Star Trek - Space: The Final Frontier

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Tasty Tatty said:
They think they want Starfleet because they expect they will spend their days doing nothing while society won't let them starve or being homeless, but reality is that their society doesn't have useless people. I'm sure people still would look down on you for being a loser. Their economy has changed, but not their attitudes. Bullies are still a thing, kids still go to school and are expected to do well, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, Federation society would absolute look down on them, perhaps even to the point they think 21st century leftoid retards are degenerate lunatics. And they'd be right, lol. That's implying our retarded friends would survive in the future. And I'm not talking about the trillion different ways to day in space or on a backwater colony. No: psychologically. Without their little problems and bullshit to complain about, what are they going to do?
 
Calandrino said:
Still makes way more sense than sparing the Borg...
Click to expand...
That's the Star Trek version of the Fourth Doctor not genociding the Daleks.

Even if you disregard the externalities that they're an existential threat to the very existence of pretty much anything else, being either Borg or Dalek is an absolutely miserable existence and it would be better not to exist at all than be either of those.

Genociding them would be a favor to literally everyone, including them.
 
AnOminous said:
That's the Star Trek version of the Fourth Doctor not genociding the Daleks.

Even if you disregard the externalities that they're an existential threat to the very existence of pretty much anything else, being either Borg or Dalek is an absolutely miserable existence and it would be better not to exist at all than be either of those.

Genociding them would be a favor to literally everyone, including them.
Click to expand...
They should of sent the Doctor to try and stop the Kaled-Thal war from the start instead right at the end when the planet is a nuclear wasteland
 
AnOminous said:
That's the Star Trek version of the Fourth Doctor not genociding the Daleks.

Even if you disregard the externalities that they're an existential threat to the very existence of pretty much anything else, being either Borg or Dalek is an absolutely miserable existence and it would be better not to exist at all than be either of those.

Genociding them would be a favor to literally everyone, including them.
Click to expand...
I feel it's the same reason they excuse heroes not killing the Joker and other popular villains, even heroes without no-kill codes. We all know the real answer is that these villains are too popular and profitable to be killed permanently.

But the writers feel they have to give us a story reason to explain this. The Doctor is an even weirder case with the Master because, if I recall correctly, they're still somehow friends, despite all the genocides and murder attempts. They also used Doctor having a crush on him as an excuse.


It's a tough sell to say the least. But with Star Trek I at least could sorta buy them having some hope of freeing Borg victims from the collective.
 
Last edited:
Chilson said:
I have been avoiding talking about that elephant in the room to not have an aneurysm.
Click to expand...
Well, even the Borg thing makes more sense than Insurrection and a good chunk of the Prime Directive episodes.

Mystery Spy said:
I feel it's the same reason they excuse heroes not killing the Joker and other popular villains, even heroes without no-kill codes. We all know the real answer is that these villains are too popular and profitable to be killed permanently.
Click to expand...
It makes sense that Batman doesn't kill the Joker. What doesn't make sense is that he escapes every five seconds or that he even ends up in a mental institution instead of the electric chair. But that's the funny papers.

In the Borg's case it's pretty simple: the Feds don't wipe them out, because they can't -- that's kind of their whole point, they're a seemingly unstoppable force that will never be open to diplomacy. It's all on the writers for introducing a plot device that can somehow wipe them out, only to give a dopey answer for why they don't use it, for the sake of a moral that doesn't make much sense.
 
Calandrino said:
Well, even the Borg thing makes more sense than Insurrection and a good chunk of the Prime Directive episodes.

It makes sense that Batman doesn't kill the Joker. What doesn't make sense is that he escapes every five seconds or that he even ends up in a mental institution instead of the electric chair. But that's the funny papers.

In the Borg's case it's pretty simple: the Feds don't wipe them out, because they can't -- that's kind of their whole point, they're a seemingly unstoppable force that will never be open to diplomacy. It's all on the writers for introducing a plot device that can somehow wipe them out, only to give a dopey answer for why they don't use it, for the sake of a moral that doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...
I think my point boils down to this: Popular villains often aren’t killed off because they’re profitable and have fan appeal—that’s the real reason. If skilled writers can craft a believable, story-driven explanation for a villain’s survival, I’m all for it. But in most cases (without naming any), the justifications feel like weak mental gymnastics—and not even convincing ones at that.

To avoid straying too far off topic, I’ll say this: I have few, if any, complaints about Star Trek in this regard. For example, it’s easy to accept that the Federation couldn’t destroy the Borg even if they wanted to.
 
Last edited:
In someway you can't really blame the actors for disliking the fan base sometimes.

In Nimoy's autobiography, I am not Spock, he comes out and says that Star Trek killed his career dead. No matter what he did, where he went it was always Spock, Spock and more Spock. And he hated it (at the time remember this was before TMP) he states that even on sets people and other actors would come up to him and want him to be Spock for them. He couldn't get much work and was forced to do other jobs to make money. Remember the convention circuit wasn't a thing back then...yet. Later on the convention circuit was a lucrative money machine for him but at this time he had been typecast and he couldn't break out of it.

He grew to hate the character and the series itself which to him was a short 3 season little tv show. He saw his career grind to halt all because of these nutters who would not let him go and he kinda hated them for it.

Now to be fair in his later years he came to realize how special Star Trek was and he grew to appreciate it and his role in it. This comes out in his second book called I am Spock. He kind of tries to apologies for the way he acted during these years. He grew to understand what they had created and how he would be remembered much longer as Spock then if he has indeed been a big A list star.

Shatner was pretty much the same, he couldn't really get work as all anyone saw was Kirk whenever he was one the screen but like Nimoy he too had a change of heart, for him it was the 1st convention where he was confronted by 15,000 fans on the opening night and he saw the impact that little TV show had. Now that didn't stop a lot of his poor behaviour as Shatner's ego was a issue for a long time until he mellowed out in old age. But he too embraced the fandom. Honestly it was probably the money he was making from the convention circuit then the huge success of TMP and Wrath that fully won him over. Remember by today's numbers TMP made over 1.5 billion in ticket sales which is blockbuster territory.

Kelly was different. If you read his autobiography (Sawdust to Stardust) he quickly saw the devotion of the fandom as something unique (at the time there was nothing even close to the rabid fan base Star Trek had, these fans had sent in over 115,893 letters to get a season 3) and he was in the twilight of his career anyway. Having spent the last 30 years in Hollywood doing solid B list type stuff but never breaking through to the big times. But now, now he couldn't go out for dinner or to shopping without someone stopping him and telling him how much Star Trek meant to them. He was moved and overwhelmed by the fans rather then upset like Nimoy and Shatner. Probably because he knew his career was pretty much already over and this was his big break so to speak so he embraced the fans willingly.

At the first convention Shatner and Nimoy were taken aback at the response and unsure how to respond, they had been told maybe a few hundred people would be there but when they came out on stage that night there were over 15,000 people waiting for them. Kelly just loved it, here was the fame and recognition he had always wanted. He later said that if people were going to remember him for a single role he couldn't have asked for a better character then McCoy.

So yah I get why Nimoy and Shatner were pissy at first and I don't really hold it against them, they came around in time and help to make the fandom what it is today...whether for better or for worse depends on your opinion. But I'm a Kelly simp. He's just such a soild, all round nice guy that it's difficult not to like him.
 
Mystery Spy said:
I think my point boils down to this: Popular villains often aren’t killed off because they’re profitable and have fan appeal—that’s the real reason. If skilled writers can craft a believable, story-driven explanation for a villain’s survival, I’m all for it. But in most cases (without naming any), the justifications feel like weak mental gymnastics—and not even convincing ones at that.

To avoid straying too far off topic, I’ll say this: I have few, if any, complaints about Star Trek in this regard. For example, it’s easy to accept that the Federation couldn’t destroy the Borg even if they wanted to.
Click to expand...
In Trek, it's the good guys who won't stay dead. Even though it's technically not the same character, the ludicrous way that Denise Crosby came back as a Romulan is one of the more fanfic-y things that made it into TNG.
 
TenMilesWide said:
We literally did genocide all lions though, at least off the only continent that matters. They used to be all over Europe from Greece to Britain, and they posed such obvious danger that it was considered heroic to kill them on sight.
Click to expand...
and picard with his 24th century perspective would call that barbaric and shortsighted.
 
Mystery Spy said:
Even in dire situations, it always felt like Picard had an "above it all" attitude. It's an arrogance that, I think, only Q ever managed to somewhat humble. And even then, he had to use literal omnipotence to do so.
Click to expand...
I'm going to try posting this. Jump to the 10 min mark of this vid (unless you want to watch the whole thing).


Screamer_2 said:
I have a few ideas. The actress is Michelle Yeoh and that trumps the actual character.

Another is that they have done truly evil acts and writing a redemption arc for an irredeemable character is a form of therapy for themselves. If they can write cannible space Hitler as being redeemable, maybe there's a chance for themselves.
Click to expand...
Because she is a minority.

I mean it really is hard not to take a look at the whole story of Discovery S1 and ask yourself why Yeoh gets to be "rescued" into the main universe while Jason Isaacs gets blown up. Especially when Jason literally did nothing that no one else on the ship didn't do.

It's really, really hard not to look at it that to the writers, being a white man makes you irredeemable as soon as you commit the tiniest slight, while being a minority (especially woman) means you always get unlimited do-overs and chances to redeem yourself. Even if you are a minority woman from a completely different universe which may have your race and sex as the privileged, dominating one.

Gan Ying said:
I dunno about the Vulcans but for the Klingons I think they just have a more utilitarian view of their "honor" than Worf does, since they grew up in it.
Click to expand...
Nah, honor and courage are just a reference to the klingon balls and dick.

AnOminous said:
Fun fact: Leonard Nimoy appeared in numerous Western TV series including Gunsmoke and Bonanza.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0x8zOg45pL8
Click to expand...
And with his dad on Mission impossible.

OrionBalls said:
Oh, my goodness it finally arrived! An asymmetrical deck building, two player only, captain on captain fight! We got it on preorder at GenCon last year!View attachment 6929845
I can't wait to break into this sucker!
Click to expand...
Interesting. The first Deck Builder was... not the best. I got the recent Star Realms with the Trek skin - that is fun but then Star Realms is a really solid engine. I'll keep an eye out for this one.

You ever play the old CCG?
 
OrionBalls said:
No, way back then, I was into MTC. Do you have decks for it? Also, you are older than I thought. Neat.
Click to expand...
I am a great old one of the Internet. :D My 1E is actually about a dozen cards shy of being complete. 2E was the GOAT though.

Anyway, fans have kept the game going in a virtual format ever since then. You can play online or print and play the cards if you want.

The Continuing Committee invites you to celebrate the thirtieth anniversary of Star Trek: Voyager with Finding Our Way,
Click to expand...

30 years since Voyager? (:_(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom