Doomsday Machine not best of TOS
- Thread starter Hatshepsut
- Start date
"The Doomsday Machine" is my favorite episode.
For it to have been a viable threat to the Rigel system, the artifact HAD to possess some sort of FTL mechanism. Otherwise, even at relativistic speeds (substantial percentiles of "c"), it would have taken hundreds if not thousands of years to reach Rigel (depending upon the number of lightyears between the planetary systems, of course). With that kind of time frame, I doubt they would have been as desperate as presented. If it only chugged along at velocities at .99+ "c" or slower, Kirk and company only needed to get out of jamming range, contact StarFleet and let it prepare for the next several decades. But since they believed they had to warn StarFleet ASAP, that urgency implies the mechanism would reach Rigel within months if not weeks. And unless that system only aquarter of a light year distant or closer, the DDM HAD to possess something to "cheat" that grand constant of the universe, "c".
Sincerely,
Bill
Sincerely,
Bill
Indeed, as Mr Spock states:
.
Even the "warp 14" Enterprise would take 300 years to get to another galaxy, I think it's safe to assume it's capable of faster than light speed travel, possibly a warp drive.
I'm not talking about Kirk pulling rank I'm talking about earlier in the Episode when it was.
"Oh my, we 400 people can do nothing to stop this crazy person from forcing us on a suicide mission because he's a commodore!"
I'm not fond of McCoy but in that scene he seemed the only one with a brain who at least bothered to call the situation the bullshit it was.
I know Starfleet is a (pseudo-)military organization, but that doesn't stop me from finding situations like that odd. I'm a civilian, all my family are civilians and I'm friends with exactly one person who's in the army. I don't care much for military protocol.
I'm not saying that it wasn't the sensible thing to do. It just seemed odd in comparison to most other TOS episodes where they jumped to face any danger that presented itself.
The thing is that I felt that after the initial mention of it I was the only one giving a shit whether that colony at Rigel survives or not.
Probably because the crew was busy fighting for their lives. They can't save Rigel if they don't survive the initial encounter.
To me it's a classic of Military Science Fiction, (J.E Pournell , Fred Saberhagen et. all)
understanding military protocol actually helps me enjoy it..
Besides it's got a GIANT SPACE THINGY..only one other TOS episode had another GIANT SPACE THINGY..it just wasn't handled nearly as well (Immunity Syndrome).
understanding military protocol actually helps me enjoy it..
Besides it's got a GIANT SPACE THINGY..only one other TOS episode had another GIANT SPACE THINGY..it just wasn't handled nearly as well (Immunity Syndrome).
I remember that said during the show, along with the "energy barrier" rimming the Milky Way. But I don't think astronomers have found any barrier, so that as you leave our galaxy, the stars and dust just peter out gradually to merge with the thin gas of the Local Group, a small cluster of galaxies both we and the Andromeda Galaxy belong to.
A second thing is that intergalactic distances aren't so bad once you've mastered interstellar distance. Andromeda is only about 20 times as far as the most distant stars in the Milky Way. If it takes the Enterprise 300 years to reach this galaxy, then dividing by 20, we guess the starship needs about 15 years to cross our own galaxy.
Star Trek's treatment of these little scientific details has always mystified me because they were well known in the 1960s. Does anyone else have more info on this?
Rigel, if it's the familiar star in Orion's foot that northern hemisphere observers can see every winter, is an odd candidate for colonization. It is one of the brightest stars in the Milky Way, exceeding the sun by a factor of 10^5. It is of spectral class B8 and probably only a few tens of millions of years old. To have a surface temperature comfortable for people, a planet would have to orbit this star at a great distance. In principle this is no problem, but then the light balance would be quite wrong: Rigel emits much of its light in the ultraviolet part of the spectrum. Imagine the fast sunburns on this planet!
What's more is that the Rigel system harbors at least three stars, including the remains of another blue giant which has already exploded and died. How would this event have affected the planet? I haven't checked whether the other two stars in the Rigel system are close enough to perturb the orbits of any of Rigel's own planets, but in general astronomers think that multiple star systems often eject their planets into interstellar space early on. Our own sun's "lonesomeness" blesses us with dynamic stability we wouldn't enjoy if the sun had companion stars.
Last edited:
Likely "Rigel" was chosen because it was a name audiences would probably know from middle school science classes, whether or not the star itself is suitable for colonization.
Of course, one could claim it's not the name of a star but the name of a company that funded the trip or the name of its founder, something like that.
Sincerely,
Bill
Of course, one could claim it's not the name of a star but the name of a company that funded the trip or the name of its founder, something like that.
Sincerely,
Bill
Got it. And why many other complications of scientific realism must get winks. Yet Star Trek fans do seem to debate such details earnestly for what is only patter to set a scene in a reasonably interesting way. Which Star Trek did better than any other action show of its day: They pull lots of license without making it look hoky.
Valid point. Despite the norm of unquestioned obedience military commanders work under some limitations regarding the kinds of orders they can give. For suicide missions they call for volunteers. Though Decker maybe didn't anticipate getting mauled by that neutronium polychaete worm, or that it would eat the planet he sent his crew to for safety.
I just finished this episode and have two things to say regarding it. 1. Where was Uhura? 2. When Decker started going a bit power-crazy, I kept saying to Spock (yes I talk to tv characters as if they were real) "Use the nerve pinch for crying out loud!" Seriously, the safety of the ship was at stake. It seemed like the most logical thing to do.
She was off that day...
Which is why it could have been saved by a few lines of dialogue.
(Spock suggests retreat and alerting Starfleet)
McCoy: You can't let it eat that colony Jim!
Kirk: I don't intend to, but you have seen what that weapon did to the Constellation. We have to retreat and see if we can find some sort of weak point on that thing.
...something like that.
Yep the name was from the episode, it was said it was Rigel and that there was a Federation colony in that system.
What's even weirder is that later in the movies and other shows there were at least two alien species known as "Rigellians"/"Rigelians".
No I meant, when Decker assumed command while Kirk was stuck on the Constellation and everybody on the Enterprise just stood there ineffectively while Decker commanded them to face the Doomsday Machine.
We know the people and we know the stakes. Why do we need to keep referencing them?
This isn't necessarily directed at you, but: people continue to say that Star Trek is for smart people. But then want to constantly have elements and dialogue that simply aren't necessary for the story if their actually paying attention.
But I thought back then they where working with the assumption that every episode could be somebody's first episode, so we can't have continuity and constantly have to spoonfeed everything.
Besides I'm not seeing the characters acting in character as "unnecessary".
Also no, it was not that I was not paying attention. It was like they introduced that plot point and never referenced it again. It might very well might have been time constraints, but I don't see our heroes actually acting like heroes as "unnecessary".
To me it's like they had shown the groom in "Balance of Terror" killed and then omitted the ending scene where Kirk consoles the bride.
It's not one of my favorites because I'm not that proud of Spock in the episode.
I've never known why Spock didn't arrest Decker and relieve him of duty the first time he wanted to take command. Spock tells him a single ship can't combat the machine. Phasers even at point blank range are no good against it. It's a fact. It's unequivocal. Still, he let's Decker bully him into exercising his prerogative under regulations and engaging the ship in what Spock knows for sure is reckless and even suicidal behavior.
In the parlance of the current movies, Decker's judgment was obviously "emotionally compromised." If the Enterprise had been destroyed, I'd have to say it was Spock's fault for not risking a mutiny in light of the circumstances. Spock's duty at that time was to the safety of the ship, not command regulations.
That said, the premise of the story was very good: a traumatized commander wants to make right. He experiences target fixation to the detriment of logic and safety. But its execution? Eh. I wouldn't flip to another channel if I came across it, but it wouldn't be in the first ten episodes I'd watch if I dusted off my TOS DVD's, either.
I've never known why Spock didn't arrest Decker and relieve him of duty the first time he wanted to take command. Spock tells him a single ship can't combat the machine. Phasers even at point blank range are no good against it. It's a fact. It's unequivocal. Still, he let's Decker bully him into exercising his prerogative under regulations and engaging the ship in what Spock knows for sure is reckless and even suicidal behavior.
In the parlance of the current movies, Decker's judgment was obviously "emotionally compromised." If the Enterprise had been destroyed, I'd have to say it was Spock's fault for not risking a mutiny in light of the circumstances. Spock's duty at that time was to the safety of the ship, not command regulations.
That said, the premise of the story was very good: a traumatized commander wants to make right. He experiences target fixation to the detriment of logic and safety. But its execution? Eh. I wouldn't flip to another channel if I came across it, but it wouldn't be in the first ten episodes I'd watch if I dusted off my TOS DVD's, either.
Last edited:
Because you can't just relieve someone of command because they do something you don't approve of. The moment Decker refused to veer off he was suicidally putting the ship and crew in material danger and Spock would have grounds to relieve him, but Spock's threat got him to acquiesce.
That Bones never bothers to tell Spock he found Decker in a state of shock is the bigger WTF for me.
That Bones never bothers to tell Spock he found Decker in a state of shock is the bigger WTF for me.
Yep. McCoy even hypos Decker with something to bring him around.
