It's quite possible that they may have
Or at least got suspended.I realize the 24th century is much more sophisticated then the 23rd, and that leadership is different. I do also like watching 24th century Trek just as much as I do 23rd.
Kirk is better then Picard
- Thread starter darkshadow0001
- Start date
It's quite possible that they may have
Or at least got suspended.I realize the 24th century is much more sophisticated then the 23rd, and that leadership is different. I do also like watching 24th century Trek just as much as I do 23rd.
Yep.
Kirk might be a bit more dangerous as a Captain, but he would do his best to get you home safely if you were in danger, and to hell with whichever alien race was holding you captive or what risk he took getting you off of some planet. Picard might well leave you there in the best interests of harmony.
I'd rather take my chances with Kirk.
I always found Picard to be very bland on screen. Nothing against Patrick Stewart, but Picard was very boring and monotonous to watch (I'd put that down to bad directing and scripts, rather than acting though).
But as a captain.. Picard is definitely better. Captains have to follow orders and regulations too, and while Kirk wasn't a total rebel intent on breaking every regulation and disobeying every order whenever he got the chance, he certainly hesitated less about breaking them when it suited him than Picard did. On the other hand, Picard, while not a saint himself either, certainly seemed more like a responsible officer. However, Kirk was far better at making his own decisions, Picard seemed to almost always rely on senior officers to make decisions, I guess that's part of their job, though I guess he could probably cope without the help for the most part, and Kirk still relied on Spock/Bones for some of his decisionmaking, so I guess they could be tied there.
While getting all the girls, getting into all the fights and having no reservations about breaking the rules makes for a good character, it certainly doesn't make for a good captain. Captains should be responsible figures of authority, not playboys who get into as much action (both in bed and of the violent variety) as possible. Not that Kirk was THAT bad as a captain by any means, but he was certainly less responsible and mature than Picard, and those are qualities a good captain should have.
I'd rather see Kirk on screen though, Picard is almost always boring as hell on screen and certainly one of my least favorite primaries on TNG
But as a captain.. Picard is definitely better. Captains have to follow orders and regulations too, and while Kirk wasn't a total rebel intent on breaking every regulation and disobeying every order whenever he got the chance, he certainly hesitated less about breaking them when it suited him than Picard did. On the other hand, Picard, while not a saint himself either, certainly seemed more like a responsible officer. However, Kirk was far better at making his own decisions, Picard seemed to almost always rely on senior officers to make decisions, I guess that's part of their job, though I guess he could probably cope without the help for the most part, and Kirk still relied on Spock/Bones for some of his decisionmaking, so I guess they could be tied there.
While getting all the girls, getting into all the fights and having no reservations about breaking the rules makes for a good character, it certainly doesn't make for a good captain. Captains should be responsible figures of authority, not playboys who get into as much action (both in bed and of the violent variety) as possible. Not that Kirk was THAT bad as a captain by any means, but he was certainly less responsible and mature than Picard, and those are qualities a good captain should have.
I'd rather see Kirk on screen though, Picard is almost always boring as hell on screen and certainly one of my least favorite primaries on TNG
I don't about that, Picard was willing to break the Prime Directive to save Wesley in Justice and even put the Enterprise at risk for his mother in The High Ground.
I agree. When you watch "Generations", it's obvious who's the better man. Picard gets his ass kicked by Soran, and Kirk beats the crap out of Soran.
Picard has a glass jaw ("measure of a man", and other examples), but Kirk has proved numerous times he's a very dangerous man if he needs to be.
As for strategy :
Kirk : " I'll count to three and then I'll fire : one.. two.. fire!"
Picard :" I'll count to three and then I'll fire : one .. two.. three... I'm not kidding! Four.. five... six.. I mean it! Seven... eight... nine... Okay, you asked for it... Ten.. eleven... twelve... damn, they damaged the phasers and Photon torpedoes. Number one, retreat.."
I'll stick with Kirk.
Edit : Oh, and watch this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goHVqVtPeXA&feature=related
and this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcwU_zDqREs&feature=related
And this is hilarious : it's a fight where you can play either Kirk or Picard : http://www.idleworm.com/sfi/strek.shtml
And for those wondering which starship would win in a fight, Kirk's or Picard's : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpDhIr7i5Go Mwahhaha!
Another hilarious clip where Kirk beats the crap out of Picard : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl33MIwTiJs&feature=related
Last edited:
They are both fine captains in some ways and not to smart in others. When they made bad decisions, it was usually because of the vision of whatever writer or producer was involved, or just in service of the plot. Having said that, let’s clear up a few misgivings about Kirk.
1) He makes decisions on his own (does not need a counselor, or second opinion): FALSE. There are a number of examples of Kirk calling a meeting of his department heads for their insight and advice. And he based his decisions on what they said.
2) Kirk loved his ship more than his crew: FALSE. His crew was his primary concern and would sacrifice the ship for them. See The Apple, where he ordered Scotty to separate the ship and “crack out with the main section” to save his crew. Yes, he was in love with his ship, but the men aboard were his primary concern. This was made clear repeatedly. And when he says “my ship” most times he’s referring to the ship and crew collectively.
3) He fights the bad guys instead of just placing them in a holding cell: He fights when attacked. Kirk does not ever pick fights. He is not a bully. And what, he’s never had anyone in the brig?
4) He gets the women: so did Riker.
5) He does not need a number one. (Although Spock sometimes could be considered his number one): of course he is; Spock is his executive officer. And he ALWAYS asked Spock for his insight. He sought out Bones as well.
6) Picard talks, Kirk fires phasers: Another falsehood. I’ve read this over the years, using this as a prime example of the differences between Kirk & Picard. Kirk nearly always tried to communicate rather than fight.
Don’t make Kirk out to be this super-brass, action first, thinking later walking penis with fists. The “legend” is not nearly true, he would have been an awful character otherwise. And how would this have fit in with Roddenberry’s hopeful outlook for the future of mankind? Kirk never started fights, but he damn well would finish them. He’d go to extremes, but never without forethought and recklessly. He wasn’t Han Solo or some unstable jackass. He was a guy on the frontier who had to act without guidance from command. Picard, however, rarely went out of communications range with Starfleet.
Kirk and Picard are from two different times. They reflect the eras in which they were created. Kirk was a warrior, both hot and cold. He needed to ship out to a warzone at a moment’s notice, but also to be prepared to keep hostilities down and promote peace. He once said he was a soldier, not a diplomat. He was wrong. He’s both.
Picard was created during an era of approaching peace and calm. Picard, also, did far less “boldly going” than Kirk. Picard would be summoned by distress signal from out Federation colony to another, rescuing people, providing aid and dealing with holodeck malfunctions. Picard was 100% diplomat (Riker and Worf were the warriors) and his missions illustrated this. But in a combat situation, Picard was no slouch. He would always try to find a peaceful way out, but when pressed, he would do what needed to be done.
I prefer Kirk simply because I like that type of character and grew up watching this cool freaking dude handle the lions share of trouble. But I have no problems with Picard.
1) He makes decisions on his own (does not need a counselor, or second opinion): FALSE. There are a number of examples of Kirk calling a meeting of his department heads for their insight and advice. And he based his decisions on what they said.
2) Kirk loved his ship more than his crew: FALSE. His crew was his primary concern and would sacrifice the ship for them. See The Apple, where he ordered Scotty to separate the ship and “crack out with the main section” to save his crew. Yes, he was in love with his ship, but the men aboard were his primary concern. This was made clear repeatedly. And when he says “my ship” most times he’s referring to the ship and crew collectively.
3) He fights the bad guys instead of just placing them in a holding cell: He fights when attacked. Kirk does not ever pick fights. He is not a bully. And what, he’s never had anyone in the brig?
4) He gets the women: so did Riker.
5) He does not need a number one. (Although Spock sometimes could be considered his number one): of course he is; Spock is his executive officer. And he ALWAYS asked Spock for his insight. He sought out Bones as well.
6) Picard talks, Kirk fires phasers: Another falsehood. I’ve read this over the years, using this as a prime example of the differences between Kirk & Picard. Kirk nearly always tried to communicate rather than fight.
Don’t make Kirk out to be this super-brass, action first, thinking later walking penis with fists. The “legend” is not nearly true, he would have been an awful character otherwise. And how would this have fit in with Roddenberry’s hopeful outlook for the future of mankind? Kirk never started fights, but he damn well would finish them. He’d go to extremes, but never without forethought and recklessly. He wasn’t Han Solo or some unstable jackass. He was a guy on the frontier who had to act without guidance from command. Picard, however, rarely went out of communications range with Starfleet.
Kirk and Picard are from two different times. They reflect the eras in which they were created. Kirk was a warrior, both hot and cold. He needed to ship out to a warzone at a moment’s notice, but also to be prepared to keep hostilities down and promote peace. He once said he was a soldier, not a diplomat. He was wrong. He’s both.
Picard was created during an era of approaching peace and calm. Picard, also, did far less “boldly going” than Kirk. Picard would be summoned by distress signal from out Federation colony to another, rescuing people, providing aid and dealing with holodeck malfunctions. Picard was 100% diplomat (Riker and Worf were the warriors) and his missions illustrated this. But in a combat situation, Picard was no slouch. He would always try to find a peaceful way out, but when pressed, he would do what needed to be done.
I prefer Kirk simply because I like that type of character and grew up watching this cool freaking dude handle the lions share of trouble. But I have no problems with Picard.
We are not talking about Riker.
Again, we are not talking about Riker or Worf.
In any case, you are right, Picard is a good captain for his era. He lived in an era that was already known, and moving onward towards newer and bigger obstacles.
I'm not sure which era I like most, I just happened to create this post after watching 3/4 of season one and noticed that Kirk was more of a go-getter type character instead of the "diplomat" type and enjoyed watching it
I think this is the first time I really watched TOS since it aired on Nickelodean back in the 80's. I think TOS gets underrated because it was made in the 60's and the technology wasn't there to make it like sci-fi of today. If you sit down and watch the episodes, you will find that they are really enjoyable despite the effects they had in those days. Which, were still pretty good. (Netflix has the remastered version online, but I have also seen them un-remastered)
Yes, true, but I neglected to mention (which would have given a reason as to why I would mention the other guys) that the "getting the chicks" and the "warrior" aspect of Kirk was spread out among the cast of TNG. So Picard did not need to be all the things Kirk was. Not to ruin anything with more "real world" explanations, but having a larger cast in a show with more realistically concieved characters, keeps the captain from being all things to all people. Kirk was amazingly cool, and had a collection of heroic traits. He was flawed, but mostly amazing.
As time passes and old trekkies die off, this will continue to be the case. Even with the new effects, people will base opinions on current TV and movie standards. The model and space opticals might be up to date, but the lighting, acting styles and music are not the same as they do it today. The real attraction of Trek will be ignored in favor of insufficient eye and ear candy. People forget.
Case in point: Gene Roddenberry pitched Star Trek as "a Wagon Train to the stars." How many times do we see it quoted today as "a wagon train to the stars"? The difference is subtle, but obvious. The pitch had nothing to do with comparing the concept to an actual 1800's wagon train; it was TV shorthand for comparing it to the then-hit series Wagon Train (granted, that wasn't accurate either, but that's not the point). But since Wagon Train is largely forgotten, younger fans, newer fans getting into it, don't get everything behind the series because of the lack of frames of reference (or the context, as I've said on the BBS before). Similarly, the appreciation for the series will be dulled as well, as the outer trappings become to far in the past, too dated for them to be appreciated by the masses.
Not in this forum he ain't.
!
trevanian
Rear Admiral
I guess that is because he gives extended reasons and explanations for his point of view, instead of just declaring his position in a one-line proclamation without support.
No, that wouldn't be Picard or a Picard-supporter, would it?
Kirk is the atypical Yankee and Picard the consummate Brit (I know, born in France, but he behaved like an Englishman).
Kirk will tend to rely on his emotional instincts, while Picard will rely on his cerebral intellect.
Kirk will tend to take calculated risks, while Picard will exercise more caution.
Kirk's first officer Mr. Spock was preoccupied with being the science officer more than making command decisions. Picard's first officer William Riker served that one role. Thus, he dovetailed with Picard's command much more so than Spock did with Kirk. You also see Riker leading away missions most of the time, while Kirk led most of his. This changed the dynamic of how Picard would command. It made Kirk appear more like a "man of his own," even though he did frequently rely on his officers for advice (e.g. calling briefing room sessions when necessary).
There was also a considerable amount of time between the two commands. Picard had the advantage of more advanced technology, which he relied upon heavily. Comparatively, Kirk was more like "on the frontier", having to make do with less, improvising more. You can definitely see a parallel dynamic between La Forge and Scotty.
I would say that Kirk was more entertaining than Picard, not necessarily better. They were both great captains... But in the final analysis, Picard appears a little stiff and Kirk a bit more daring. If I had to pick one, it would be Kirk.
Kirk will tend to rely on his emotional instincts, while Picard will rely on his cerebral intellect.
Kirk will tend to take calculated risks, while Picard will exercise more caution.
Kirk's first officer Mr. Spock was preoccupied with being the science officer more than making command decisions. Picard's first officer William Riker served that one role. Thus, he dovetailed with Picard's command much more so than Spock did with Kirk. You also see Riker leading away missions most of the time, while Kirk led most of his. This changed the dynamic of how Picard would command. It made Kirk appear more like a "man of his own," even though he did frequently rely on his officers for advice (e.g. calling briefing room sessions when necessary).
There was also a considerable amount of time between the two commands. Picard had the advantage of more advanced technology, which he relied upon heavily. Comparatively, Kirk was more like "on the frontier", having to make do with less, improvising more. You can definitely see a parallel dynamic between La Forge and Scotty.
I would say that Kirk was more entertaining than Picard, not necessarily better. They were both great captains... But in the final analysis, Picard appears a little stiff and Kirk a bit more daring. If I had to pick one, it would be Kirk.
In "Q Who", Picard's inability to make a quick decision leads to the loss of 18 lives, even when Guinan warns him he makes the wrong decision. If Kirk had been in command, the Borg ship would have been destroyed because Kirk would not have waited for the Borg to adapt; he would have kept on firing until that cube had blown up.
That's only one example; there are dozens more!!
Last edited:
Similar threads
