi arc on Enterprise I thought, "This is what Voyager should've been, a ship that's beat to hell barely limping home." But no, not only did Voyager make it back with not a scratch on her hull, but she had some nifty future shields fully deployed for all to see.

This was primarily due to network interference. In fact, the original plan with the Year of Hell storyline was that it would last an entire season and have some actual consequences that would have to be dealt with. For starters the ship would have stayed a damaged hulk liable to fall apart any moment. However, UPN overruled this, fearing such a move would scare viewers and ruin any chances of the show having a life in syndication. All they would allow of the storyline was a two parter which would then be reset at the end.

By the time Enterprise did the something similar with the Xindi storyline it was because by that point long term story arcs were becoming an "in thing" in the television industry and UPN wanted a piece of that pie.

 

[Maxillius]

The most irritating part of the Xindi arc is that stupid western they stuck smack in the middle for no reason and with no explanation and had absolutely nothing to do with the storyline. In fact, why would Enterprise stop their mission to save Earth (keeping in mind that they were on the clock and knew it) just because they saw a colony of humans? It should've been, "Hey look, a human colony." "Are they in danger?" "No." "Ok, we'll come back to them".

 

[T'Girl]

the original plan with the Year of Hell storyline was that it would last an entire season and have some actual consequences that would have to be dealt with

UPN was correct to nix this flawed idea, I can't think of anything worst than to take the two part episode we were give, and ridiculously pad it out to cover an entire season.

Glad it never happen.

 

[The Wormhole]

The most irritating part of the Xindi arc is that stupid western they stuck smack in the middle for no reason and with no explanation and had absolutely nothing to do with the storyline. In fact, why would Enterprise stop their mission to save Earth (keeping in mind that they were on the clock and knew it) just because they saw a colony of humans? It should've been, "Hey look, a human colony." "Are they in danger?" "No." "Ok, we'll come back to them".

Yeah, that episode really is an odd one. I didn't much care for it when it first aired and my opinion has since has softened only because I've developed a better enjoyment of westerns than I had at the time. But still, you're right it had absolutely nothing to do with the Xindi arc at all. That season had quite a few stand alone episodes all things considered, but at least the others contribute to the overall arc in some tangential way. North Star could easily have been inserted into any other season (or even another series) and have been essentially the same episode.

the original plan with the Year of Hell storyline was that it would last an entire season and have some actual consequences that would have to be dealt with

UPN was correct to nix this flawed idea, I can't think of anything worst than to take the two part episode we were give, and ridiculously pad it out to cover an entire season.

Glad it never happen.

That's one perspective. At the very least, I think a better compromise would have been to leave it as a two parter but not have a reset button. Obviously, this would require the ending o be re-written so that Voyager doesn't get destroyed, but the reset button really does ruin the episode essentially making it so that an entire two part episode never happened really is a bit of a waste.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I like the idea of sending Voyager through hell for a season. Or if not a season (Seasons were too long) maybe a 6 or 10 episode arc like DS9. Make them deal with real long term problems that don't go away at the end of the episode, make Voyager S4 like Enterprise S3.

The problem with technobabble wasn't its existence so much as its use. The purpose of technobabble is to make the characters seem more professional, not to substitute for story. Throw in a little technobabble to explain what's going on in a way that seems 24th century, but don't resolve your plot just based on technobabble.

 

[Cyke101]

I like the idea of sending Voyager through hell for a season. Or if not a season (Seasons were too long) maybe a 6 or 10 episode arc like DS9. Make them deal with real long term problems that don't go away at the end of the episode, make Voyager S4 like Enterprise S3.

Agreed. It would really, really highlight two very important facts needed for Voyager's premise:

1. Space was dangerous. That's part of what makes it worth exploring.

2. They are alone. No Starfleet for back up, no starbases for repairs.

Sure, TOS and TNG showed that space was dangerous, but there was always some element of safety in being part of "one big happy fleet." Voyager's premise was to make it a true frontier, which needs repercussions. After all, why go to the trouble of stranding them that far out into space if you're going to make it relatively easy for them?

 

[viconia]

I hate :

- Most of the holodeck episodes. Not that they don't have some interesting plots, it just that most of them revolve around the premise that everyone in the 24th century is obsessed with things like 1940's detective movies and such. No one is ever into anything from their own era, or even into stuff from say the 1980s. I always found that rather ludicrous.

-Chakotay's cheesy generic native American spiritual stuff was kind of offensive. They could have at least given him a real tribe and researched what beliefs they had. Instead some of the stuff involving him was borderline racist.

-All the planets where everyone dresses the same. I remember an episode of Voyager where the aliens on a planet looked exactly like humans... except they were all wearing these ugly orange and brown outfits that looked exactly the same. Janeway and some other crew member went and bought one of the outfits and were able to blend in just from that.

 

[Gary7]

I hate the inconsistency in attention to obvious solutions to problems. There are times when the crew touches on solutions to deal with dire circumstances that are quite plausible and even expected. But then there are other times when they don't even try.

In TWOK, the Genesis device is activated by Khan. "There's no way to stop it once it has started!" declares David (paraphrased). Did anybody try to use the transporter to lock onto it and beam it out into space as a jumble of molecules? No. Yes, if they did that then Spock wouldn't die. However, here's how it could have played out:

Kirk: "Transporter room, lock onto the Genesis device coordinates and hold it in the pattern buffer!"
David: "It won't work--the generated field around Genesis blocks transporter beams."

So a very plausible means of dealing with the situation that was used MANY TIMES BEFORE wasn't even broached. Annoyed me to no end. There are other examples of this kind of thing in Star Trek... and if there's anything I hate it's this. The obvious ignored.

 

[BillJ]

I hate the inconsistency in attention to obvious solutions to problems. There are times when the crew touches on solutions to deal with dire circumstances that are quite plausible and even expected. But then there are other times when they don't even try.

In TWOK, the Genesis device is activated by Khan. "There's no way to stop it once it has started!" declares David (paraphrased). Did anybody try to use the transporter to lock onto it and beam it out into space as a jumble of molecules? No. Yes, if they did that then Spock wouldn't die. However, here's how it could have played out:

Kirk: "Transporter room, lock onto the Genesis device coordinates and hold it in the pattern buffer!"
David: "It won't work--the generated field around Genesis blocks transporter beams."

So a very plausible means of dealing with the situation that was used MANY TIMES BEFORE wasn't even broached. Annoyed me to no end. There are other examples of this kind of thing in Star Trek... and if there's anything I hate it's this. The obvious ignored.

I've always wondered what David's statement has meant because it's kind of vague. Does it mean that the Genesis Device has no off-switch or does it mean once activated it would inhibit transporter functions around it?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I hate the inconsistency in attention to obvious solutions to problems. There are times when the crew touches on solutions to deal with dire circumstances that are quite plausible and even expected. But then there are other times when they don't even try.

In TWOK, the Genesis device is activated by Khan. "There's no way to stop it once it has started!" declares David (paraphrased). Did anybody try to use the transporter to lock onto it and beam it out into space as a jumble of molecules? No. Yes, if they did that then Spock wouldn't die. However, here's how it could have played out:

Kirk: "Transporter room, lock onto the Genesis device coordinates and hold it in the pattern buffer!"
David: "It won't work--the generated field around Genesis blocks transporter beams."

So a very plausible means of dealing with the situation that was used MANY TIMES BEFORE wasn't even broached. Annoyed me to no end. There are other examples of this kind of thing in Star Trek... and if there's anything I hate it's this. The obvious ignored.

I've always wondered what David's statement has meant because it's kind of vague. Does it mean that the Genesis Device has no off-switch or does it mean once activated it would inhibit transporter functions around it?

You gotta take a genius scientist at his word when it comes to plot points like that. No way means literally no way. Phaser it? Kaboom! Beam it? Can't get a lock. Don't waste your time.

 

[Kemaiku]

Yeah, to this day I don't know why they didn't move only beyond the blast radius of the Reliant's core breach range and target the core. The Genesis device needed time to fully charge or whatever, an antimatter explosion would deal with that nicely.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Yeah, to this day I don't know why they didn't move only beyond the blast radius of the Reliant's core breach range and target the core. The Genesis device needed time to fully charge or whatever, an antimatter explosion would deal with that nicely.

Well, I guess because, "can't stop it" means "can't stop it". That means, an antimatter explosion will fail spectacularly.

As to why the magic torpedo that's going to work lots of magic when it's ready can't be stopped? It's magic. Got protomatter in it.

As far as blast radius goes, what exactly is the blast radius of a warp core breach and could the Enterprise limp that far in four minutes tops? Not that it matters anyway, because the Genesis device couldn't be stopped. They said so, and so we're supposed to believe it, unless they later tell us otherwise.

 

[doubleohfive]

What do you HATE about Star Trek?

Fandom.

 

[2takesfrakes]

I hate the need for crossovers. And there are so many of them, aren't there? Why couldn't TNG be seperate and discreet from TOS ... as I would've done, had I been Rick Berman? Just leave TOS alone. It's not necessary to see Scotty. Same with Sulu in VOYAGER. Just ... keep him in the TOS era. I know where to find them, should I be in a campy, TOS kinda mood! I was about to include DS9's Trials & Tribulations, but to see Dax all tarted up and in her TOS miniskirt has me being swayed. They just aren't necessary, that's all. I guess it's similar to how I don't like my food touching. Everything has to be enjoyed discreetly and seperately.