• 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!

Am I the Only One Who Desperately Craves a Captain Shaw Series?

With Shaw, there was no software to transfer his mind into. He wasn't launched onto the Genesis Planet. And, no offense to Shaw, but he's not Kirk or Picard, so it's not like Section 31 would keep his body in Cold Storage. He was a Nobody Captain and proud to be a Nobody Captain who did what he was told, followed the book, and had humble roots as a "grease monkey".

Shaw appeals to that section of the fandom that says, "Yep, dat dem der Shaw's a REAL man!" :shifty:
 
Last edited:
Matalas talked about them bringing back Shaw in a clever way, but everything I can think of feels contrived.

Seven pumped nanoprobes into him which brought him back to life.
He's his own twin brother
Clone
Transporter duplicate
Time travel
Emergency Engineering Hologram
Mirror Universe Shaw (who wouldn't be a grumpy dipshit so what's the point?)
The Shaxs option (actually my favourite, he's just there and it's never explained why)

They could go the Battlestar Galactica route with Seven/Shaw like they did with Baltar and Six, and have Shaw pop in inconveniently every now and then and nag Seven :lol: It could even be explained Seven tried rescuing him with nanoprobes, but he still died, and some of his consciousness was transferred to Seven's brain
 
I think the appeal of the Shaw character is similar to why people liked Miles O'Brien. He's a regular person, with flawed attitudes, but down deep is a decent guy who is highly competent at certain things and probably cares more than he's willing to show.

For whatever reason, whether because of selfishness about his own trauma or he thought "tough love" was an appropriate training tool, Shaw believed giving Seven of Nine crap was better than developing a good relationship and showing openness to accepting her as "Seven." Given how we've seen captain-first officer relationships go in Star Trek (i.e., Kirk-Spock, Picard-Riker, etc.) that's a very flawed way of handling things, but it's relatable in how flawed people deal with things in a flawed way.

As far as him coming back, this is science-fiction. So mirror-universe counterpart, brought back to life by Q-level being, etc., is on the table.
 
I think the appeal of the Shaw character is similar to why people liked Miles O'Brien. He's a regular person, with flawed attitudes, but down deep is a decent guy who is highly competent at certain things and probably cares more than he's willing to show.

And... how is that any different from Raffi or Rios? They both seem like regular people with flawed attitudes who deep down are decent, highly competent at certain things, and probably care more than they're willing to show.
 
And... how is that any different from Raffi or Rios? They both seem like regular people with flawed attitudes who deep down are decent, highly competent at certain things, and probably care more than they're willing to show.
Possibly the acting and the writing with Shaw came off better with the Picard audience than with Rios and Raffi?

I thought Rios and Raffi had good moments and scenes during the first 2 seasons (e.g., Michelle Hurd was great when she attempts to meet her son again for the first time), but overall I don't think they worked as well because the writing was slapdash in supporting their characterization.

Yes, Rios is a similar personality type, but it's also tacked onto to a Han Solo-ish rogue persona in the first season that's never fully realized. And then season 2 begins and all of his regrets and problems with having been through a disaster in Starfleet are fixed enough for him to be back in a uniform with his own command.
 
Last edited:
How they bring Shaw back in Legacy:

edh.jpg
 
Waaaay late here but getting back to the OP question; Shaw is dead.

And while I understand that could only be a temporary condition, I have had my fill of resurrections.

I know how it feels for a favorite character to be killed off, I have dealt with that too but they should not not stretch Treks credibility any further in this regard, for now. Let's let the dead rest in peace, again, for a while.
 
I like Rayner and Shaw, BUT Shaw's not someone I see as being the lead character in a Star Trek series unless they were aiming to cast against type. Shaw wants to be the mediocre Captain who loves the chain of command and says "No." Rayner is someone who I could see as the lead character in a Star Trek show, he aims for more, and I can tell there's more to him (in a good way) than what little we've seen so far.

The key difference: Shaw's an asshole. Rayner on the other hand, is a hard-ass. I'd say a bad-ass.

Shaw was meant to be an asshole though, so that's an observation not a critique.

I'm happy with how things turned out. If Legacy happens (I don't want to argue about it, I'm just saying IF), then I'd rather have had Seven anyway. If Rayner ends up on Starfleet Academy or if they made a different spin-off with him, I'd be all for that too.
 
Last edited:
Shaw wants to be the mediocre Captain who loves the chain of command and says "No."

Shaw was a bureaucrat. He only made captain because he was "the best of what was left."

They could go the Battlestar Galactica route with Seven/Shaw like they did with Baltar and Six, and have Shaw pop in inconveniently every now and then and nag Seven :lol: It could even be explained Seven tried rescuing him with nanoprobes, but he still died, and some of his consciousness was transferred to Seven's brain

Please God ... No.

What does this say about Seven? She's so incompetent as a captain that she needs Shaw's consciousness transferred into her head in order for her to be effective?

How sexist ... :shifty:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top