Overly Emotional Vulcans: Why?

[Sorak]

I have just finished watching Enterprise S4's Vulcan arc. As you can notice from my avatar, I'm a huge fan of Vulcans, and I consider myself if not an expert on them at least someone who clearly knows the difference between a Human and a Vulcan. Right. In this arc, I didn't see it.

Let's play a little game, pick up the differences between Vice Admiral Leyton:

and Administrator V'las:

Let us keep things in-universe here, so I will gloss on their, ahem, surprising physical similarity. What I saw as an INSULT to 47 years of Trek history (starting from the 1964 in which The Cage script was written) was seeing emotional post-Surak Vulcans. I have nothing against the episodes' plot per se: I actually quite like the concept of Vulcans straying from their path, being xenophobic and paranoid, with the Syrannites setting things to right. It's a solid plot, it makes sense, it's entertaining and fascinating. What I'm criticizing is THE ACTING and here I need to get in IRL mode. V'las looks just as ruthless as Leyton in creating false intelligence as an excuse to militarize his planet and launch a pre-emptive strike against his opponents; and he does so jumping from one side of the screen to the other, being grumpy, pissed off and sarcastic all the time. I mean, he's just a cliché evil guy who then gets what he deserves so that the audience can say "in your face!". The actor who portrays him was great in the DS9 S4 two-parter, but in the Vulcan arc he just did eveything wrong. Very wrong. And they let him do it. I can see Spock raising his eyebrow to the floor when witnessing yet another outburst of 'Vulcan Gratuitous Rage'. Same goes for all his minions: fists clenched tight, faces distorted by anger. I also don't buy into the "corrupted Vulcans" explanation some might offer. They were corrupted in their actions, not in their ability to suppress emotions. I would have portrayed them, rather, as cold, efficient, Machiavellian leaders ready to do what they perceive as logic in order to protect Vulcan from foreign intereferences. Instead, they looked like stereotyped bad guys. Besides, the "Syrannite being the Vulcans we got to know in previous series" argument doesn't work: T'Pau in the arc is a hottie who shows too much emotivity for a radical adept to Surak's teachings. Where is the magnificent, regal, self-possessed and absolutely Kohlinar-ish T'Pau of The Amok Time and ST III? T'Pol's mother is also too emotional.


This one character, though, maintained high the aura of dignity and composure Vulcans are known for:

A masterful piece of acting.

Finally, it would be unfair not to mention that ENT anyway showed Vulcan and Vulcans in all their beauty. Their costumes are wonderful, the CGI effects stunning, the artifacts beautiful. Visually, the best Star Trek series. But seeing angry Vulcans who looked more like rogue CIA agents in some Cold War film about a high-level conspiration to have the USA declare war on the URSS was more than I could bear.


Peace and long life, set your phasers on pleasure.

 

[Brikar99]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

This is pretty much the one thing I didn't like about this arc, was that the primary villain - even as an agent of the Romulans - spends a lot of time shouting at people, and no one seems to have a problem with it.

 

[Admiral Shran]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

I have to say that this really didn't bother me. Sure, V'Las acts emotionally, no doubt about that. But so do a LOT of other Vulcans in ENT. Even Soval, who you credit as acting perfectly logical and unemotional, loses his control in the very first episode. Archer even flat out calls him on it.

I think the point was that Vulcan society had become so corrupted that they were willing to overlook their own emotional shortcomings and hypocritically view themselves as superior (even with the flaws which they ignored).

Could Robert Foxworth have toned it down a bit as V'Las? Well, yes, he could, and should, have. But that doesn't negate what they were trying to do.

And as for T'Pau - I'm glad they didn't have her be exactly like she was in Amok Time. I mean, more than a century of experience would change her in someone more regal. And BTW, she wasn't in Star Trek III, that was another character.

 

[Sorak]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Yes, good points, but wouldn't cold, Machiavellian Vulcans make more sense than angry, dodgy ones? They would also have appeared more charming and attractive, making both die-hard fans and the casual audience happy.

Right about T'Pau, I was misled by the book I Am Spock in which Nimoy says that they wanted T'Pau back for ST III but Celia Lovksy, who played T'Pau, had died. As for the experience, I disagree though. Lack of experience for a Vulcan can mean rash, foolhardy actions, but emotional reactions? I mean, they're Vulcans, but they behave like humans. Humans who also happen to be Alpha Males into the bargain. I, personally, am really bothered by what I've seen. There was no dignity in that acting, and dignity and Vulcans go hand in hand. It was a bit like seeing a horde of effeminate Klingons.

I'm also not strictly conservative: Spock and Sarek are the two Vulcans for excellence, sure, but in my opinion so is Tuvok. Curiously, the three of them all struggled with their emotions for different reasons. Yet, they all were very calm and self-possessed. Imagine pure, straightforward Vulcans, I'd expect them to be even colder and more rational.

 

[Noname Given]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Rememebr - the whole point of the Arc was to show that Vulcans had mostly forgotten Surak's true teachings; and had staryed from the path of 'logic' (more than they cared to admit. Finding the Kishara started a new awakening in Vulcan society (the results of which we see in TOS et al.)

I personall didn't mind Vulcans in ENT (and I think it's something the Producers did right fro dy ome); and it showed that BOTH Human and Vulcan societies were far from perfect/utopiam, and both were growing/evolving in their own way.

Besides in TOS Vulcans were subject to emotions (even in the y didn't want to admit it) as:

Sarek married a Human and had Spock.

In Journey To Babel - Amanda is the one who tess Kirk that Sarek and Spock had a disagreement about Spock's career choice; and hadn't spoken to each other for 18 years as a result -- emotionless Vulcans my ass

 

[Sorak]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

This is pretty much the one thing I didn't like about this arc, was that the primary villain - even as an agent of the Romulans - spends a lot of time shouting at people, and no one seems to have a problem with it.

I must say that I still have to watch the remaining episodes of the season, so I don't know how things will turn out. But yes, V'Las behaved like a paranoid Romulan who's dealing with andropause rather than a Vulcan.

 

[Sorak]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Rememebr - the whole point of the Arc was to show that Vulcans had mostly forgotten Surak's true teachings; and had staryed from the path of 'logic' (more than they cared to admit. Finding the Kishara started a new awakening in Vulcan society (the results of which we see in TOS et al.)

I personall didn't mind Vulcans in ENT (and I think it's something the Producers did right fro dy ome); and it showed that BOTH Human and Vulcan societies were far from perfect/utopiam, and both were growing/evolving in their own way.

Besides in TOS Vulcans were subject to emotions (even in the y didn't want to admit it) as:

Sarek married a Human and had Spock.

In Journey To Babel - Amanda is the one who tess Kirk that Sarek and Spock had a disagreement about Spock's career choice; and hadn't spoken to each other for 18 years as a result -- emotionless Vulcans my ass

Hahaha!

As I said, however, my point is not about their actions. I liked the whole thing. It's much simpler: it's the acting. It's stilted and overly enthusiastic. For example, the moment in which V'Las shouts, waves his fist in the air, shows his teeth and launches himself towards the Kir Shara ... C'MON! YOU'RE BETTER THAN THIS! He could have said, rather, that they couldn't trust that Syrannite and that Human, that their plans must continue as agreed until the autenticity of the Kir Shara was confirmed, lest that was only a ruse to prevent them from invading Andoria. Meanwhile, the Vulcan fleet would have kicked Andorian Blue Asses, and once the dust had settled the Kir Shara would have been tried to be dispensed with in the shadow. Cold, efficient, logic, effective, charming, sneaky and even audience-friendly. But no: let's dick about like a jack-in-a-box and then get shot in an attempt to...to... to do what, I don't know, the Kir Shara is made of stone, you can't destroy it with your bare hands which is all V'Las had in that scene so I really can't fathom what on Earth (or what on Vulcan) had he in mind.

As for Vulcans in general: yes they have emotions, they sometimes behave emotionally, but they rarely spin around in a frenzy shouting at everyone in the room, possibly with foam in their mouths. Sigh...

 

[Brikar99]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

This is pretty much the one thing I didn't like about this arc, was that the primary villain - even as an agent of the Romulans - spends a lot of time shouting at people, and no one seems to have a problem with it.

I must say that I still have to watch the remaining episodes of the season, so I don't know how things will turn out. But yes, V'Las behaved like a paranoid Romulan who's dealing with andropause rather than a Vulcan.

I think Season 4 as a whole was the best the show ever treated the Vulcans. Even Soval, who I had disliked greatly, became a character I could get behind. It's not perfect, but seriously, they were so lame in the first two seasons.

...though that's pretty much how I feel about the first two seasons in general.

 

[Sorak]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

This is pretty much the one thing I didn't like about this arc, was that the primary villain - even as an agent of the Romulans - spends a lot of time shouting at people, and no one seems to have a problem with it.

I must say that I still have to watch the remaining episodes of the season, so I don't know how things will turn out. But yes, V'Las behaved like a paranoid Romulan who's dealing with andropause rather than a Vulcan.

I think Season 4 as a whole was the best the show ever treated the Vulcans. Even Soval, who I had disliked greatly, became a character I could get behind. It's not perfect, but seriously, they were so lame in the first two seasons.

...though that's pretty much how I feel about the first two seasons in general.

Yeah, this thread was started instinctively: I had seen only ENT's first three seasons, and that more than three years ago. I grew up with TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY (later). I remember my excitement when ENT was broadcasted here in Italy for the first time in 2002, sadly dubbed in Italian but still, it was a new Star Trek series so I was really happy. I remember buying myself a huge pizza, fries and ice cold beer to enjoy the show. Then things simply went worse: rather than offering us an insight into how the 23rd/24th century universe came to exist they chose to pull off stuff like the Temporal Cold War which nobody cares about. At least, not me: that theme would have worked in a Star Trek series based on the 28th century Federation with temporal ships like the Relativity and so on. It would be a very juicy series actually. But I was hoping we would have seen the beginning of the Star Trek universe as we knew it, instead... the series ultimately jumped the shark when they showed the Borg. In season 4, which I'm watching right now, the writers seem to have understood at last that a bit of hindsight is better than futuristic stuff. So they gave us Vulcans, Andorians, the Babel episodes I still have to watch and the season ending that seems to be about the birth of the UFP. If the whole series had been like that, it would have been much better I think. I'm seeing Enterprise as a good Sci Fi series, but as a Star Trek series it has tons of undeveloped potential. TONS.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

It's a fannish misconception that Vulcans lack emotion. Vulcans are very emotional beings (they almost destroyed themselves), they just repress and control it as best as they can. Some do it better than others.

 

[lurok]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

It's a fannish misconception that Vulcans lack emotion. Vulcans are very emotional beings (they almost destroyed themselves), they just repress and control it as best as they can. Some do it better than others.

What KD said Hasn't it been cited so often that I can't believe people still misunderstand it (esp re: ST XI). Vulcans are NOT androids/Data. They do have emotions (as Spock so brilliantly illustrated on TOS). They just try better to control them/have trouble controlling them. Which is what makes them fundamentally fascinating....

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Yes, good points, but wouldn't cold, Machiavellian Vulcans make more sense than angry, dodgy ones? They would also have appeared more charming and attractive, making both die-hard fans and the casual audience happy.

I believe it was a missed opportunity to show logical "evil". Chu'lak comes to mind from the DS9 ep Field of Fire. And lets not forget Valeris who had a very logical framework and reason for her actions. Using logic as a weapon and to fortify your possibly dubious ethical choices seems a likely route for Vulcans and this did not happen with the characters the OP is discussing. I think some of the casting of Vulcans on ENT was very poor, some of them looked like some dude at a Trek con in Vulcan ears rather than like another species. (I had the same complaint about the casting of Sarek in ST:XI).

The actors could have reigned it in and it's a mystery why they weren't told to. When a Vulcan presents a very logical and cool exterior, parrying any emotional discussion on the part of humans with more logic and more logic and then, pushed to a limit, allows irritation to show it's powerful. This is completely lost when they are grumpy grasping assholes through the whole scene.

I love ENT but this is one element I felt they failed in and every time I rewatch it hits me again.

My favorite Vulcan ever comes from ENT

 

[lurok]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Yes, good points, but wouldn't cold, Machiavellian Vulcans make more sense than angry, dodgy ones? They would also have appeared more charming and attractive, making both die-hard fans and the casual audience happy.

I believe it was a missed opportunity to show logical "evil". Chu'lak comes to mind from the DS9 ep Field of Fire. And lets not forget Valeris who had a very logical framework and reason for her actions. Using logic as a weapon and to fortify your possibly dubious ethical choices seems a likely route for Vulcans and this did not happen with the characters the OP is discussing. I think some of the casting of Vulcans on ENT was very poor, some of them looked like some dude at a Trek con in Vulcan ears rather than like another species. (I had the same complaint about the casting of Sarek in ST:XI).

The actors could have reigned it in and it's a mystery why they weren't told to. When a Vulcan presents a very logical and cool exterior, parrying any emotional discussion on the part of humans with more logic and more logic and then, pushed to a limit, allows irritation to show it's powerful. This is completely lost when they are grumpy grasping assholes through the whole scene.

I love ENT but this is one element I felt they failed in and every time I rewatch it hits me again.

My favorite Vulcan ever comes from ENT

Aaargh I'm trying to differentiate here between the aesthetic beauty of cold logic (as per Valeris you cited) and the wider canon point of Vulcans lacking/not lacking emotion. Do you think Valeris lacked emotion? I think great aspect of Cattrall's portrayal was showing emotion in check. The problem with ENT, which I do think sadly was a failing, was allowing Foxworth to just do his usual shtick, as if he was still playing Fed admiral...

 

[lurok]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

annoying dupe post

 

[mirandafave]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Yeah, I think ENT has to be given props for deciding to shake things up pre-TOS by ruffling the audience's feathers with the portrayal of the Vulcans. I at the start thought it very off, but saw that it gave a lot of room for story potential to show that not only the humans but the Vulcans too had to develop and grow before we could ever reach the unity required for a Federation to be formed.

The antagonistic Vulcans fits with the conflict with the Andorians and this was well played to throughout the course of ENT. That said, the character of V'las was horribly over acted. Even in this age of 'corrupted' Vulcans he comes across as a prig, who does not use logic, is emotionally charged and is aggressive in his policies. That was a huge misstep.

 

[Sorak]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

It's a fannish misconception that Vulcans lack emotion. Vulcans are very emotional beings (they almost destroyed themselves), they just repress and control it as best as they can. Some do it better than others.

It's a fannish misconception that Vulcans lack emotion. Vulcans are very emotional beings (they almost destroyed themselves), they just repress and control it as best as they can. Some do it better than others.

What KD said Hasn't it been cited so often that I can't believe people still misunderstand it (esp re: ST XI). Vulcans are NOT androids/Data. They do have emotions (as Spock so brilliantly illustrated on TOS). They just try better to control them/have trouble controlling them. Which is what makes them fundamentally fascinating....

ARGH! I never said Vulcans are robots! I mentioned the 'suppression of emotions' some posts ago. Of course Vulcans have emotions, and those emotions are much stronger than the human ones. Tuvok, Sarek and other 'proper' Vulcans in the show struggled with emotions. Then there's their horrible violent past made of wars and near-annihilation and so on, we all know this, I never said they are androids. But they do control and suppress emotions right? So, again, why portraying them in that way? I think it was a mistake, and as it seems also teacake here thought so. I really liked the concept of "The logic of evil" and the comparison to Valeris: cold, logic, mathematical. Ah, remember that scene in which Spock slams Valeris' phaser off her hand in an outburst of rage? That is understandable, and I have no problem with that. Besides, Vulcans often smirk and exercise their acerbic wit on other species, so as a matter of fact they even have a sense of humour. But what happened on ENT was just too much, in my opinion.

PS. I also would like to reiterate, again, that the suppression of their emotions is not solely philosophy and self-control. They have a part of their brain that is devoted to the suppression of emotive behaviours, so it's a much more radicated process. Assuming the Vulcans on ENT, as corrupted as they are, were anyway trained to suppress emotions like everyone else on the planet, what happened then to that part of their brains?

And now, a question: do you think that a well-trained, mature Vulcan could choose to feel emotions again? Remember that their ability to suppress emotions is learned from infancy, and a part of their brain is devoted to it. I assume that at some point it would be quite innatural and difficult for them, barring some disease like the ones that hit T'Pol or Sarek. Yet, Vulcans are able to exercise enormous control over their brains, so perhaps after some toiling they would be able to.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

And now, a question: do you think that a well-trained, mature Vulcan could choose to feel emotions again? Remember that their ability to suppress emotions is learned from infancy, and a part of their brain is devoted to it. I assume that at some point it would be quite innatural and difficult for them, barring some disease like the ones that hit T'Pol or Sarek. Yet, Vulcans are able to exercise enormous control over their brains, so perhaps after some toiling they would be able to.

It's likely the V'tosh ka'tur learned the disciplines for controlling emotions as children, like all Vulcans, but chose to experience emotions after they reached adulthood. But as you indicate, it would be quite a balancing act, to learn to be emotional beings without going off the deep end. In "Fusion," the captain of the Vakhlas, Tavin, and the engineer, Kov, seem to have figured out how to walk the line with equanimity, but Tolaris turned into a monster.

Also, it's hard to believe Sybok The Laughing Vulcan was that way all his life, with Sarek being his father. Sybok probably made the choice to be emotional after he viewed Vulcan society as an adult and found it...lacking.

 

[Nimthim]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

I always interpreted V'las as one of those Romulans who still looked Vulcan,or at least having some Romulan heritage, because it seemed he reacted more like a Romulan when frustrated in his purpose. Certainly, the High Command had been corrupted to Romulan interests for quite some time, and the most effective method to accomplish their purpose would be strategically placed operatives who could exert influence.

As to the general assholish behavior of Vulcans in ENT, one wonders if the revelation of the Kirshara was to be part of a story illustrating the transformation of Vulcan society to the one more familiar to us. But I think another point that ENT was trying to make was that humans were quite outside Vulcan experience and they truly did not understand them, nor how to interact effectively with them, so, many Vulcans gave up the effort and just treated humans like recalcitrant children, immature and not worthy of much consideration.

 

[antiquityscion]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

I think the way Enterprise portrayed the Vulcans was just fine. It neither conflicts with previously established canon and it just demonstrates Vulcans are not infallible, and why they needed the humans.

That right there highlights why the humans were so instrumental with bringing the other planets together to form the UFP. Otherwise, if Vulcans were perfect, everyone would follow the Vulcan way, no? In fact, it says something about humans: every other race in Trek represent a single aspect or trait of humans, sometimes in the extreme, and they are meant to showcase how humans embody all those traits, and have learned to balance those emotions\traits out.

For example Vulcans represent the logical side of humans, Klingons are humans' warlike and violent nature, Romulans represent the paranoid and treacherous nature, Andorians the brash, hot-headedness of humans, Telerites are the argumentative and stubborn nature of humans, Cardassians are the brutal, racist, and cold blooded nature and later (in DS9) learn to atone for past crimes, Bajorans are the spiritual nature, Ferengi are the entrepreneurial nature... on and on. Point is, the humans in Trek take all the best of those qualities and roll them into one, and balance them out...at least in Trek.

In reality, I think the Vulcan narrative is to showcase how we humans can be logical, scientific, and honorable, yet can also lose our objectivity, be arrogant, and stubborn, without realizing it.

Rememebr - the whole point of the Arc was to show that Vulcans had mostly forgotten Surak's true teachings; and had staryed from the path of 'logic' (more than they cared to admit. Finding the Kishara started a new awakening in Vulcan society (the results of which we see in TOS et al.)

I personally didn't mind Vulcans in ENT (and I think it's something the Producers did right fro dy ome); and it showed that BOTH Human and Vulcan societies were far from perfect/utopiam, and both were growing/evolving in their own way.

Besides in TOS Vulcans were subject to emotions (even in they didn't want to admit it) as:

Sarek married a Human and had Spock.

In Journey To Babel - Amanda is the one who tess Kirk that Sarek and Spock had a disagreement about Spock's career choice; and hadn't spoken to each other for 18 years as a result -- emotionless Vulcans my ass

Agreed and good points. The idea that all Vulcans need to act completely emotionless because that's how they were in TOS is a myth. Personally, I think that if some people really think all Vulcans act 100% logical 100% of the time outside of pon far, then that's being unrealistic.

Vulcans are not Soong-Type androids, and just like that not all Klingons are warriors, with honor, or are all brave, so too are there Vulcans with varying degrees of controlling their emotions. It's like saying that 100% of religious humans don't lie, cheat, steal, act immorally, and completely follow their religion to the "T" 100% of the time. THAT is what makes Vulcans interesting: they are more like humans in that they are flawed as well, and their unwillingness to admit it is one of those flaws.

TOS (and later shows) never established Vulcans as completely emotionless, either, and they were every bit as emotional on TOS as on Enterprise, or any other Trek show.

First you are right about Sarek. For example, you can cite the TOS movies in addition to Babel, and is even quoted as saying "My logic is uncertain when concerning my son." He was very emotional when he mind melded with Kirk as well as his appearance on TNG (his illness).

Then you have Spock. In the Cage he clearly smiles. Throughout the TOS show, he displays emotionalism, sometimes under external influences, but it is also clear that he always has that emotional reaction to everything (friendship with Kirk, arguments with McCoy, love for his mother, strife and love with his father, even his "un-relationship" with Nurse Chapel) that he masks with logic. Later, Spock is compelled to reach out to the Romulans in an attempt to unify Romulus and Vulcan, and even admits Logic can't explain why he is doing it.

Tuvok is another example of an emotional Vulcan. He constantly walked the line between logic, and cracking the occasional, yet logical, joke, albeit subtle and dry wit.

It is even implied all the time that Vulcans have emotions that are more intense than humans, possibly approaching Klingon-like emotionalism, and the idea they can suppress that kind of emotion itself as well as they do,is a feat in of itself, and some emotions are bound to peak out occasionally.

In fact, TMP establishes that Kholinar, the shedding of all emotion, is actually a very rare feat, which Spock himself never acheives. So for those reasons, it is clear that Vulcans are every bit as emotional and flawed as humas. They just happen to more often than not, be more disciplined than humans, and have the ability to mask and suppress emotions. But those emotions still exist and peak out.

This is pretty much the one thing I didn't like about this arc, was that the primary villain - even as an agent of the Romulans - spends a lot of time shouting at people, and no one seems to have a problem with it.

I must say that I still have to watch the remaining episodes of the season, so I don't know how things will turn out. But yes, V'Las behaved like a paranoid Romulan who's dealing with andropause rather than a Vulcan.

First, the vulcans who followed him didn't say anything because that was exactly what the show was about: vulcans following illogical ways for illogical reasons, and not questioning them.

Second, it can be possibly explained in that emotions were not discussed, especially if a superior displayed them. When it came to Vulcans, they treated emotions much like the Victorian era treated sex: they are there, but not to be discussed. If a Vulcan was experiencing the Pon far symptoms, other Vulcans understood, but just didn't discuss it. If a Vulcan had the Alzhemer's-like Syndrome(was it Bendi??) that causes emotional outbursts, other vulcans would downplay it as fatigue, etc.

So for those 2 reasons, I think V'Las's reactions were either ignored or excused.

 

[gblews]

Re: Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?

Rememebr - the whole point of the Arc was to show that Vulcans had mostly forgotten Surak's true teachings; and had staryed from the path of 'logic' (more than they cared to admit. Finding the Kishara started a new awakening in Vulcan society (the results of which we see in TOS et al.)

I personall didn't mind Vulcans in ENT (and I think it's something the Producers did right fro dy ome); and it showed that BOTH Human and Vulcan societies were far from perfect/utopiam, and both were growing/evolving in their own way.

Besides in TOS Vulcans were subject to emotions (even in the y didn't want to admit it) as:

Sarek married a Human and had Spock.

In Journey To Babel - Amanda is the one who tess Kirk that Sarek and Spock had a disagreement about Spock's career choice; and hadn't spoken to each other for 18 years as a result -- emotionless Vulcans my ass

Hahaha!

As I said, however, my point is not about their actions. I liked the whole thing. It's much simpler: it's the acting. It's stilted and overly enthusiastic.

The problem is that your thread title "Emotional Vulcans Galore: Why?" implies that you have a problem with the emotional Vulcan characters (a criticism heard in this forum many many times in the past). But your initial post in the thread indicates that your complaint is not about the characters but about the actors' portrayals of the Vulcan characters.

The Vulcans characters shown in seasons 1, 2, 3, and 4 (up to Kir'shara) were all supposed to be portrayed as overly emotional. That presumably is the way the actors were directed to portray the characters. Perhaps your complaint should be aimed at the directors of these episodes.

Your thread title and your actual point are in conflict. That might be the reason you think people are misunderstanding you. Most people are simply responding to your thread title, which raises a very familiar complaint about Ent, but appears to have little to do with your actual point.