Star Trek - Space: The Final Frontier

Gan Ying said:
For a supposedly "woke" show to have a character explicitly designed to be Space Hitler become a good guy main character is an insane choice. Could have been an interesting contrasting character, but I think they just underthought it.
Click to expand...
No no.... you're underselling it.

Not only did they give her a redemption arc, BUT THEY KILLED LORCA TOO. The show all but outright judges him as guilty and worthy of death.

At that point it's not subtext, it's outright text that to be a white man is to be irredeemable. Whereas if you are a minority woman, why you can always get a second chance.
 
Flexo said:
Does Red Forman know someone else knocked up his wife?
Click to expand...
In his defense, he was busy shoving his foot in the space-time continuum's ass.
1776819151912.png
 
Ultraman Orb Dark said:
In his defense, he was busy shoving his foot in the space-time continuum's ass.
View attachment 8894315
Click to expand...
1000136855.jpg

“Year of Hell” is a monkeys paw situation where Beltran’s like, “hey can I get better writing” and they’re like “sure,” and then immediately Chakotay gets black bagged by Kurtwood Smith and asked to become his apprentice aboard the temporal murder yacht.

And Chakotay, for no reason, doesn’t even negotiate. He’s not like “hey can we get home?” He’s just like “I respect your workflow, teach me how to delete civilizations.”

1000136856.jpg

Paris is basically the only person on Voyager with a brain.
 
Ultraman Orb Dark said:
It's an odd choice to try downplaying genocide and cannibalism as soon as she joined the crew because you want to include a quirky anti-hero.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting contrast with Garak, who is conceptually a similar character. In a way, they do kind of downplay Garak's past actions for a lot of show, but it's always intentionally vague what he's actually done, and includes him pretending to have committed a war crime that he actually hadn't (or did he?) For a lot of the show, he's almost more of a comic relief character.

This makes his actions in In the Pale Moonlight more shocking. You immediately believe he's capable of doing something like that, but iirc it's the first time he does something so openly immoral, so it is still surprising. It casts a new light on the character, which is what you should be doing 6-7 seasons into a show.

If right from the start, we knew in detail how many babies he bayonetted and how many Bajorans he sent to the gas chambers, it would strain the credibility of his relationship with Bashir, and the rest of the cast. And there'd be nowhere for the character to go.
 
Found a blog going through star trek books, specifically reading order.

Like all giant franchises it's a mess.

Behold:

530.png

Probably out of date by now. The blog said to start with any series but personally I think it's obvious you start with the Garak books.

I have not read any of them.
 
WhatIsThePunchline said:
Found a blog going through star trek books, specifically reading order.

Like all giant franchises it's a mess.

Behold:

View attachment 8896720

Probably out of date by now. The blog said to start with any series but personally I think it's obvious you start with the Garak books.

I have not read any of them.
Click to expand...
I'm still going through boxes of these.

Anybody want some?
 
Gan Ying said:
For a supposedly "woke" show to have a character explicitly designed to be Space Hitler become a good guy main character is an insane choice. Could have been an interesting contrasting character, but I think they just underthought it.
Click to expand...
Somewhere, a white man took her sins upon himself, per usual.
Gan Ying said:
Based on what I've read, she never really apologizes or disavows her actions in the mirror universe either. Even if she had done a full on redemption arc, there's really no narratively satisfying redemption for a character like that besides death. Mass genocide and enslavement of aliens, gleeful murder, it's all chill.
Click to expand...
We have people who don't understand the basics of how redemption works in stories telling stories now.

It's like Darth Vader. Some people think (incorrectly) that he wasn't redeemed in RoTJ because of how many people he killed. The reason it works, narratively, is because he does something selfless, sacrificing himself to save the life of someone else. It's the ultimate noble act. And a father dying to save his son is no less noble or more selfish than if he had saved a stranger, respite what Reddit may claim.

Then there are the gay fan theories that are like "what if Vader didn't die after he was redeemed?"
My nigger, his death was necessary, or there would be no redemption. Saving Luke in exchange for losing nothing? That's just switching sides, not redemption.
 
NSA said:
It's like Darth Vader. Some people think (incorrectly) that he wasn't redeemed in RoTJ because of how many people he killed. The reason it works, narratively, is because he does something selfless, sacrificing himself to save the life of someone else. It's the ultimate noble act. And a father dying to save his son is no less noble or more selfish than if he had saved a stranger, respite what Reddit may claim.

Then there are the gay fan theories that are like "what if Vader didn't die after he was redeemed?"
My nigger, his death was necessary, or there would be no redemption. Saving Luke in exchange for losing nothing? That's just switching sides, not redemption.
Click to expand...
It's why the story for Happy! doesn't work in the screen adaptation. In the graphic novel, Nick Sax dies. In the series, he lives, and the arc is not complete.
 
NSA said:
Then there are the gay fan theories that are like "what if Vader didn't die after he was redeemed?"
My nigger, his death was necessary, or there would be no redemption. Saving Luke in exchange for losing nothing? That's just switching sides, not redemption.
Click to expand...

My meatbagger friend, they did that.

Star Wars: Infinities (Return of the Jedi).
1776893256949.png
1776893294323.png
 
Gan Ying said:
It's an interesting contrast with Garak, who is conceptually a similar character. In a way, they do kind of downplay Garak's past actions for a lot of show, but it's always intentionally vague what he's actually done, and includes him pretending to have committed a war crime that he actually hadn't (or did he?) For a lot of the show, he's almost more of a comic relief character.

This makes his actions in In the Pale Moonlight more shocking. You immediately believe he's capable of doing something like that, but iirc it's the first time he does something so openly immoral, so it is still surprising. It casts a new light on the character, which is what you should be doing 6-7 seasons into a show.

If right from the start, we knew in detail how many babies he bayonetted and how many Bajorans he sent to the gas chambers, it would strain the credibility of his relationship with Bashir, and the rest of the cast. And there'd be nowhere for the character to go.
Click to expand...

There is a reason In the Pale Moonlight is my favorite Trek episode ever.

I remember watching in on first broadcast when I was 12 or 13 with all my friends and we were all blown away by the ending, Trek had never done anything like that before.
 
BubbaRobot887 said:
There is a reason In the Pale Moonlight is my favorite Trek episode ever.

I remember watching in on first broadcast when I was 12 or 13 with all my friends and we were all blown away by the ending, Trek had never done anything like that before.
Click to expand...
"In the Pale Moonlight" could honestly be watched on its own, without any other context, and be considered a great piece of television.

Go ahead and rate this post "Lunacy," Captain Syrup. You know I'm right.
 
So, I've got a friend that likes ST, but he just never got around to watching VOY. All he knows of it is Twovix. He's decided to correct that and has been keeping me abreast of his progress. His tastes are a bit different from mine (He loves Neelix while I cheered when an episode opened with Mr. Vulcan choking him to death), but it's been fun.

Especially when he got to Threshold and messaged me asking "How in the fuck did this get an Emmy?!" Been some good times and motivated me to go back and re-watch it myself. Haven't seen it in about twenty-five years, so it's been almost like seeing it for the first time.
 
Hey Johnny Bravo said:
"In the Pale Moonlight" could honestly be watched on its own, without any other context, and be considered a great piece of television.

Go ahead and rate this post "Lunacy," Captain Syrup. You know I'm right.
Click to expand...
It is superb television, and whilst I do agree that it's good enough to stand on it's own it's even better given the full context of the rest of the show and Star Trek in general.

I do think it taught the wrong thing to some people, that Star Trek needs to be dark and gritty all the time when it works far better when episodes like ItPM are the exception rather than the rule.
 
Im into S3 and now understand why Farscape didn't catch on

Everyone in this show is an asshole, they're all constantly yelling at each other or getting tortured, nothing but bad depressing stuff happens at all times, every society is evil and fucked up.

Youre not going to catch an audience being so damn dour at all times.
 
Dragged Into Sunlight said:
Im into S3 and now understand why Farscape didn't catch on

Everyone in this show is an asshole, they're all constantly yelling at each other or getting tortured, nothing but bad depressing stuff happens at all times
Click to expand...
1000137024.jpg

There’s that episode where John and Scorpius go back to that mirror-joke dimension where everybody’s wearing the wrong makeup. There’s this hybrid of Claudia Black and Gigi Edgley running around.

Instead of having fun with it (going full Wormhole Rider on grey-skinned Claudia Black), John's like, “What if we make this bleak and annoying?” He has Scorpius kill her immediately so she can fall down and whisper some mystical dying code. Not everything has to be a funeral.:stress:
Mussolini’s Merkin said:
I do think it taught the wrong thing to some people, that Star Trek needs to be dark and gritty all the time when it works far better when episodes like ItPM are the exception rather than the rule.
Click to expand...
1000137022.jpg

Yeah but even then they gotta ruin it by making Sisko act like a loan shark, grabbing some blue alien by the collar like, “I’ll kill you!”
 
Last edited:
I tried to binge trough VOY and got to about s3 before I just couldn't do it anymore.

I'm sorry guys, I just can't do it. I was bored to tears for so much of it and I want to put Neelix in a gas chamber.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom