Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Amasov, Jun 20, 2020.
I mean a fully informed choice.
That's what I meant with my second sentence.
Insipid, New Age-y, puffed-up chest and lifeless. No wonder the majority of TNG's characters are still drawing blanks within popular culture awareness nearly 40 years after its debut.
...and if your best characters are any from the periphery of the main group / overall story, it says much about the unappealing, soulless nature of that main group.
Part of the issue is that other than Picard, Data, and Worf, TNG characters do not have personalities to speak of.
Oh, they have quirks. Riker gets laid and plays the trombone. Geordi is bad with women. Some characters don't even get this, though. I'm struggling to come up with anything to say that makes Deanna stand out beyond liking chocolate (which she shares with half the human race).
In general, the characters are defined by their ranks, jobs, and social roles. So Bev is a doctor and a mom, and that's about it. But she doesn't have a personality beyond this worth speaking of. Who she is as a person in no way defines the choices she makes in the show. The needs of the plot of the week define those choices.
Pike doesn't have a new choice that he can stick to.
Anytime he chose differently, a time traveller intercedes from a dark timeline and begs Pike to reconcider.
One could certainly say the same thing about TOS. Of course on TOS the supporting cast weren't co-stars. (Until The Search for Spock.)
Deanna is certainly "Most Improved". No, she does not have a "quirk". But she becomes much more of a personality as the show goes on. What's amazing is how much Deanna grows and yet she never becomes remotely like Marina.
I've noticed this too. Marina Sirtis takes the rather thin material she's given and absolutely runs with it for all she's worth in later seasons. Troi gets a little bit of a harsher, sarcastic edge, but also some real warmth and humour beyond just generic "empathy" – and also becomes, despite being half-alien with borderline magic powers, something of the accessible everyman of the TNG crew. She's a joy in seasons six and seven. (Now I'm wondering what Marina is actually like...)
EDIT: also, she's fucking brilliant in PIC. I mean, they all were in season three, that's a given, but she's genuinely excellent in season one's "Nepenthe". Pathos, humour, caring, guts. Marina can do a hell of a lot with very little.
I SENSE PAIN. PAIN!
UNHAPPINESS. TERRIBLE LONELINESS!
Nothing, really. Just thought I sensed something.
Oh seriously, I agree with what's been said here about her.
Still in the thin category, but Troi/Sirtis was also great comic relief in STVIII. And unless I'm overlooking something, with the exception of Data/Spiner, who had often been that in the series anyway, none of the other characters/actors could really say that about their parts in the films. Guinan/Goldberg had done comic relief in the series, sometimes really well, but I don't recall her doing much of that in Generations or NEM either (though in fairness, I've largely deleted that train wreck from my active memory buffer).
I'd say even Worf fits into that category, at least until DS9.
The Romulan Supernova should have never happened. It sounds very nonsensical to me and anything involving Picard and Discovery is not at all "Star Trek" to me.
TOS was explicitly set up to be effectively an anthology show which happened to have a recurring cast. This was the era where serials were considered to be lowbrow, and anthology shows were at their absolute apex in terms of being considered the high art of moving pictures.
I'd actually argue that to the degree there was any characterization at all, it mostly came down to the actors discovering the characters and the writers beginning to pivot their scripts to actually reflect what they were bringing to the table. This famously happened with Spock, as Nimoy came up with the stoicism thing after Shatner was cast because he thought it played better off of a more lively leading man, with the whole "Vulcan logic" thing just added later.
It's an interesting enough plot point (and we can't do Praxis twice.) Of course the notion that the Romulan supernova would "threaten to destroy the galaxy" is JJ BS.
Heh, I never realized that Star Trek 2009 never says that it was ROMULUS' star. Just "a star" that was "consuming everything in its path".
I know distance rate and time has never been Star Trek's strong suit but this really takes the cake. And leaves it out in the rain.
Eh, TUC did the same thing with Praxis' explosion and Generations with Armagosa. We just have to accept that in the Star Trek universe some events cause devastating subspace ripples or something.
With regard to Praxis I think there was a line about a "subspace shockwave" within the movie itself, so that problem is sidestepped somewhat.
The Amargosa star situation is arguably worse because the dialogue (being TNG) is that much more specific:
DATA: The destruction of the Amargosa star has altered the gravitational forces throughout this sector. As a result any ship passing through this region would have to make a minor course correction.
As detailed in the Nitpicker's Guide; gravity is caused by mass and the mass of the star is only reduced by the shedding off of matter. So until that matter has dispersed beyond the region there won't be a change in gravity, certainly not an instantaneous one!
I guess since Aramgosa was destroyed by a trilithium weapon we can hypothesize a similar subspace effect as with Praxis. The star's mass had to have been dumped out of regular space as part of it destruction for Data's statements to make sense. Perhaps the Hobus star had massive amounts of dilithium or trilithium and going supernova caused a subspace shockwave that threatened nearby systems.
Somewhat grasping at straws, JJ09 was describing a natural event (taking into account JJ doesn't word very well, see also The Resistance) while TUC and GEN are not. (At least Red Matter doesn't have to act like a thing.)
Mind you, they're all dumb in increasing degrees.
Trek physics has never made sense. Once one accepts this incontrovertible truth, it’s much easier to enjoy any of its iterations.
Be careful you don’t encounter any “Anti-Time”.
Pfft. I run into that on a regular basis. Every single instance where my PhD supervisor asks for my next chapter. Suddenly, whatever time I might have to devote to it is annihilated. Another way to say “anti-time” is children.
Separate names with a comma.