Biggest problem with "Voyager" is that they didn't really take any chances.

[Voth commando1]

Tuvix isn't episode TNG would do, and I think Sisko would do what Janeway did-I can certainly see Bashir refusing to perform the procedure but he probably wouldn't like it.

Archer? Given 22nd century technology it would have ended in death not a new life form-I can see an accident like this bothering him though perhaps so much that either bans or regulates the transporter(even more than it was at the time).

 

[marlboro]

When I see episodes like Tuvix, Dear Doctor, or Sons of Mogh, I can't help but feel that the writers of post TNG Trek have a very different view of right and wrong than I do. I'm not so sure that they think they are writing something to challenge the audience or if they are just making a moral judgment that seems obvious to them. I say that because there are really never any consequences, repercussions, or regrets for their actions.

 

[Voth commando1]

They often are-their just in the the last five minutes or so of the episode.

 

[fireproof78]

Doh, I worked it out Wrath of Khan.

It WAS the best. Makes Cumberbatch look like an accountant.

I would rather watch ST 09 and ST ID than TWOK. I can acknowledge its technical proficiency, well crafted cinematography, and overall story, but as far as enjoyment goes? No, I I don't enjoy TWOK as much as I enjoy Undiscovered Country, Star Trek 09 and Star Trek Into Darkness. I don't have to compare the TWOK to ST ID, because I enjoy them for different reasons.

Same thing with VOY and DS9. DS9 is a show that I can appreciate, flaws and all, and enjoy on a multipart saga. VOY is far more episodic, and something I'll pop in for quick entertainment. I'm not as interested in the characters as with other shows.

It just comes down to entertainment value for me. YMMV, obviously.

 

[Refuge]

Damn these acronyms.

But what about Ricardo Montalban and that chest? Doesn't that eclipse everything??

 

[fireproof78]

I tried to write them out at some point.

Also, Ricardo Montlalban's chest still haunts my nightmares. That an the Ceti eel left me with some irritations by the end of the movie.

 

[Refuge]

Yeah that eel thing was creepy. It took way too long going through Chekov's brain to be realistic ..should've taken half an hour..

 

[Nightdiamond]

Perhaps its a case of looking at it in hindsight but I can't see TNG ever doing an episode with an ending like Tuvix.

Not the way Voyager did it, I think. It left it up in the air that Janeway might have intenionally
committed murder of an innocent being.

I don't think TNG would ever play a risk with Picard's character like that. Then again....

Kirk would have found a way to save all three of them.

Picard would ramble on about the ethical implications for about 25 minutes, sipping a lot of earl grey, and probably even find a way to invoke the prime directive in it. Which way the decision ultimately would go, I can't say. Probably perform the separation procedure but store the Tuvix consciousness on the holodeck first until a way can be found to give him a body or some such thing.

Sisko would have done the same as Janeway, but ending the episode with a speech in his private quarters:
" I think I can live with it... And if I had to do it all over again... I would. I'm sure about one thing – a guilty conscience is a small price to pay for the safety of the crew. So I will learn to live with it...Because I can live with it...I can live with it. Computer – erase that entire personal log."

Archer probably would just have remarked that ''They're dangerous, those transporters... but one day, we'll get it right". And then it would have been time to feed Porthos.

With Sisko, I can see him letting Tuvix make his own decision to stay, but reminds him that he's killing two people in the process. Then in drunken guilt, Tuvix stumbles into the transporter alone and does the reverse procedure.

With TNG, I think it could have happened like this; Picard gives a speech about individual freedoms and rights and Tuvix would ultimately agree and have ended up going back into the transporter HIMSELF.

Problem is, you can't sustain that for 7 years straight. If they can't get over themselves and learn to co-exist, they'd never survive.

At the time of Voyager, the Maquis had barely existed for 1 year.

This is the problem, having their disagreements be based around a political dispute that was now 75 years away would get silly after a while.

To be honest, though, rational or not, for 7 years straight- it might have made for interesting viewing. I'm not saying it's rational either, but the viewers very well may have enjoyed seeing the crew bump heads throughout the show, and yet still somehow make it out of the DQ.

We realize that on the ship, both sides would have put aside their differences. In this case, we're talking about just one episode. Both sides had their opinions, but a lot of the animosity or resentment might have been more on the Maquis side than Starfleet.

A lot of them probably had personal experiences with being forced to leave their colonies or with brutal Cardassian soldiers . Starfleet officers were living relatively comfortably in their homes or starships.

It may have started out by accident, but a debate starts, and everyone airs their resentments and opinions. It gets intense, emotional, politics and history comes up, and everyone (the fans) are talking about it.

I think it would be pretty realistic, but entertainment wise, a serious missed opportunity.

 

[Akiraprise]

Has anyone mentioned the gender of the lead? So no one is allowed to Bash Voyager?

I never bought into the female captain bash either. Janeway was a strong character, inconsistently written from time to time, but she was always a boss. Loved that about the show. She took no shit.

 

[Voth commando1]

Not the way Voyager did it, I think. It left it up in the air that Janeway might have intenionally
committed murder of an innocent being.

I don't think TNG would ever play a risk with Picard's character like that. Then again....



With Sisko, I can see him letting Tuvix make his own decision to stay, but reminds him that he's killing two people in the process. Then in drunken guilt, Tuvix stumbles into the transporter alone and does the reverse procedure.

With TNG, I think it could have happened like this; Picard gives a speech about individual freedoms and rights and Tuvix would ultimately agree and have ended up going back into the transporter HIMSELF.




To be honest, though, rational or not, for 7 years straight- it might have made for interesting viewing. I'm not saying it's rational either, but the viewers very well may have enjoyed seeing the crew bump heads throughout the show, and yet still somehow make it out of the DQ.

We realize that on the ship, both sides would have put aside their differences. In this case, we're talking about just one episode. Both sides had their opinions, but a lot of the animosity or resentment might have been more on the Maquis side than Starfleet.

A lot of them probably had personal experiences with being forced to leave their colonies or with brutal Cardassian soldiers . Starfleet officers were living relatively comfortably in their homes or starships.

It may have started out by accident, but a debate starts, and everyone airs their resentments and opinions. It gets intense, emotional, politics and history comes up, and everyone (the fans) are talking about it.

I think it would be pretty realistic, but entertainment wise, a serious missed opportunity.

Imagine you have a time travel premise where Israelis and Palestinians are transported back to say Palestine 15th century BC? Would there be tension? Yes . But if they wanted to survive they would put it past them.

 

[Prax]

When I see episodes like Tuvix, Dear Doctor, or Sons of Mogh, I can't help but feel that the writers of post TNG Trek have a very different view of right and wrong than I do. I'm not so sure that they think they are writing something to challenge the audience or if they are just making a moral judgment that seems obvious to them. I say that because there are really never any consequences, repercussions, or regrets for their actions.

If one both lives in Hollywood, And works in the entertainment industry, chances are they do have a very different view of right and wrong. I wouldn't single TNG out as they were all written by the same people.

 

[Getoffmylawnyadamnkids]

I never bought into the female captain bash either. Janeway was a strong character, inconsistently written from time to time, but she was always a boss. Loved that about the show. She took no shit.

I thought she was a consistently weak tactical leader who put her crew in danger by having zero situational awareness. Her shields we're at 50% before she decided that she might want to do something other than have Paris zig zag through space. She failed to adjust to a new paradigm in which she didn't have the luxury of lazy reaction times.

Of all the Captains in Star Trek the writers gave her the least effective set of skills for the job of being a warship Captain. She belonged on a science vessel. Was she loyal to her crew, I'd say yes but her inability to adjust to a hostile environment and move beyond rigid Federation rules and her lazy engagement policies made her dangerous to the ship.

Improvise, adapt, overcome, survive, Janeway struggled with the basic concept of being behind enemy lines and didn't consistently work towards her main concern....get home, save your ship, save your crew.
Her failure to find allies, join a group of ships and use the safety of traveling in a pack was inexcusable and it should have been her first step in survival. I was taught to always use teamwork, it gives the enemy someone else to shoot at. Janeway fails to accomplish what even the lowest rank soldier is taught.

 

[at Quark's]

Of all the Captains in Star Trek the writers gave her the least effective set of skills for the job of being a warship Captain. She belonged on a science vessel.

She was written to have a science background, so it would fit she was less oriented to military matters. At least, initially.

Was she loyal to her crew, I'd say yes but her inability to adjust to a hostile environment and move beyond rigid Federation rules and her lazy engagement policies made her dangerous to the ship.

...

Her failure to find allies, join a group of ships and use the safety of traveling in a pack was inexcusable and it should have been her first step in survival.

You mean, like Seska did? Or like Janeway actually tried to do in 'Alliances' only to have it all blow up (literally)?

I agree she perhaps should have sought the protection of friendly and cooperative others, but she'd have to be able to find these others, first.

 

[Getoffmylawnyadamnkids]

She was written to have a science background, so it would fit she was less oriented to military matters. At least, initially.



You mean, like Seska did? Or like Janeway actually tried to do in 'Alliances' only to have it all blow up (literally)?

I agree she perhaps should have sought the protection of friendly and cooperative others, but she'd have to be able to find these others, first.

No not as far as Seska of course she was a true traitor and everyone's idea of the worst kind of ex, but you can color outside the lines and still try to live up to the best intentions of the rules.

Janeway has a good heart and is a fine person but the writing didn't allow her to grow into a combat seasoned officer. The writers almost never let her learn from past expierences and alter her approach to living in a hostile environment while outnumbered.

I do think that given her grit and intellect she would have made changes to her approach to life in the Delta quadrant but the writers seem unable to or unwilling to let the character change. It would have been more realistic if she were allowed to grow into a veteran combat leader rather than a wide eyed science officer acting like she was traveling to a meet and greet Delta quadrant expo.

She wasn't a bad Captain per se just written so rigidly that she never seemed to grow through her experiences.

 

[Prax]

No not as far as Seska of course she was a true traitor and everyone's idea of the worst kind of ex, but you can color outside the lines and still try to live up to the best intentions of the rules.

Janeway has a good heart and is a fine person but the writing didn't allow her to grow into a combat seasoned officer. The writers almost never let her learn from past expierences and alter her approach to living in a hostile environment while outnumbered.

I do think that given her grit and intellect she would have made changes to her approach to life in the Delta quadrant but the writers seem unable to or unwilling to let the character change. It would have been more realistic if she were allowed to grow into a veteran combat leader rather than a wide eyed science officer acting like she was traveling to a meet and greet Delta quadrant expo.

She wasn't a bad Captain per se just written so rigidly that she never seemed to grow through her experiences.

Can you give some examples?

 

[Refuge]

I thought she was a consistently weak tactical leader who put her crew in danger by having zero situational awareness. Her shields we're at 50% before she decided that she might want to do something other than have Paris zig zag through space. She failed to adjust to a new paradigm in which she didn't have the luxury of lazy reaction times.

Of all the Captains in Star Trek the writers gave her the least effective set of skills for the job of being a warship Captain. She belonged on a science vessel. Was she loyal to her crew, I'd say yes but her inability to adjust to a hostile environment and move beyond rigid Federation rules and her lazy engagement policies made her dangerous to the ship.

Improvise, adapt, overcome, survive, Janeway struggled with the basic concept of being behind enemy lines and didn't consistently work towards her main concern....get home, save your ship, save your crew.
Her failure to find allies, join a group of ships and use the safety of traveling in a pack was inexcusable and it should have been her first step in survival. I was taught to always use teamwork, it gives the enemy someone else to shoot at. Janeway fails to accomplish what even the lowest rank soldier is taught.

Zero situational awareness? That's a little exaggerated don't you think. lol. Obviously the Delta quadrant was a new zone as such but if Janeway was not a capable captain they wouldn't have made it past week one. Her science background often saved the day and rememer Voyager was not always in the capacity of War Ship there were other skills and challenges Voyager needed to draw upon to make their journey. Janeway was never going to enlist a bunch of kindly local ships to act as her 'unit' as she guided Voyager home they had their own territories to maintain, their own lives.

Sisko was the least of the Captains, let's face it, he captained a bus. Janeway was the best, she did something the others never did or could, and she made Admiral. Picard stayed a Captain plodding along never quite excelling.

 

[fireproof78]

And what about Kirk?

 

[Refuge]

Given all the different viewers out there the writers were never going to please us all. Was Janeway an example of a proficient military Captain, was she conventional enough? Careful enough. Could she satisfy that and take more chances? How can you do both? Be buttoned down to survive and still explore, still take risks.

 

[Prax]

Kirk is the frickin man, that's what!

 

[Refuge]

And what about Kirk?

I was avoiding mentioning Kirk in case he challenged Janeway in my reckoning. Kirk embodied the spirit of adventure and ability. He commanded respect. Yet with that smirk of his which was still likeable he was at home in the Captains chair. He was the yardstick.