Most hated characters in Star Trek

[Bad Thoughts]

Did you perhaps not read the OP right? Considering almost nothing you wrote is about the characters but about the actors portraying them.

I read the OP, and I decided that these individuals have, through the notoriety they gained being in Star Trek, have been characters of themselves, public performances rather than genuine people.

 

[CetiAlphanEel]

This!

Spot #1 is definitely mirror Georgiou for me. Not Michelle Yeoh's fault, though.

#2 is Michael Burnham.

And sorry, I just have to break the op rule ... imo, Neelix is the Jar Jar Binks of the Star Trek universe.

I Agree on both but yeah I'm not blaming the actresses or anything. I actually am a fan of Michelle Yeoh so it was kind of disappointing to see how bad her Star Trek character was

 

[Nerys Myk]

I read the OP, and I decided that these individuals have, through the notoriety they gained being in Star Trek, have been characters of themselves, public performances rather than genuine people.

 

[CoveTom]

I assume separately since I don’t recall them being in a relationship. Did Ogawa have a spouse?

Ogawa mentions that she has gotten engaged to an unseen officer named Andrew, and then by the time of "All Good Things...," she is pregnant. So although we don't know much detail about her personal life, we assume she has a successful relationship.

 

[NigellaDeanna20]

1. Jean-Luc Picard (TNG) — A self-centered, patronizing, and deeply amoral man who nonetheless prides himself on his morality?

Are you fing serious? Picard wasn't amoral; in fact if anything he's the complete opposite of that. you mustnt have been watching the same show dude.

 

[Cicero]

Are you fing serious? Picard wasn't amoral; in fact if anything he's the complete opposite of that. you mustnt have been watching the same show dude.

I say that because of the inconsistency of his moral standards, and their not infrequent immorality (e.g. "Pen Pals," "Homeward," his strange lack of attention to the extensive life that will be wiped on on the Ba'ku planet in Insurrection, keeping Livingston in his ready room).

While the show obviously intends to depict (or at least position) him as highly moral, I don't think it succeeds. I think he's deeply moral from a Watsonian and Doylist perspective, but not from a descriptive point of view.

 

[CoveTom]

I say that because of the inconsistency of his moral standards, and their not infrequent immorality (e.g. "Pen Pals," "Homeward," his strange lack of attention to the extensive life that will be wiped on on the Ba'ku planet in Insurrection, keeping Livingston in his ready room).

While the show obviously intends to depict (or at least position) him as highly moral, I don't think it succeeds. I think he's deeply moral from a Watsonian and Doylist perspective, but not from a descriptive point of view.

You think having a fish is immoral?

 

[Cicero]

You think having a fish is immoral?

According to Ronny Cox, Patrick Stewart did:

Jellico made them take the fish out of the ready room. And here’s a secret: Patrick hated the fish in the ready room. Patrick was always after them to take the fish out. His point—and it’s a point well taken—was, "We’re doing a series about the species of the universe, about the dignity of different species, and we have a captured species swimming around in the ready room? That’s immoral." So he never wanted the fish there.

 

[CoveTom]

According to Ronny Cox, Patrick Stewart did:

Well, suffice it to say, I disagree with Sir Patrick. But regardless of what Patrick Stewart the actor thought about it, the character of Picard clearly has no moral objection to having a pet fish. And given that the captain of the Federation's flagship has a pet fish prominently in his ready room, it would seem that Starfleet in general has no problem with it either.

Regardless, though, I think Picard considers himself to have a strong sense of morality, but rather frequently fails to live up to those ideals. He certainly talks a good game, and sometimes he does truly act in a way that is very noble and good, but oftentimes his behavior is, IMHO, quite questionable. And his famed speeches, though compelling, are oftentimes not exactly based entirely on truth.

Actually, come to think of it, much of that would apply to Gene Roddenberry as well. Coincidence?

 

[camdudetenger2018]

its hard to say because there are tons of different characters in the star trek universe

 

[1001001]

 

[BillJ]

it meant we suffered less of his acting. If only they could have killed his character and transferred Nog in.

Never thought about this before, but Nog would’ve been an interesting addition. Could’ve covered Kim’s role and been a wheeler-dealer where resources were concerned.

Though the timing wouldn’t have worked out.

 

[XCV330]

like @BillJ , hate is a too strong a word for me about characters on the show but ones I dislike or could do without:

Ellen Landry:
Nog
Tom Paris

 

[F. King Daniel]

ALEX KURTZMAN

J.J. ABRAMS

...nah, they're fine. Just getting in before anyone else

 

[BillJ]

Ellen Landry

She was just an idiot.

 

[XCV330]

She was just an idiot.

ultimate redshirt

 

[BillJ]

ultimate redshirt

I don’t compare her to a redshirt because it was her own actions that got her killed.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Nagilum and Armus.

 

[DonIago]

I don’t compare her to a redshirt because it was her own actions that got her killed.

I wish we'd been given any indication at all of what Lorca saw in her, unless he was just looking for a shoot-first flunkie who wouldn't ask questions.

 

[XCV330]

I wish we'd been given any indication at all of what Lorca saw in her, unless he was just looking for a shoot-first flunkie who wouldn't ask questions.

maybe the Mirror Universe version of her had been more useful for what he was up to over there. Prime Landry must have cheated her way through academy.