So, the judgement against this short trek is the brief bit at the end?
New Short Trek: The Trouble With Edward
- Thread starter eschaton
- Start date
Isn't "Fleet Captain" the non-rank title given in that case?
*Worf voice* I cannot think of any.
Dude, it was just a fun joke they put in after the credits. It had VCR distortion and time index text on it. It's not meant to be a serious in-universe segment.
Rationally-speaking, if you're looking for a food source for a colony that doesn't have the kind of infrastructure to support wide-scale deployment of food synthesizers, eating small, easily-controlled, easily-killed fauna like tribbles makes sense. And in theory, manipulating their genetics to increase the reproduction rate in order to make them more easily replenishable also makes sense.
The post-credits scene is apocryphal, as indicated by the VHS tape lines. It is a joke. The actual short is part of the canon, the post-credits scene is not.
You are in no way lending credence to the old stereotype of Trekkies as uptight, over-serious nerds with no sense of humor or common sense by asking how a clearly-joking, clearly out-of-continuity post-credits sequence meant to be funny can fit in with 50 years of already-contradictory continuity.
I finally got around to watching this. Id like to give it a good rating, but I just can't.
There's just nobody to root for in this Short Trek, the closest we get is Captain Lucero, putting up with the reckless and ridiculous actions of Edward. We're supposed to like her because she's clearly go the confidence of Pike. She clearly tries to make the ship run well, unfortunately she doesn't pick up on how dangerous Edward is.
While the Captain is responsible for everything that happens under their command, Edward clearly has no respect for anyone. There's been Barclay comparisons made to him, which to me, don't hold up. Barclay had respect for others, he took out his anger over their actions in the holodeck, but there would never be a point where Picard could've made him mad and he would have reacted in such an inappropriate way.
A ship destroyed, a planet devastated, tensions increased with the Klingons and a new Captains career damaged or ruined. Edward died, but given the cost of his terrible choices, I'm glad it wasn't anyone else.
This episode tried to combine TOS, Archer and The Orville, to me it's a big miss on all fronts.
Revisiting the Tribbles is an idea that's worthwhile, but did we really need to change their history so that their out of control breeding became the result of that guy?
My answer is: No.
There's just nobody to root for in this Short Trek, the closest we get is Captain Lucero, putting up with the reckless and ridiculous actions of Edward. We're supposed to like her because she's clearly go the confidence of Pike. She clearly tries to make the ship run well, unfortunately she doesn't pick up on how dangerous Edward is.
While the Captain is responsible for everything that happens under their command, Edward clearly has no respect for anyone. There's been Barclay comparisons made to him, which to me, don't hold up. Barclay had respect for others, he took out his anger over their actions in the holodeck, but there would never be a point where Picard could've made him mad and he would have reacted in such an inappropriate way.
A ship destroyed, a planet devastated, tensions increased with the Klingons and a new Captains career damaged or ruined. Edward died, but given the cost of his terrible choices, I'm glad it wasn't anyone else.
This episode tried to combine TOS, Archer and The Orville, to me it's a big miss on all fronts.
Revisiting the Tribbles is an idea that's worthwhile, but did we really need to change their history so that their out of control breeding became the result of that guy?
My answer is: No.
Except it's not a stereotype; it's how many Star Trek fans think. Because, you know, they love the show. Not because they hate it. If they hated it, they wouldn't watch it and wouldn't care about such idiosyncrasies like how this Short Trek (and DSC in general) isn't really in continuity with TOS.
My understanding was that the Edward character was the one who wanted to eat them and everyone else was a bit repulsed by the idea, at best.
I don't think that scene was meant to be taken as canon (by the very nature that it could't have happened, due to Edward's plans falling apart before he could set the tribbles up as a food source). While not official, I do find it interesting that Memory Alpha is flagging everything from that scene with a note that it might not be canon.
Given that the tribbles had a different scientific name here, I think that the rationalization that it was a slower-breeding tribble subspecies might be in play. It may also be that Edward (who was an idiot) was not well-informed on how fast the tribbles actually bred and "upgraded" the normal tribbles we all know and love. I mean, as I understand it, Edward's modified tribbles breed even faster the the fast ones from the other episodes.
I like to think that Edward's tribbles were initially slow-breeding because he didn't feed them enough to kick off their breeding cycle. He erroneously assessed them as having a slow reproductive cycle and his experimentation kicked tribble reproduction into overdrive and in a manner independent of food intake.
If Trekkies wont face facts and accept that eating tribbles is the canon explanation for how humanity conquered hunger, that's their problem
While I can see your point, I disagree. I think Trek fans feel a need to watch, even hate watch, to find these idiosyncrasies.
Correct and even though Discovery seems to imply that the Enterprise could be the flagship and doesn't shy away from talking about how important she is, it's doing so because of its 50+ year history in the real world. The show is treating the Enterprise in the fictional world as a prominent vessel the same way us fans think of her in the real world. And while I have no problem with that because it was never officially confirmed or denied this was the case before, it seems only slightly odd because TOS and the TOS films don't seem regard the ship in that way.
Hell, before we even see the Enterprise, Burnham mentions the ship by name only once to Tilly when referring to the Constitution class starships. Her naming the Enterprise specifically was just the writers throwing a bone to the fans. It seemed to be implied that the Constitution class starship as a whole, not just the Enterprise, were the pride of Starfleet.
Even in Star Trek III when Morrow states he feels the Enterprise's day is over, it's never suggested that another Enterprise is coming up to take her place. The Enterprise-A, to me, always came off like a present whose existence only came about because of Kirk and crew's saving of the planet.
I suspect the Enterprise-D became known as the flagship due to the number of diplomatic missions it undertook over the course of its life. In other words, could it just be that the Federation only chooses a flagship based on whats its role is?
Last edited:
and therefore something you might find difficult to understand
Similar threads
