All Star Trek Discussion Thread ("Into Darkness" trailer released)

[BlobVanDam]

But the parameters were flawed, which is what Kirk pointed out.  Landru had only one purpose, and it was doing the opposite of that purpose due to a flaw in it's understanding of human nature.  I see no problem with this.

How were the parameters flawed? And how did Kirk actually prove the parameters were flawed? All Kirk did was simply tell it his own idea of what a society should be, but not proving that it was necessary in any way. The society was working fine, aside from the random violence which was never even explained or mentioned anyway.
It must have been a terrible computer to blow up from being yelled at.

[El Barto]

Perhaps he proved the flaw by example.  Landru's minions had stagnated for decades.  Kirk's creativity enabled crew managed to stay a step ahead of Landru, figure out it's purpose and confront him about it, all in about a day. 

It occurs to me that we both have problems with one of the underlying necessities of the shows.  Starship captains have to be portrayed as the very best humanity has to offer; otherwise what's the point.  This involves giving them a superhuman skill-set.  That means some talents that you wouldn't really expect them to have.  I always found Picard's ability to beat the living shit out of a knife-wielding Klingon or seven foot Nossican to be far fetched, to say the least.  I can certainly see how Kirk out-thinking a computer, or beating Spock at chess wouldn't sit well with you.  In the end, I suppose it comes down to which character you like better.  I obviously prefer JTK's style.  I've got no problem with people preferring JLP's.  Once you decide you like the character, portrayals of them being vastly superior aren't such a problem.


edit: and I draw the line at Troi's insipid ass beating Data at chess.  That was just fucking stupid.

[BlobVanDam]

It has nothing to do with liking or disliking him. I like Kirk, I just believe he's the product of narrow minded '60s ideals of society, and thus was a bad influence on many societies that functioned perfectly until he intervened, and I can guarantee would have quickly crumbled once the Enterprise left. These societies just weren't prepared to be thrown into the deep end on their own. Then Kirk and crew left smug that they'd made the galaxy more "human".

Kirk didn't prove to the computer that it had failed. The computer's purpose was to maintain peace, tranquility, the good of the "body". It was doing this aside from the random violence, which was never explained, nor ever brought up by Kirk as evidence to Landru to support Kirk's point. There was no reason ever given for the random violence, so we don't know whether it was due to a computer malfunction or limitation of removing free will, or relevant in any way, and was basically a fun plot point to establish an interesting civilization to walk into (which I actually loved).
Kirk says the "body" needs creativity or it dies, but did not prove this in any way, especially not the melodramatic literal way he suggested. The computer states that peace, order and tranquility were maintained, and it reserves creativity to itself. Kirk did not prove that the people needed the creativity and free will themselves, since the society had functioned for thousands (?) of years before they interfered. He didn't make any link as to why the "body" dies without creativity. If that was an essay, he would have failed for jumping straight to the conclusion without evidence.

edit: And wtf, Troi couldn't beat a chocolate sundae at chess. I can't remember that, but Data would have to be literally switched off for that to be remotely plausible.

[El Barto]

Well, I think we've already established that I have a different view of what constitutes healthy humanity than you and Adami.  The Kirk era comes a lot closer, in my book.  I maintain that the Picard era humans are lifeless avatars.  We won't agree on which is better, so we'll just go on preferring different depictions. 

As for Landru, Kirk made the more convincing argument.  I agree that there was no proof that creativity was vital to the continuation of the body, but I'm not sure that matters.  For one thing proof isn't always present, and you can still win an argument by making the better case.  Another consideration is that perhaps Landru already recognized that creativity was necessary, but hadn't been factoring it in all of these years.  As was pointed out, it had the original Landru's intellect and ideas, but couldn't gain his wisdom.  The necessity of creativity might have just been something it knew innately, but hadn't come to realize yet.

Don't recall which episode it was, although it was recent, but Data told troi that she made a foolish move.  She smugly said "you just wait and see," and made a move that surprised Data, who told her that she'd win in x number of moves.  Then they all got called to the bridge for some pointless love fest or something. 

[BlobVanDam]

Kirk made the more convincing argument.

He made no argument at all. He leapt directly to the conclusion with nothing inbetween. This argument wouldn't even hold water for arguing with a human with opposing ideals, let alone a computer that should have required REAL logic, and not just yelling. You can't win an argument against a computer without objective proof. That cannot make a case at all. Landru already said it reserved creativity for itself, and Kirk made no argument that this was not working. None at all.

At least in the other cases of Kirk arguing with machines, he actually had some valid arguments of logic. In the Ultimate Computer, it was programmed to know that killing was wrong, and knew what the punishment was, so they could objectively prove that it had contradicted its programming, so it had no choice but to obey its own programming. In I, Mudd, they beat the machines not with logic, but with illogic. The robots simply weren't programmed to solve the contradictions they were offered with conflicting input.

But in this episode, Kirk did not beat the computer with logic, or illogic. He simply pummeled it to death with irrelevant human ideals that had nothing to do with its programming. I'm not saying these ideals were wrong, but he made no case to prove them at all, especially not for a computer with strict parameters that it was clearly functioning within.

[Adami]

I, shockingly, agree with Blob. At no point did Kirk actually use logic to destroy a computer. He simply annoyed them to death by repeating himself over and over. I assume they died from suicide as an attempt to shut him up.

Also, noticing 2 things about TOS so far in my rewatch.

1. McCoy is the most condescending ethnocentric character on the show. Every alien planet that is different than earth's he insults and demands they become more like earth.

2. Between the non main crew away team dying every time they go somewhere, and they super hot 25 year old female "specialist" they keep having to bring a long and then leaving on the planet once she falls in love with villain of that week, I'm surprised they had much of a crew left.

[El Barto]

I, shockingly, agree with Blob. At no point did Kirk actually use logic to destroy a computer. He simply annoyed them to death by repeating himself over and over. I assume they died from suicide as an attempt to shut him up.

Also, noticing 2 things about TOS so far in my rewatch.

1. McCoy is the most condescending ethnocentric character on the show. Every alien planet that is different than earth's he insults and demands they become more like earth.

2. Between the non main crew away team dying every time they go somewhere, and they super hot 25 year old female "specialist" they keep having to bring a long and then leaving on the planet once she falls in love with villain of that week, I'm surprised they had much of a crew left.

It's a shame Picard wasn't there to rip Landru apart with his bare hands.   

The only hot specialist I can think of that they left behind after falling in love with the bad guy was MacGyvers w/Khan.  Who else was there?  Apollo died, so it's not that chick. 

[Adami]

Oh I was obviously exaggerating. It was more the idea that they keep having these different 25 year old hot specialists that fall in love with the villain. I think a few of them got left behind besides the girl with Khan (which was a terrible idea by the way, oh you tried to take over the ship and kill everybody? Well we'll just give you a planet.....if it's alright with you). But I can't recall them off hand.

And your disliking of picard not withstanding, the idea that you can just convince all of your enemies to give up by saying that you're view is the right one is a horrible idea.

[El Barto]

The Apollo chick is the only other one I can think of that fell in love with the villain.  And I don't recall any of them being left behind.

I thought the solution to Khan was alright.  Imprisoning them would have been a tragic waste.  In retrospect it was obviously the wrong call, but they had no way of knowing that and I can certainly appreciate their willingness to take a creative approach.  It's interesting to ponder what Picard would have done with him, and the only think I can think of is that he would have left the decision up to Starfleet command.  Kind of weak, IMO. 

And I don't dislike Picard at all.  As I've said all along, he and Data are the two characters that make the show as good as it is.  I do think they try and make him out to be a superman, but like I said, they did the same thing with Kirk out of dramatic necessity.  I just prefer Kirk as a representative of his era. 

[The King in Crimson]

Regardless of the series, the main characters have always had the skills and strength to take down whatever the villain of the week was.  Picard beats the hell out of Klingons, Sisco and Co take on Jem'Hadar (frequently) in hand to hand combat and don't get killed and Kirk convinces computers to blow up.  Fer Chrissakes, DS9 (the best Trek series) has Klingon boarding parties getting the crap kicked out of them by Bajoran and Federation officers.  Not one or two Klingons, but entire parties of the lifelong warriors.

It's ridiculous, but it's Star Trek.

[Adami]

Regardless of the series, the main characters have always had the skills and strength to take down whatever the villain of the week was.  Picard beats the hell out of Klingons, Sisco and Co take on Jem'Hadar (frequently) in hand to hand combat and don't get killed and Kirk convinces computers to blow up.  Fer Chrissakes, DS9 (the best Trek series) has Klingon boarding parties getting the crap kicked out of them by Bajoran and Federation officers.  Not one or two Klingons, but entire parties of the lifelong warriors.

It's ridiculous, but it's Star Trek.

The Klingons and Jem Hadar aren't super human robots. They can be taken out. The federation officers are (supposed to be) highly trained as well. Also keep in mind that at one point early on, the Jem Hedar and the Federation (at least part of them) trained together.

[The King in Crimson]

Regardless of the series, the main characters have always had the skills and strength to take down whatever the villain of the week was.  Picard beats the hell out of Klingons, Sisco and Co take on Jem'Hadar (frequently) in hand to hand combat and don't get killed and Kirk convinces computers to blow up.  Fer Chrissakes, DS9 (the best Trek series) has Klingon boarding parties getting the crap kicked out of them by Bajoran and Federation officers.  Not one or two Klingons, but entire parties of the lifelong warriors.

It's ridiculous, but it's Star Trek.

The Klingons and Jem Hadar aren't super human robots. They can be taken out. The federation officers are (supposed to be) highly trained as well. Also keep in mind that at one point early on, the Jem Hedar and the Federation (at least part of them) trained together.

Yeah, but...
Klingons and Jem'Hadar are warriors.  Jem'Hadar are engineered specifically to be warriors.  They're stronger than humans and they exist only to fight for the founders.  Klingons, at variously inconsistent times, have been shown to possess strength beyond that of most humans.  Many train in hand to hand combat with archaic weapons and they sure as hell probably train more than the average Federation officer.

My point is not that they should be impossible to fight, but just how inconsistently they're handled as capable warriors.  Plus, add in the fact that most Federation ships are 'science' ships, they're crewed by scientists and families, not necessarily warriors.  That's what made the Defiant so special:  it was the only Federation warship at that point.

To be fair, this is not something that really bothers me, it's just worth pointing out in the context of the argument.  Every Trek series has silly things.  I guess the point comes, can you ignore these silly things enough to enjoy the show?  With DS9 and (mostly) tNG, I can.  With Voyager and TOS, I try really hard to, but mostly I can't.

[El Barto]

The Jem Hadar kind of are.  The Gamma variety were designed from scratch to be the perfect human killing machines.  They're superior to humans in every way that relates to combat, with the only deficiency being the human creativity that has been the basis for humans winning every fight throughout every series; including Kirk vs. computers. 

[rumborak]

1. McCoy is the most condescending ethnocentric character on the show. Every alien planet that is different than earth's he insults and demands they become more like earth.

That's why I never understand people lactating over the K/S/M triangle. To me McCoy is mostly just, as you say, an ethnocentric grumpy old guy who just rants at everybody, but has usually little to offer for the resolution of the problem at hand.

rumborak

[rumborak]

So according to Memory Alpha, Dax was born in 2018. They could totally fold him/her into the next ST movie. Sadly, I know they won't

rumborak

[Adami]

So according to Memory Alpha, Dax was born in 2018. They could totally fold him/her into the next ST movie. Sadly, I know they won't

rumborak

They won't for 1 reason. It's not aimed at Star Trek fans. It's aimed at people who have seen SOME star trek at most and know a few little jokes. Hell I doubt the two idiot writers even know who Dax is.

[BlobVanDam]

1. McCoy is the most condescending ethnocentric character on the show. Every alien planet that is different than earth's he insults and demands they become more like earth.

That's why I never understand people lactating over the K/S/M triangle. To me McCoy is mostly just, as you say, an ethnocentric grumpy old guy who just rants at everybody, but has usually little to offer for the resolution of the problem at hand.

rumborak

From the start I almost considered it like Spock and McCoy were Kirk's two consciences, basically "good" and "bad". Unfortunately, Kirk usually listens to the bad more often than not. The main reason I strongly disliked McCoy at the start. He's grown on me now as a silly old coot.

So according to Memory Alpha, Dax was born in 2018. They could totally fold him/her into the next ST movie. Sadly, I know they won't

rumborak

Yeah, I wouldn't expect anything like that as more than a passing reference, like mentioning Admiral Archer's beagle in the last movie.

[Adami]

I don't remember much about the motion picture, but I'm pretty sure they made the characters really great when the movies came out. The show though, eesh. I'm actually watching the first season of Frasier at the same time because watching back to back TOS episodes is tedious.

[El Barto]

Same characters, they just bothered to give them some time to develop in the movies.  Kirk was wiser and more jaded.  McCoy mellowed out quite a bit.  Spock ran the gamut from stoic and taciturn, to cool and wise, to dead and mildly retarded.

And I think you're expecting too much from TOS.  It is what it is, which is a piece of low-budget 1967 sci-fi.  Personally, I like it.  You and BVD seem to expect it to be up to DS9 or BSG standards.  Not gonna happen.  It's made by people with no money, no resources, and ostensibly no future.  Not grading them on the basis of what people did with their idea 25 years later, I think they did a pretty good job. 

[Adami]

I don't hold the budget or consistency with other shows against them. I hold the writing/directing/acting against them. I doubt having tons more money would make their stories any less dumb.

I'm on the episode now where they're in "chicago" in the 20's. Scotty finds out they've been kidnapped............but doesn't even considering beaming them out? They have to wait till Spock escapes and personally asks to be beamed out? Eh.

[BlobVanDam]

Heck, my favourite series is Voyager, so I don't think my standards are too picky
I don't expect it to be as good as later series, so it baffles me that anyone can rank it with them. At all. It is what it is; a fun old '60s scifi show that spawned one of my favourite franchises, but in itself is a pretty laughable show.
And in that regard, I greatly enjoy TOS. But I don't take it seriously at all.

[El Barto]

I don't hold the budget or consistency with other shows against them. I hold the writing/directing/acting against them. I doubt having tons more money would make their stories any less dumb.

I'm on the episode now where they're in "chicago" in the 20's. Scotty finds out they've been kidnapped............but doesn't even considering beaming them out? They have to wait till Spock escapes and personally asks to be beamed out? Eh.

Well, actually, having more money for writers and directors might actually have made the show better.  Don't ya think?

And honestly, the whole point of a lot of these is to be fun.  That episode qualified.  It's no different than any of the comedy episodes TNG did, and no shorter in huge, gaping plot holes (which that might not actually be, anyway). 

[rumborak]

I think one of TOS' detriments was that even when it had an interesting premise, it was poorly thought through. Take the episode about the two societies that wage war inside their computers. Awesome premise because it is a believable in view of the increasing automation of war. Termination chambers? Not so much. A simple twist, e.g. that people would enroll as virtual soldiers (with the potential of actual death through termination) in the war, in return for compensation, causing the poorest segment of society to turn to canon fodder... now that would have made the episode interesting because it would have struck home with a lot of viewers.

rumborak

[El Barto]

That's a fine idea.  But like I said, I think TOS was more about being fun, and that's a little more thoughtful than they were out for.  They'd occasionally make social statements, and that episode was one of those, but they still tried to do it in a somewhat lighthearted manner, rather than getting all The Deer Hunter on us.

A problem with your premise is that a real life soldier has some control over their fate.  Better skilled guys tend not to get fragged as often as noobs.  In their model, it'd still be a random outcome.  You get paid to roll the dice a couple of times a week, and maybe you get disintegrated.  The pay would have to be phenomenal. 

[rumborak]

A problem with your premise is that a real life soldier has some control over their fate.  Better skilled guys tend not to get fragged as often as noobs.  In their model, it'd still be a random outcome.  You get paid to roll the dice a couple of times a week, and maybe you get disintegrated.  The pay would have to be phenomenal.

With the same argument lotteries shouldn't work. Maybe they could have a double-sided lottery. There's both the chance to win big, and to lose big.

rumborak

[ReaPsTA]

I think one of TOS' detriments was that even when it had an interesting premise, it was poorly thought through. Take the episode about the two societies that wage war inside their computers. Awesome premise because it is a believable in view of the increasing automation of war. Termination chambers? Not so much. A simple twist, e.g. that people would enroll as virtual soldiers (with the potential of actual death through termination) in the war, in return for compensation, causing the poorest segment of society to turn to canon fodder... now that would have made the episode interesting because it would have struck home with a lot of viewers.

rumborak

What your describing wasn't what the episode was about.  The issue between the two civilizations wasn't that soldiers were fighting and dying.  It's that they were destroying each other's planets.

If they did the compromise you're suggesting, it would make sense in a weird way.  Cut out the suffering and the hassle.  What's the price that needs to be paid in lives?  Pay it without the hassle of a war.

The reason the compromise in the episode is so wrong is that it's a way for both civilizations to experience a version of war that is easy for purely self-interested purposes.  They weren't trying to make the consequences of war easier to go through, they were trying to eliminate the consequences.  This is why Kirk's speech was what it was and why his speech matters.  They would rather send innocent people to death chambers than go through the process of trying to resolve their differences, simply because they didn't want to ruin the landscaping.  It's indefensible if you have any traditional sense of ethics.

[El Barto]

I'm kind of digging the WWPD game.  Would Picard have stopped their war?  My guess is that he very likely wouldn't have.  However, he also wouldn't have sacrificed his crew/ship, which would probably be in violation of the prime directive anyway (laws and customs of the host planet).  He still would have offered to mediate the truce, so the outcome might have been the same anyway, but Kirk's solution left them with no avenue to fall back to the existing model.  Picard would have left their ability to return to their computer war intact, lessening the prospect of success.  But then they'd be off doing something else next week, so it wouldn't really matter. 

[El Barto]

Worf's an idiot

And Worthless as head of security

To be fair, he was right on a couple of those occasions, and he won some of those fights (eventually), but both points are still valid.  I'd be curious to see who'd win a fight between him and a TOS redshirt (although the guy who fought Matt Decker would have kicked his ass royally).

[Adami]

Worf didn't really have a point for a long time. He wasn't great until DS9.

[El Barto]

In the history of the Star Trek franchise, has there ever been a command decision more stupid than placing Dr. Crusher in command of the ship in a known hostile environment?  Against teh Borg, no less?  Even Troi has some command experience.  What's all the more puzzling is that the only thing all of these people were needed for is wandering around looking for Data.  Is Picard actually better suited for a search party than Crusher, or anybody else for that matter?  Maybe take the guy that's 18th on the order of succession and give him the chair, since he's probably about 400 people ahead of the CMO.

And once they found the building, why not send some people back up.  Did he even tell anybody they found the building, or is Riker and everybody else out searching for something they already found. 

And thus far we have three expendable crewmen dead from phaser fire.  Only one of them even bothered to get a name; probably a SAG actor.  The last one decided he wanted to shoot it out with the 200 borg that had surrounded him; must have been a new guy. 

[Adami]

Looks like this thread has become the "El Barto vs. Adami: TOS vs. TNG" thread.



Well to make this argument quick and concise, my ship is bigger. Booya.

[El Barto]

Nah, I actually like TNG a lot more than you like TOS.  Wouldn't be fun.  However, when they try to make a signature piece, like a season cliffhanger, and fuck it up so horribly, I'm certainly going to point it out.  If this had just been some mid-season bottle episode, I probably wouldn't be commenting on it.  This is one they likely took very seriously, and predicated it on an idea so fundamentally stupid that it's embarrassing. 

[Adami]

Nah, I actually like TNG a lot more than you like TOS.  Wouldn't be fun.  However, when they try to make a signature piece, like a season cliffhanger, and fuck it up so horribly, I'm certainly going to point it out.  If this had just been some mid-season bottle episode, I probably wouldn't be commenting on it.  This is one they likely took very seriously, and predicated it on an idea so fundamentally stupid that it's embarrassing.

To which episode are you referring? There are 28 seasons of Star Trek that I own and sometimes I can't remember specific episodes. Can you clarify so that I might investigate its (alleged) lameness?

[El Barto]

Descent.  Data and Lore corrupt the Borg and torture Geordi.  Beverly turns into Rommel and kicks the Borg's ass.

[Adami]

Descent.  Data and Lore corrupt the Borg and torture Geordi.  Beverly turns into Rommel and kicks the Borg's ass.

Ohhhh yea. You know they really had a decent idea there with the individualized Borg. Sucks they just kind of..........forgot about it. Luckily Voyager did a decent job with it for a short time.


I got an idea Bart. I think you and I need some bonding time. How about next year when Star Trek whatever comes out, you and I go together. You can wear a TOS shirt or a "10 reasons Kirk is better than Picard" shirt and I'll wear an "I'm with stupid shirt" with an arrow pointing to you. Then we can watch the movie together and hate it equally, although most likely very different things about it.