The One Thing You Could Change, TOS Edition...

I really don't want Star Trek talking about Oaths of Celibacy. You know and other stuff from TMP like Kirk's mothers love instructor. Its just awful.
Can it just be implied or something?

I liked a lot of Number One but you know at times she was a bit dull and she lacked charisma. She needed some sassy comebacks like Spock had. I think she was a bit let down by the script.
Dehner was a lot more likeable IMO.

 

Make Kirk actually think before he imposes a given life on a planet's population. Realistically speaking, he probably effectively obliterated the populations of the planets featured in "Spock's Brain" and "The Apple". Vaal's followers had no idea how to live independently, and the women on the other world had no idea how to live like cavemen.

 

Yeah, telling Akuta and his followers they'll figure out how to live free from Vaal is pretty damn irresponsible but given how he preaches "Freedom!" in most episodes he probably thinks he's doing the right thing for them.

 

It's like being a parent. You understand that your child will because free individual someday, but you understand that your job is to teach them the skills they need to survive, and protect them until they have those skills. Kirk's actions were comparable to child abandonment.

 

Didnt Kirk leave them with some advisors or was that some other planet.

Look I think there's one maybe 4 exemptions to the Prime Directive in TOS.
1. Civilisation on a death course FTWIHAIHTTS (Natra's ship), the Amerind place, Miri
2. Federation wants something (Errand of Mercy, Friday's Child etc)
3. Somethings already interfered (Piece of the Action, Bread and circuses)
4. Computer has enslaved a civilisation (Return of the Archons, Apple)

Basically Apple natives were slaves. Kirk was just freeing the slaves.
And In Spock's Brain, those guys had interstellar travel, so weren't really subject to the Prime Directive.
So say Spock's brain had stayed there he probably would have just reorganised the planet. Surely he wouldn't just be running the pumps and electricity. He'd probably be justified in getting them independent and learning how to run their own planet without need to steal a controller every 100 years or so.

 

I never said Kirk shouldn't have freed Vaal's subjects. Just that freeing them and then leaving them to their own devices was a death sentence. It's like rescuing a child from an abusive family. It's noble in and of itself, but if you leave the child by the side of the road to fend for himself... have you really helped him?

 

I assume that Starfleet followed up on the Vaal incident by sending a team of experts to "guide" Vaal's people. And of course such a team would have to include at least one sociologist as with "Return of the Archons." Sociology had somewhat of a resurgence in the 1960s, so it made perfect sense that something trendy at that time would be a vital part of Starfleet operations three hundred years later.

Kor

 

That's right. They were due to teach the children of Vaal and then swing by Ceti Alpha V.

 

If that's what Kirk did, then fine. But no mention was made of it.

 

I would imagine that Starfleet has task forces dedicated to cleaning up all the cans of worms and Pandora's Boxes that get opened up by captains out on exploration missions. Of course, this would depend on the captains submitting accurate and complete logs to HQ.

Kor

 

Sounds like a job for the USS Cerritos.

 

The problem I've always had with "The Apple" is they never once stop to consider who built Vaal in the first place. What if it was the Feeders of Vaal themselves who eons ago decided they didn't like the direction their society was going and built this machine to give them placid, pleasant, brainless, effective immortality? Or if these aren't the actual people who built Vaal so long ago that they've forgotten, but are their "replacements", do they have the right to choose for themselves if they want Vaal or the things that are forbidden. The story cheats by putting the Enterprise in imminent danger, at which point all bets are off because Kirk will kill any civilization to save his ship.

 

That horrible word balloon placement hurts my soul.

Same here. She was certainly attractive, but the lengths that some folks here go to in singing her praises is really over the top.

It's certainly the most unprofessional suggestion she could've have made. She could've picked something more specific than "You're hungry!" and not as nuts as "Hey, imagine that we hooked up the night we talked and danced at the Christmas party." There's a VAST middle ground between those two.

Yes. It quickly becomes tiresome.

Yes. It's surprising how many people don't get this.

According to an earlier draft script, Kirk mistook Noel for a civilian passenger at the party and thus was more flirtatious with her than he would've been if he'd realized she was a member of his crew. He was embarrassed at his innocent mistake, and he was angry at McCoy because McCoy was reminding him of that embarrassing moment.

I've honestly never gotten the appeal of the Romulan Commander from "The Enterprise Incident." She's easily fooled throughout the entire episode, and never presents much of a challenge for Kirk or Spock. She's not any kind of formidable foe, IMO. I don't think she had much in the way of chemistry with Spock, either.

Considering that that story originated with Roddenberry, take it with a few truckloads of salt. NBC was fine with a female First Officer. They just didn't want Roddenberry's mistress playing the part. Realizing how awkward it would be for him to recast the part he intended for Majel, GR simply lied and said that those mean old sexist executives didn't want a woman as second in command.

 

So Helen Noel's fantasy was for Kirk to take her away from the Christmas Party to his room and to say he didn't really care for her. Is something wrong with her? Her fantasies suck!
I know it needed to be this for the script so that it was changed for Kirk to be madly in love with her with the help of the neuraliser. But it doesn't make sense. Surely Noel's fantasy would be for Kirk to 'care' for her. Albeit not as much as Adams tried to make it.
Also were we really supposed to guess that the reason Kirk was so upset by Noel's appearance was that Kirk chatted her up at the Christmas Party and later found out she was new crew. I never saw the first draft of the script. I just see Kirk picking up Noel in his arms and saying well along the lines of its going to be a one nights stand - not being embarrassed or anything.

 

I was just thinking about everyone's blood pressure

 

To be honest, some women are in to that. Just because you want a sexual encounter with a desirable partner, doesn't mean that you're also looking for "caring."

 

Very true. I've known women like that.

 

But she actually said something like 'it would be different if you cared for me'. Unless she was being sarcastic I suppose.

 

If I could change one thing, it'd definitely be for the characters outside the big three to receive more time/development. I feel like TAS is better than TOS in this regard, and I suspect things would have gone that way if we'd gotten a fourth season.

 

I was watching 'The Enterprise Incident' today and would definitely change it. I really like the Romulan Commander but thought it was too easy the way she fell for Spock's charms.
I have queries about the Federation's morality here. I'd have liked Kirk and Spock to have been more concerned about this. If I were to change the episode I would make The Rom Commander just the Captain of one of the 3 ships and would have Tal be fleet commander and commanding her to try to seduce Spock. She would object then agree and sort of fall for Spock and eventually they would lament together that they must do as ordered by their captains.
Ooh sorry gone into fan fiction mode but the Rom Commander came out looking like a bit of a fool and I would like there to be a reason for that. Perhaps her reason for jumping into the transporter was trying to pull Spock back or something.