• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Section 31 General Discussion Thread

A Section 31 series. Yay or nay?

  • Yay, a Section 31 series!

    Votes: 80 40.0%
  • Nay, give us anything else instead!

    Votes: 120 60.0%

  • Total voters
    200
To me "a hater" is someone who makes posts like " This sucks!, "if It's Kurtzman crap I won't watch! " and then offer no real insights as to why they feel like that.
All I was saying is that when I see people dropping by with videos and images showing why Kurztman Trek is the worst thing ever, I rarely see those same names participating in other threads. To my recollection.

I'm certainly not trying to judge people who have honest criticisms about the Section 31 movie, because I'm sure people have their reasons. My reasons are that treating the Section 31 organisation as anything other than another Badmiral group to be defeated shows a fundamental misunderstanding about what Star Trek is, and this whole project seems flawed on the conceptual level. Also it looks bad.
 
Honestly, I don't understand why this project is considered flawed. Yes, Section 31 is not up to Star Trek's supposed moral standards, but then many characters in Trek are not either. My go to example is Garak, and if this show was about him and his skullduggery there would be as many fans all for it.

Similarly, I don't like the Klingons. I think they are a grotesque twisting of honor and glory in the name of one's own pride that makes me as hesitant to attend a Viking recreation fair as some conventions with Klingons. I don't care for them or their culture at all. Yet, many would say there are the quintessential Star Trek alien race and would watch a show all about them, even though by many moral standards, including Trek's purported standard, are quite bad.

Section 31 as a show or a film is not saying, "Oh, hey, Section 31 is totally the good guys now," any more than the Godfather was saying being in a Mafia family is a good life goal, or the various video games supporting crime as a thrilling adventure and running from the cops as good goals.

So, I fail to see why this project some how fails this standard.
 
Making Section 31 the heroes says that a: everyone else who knows about them is willing to accept the moral compromise of others in order to keep their own hands clean, and b: we need them to save the day, as the idea that we can find a moral solution to our problems is naive and unrealistic.
 
Making Section 31 the heroes says that a: everyone else who knows about them is willing to accept the moral compromise of others in order to keep their own hands clean, and b: we need them to save the day, as the idea that we can find a moral solution to our problems is naive and unrealistic.
I don't think it says either of those things.

I think it says there will always be those who want to operate outside the rules to ensure safety and security. Kirk does it from time to time, Pressman did it, Picard did it, etc.

How far is the better question, a more dramatic question, an almost Shakesperean question. I think Trek is welcome to explore it. It doesn't give approval to Section 31 or their methods.
 
SFX preview article:
In fact, the alterations have been so significant the end result is completely different to the original pitch for the spin-off's pilot episode, with everything changing bar two character names.

As Osunsanmi explains: "I would say the only two things that are the same from the original series pilot to the movie that we've got now is that there is a character named Alok and Philippa Georgiou. It has been retooled so much, the two stories are completely unrecognizable, and Craig Sweeny, the writer, has been in the middle of that [for] the whole process."

Continuing, Osunsanmi details the extent of the changes, adding that they went through about seven different versions of what Section 31 would be. The filmmaker adds: "He's [Sweeny] been in a situation to have written – I think – seven different iterations of this. When I say seven different iterations, the first iteration was six episodes of the first season of Section 31. The second iteration was another five episodes of Section 31 which were completely different than the previous iteration. Then the fourth, fifth, and sixth were multiple pilots that were outlines, then we had the movie, and the movie itself went through a couple of iterations."

Naturally, all of the above led to both fans and those working on the project raising their eyebrows, concerned about the development of Section 31. However, Osunsanmi is keen to emphasize that he believes the end result is totally worth the difficult journey: "I think where we ended up was wonderful, because we never would have gotten here if it weren't for that journey. Sometimes you just got to go on the journey in order to arrive at the place that you arrive at."
 
If something that silly is 'killing you' then you're taking it way too seriously to be mentally healthy.

There is nothing wrong with thinking something looks good.
Death...by musical.

Hmmm...

kXp2zYg.gif
 
Making Section 31 the heroes
Section 31 folks are the "Protagonists".

They may be "Heroes in their own Minds", but they aren't "The Heroes to most people's minds".

Let's leave it at that.

If you go by the D&D Morality Alignment Table, I'd argue that they are a "Chaotic Good" faction that exists within the UFP.

They'll do "Whatever Is Necessary" to safe guard the Utopia that most people believe the UFP is.

They're willing to do the dirty work & the morally questionable things to protect paradise.


says that a: everyone else who knows about them is willing to accept the moral compromise of others in order to keep their own hands clean,
Oh definitely, when StarFleet was getting their arse kicked and Section 31 had a "Ace Up their Sleeve" with the Changeling Morphogenic Virus, every body that was within StarFleet's Upper Brass & the Federation Council were on the "Odo, DON'T YOU DARE cure them" side and that the cure must NEVER be given to them until they surrender.

It took Odo, to have the courage to offer the cure first, then the female changeling would stop her forces and surrender.

and b: we need them to save the day, as the idea that we can find a moral solution to our problems is naive and unrealistic.
Depends on the situation, how dire it is, how many of UFP / StarFleet's Rules & Regulations you must break to accomplish it.

Section 31 in the 24th century & beyond should be a "Fully Autonomous & Covert Intelligence / Action" group.
 
It's not like "above and beyond" is beyond Trek's scope. Even the heroes did it. Should they be ostracized from Trek?

4S8tR4o.jpg

ivHXfAc.jpg

x6fHU3a.jpeg
 
Pegasus is about Riker deciding that Pressman's actions were immoral and unnecessary, which works for me.

In the Pale Moonlight has one of the rare 'no moral options, everything you do is going to hurt people' situations and it's handled by a Starfleet officer, not the 'hard men making hard decisions' squad, so the episode is all about how it's destroying him. He pays a price for it and isn't about to team up with Garak for weekly assassination adventures.

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges (I got the words right, had to look up the order) has Bashir deciding that Ross's actions were immoral and unnecessary.
 
Pegasus is about Riker deciding that Pressman's actions were immoral and unnecessary, which works for me.

In the Pale Moonlight has one of the rare 'no moral options, everything you do is going to hurt people' situations and it's handled by a Starfleet officer, not the 'hard men making hard decisions' squad, so the episode is all about how it's destroying him. He pays a price for it and isn't about to team up with Garak for weekly assassination adventures.

Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges (I got the words right, had to look up the order) has Bashir deciding that Ross's actions were immoral and unnecessary.
And?


And Bashir does nothing. Sisko was wrong. Kick them out.
 
Bashir did nothing... that week. A few weeks later he kidnapped Sloan and stole information from his mind, leading to his death. Of course Sloan tried to trick him into staying in his mind and dying along with him by temping him with something he couldn't resist:

BASHIR: These files, they contain all of Sloan's memories on Section 31. With this information we can destroy the entire organisation.

Bashir was fully intending to shut Section 31 down and he nearly died trying.
 
Bashir did nothing... that week. A few weeks later he kidnapped Sloan and stole information from his mind, leading to his death. Of course Sloan tried to trick him into staying in his mind and dying along with him by temping him with something he couldn't resist:



Bashir was fully intending to shut Section 31 down and he nearly died trying.
So...that excuses his behavior and leading to a man's death?

See, here's my thing. You can justify anything and that is what I see happen over and again. It's ok the good guys did bad things because we can justify it. But, a show about Section 31? Violates the very sanctity of Star Trek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 :shrug: :wtf:
 
So...that excuses his behavior and leading to a man's death?

See, here's my thing. You can justify anything and that is what I see happen over and again. It's ok the good guys did bad things because we can justify it. But, a show about Section 31? Violates the very sanctity of Star Trek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 :shrug: :wtf:
I've never been against the idea of a Section 31 show, I'm against them being shown in a positive light. I'm against Starfleet being shown to rely on them to solve problems. I'm against being encouraged to root for them. I'd write a Section 31 show myself, and it'd be a spy thriller about Starfleet Intelligence agents hunting them down.
 
I've never been against the idea of a Section 31 show, I'm against them being shown in a positive light. I'm against Starfleet being shown to rely on them to solve problems. I'm against being encouraged to root for them. I'd write a Section 31 show myself, and it'd be a spy thriller about Starfleet Intelligence agents hunting them down.
I don't see them as being in a positive light.

I don't see us encouraged to root for them.

I don't see Starfleet relying upon them to solve the problem.

I see them using them to solve a problem; kind of like what Star Trek has done before. Call it mutual cooperation, like Garak and Sisko.
 
I don't see them as being in a positive light.

I don't see us encouraged to root for them.

I don't see Starfleet relying upon them to solve the problem.

I see them using them to solve a problem; kind of like what Star Trek has done before. Call it mutual cooperation, like Garak and Sisko.
And that's probably why they send in a young "Rachel Garrett" to make sure that the rag-tag Section 31 group they assembled doesn't go "Too Off-the-Rails" & Kill Innocent People.

It's I scratch your back, you scratch my back, I make sure you don't obliterate innocents while you do your dirty scratching...

It's give & take. Obviously, with the premise of the movie, I can see 2x characters being protected.

Michelle Yeoh's character of Phillipa Georgiou.

Rachel Garrett is protected.

Everybody else on the team is expendable as far as I'm concerned.
 
The review embargo lifts January 22nd, while the TV Movie itself will be released January 24th.

Such a short review window is... not promising.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top