Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Amasov, Jun 20, 2020.
I'm fine with a Talaxian showing up in SNW, calling Spock "Mr. Vulcan".
He said he wasn't emotionally invested in the fake crew..
With an entire galaxy's worh of planets and locales to simulate, I wouldn't choose Chicago for a honeymoon, either. Who knows what goes through the minds of the faux crew, they've clearly made odd decisions.
A real Klingon would have just walked that off!!!!!!
Voyager was a worthless exercise in crapping out more ST for no creative motivation whatsoever, so I find it rather odd that there's certain fans incapable of wrapping their heads around VOY never getting a movie or latter-day revival series.
I would argue we already have a semi-revival of Voyager with Prodigy and if Legacy ever comes around it will feel like one as well.
To be fair it was lightning II when it was still YF
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loc...e YF-22 was given,named the aircraft "Raptor".
Voyager's great when you don't consider its botched premise and focus instead on individual episodes a la TNG. Kinda like thinking of Picard as an anthology series.
I just want more Harry Kim.
Yeah, the USAF changed that name after it went into production.
The reasoning was dumb, but it is what it is.
They did change some things, but there's no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater. But yes, what you say qualifies as a "Controversial Opinion".
You're probably talking to the wrong person. I also like Picard, which many would say isn't a real continuation of TNG. I actually like PIC better than TNG. That's my "Controversial Opinion".
In general: If I like what I'm watching, I overlook a lot. If I don't, I won't. I've found that's true of most people here, whether they say so or not.
Yes, this. I'm currently rewatching Voyager, just started the 3rd season in fact. It's a lot more enjoyable if you can ignore the big red reboot button and the inconsistencies between episodes. It's not my favorite Trek by any means, but I still enjoy watching it. Last time I watched it, I was too focused on what it wasn't (a reasonably consistently written show with good character development for all main characters and some character development for regular subsidiary characters, and a good mix of arc-based episodes and standalones, like Babylon 5 and DS9) to enjoy it for what it is. Or maybe I've just grown more mellow when it comes to enjoying entertainment on its own terms...
The TOS Movies are probably my favorite "phase" of the entire Star Trek franchise.
Movies 2-6 are my main attraction to TOS.
I wish they had more movies like TUC. Maybe a treasure hunt in place of the conspiracy.
TOS and the TOS Movies are what me me fall passionately in love with Star Trek.
Well... I didn't have access to time travel so it was pretty much TOS and TAS. And get off my lawn!
Hey, you missed one!
Don't get him started.
I think II-III-IV are a great trilogy of movies that sets the tone for Star Trek being in-part about families, friendships that become as deep as family, and what that says about human nature.
If you look at II-III-IV, they basically debate the idea of "the needs of the many...," and I personally love Search For Spock.
As a kid, I accepted the idea it was part of the odd movie curse, and was kinda the boring one between II and IV. But as an adult, I realized that in a lot of ways it probably has some of the best character moments for the TOS movies.
Wrath of Khan is Spock's sacrifice based in utilitarian Vulcan logic that his death is worth saving the "many."
Search For Spock is Kirk and the crew inverting everything with human nobility. They are willing to sacrifice everything they have to save Spock.
Sarek : Kirk, I thank you. What you have done is...
Kirk : What I have done, I had to do.
Sarek : But at what cost? Your ship. Your son.
Kirk : If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul.
People always seem to think Star Trek accepts the idea that “the needs of many outweighs the needs of the few, or the one,” but those 3 films as a whole argue there’s a balance and one of the most endearing examples of true friendship and “family” occurs within Trek when the characters explicitly go against that philosophy.
Amanda : Spock, does the good of the many out weigh the good of the one?
Spock : I would accept that as an axiom.
Amanda : Then you stand here alive because of a mistake made by your flawed, feeling, human friends. They have sacrificed their futures because they believed that the good of the one - you - was more important to them.
Spock : Humans make illogical decisions.
Amanda : They do, indeed.
Voyage Home is a fish out of water story, and it's accessible because of the humor derived in that and the present-day setting, but it is also rooted in these themes, and Spock realizing there's a third way between these viewpoints and finding value in the "human thing to do."
McCoy : Jim. You've got to let me go in there. Don't leave him in the hands of 20th-century medicine.
Spock : Admiral, may I suggest that Dr. McCoy is correct? We must help Chekov.
Kirk : Is that the logical thing to do, Spock?
Spock : No, but it is the human thing to do.
Nope. It has regularly rejected that rather trite catchphrase. Kirk won't let Spock die in TOS, and when there was the chance to save him in TSFS he took it. Bashir wouldn't let Odo die and regardless of the threats from Starfleet Medical and Security he searched for the cure. Pike is unwilling to let Spock die so that he can save others.
It is, as Heinlein would note, poor math, but very human.
Separate names with a comma.