What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Lord Garth]

I wish they hadn't gone out of their way in "Relics" to explicitly point out "there have been five starships" with the name Enterprise. Later retconned to be five Federation starships named Enterprise (as of when "Relics" takes place). Even though it made for a great gag.

Now the fact that they went 85 years without a Starship Enterprise (2161-2245) looks weird, given everything else we've seen. And given how Starfleet likes to recycle names. There's room for a good three or four post-ENT/pre-TOS Enterprises. It's just that Kirk's became the most famous. And he saved Earth twice (TMP and TVH). So the next Enterprise he was given had the -A attached to the NCC-1701. That's how I would've done it.

 

[cooleddie74]

I guess Archer cast a very long shadow and the Federation Starfleet was reluctant to launch another starship named Enterprise that quickly after 2161. And if Archer in the Prime Timeline did live to well over 100 then maybe he had some influence over whether or not a new ship used the name of his own, not caving in until the end of his life?

He did also serve as Federation President, you know. Politics.

 

[Paul755]

maybe Starfleet was hesitant to reuse a name but for whatever reason Archer decided Starfleet needed an Enterprise so he pulled some strings and got the first non-prototype Constitution Class named after his ship.

 

[Nyotarules]

I guess Archer cast a very long shadow and the Federation Starfleet was reluctant to launch another starship named Enterprise that quickly after 2161. And if Archer in the Prime Timeline did live to well over 100 then maybe he had some influence over whether or not a new ship used the name of his own, not caving in until the end of his life?

He did also serve as Federation President, you know. Politics.

The gazelle speech killed the idea of another Archer era Enterprise

 

[cooleddie74]

I'D have put a new ship on hold after that.

 

[Orphalesion]

I wish they hadn't gone out of their way in "Relics" to explicitly point out "there have been five starships" with the name Enterprise. Later retconned to be five Federation starships named Enterprise (as of when "Relics" takes place). Even though it made for a great gag.

Now the fact that they went 85 years without a Starship Enterprise (2161-2245) looks weird, given everything else we've seen. And given how Starfleet likes to recycle names. There's room for a good three or four post-ENT/pre-TOS Enterprises. It's just that Kirk's became the most famous. And he saved Earth twice (TMP and TVH). So the next Enterprise he was given had the -A attached to the NCC-1701. That's how I would've done it.

I see what you mean and I agree it's sloppy.
But if we really wanted we could explain that. If you look at history, popular things sometimes fall by the wayside and are forgotten until they are revived at a latter point. I'm having a trouble thinking of examples that apply here right now, and I'm kicking myself trying to think of some, but they definitely exist.

 

[cooleddie74]

Technically the 1701-D holodeck computer says: "There have been five Federation ships with that name." So that gives the episode a convenient out when it comes to not mentioning the NX-01. Although Scotty is so vague about which Enterprise bridge he wants to see that technically it could also have been the bridge of the ringship or one of the 20th and 21st century aircraft carriers.

 

[Vger23]

The gazelle speech killed the idea of another Archer era Enterprise

What's wrong with the gazelle speech?

 

[Nyotarules]

What's wrong with the gazelle speech?

Ask the gazelle lol

 

[fireproof78]

What's wrong with the gazelle speech?

I always love SF Debris recurring jokes around that when it gets mentioned.

From Trials and Tribble-ations:

DULMUR: Be specific, Captain. Which Enterprise? There've been five.
LUCSLY: Six.
[SF Debris VO joke]
DULMUR: Five. Jonathan Archer is dead to me.

From the Motion Picture
DECKER (on viewscreen): All these vessels were called 'Enterprise'.
[SF Debris VO joke]
ILIA PROBE: What of the one captained by Archer.
DECKER: He's dead to us.

 

[tomalak301]

What's wrong with the gazelle speech?

I thought he made up for it with his Terra Prime speech.

 

[Lord Garth]

It was that thing Archer did when he was President of the Federation. The Smoking Gun.

No one looked at him the same after that. Oliver Stone's descendent made a holomovie about it.

 

[Maurice]

Ask the gazelle lol

Go to 4:52...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Qonundrum]

I see what you mean and I agree it's sloppy.
But if we really wanted we could explain that. If you look at history, popular things sometimes fall by the wayside and are forgotten until they are revived at a latter point. I'm having a trouble thinking of examples that apply here right now, and I'm kicking myself trying to think of some, but they definitely exist.

I'm trying to think of examples, while forgetting the recursive one since I know you're right and I'd forgotten about that part of human nature.

That said, I'll still side with Lord Garth - "Relics" immediately puts in a hard, direct, and indelible quantifier that, a handful of years later, is promptly thrown out the window because they wanted to show NX-01, and since when does Starfleet discount test prototypes ships for being just as spacefaring as the other space vessels of the same name? (or any ship on water or air or space vacuum...) It is minutiae in a way, and for the sake of building up drama. It's best done indirectly than with the proverbial hammer o' sledge...

It's also true that script writers can choose to throw out continuity (if remembered) if there's a possible greater outcome. Like Scotty in "Generations" seeing Kirk apparently die despite "Relics" having him drooling over the idea that Kirk saved him. There's a missing puzzle piece, one that's shaped rather incongruously and probably can't ever fit in... and had "Generations" paid off it wouldn't be as big a deal. Like a certain Borg Queen, who also upends continuity (but not directly so and Alice Krige sorta steals the show too... latter for Susanna Thompson, who also makes the role just as effective... or rises above the limitations of the role...)

 

[cooleddie74]

Well, since it's the Holiday season right now It's A Wonderful Life applies. It was at best a middling success at the time of its release and not exactly warmly embraced by either audiences or critics but as years passed and the film was broadcast on television for Christmas it was reevaluated as a work of art and built its massive fan following, soon becoming a regular entry on Best Movies of All Time lists. Now it's considered one of the greatest films ever made, at least by American audiences who embrace Frank Capra's vision of small-town Americana and redemption.

 

[Orphalesion]

I'm trying to think of examples, while forgetting the recursive one since I know you're right and I'd forgotten about that part of human nature.

Even now the only example that I can think of is the Venetian Carnival which was abolished during Hapsburg rule in the 18th century and not re-instated until the 1970s

 

[Farscape One]

I think STAR TREK: GENERATIONS is a solid, good movie for the franchise.

It had great character beats, and some excellent development for Picard. He got to face not only losing his brother and nephew, but the big realization that he is the last of his entire lineage. That's a heavy realization. (One I can fully understand, being the last of your clan.)

I think it also played an indirect factor in STAR TREK: PICARD on the setting of where the season begins.

 

[cooleddie74]

GEN is better than more than a few Trek films. It's deeply flawed but has great rewatch value and there's rarely a moment when I tell myself: "Nah, I've seen enough of that. It's played out."

 

[Paul755]

Generations would have been a much better movie if everything Kirk had been removed and you re-work the Nexus rules so the “why didn’t Picard just arrest Soren in Ten Foreward” plot hole is closed.

You could even keep the Enterprise B stuff, just don’t make it a publicity mission.

 

[ananta]

It had some good moments but Generations was the most flat out depressing Trek film ever made. There was just a blanket of doom hanging over the whole damn film. I left the cinema feeling so deflated and depressed. From the needless, horrific deaths of Picard’s only family to the shockingly weak send-off for Kirk, who got to die twice essentially, to the dark sets and Data being almost unbearably annoying... I did like the music though.