Ridiculous dialog

[Ghrakh]

It's exchanges like this that gives you the full story on why Denise left the show. Her character is deliberately written to be incompetent that you'd think the writers were doing this to her character on purpose.

I think it was more about the show's message that "peaceful" solutions would be preferred over "aggressive" ones. A security chief would instinctively be inclined to fire phasers. Just like Worf suggested often when he took over. And we all know how that went.

 

[Jeyl]

I think it was more about the show's message that "peaceful" solutions would be preferred over "aggressive" ones.

More likely it was an attempt to show how super clever Picard was by knowing how to deal with the situation while everyone else does not. Like how they made captain John Jarriman completely clueless in how to deal with a rescue operation so Kirk can come in and do his Kirk thing.

Here's an idea.

VALEDA: Captain, the plague ship is approaching transport range.
PICARD: Then we can't delay any longer. Ready the tractor beam, Lieutenant Yar. Target the ship. Activate on my command.
TASHA: Tractor beam ready.
PICARD: Engage.
TASHA: Got them, sir.​

What's wrong with that?

 

[cgervasi]

Is growth actually occurring?

This is from The Child except for the last line.

Computer reports growth of a deadly virus that is supposed to be in stasis.
DATA: Computer, run diagnostic on module L seven three.
COMPUTER: (male) All circuits functional.
LAFORGE: Environment's as programmed. Temperature ninety seven degrees Kelvin. Radiation flux zero. Stasis field nominal. Everything exactly as it should be, right down the line.
DATA: Perhaps it is a sensor malfunction. Computer, inquiry. Is growth actually occurring in module L seven three?
COMPUTER: Actually no, I was just messing with you.​

Of course the computer says yes.

It only makes sense if you take "actually" to mean "currently" as in Spanish.

It's bizarre that they run a diagnostic and manually check readings, but they aren't sure until they ask the computer if this is for realsies.

 

[cgervasi]

I CANNOT and WILL NOT subscribe to your interpretation of this event.

My favorite bit of ridiculous dialogue was a clunky line from Wrath of Khan:

"I CANNOT and WILL NOT subscribe to your interpretation of this event."

No one talks like that. Come on, Nick.

Really? My love -- the professional philosopher in the family --- and I routinely have disputes that involve challenging one another's conceptual theories of the subject, and we do accuse the other of making uncharitable readings of a situation, or of engaging in fallacies. ``I cannot and will not subscribe to your interpretation of this event'' is really not outside the bounds of how we might argue a point.

This dialog seemed very natural to me. She was the head scientist at a lab. Her staff was worked up, fearing Starfleet planned to steal their research and use it as a weapon of mass destruction. She was trying to keep her team cool-headed, professional, focused on the known problem (Reliant), and not speculating about a larger problem involving all of Starfleet. So she used formal language. I see this happen in work settings when emotions start running high.

 

[Kor]

Also from Picard:
"Klingon Imperial Empire."

Yes, quite.

Kor