Six reasons Star Trek should stay dead?

[Damask]

stj said:
Literally that's true. But Odo spent most of his time as a failed copy of a human being. Failed imitation is the most pathetic form of flattery. To rephrase---however they ended Data, Odo, EMH and Seven of Nine most of the time were characters who wanted to be human.

I'm still not sure how you see this? Odo left the humans to return to his own people at the end. Odo never wanted to be a human. He wasn't Pinocchio.

It's just that DS9 was never going to show Odo as a different form every week (especially when they had a good actor in Auberjonois). The Female Shapeshifter spent most of her time as humanoid but I'd never suggest she wanted to be human.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Odo tried to fit in as a solid but couldn't. That was his entire life. He acted differently than others of his kind (who viewed solid form as some kind of chore, not as their normal way of doing things). He shifted back and forth between identifying himself as a solid or a founder after he met his people. When he became a solid, he was disgusted by the limitations (although Quark points out that, in some ways, he liked it). In the end, I think he did accept himself as a changeling and not as a solid.

Odo doesn't entirely fit the mold, but he isn't entirely against the mold.

 

[stj]

Odo could have taken Cardassian form (most logical for the backstory) or Bajoran form (most practical for the job.) But he wanted to appear human, even if he couldn't fully succeed.

 

[CaptainStoner]

It's not dead, Jim. It's mostly dead. Big difference.

 

[Damask]

stj said:
Odo could have taken Cardassian form (most logical for the backstory) or Bajoran form (most practical for the job.) But he wanted to appear human, even if he couldn't fully succeed.

Odo actually modelled himself on Bajoran's (Dr Moira). He couldn't become extacly like them due to his lack of knowledge.

I can see some parts of what your're saying but there's no way I'd lump in with Seven, The Doctor or Data. He might have enjoyed some aspects of being a solid or thier nature but he never wanted to become one and in the end he went back to his own people.

Anyway this is digressing from the whole dead Star Trek thing but I'm quite willing to discuss on the DS9 section.

 

[JoeZhang]

[/QUOTE]3. It's no longer looking ahead. Like Star Wars, Trek is trapped in prequel-land. Enterprise bored us by filling in pointless backstory on the early days of Starfleet, but the J.J. Abrams movie looks to be twice as pointless. We already know everything we need to about young Kirk and the other Trek tots. Mining your own past is a prime symptom of idea bankruptcy.

[/QUOTE]

I'd pretty much agree with this, Trek hasn't had a big idea in a long time - it's the same old same old - a man rocking from side to side in an chair while watching a cgi viewscreen.

2. We're tired of the clueless wanker with Asbergers who teaches us what it means to be human. Spock was sort of cute, so nu-Trek served up Data, Odo, that holographic doctor, Seven of Nine and T'Pol. It's not Trek without Rain Man trying to understand our human ways. We prefer the Cylons, who school us about humanity by screwing and killing us.

I'd broadly agree with this as well.

1. Sanctimonious preaching is in Trek's DNA. From the Prime Directive to the Captain's Log, the franchise was made for droning voices giving us lectures. Starfleet Academy must give would-be captains a special course in holding forth about the moral lesson in every conceivable situation. We're also sick of constantly hearing about how our heroes are too noble to share their advanced technology with other cultures.

I'd agree with this as well.