No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Contact
- Thread starter GotNoRice
- Start date
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
During the finale, you mean?
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
From the looks of the finale, the time between the treaty being agreed to and it's actual signing, seems very short-maybe only a matter of hours or days.
Logically, Enterprise would be more busy with relief efforts or peacekeeping at this time rather than going on an archaeological dig.
With that timetable, it plays out more like, 'Ok, Starfleet just finished a brutal battle, lets hurry and rush over to explore the archaeological ruins of radinus 4 as soon as possible.'
The finale says the ambassadorship was offered to Worf after the treaty signing-
--but that means if Worf was still Sisko's XO in Insurrection, he had to leave the warfront to join the Enterprise crew while the last battle was being fought. confusing.............
I suspect the failure to mention a Star date for Insurrection is tied up with keeping the Enterprise as separate from DS9 and the Dominion war as possible.
From the looks of the finale, the time between the treaty being agreed to and it's actual signing, seems very short-maybe only a matter of hours or days.
Logically, Enterprise would be more busy with relief efforts or peacekeeping at this time rather than going on an archaeological dig.
With that timetable, it plays out more like, 'Ok, Starfleet just finished a brutal battle, lets hurry and rush over to explore the archaeological ruins of radinus 4 as soon as possible.'
The finale says the ambassadorship was offered to Worf after the treaty signing-
--but that means if Worf was still Sisko's XO in Insurrection, he had to leave the warfront to join the Enterprise crew while the last battle was being fought. confusing.............
I suspect the failure to mention a Star date for Insurrection is tied up with keeping the Enterprise as separate from DS9 and the Dominion war as possible.
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
^ Well, also, they obviously didn't want Insurrection to be a movie about the Dominion war. Had they made a more significant mention of it than Riker's one brief comment about the diplomatic corps being involved in Dominion negotiations, people would have started asking why the Enterprise was off doing relatively unimportant stuff while the rest of the fleet was off fighting a war.
Even Riker's line comes off as a little odd, though. If Insurrection takes place during the war, did we ever get any indication that the Federation ever had negotiations with the Dominion during that time? And if it happened after the war, what negotiations were there to be taking place?
^ Well, also, they obviously didn't want Insurrection to be a movie about the Dominion war. Had they made a more significant mention of it than Riker's one brief comment about the diplomatic corps being involved in Dominion negotiations, people would have started asking why the Enterprise was off doing relatively unimportant stuff while the rest of the fleet was off fighting a war.
Even Riker's line comes off as a little odd, though. If Insurrection takes place during the war, did we ever get any indication that the Federation ever had negotiations with the Dominion during that time? And if it happened after the war, what negotiations were there to be taking place?
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
I think the Federation continued to press for peace talks with the Dominion and the presence of the Enterprise would add some much needed muscle to negoatiations. It might also have a wry comment by Michael Piller about the Dominion war, we have no idea what he thought of the show after he left or what direction he originally intentioned for the show to take. Of it he did ever made any such comments I don't recall ever hearing them.
I think the Federation continued to press for peace talks with the Dominion and the presence of the Enterprise would add some much needed muscle to negoatiations. It might also have a wry comment by Michael Piller about the Dominion war, we have no idea what he thought of the show after he left or what direction he originally intentioned for the show to take. Of it he did ever made any such comments I don't recall ever hearing them.
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
The one bit in ST:INS that speaks in favor of the movie taking place during the war, not after it, is Worf's status as a non-Ambassador.
Then again, ST:NEM also features Worf as a non-Ambassador. We don't know when Worf went from Ambassador to non-Ambassador, so we can easily argue it happened after the war (that is, after DS9) but before ST:INS. Or we can argue he never even got the position, considering that it was only in the early stages of discussions (two top soldiers and one top politician supported him but nothing was official yet) when DS9 ended.
Timo Saloniemi
The one bit in ST:INS that speaks in favor of the movie taking place during the war, not after it, is Worf's status as a non-Ambassador.
Then again, ST:NEM also features Worf as a non-Ambassador. We don't know when Worf went from Ambassador to non-Ambassador, so we can easily argue it happened after the war (that is, after DS9) but before ST:INS. Or we can argue he never even got the position, considering that it was only in the early stages of discussions (two top soldiers and one top politician supported him but nothing was official yet) when DS9 ended.
Timo Saloniemi
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
The failure to mention any Stardate at all in Insurrection is a little suspicious, probably related to avoid mentioning some details from DS9.
I think there's no major harm by making only brief Dominion references in the movie, but by avoiding so much of it, the fans have jump through hoops to explain the strangeness of it.
Like trying to explain why the Enterprise crew would be doing something as strange as exploring ruins during or immediately after a major battle.
Or Worf even being with the crew in the first place-that means he either disappeared sometime during the final battles to join the TNG crew again, or immediately after he became ambassador, he left and ended up joining the crew, without saying a word about his promotion.
Worf had to have been made Ambassador, I think-the Klingon who requested it was the leader of the Klingon Empire- it was a shoe in.
The failure to mention any Stardate at all in Insurrection is a little suspicious, probably related to avoid mentioning some details from DS9.
I think there's no major harm by making only brief Dominion references in the movie, but by avoiding so much of it, the fans have jump through hoops to explain the strangeness of it.
Like trying to explain why the Enterprise crew would be doing something as strange as exploring ruins during or immediately after a major battle.
Or Worf even being with the crew in the first place-that means he either disappeared sometime during the final battles to join the TNG crew again, or immediately after he became ambassador, he left and ended up joining the crew, without saying a word about his promotion.
Worf had to have been made Ambassador, I think-the Klingon who requested it was the leader of the Klingon Empire- it was a shoe in.
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
Of course, the proper explanation would be that if they DID use the Dominion as the enemy here most of the audience wouldn't know who they were and why the Feds were at war with them since most of the audience were TNG fans but not DS9 fans.
Of course, the proper explanation would be that if they DID use the Dominion as the enemy here most of the audience wouldn't know who they were and why the Feds were at war with them since most of the audience were TNG fans but not DS9 fans.
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
But it would be the Federation making the decision. And they'd do well to contradict the new Klingon leader on this issue, to deny him his lapdog and to force in somebody more loyal to the UFP side of the game.
Using the Dominion as enemies in ST:INS would probably work just fine because they could be introduced with something like three sentences, none of which would contain a reference to DS9. "Conquest-minded baddies from far away; control their troops with drugs; have been pushing Starfleet back for a long time". The Borg were given this treatment for ST:FC, requiring no knowledge of their TNG past.
But it was IMHO much more enjoyable that the Dominion were worked into the background tapestry of the movie: the baddies were in cahoots with this devil (so buddying up with them is suspicious) but they weren't the devil Himself (so it's not immediately clear that the buddying up amounts to high treason).
Timo Saloniemi
But it would be the Federation making the decision. And they'd do well to contradict the new Klingon leader on this issue, to deny him his lapdog and to force in somebody more loyal to the UFP side of the game.
Using the Dominion as enemies in ST:INS would probably work just fine because they could be introduced with something like three sentences, none of which would contain a reference to DS9. "Conquest-minded baddies from far away; control their troops with drugs; have been pushing Starfleet back for a long time". The Borg were given this treatment for ST:FC, requiring no knowledge of their TNG past.
But it was IMHO much more enjoyable that the Dominion were worked into the background tapestry of the movie: the baddies were in cahoots with this devil (so buddying up with them is suspicious) but they weren't the devil Himself (so it's not immediately clear that the buddying up amounts to high treason).
Timo Saloniemi
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
'Statistical Probabilities' is evidence that negotiations were ongoing during the fighting, and there were still quiet periods in the war. For example, not much seems to be happening between 'Tears of the Prophets' and 'Image in the Sand'. In fact, if Worf weren't as chipper in 'Insurrection', I'd say that was a good time for the film to happen.
There's a reference in one of the final episodes to the Son'a defending a Ketracel White facility, which suggests they are allied to the Dominion by that stage (or at least no longer working with the Feds). On the other hand, that could be taken to mean it's before 'Insurrection', as the whole Briar Patch operation could have been a way for the Federation to take the Son'a out of the war. I'd still put it after though.
The fact that the Data is on an unimportant survey mission, and the Enterprise is off to an archaeological dig would seem to indicate the Federation isn't on the verge of annihilation, but Picard's line about "one more brushfire" might mean the flagship is basically doing the job of the entire diplomatic corps - securing new alliances, and doing other routine stuff on the way.
They were probably part of Starfleet's core defence fleet, not a front-line battleship. Maybe the Enterprise helped fight off the Breen attack on Earth, and was part of the fleet caught on manoeuvres while the Jem'Hadar waltzed into Betazed?
Maybe the best place to put 'Insurrection' is after the end of the final battle in 'What You Leave Behind', but before the treaty is signed. There could be a gap of months between these. Everything seems to fit quite neatly if you put it there. Worf's not an ambassador, the Federation doesn't seem to be on the brink of extinction, and they have a shaky and dubious alliance with a recent enemy.
'Statistical Probabilities' is evidence that negotiations were ongoing during the fighting, and there were still quiet periods in the war. For example, not much seems to be happening between 'Tears of the Prophets' and 'Image in the Sand'. In fact, if Worf weren't as chipper in 'Insurrection', I'd say that was a good time for the film to happen.
There's a reference in one of the final episodes to the Son'a defending a Ketracel White facility, which suggests they are allied to the Dominion by that stage (or at least no longer working with the Feds). On the other hand, that could be taken to mean it's before 'Insurrection', as the whole Briar Patch operation could have been a way for the Federation to take the Son'a out of the war. I'd still put it after though.
The fact that the Data is on an unimportant survey mission, and the Enterprise is off to an archaeological dig would seem to indicate the Federation isn't on the verge of annihilation, but Picard's line about "one more brushfire" might mean the flagship is basically doing the job of the entire diplomatic corps - securing new alliances, and doing other routine stuff on the way.
They were probably part of Starfleet's core defence fleet, not a front-line battleship. Maybe the Enterprise helped fight off the Breen attack on Earth, and was part of the fleet caught on manoeuvres while the Jem'Hadar waltzed into Betazed?
Maybe the best place to put 'Insurrection' is after the end of the final battle in 'What You Leave Behind', but before the treaty is signed. There could be a gap of months between these. Everything seems to fit quite neatly if you put it there. Worf's not an ambassador, the Federation doesn't seem to be on the brink of extinction, and they have a shaky and dubious alliance with a recent enemy.
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
I agree with you on this. Sure, I've seen people say they could explain the DS9 Dominion war situation with a crawl or something at the beginning of the movie. But that doesn't change the fact that making a TNG Dominion war story is really a DS9 story. Unless Picard and co. wins the war, it would leave the non-DS9 watching audience hanging.
Robert
I agree with you on this. Sure, I've seen people say they could explain the DS9 Dominion war situation with a crawl or something at the beginning of the movie. But that doesn't change the fact that making a TNG Dominion war story is really a DS9 story. Unless Picard and co. wins the war, it would leave the non-DS9 watching audience hanging.
Robert
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
...But the episode more or less established that such negotiations would be futile in the future, as there was nothing bona fide about the Dominion diplomacy.
...And a reference in ST:INS to a past Son'a role as a Ketracel White producer. It would be pretty unthinkable for the Feds to be working with somebody who actively provides their bitter enemy with war materiel, but reasonably possible for them to be in cahoots with a past provider who has now repented and shares his expertise with the other side.
It doesn't sound logical that there would be time for any "other routine stuff" in addition to such a role. Especially since the archaeological dig seems to be planned on a timescale of months or indeed entire seasons!
True enough. But such a "fleet in being" would only be effective if the ships didn't perform any missions - and certainly not missions that would take them far away from Earth.
Those are definite possibilities, but they don't appear to have happened anywhere near the timeframe of ST:INS, because our heroes don't mention such war experiences with half a word - even though they dedicate several lines of dialogue to all the non-war-related stuff they are doing.
It's quite telling that the heroes lament how their diplomatic duties make it impossible for them to be explorers. If there really were a war on, they would certainly be lamenting that their combat duties stop them from being explorers, or that their diplomatic duties prevent them from fighting for the Federation.
Could there? The final battle and the signing scene both come before Dukat and Winn complete their Fire Caves adventure, but after they initiate it; it doesn't sound plausible that Dukat would have spent months spelunking, and it's flat out impossible that the mortal Winn could have done so.
Timo Saloniemi
...But the episode more or less established that such negotiations would be futile in the future, as there was nothing bona fide about the Dominion diplomacy.
...And a reference in ST:INS to a past Son'a role as a Ketracel White producer. It would be pretty unthinkable for the Feds to be working with somebody who actively provides their bitter enemy with war materiel, but reasonably possible for them to be in cahoots with a past provider who has now repented and shares his expertise with the other side.
It doesn't sound logical that there would be time for any "other routine stuff" in addition to such a role. Especially since the archaeological dig seems to be planned on a timescale of months or indeed entire seasons!
True enough. But such a "fleet in being" would only be effective if the ships didn't perform any missions - and certainly not missions that would take them far away from Earth.
Those are definite possibilities, but they don't appear to have happened anywhere near the timeframe of ST:INS, because our heroes don't mention such war experiences with half a word - even though they dedicate several lines of dialogue to all the non-war-related stuff they are doing.
It's quite telling that the heroes lament how their diplomatic duties make it impossible for them to be explorers. If there really were a war on, they would certainly be lamenting that their combat duties stop them from being explorers, or that their diplomatic duties prevent them from fighting for the Federation.
Could there? The final battle and the signing scene both come before Dukat and Winn complete their Fire Caves adventure, but after they initiate it; it doesn't sound plausible that Dukat would have spent months spelunking, and it's flat out impossible that the mortal Winn could have done so.
Timo Saloniemi
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
I understand the reasoning about fans and preferences, but this is something I always wondered about whenever this subject comes up:
How can someone be a TNG fan (or any Trek fan) and not be able to understand other trek related ideas to the point you couldn't understand the movie?
Introducing themes from another trek series into a movie would be no different than introducing a new alien or villain the audience has never seen before - they both have to be explained to the audience.
I mean, if you introduce a new alien that the fans never seen before in a movie, it would still take time to explain them to the audience anyway.
Look at how they had to explain Shinzon and the Remans in Nemesis.
Then again, that didn't work well either, so maybe you're right.
Has anyone noticed that Trek story lines that are less complicated tend to do better at the box office?
Maybe the 'ship of the week' formula works better...
I understand the reasoning about fans and preferences, but this is something I always wondered about whenever this subject comes up:
How can someone be a TNG fan (or any Trek fan) and not be able to understand other trek related ideas to the point you couldn't understand the movie?
Introducing themes from another trek series into a movie would be no different than introducing a new alien or villain the audience has never seen before - they both have to be explained to the audience.
I mean, if you introduce a new alien that the fans never seen before in a movie, it would still take time to explain them to the audience anyway.
Look at how they had to explain Shinzon and the Remans in Nemesis.
Then again, that didn't work well either, so maybe you're right.
Has anyone noticed that Trek story lines that are less complicated tend to do better at the box office?
Maybe the 'ship of the week' formula works better...
Last edited:
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
...ST4 required extensive knowledge of who Spock really was, detailed knowledge of what had happened in two preceding movies, and a passing familiarity with an ages-old TOS episode. It did really well...
Timo Saloniemi
...ST4 required extensive knowledge of who Spock really was, detailed knowledge of what had happened in two preceding movies, and a passing familiarity with an ages-old TOS episode. It did really well...
Timo Saloniemi
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
Over here in the UK, we got a nice recap at the start of ST4!
Over here in the UK, we got a nice recap at the start of ST4!
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Re: No acknowledgment of defiant’s role against the borg in First Cont
Also: Doesn't Riker outright reference the diplomatic corps being busy with negotiations with the Dominion? Would this not suggest that hostilities are still on?
Also: Doesn't Riker outright reference the diplomatic corps being busy with negotiations with the Dominion? Would this not suggest that hostilities are still on?
Similar threads
