• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

I honestly don't see what's so terrible about Pic season 2. I'm not head over heels for it and it made choices I disliked - most notably the sidelining of original characters from season 1 - but I pretty consistently had fun with it.

I consider it part of the good batch of Trek time travel stories, with some interesting historical stuff and engaging character work. Also, a better Borg story than the endless 'Borg are trying to conquer us again' repeats of the rest of the franchise (season 3 being one of the worst). And while it doesn't reach the same highs as early to mid season 1, when taking the full season (and season 1's heavily disappointing finale) into account, it's easily the best season of the show for me.
 
Picard season 2 just drags tremendously. It feels as though there was a storyline that was dropped with how little happens throughout the season. It’s been hinted that that’s the case as COVID was still a big concern during production. It’s not really a bad story, per se, it just is half baked.

I also am not fond of it because it’s the last we see of many of the characters I grew to enjoy throughout two seasons to be replaced by characters we already spent a lot of time with.
 
Picard 2 had a lot of problems. But Picard's psychotic childhood was the worst. That I remember anyway.

I'm all for pushing back against Roddenberry's "perfected humans" but there are certainly ways to go too far in the other direction.

There has to be SOMETHING for them to feel superior about to 21st century Earth.
 
The entire Federation being wiped out because Picard's an arsehole seems like a bit much.

For a similar controversial opinion though, I do think Picard should have died in BoBW - mostly to make way for Riker as a much less self-assured and thus potentially more interesting captain, but it'd also satisfy the theme you're raising I suppose.
An XO shouldn’t get captaincy of a ship except in the short term. I know Trek has that happen but it’s not something I think a sane organization would encourage
 
Sisko's actions in "For the Uniform" are consistent with Starfleet's General Order 24 (from TOS, "A Taste of Armageddon") where a security threat large enough to the Federation does indeed allow such an action. Given that this was also done in defense, as means of last resort and all other options exhausted because even TOS couldn't show such a complex situation, that is a stronger reason why Sisko would not be court martialed. But it's still controversial that TOS or DS9 would include the notion of an order, much less using it. Then again, DS9 feels more like a spiritual successor to TOS than TNG had (is that controversial enough?) .
 
Sisko's actions in "For the Uniform" are consistent with Starfleet's General Order 24 (from TOS, "A Taste of Armageddon") where a security threat large enough to the Federation does indeed allow such an action. Given that this was also done in defense, as means of last resort and all other options exhausted because even TOS couldn't show such a complex situation, that is a stronger reason why Sisko would not be court martialed. But it's still controversial that TOS or DS9 would include the notion of an order, much less using it. Then again, DS9 feels more like a spiritual successor to TOS than TNG had (is that controversial enough?) .
Completely agreed. DS9 is the spinoff that best encapsulates the spirit of TOS and the franchise.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top