Jammer's Reviews

Comment Browser

Clear | RSS for this | Bottom

Total Found: 22,593 (Showing 76-100)

Next »« PreviousPage 4 of 904
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 2:30pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

I'll quote Elliott too!

"The mirror/myth of this premise is that contemporary humans, just like every other species, are evolving in this direction and we should embrace/encourage that evolution."

If we are evolving towards that ideal now, we cannot currently be there. I'm not saying you can't disagree with Elliott, merely that your use of "present-day humans from the Western civilization" is a misrepresentation.
Paul M. - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 2:24pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Robert: No, that's exactly what Elliott said.

I will quote him once again:

The premise of the Federation is not that other worlds would simply embrace human ideals, it is that *all* races/species inexorably evolve these ideals.
Jack Bauer - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 2:19pm (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S6: Profit and Lace

"Lesson of the week: When a viewer starts waiting impatiently for all the story's main characters to get blowed up real good, that's probably a telling sign that the story isn't working."

Huh, so does 7 years of Voyager count in all this?

I thought this episode should have been Negative 5 stars. The 6 minute rape scene near the end was atrocious.
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 2:11pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

"Ah, there are no terms strong enough with which I could express my disagreement. You seem to contend that every single society in the vastness of universe will inevitably (unless some shit, like extinction or whatever else) come to the same conclusions as present-day humans from the Western civilization. "

I won't weigh in on either side of the argument, but that is not what Elliott said. At best he said the EU is the beginning of an eventual evolution of better ideals.

You can still disagree with Elliott, but the premise was that "Every single society in the vastness of universe will inevitably (unless some shit, like extinction or whatever else) come to the same conclusions as FUTURE ENLIGHTENED humans".
Paul M. - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 2:02pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Some strange word-eatage occurred. My last paragraph from the previous post should read as:

No wonder we have a history of slavery and genocide. Everyone who's not exactly like us *is* by default inferior, since the only explanation why they're not like us is that they haven't yet reached the "inexorable" point in their evolution. It is up to us then to help them along. Earthman's burden indeed.
Paul M. - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 1:57pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

@Elliott: "The premise of the Federation is not that other worlds would simply embrace human ideals, it is that *all* races/species inexorably evolve these ideals"

Ah, there are no terms strong enough with which I could express my disagreement. You seem to contend that every single society in the vastness of universe will inevitably (unless some shit, like extinction or whatever else) come to the same conclusions as present-day humans from the Western civilization. This is simply a preposterous train of thought. Not to mention that this reasoning supposes that our present socio-economic ideals are the *only* ideals worth having and that the future is hence unable to deliver anything new except means of attaining said ideals more easily. What you're proposing aren't ideals; it's religious dogma.

No wonder we have a history of slavery and genocide. Everyone who's not exactly like us *is* by default inferior, since the only explanation why they're not like is that they haven't yet reached the "inexorable" point in their evolution. It is up to then to help them along. Earthman's burden indeed.
Elliott - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 1:49pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

"What Trip goes through is the absolutely typical response of anyone not understanding and not liking what he is experiencing in a sufficiently alien culture. He then jumps to conclusions."

Maybe. But as Robert has pointed out a couple of times, the episode itself supports the idea that Trip's conclusion was correct. Maybe he stumbled onto this conclusion because the TV format doesn't allow for him to come to this conclusion in careful, considered ways (and the episode is mindful of the fact that this is true), but that does not discredit his, shall we say, "accidental" revelation.
Elliott - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 1:41pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

@ Andy's Friend ;

To echo Robert, in addition to the numerous, gaping logical flaws in your admittedly prolific arguments, you have consigned your analysis of the Federation to a comparison with the EU, because it is the only example you care to use from extant history.

To quote from TNG's "Attached" :

"Every member of the Federation entered as a unified world, and that unity said something about them, that they had resolved certain social and political differences, and they were now ready to become part of a larger community."

The premise of the Federation is not that other worlds would simply embrace human ideals, it is that *all* races/species inexorably evolve these ideals, and would naturally seek unity with other worlds once interstellar exploration became possible. The mirror/myth of this premise is that contemporary humans, just like every other species, are evolving in this direction and we should embrace/encourage that evolution. The EU may be seen as a kind of embryonic form of this--wherein those things which already hold the nations together in common are formalised politically and economically. But we shouldn't hold the futuristic Federation's admittance practices to the EU's standards. On the contrary, we should encourage the EU to be more Federation-like!
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 1:00pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

It would be fascinating to live in another country for a time though. I'm sure I'd get a whole new perspective on many things I take for granted. So perhaps neither of us is right and both of us see it through the lens of our own experiences. Death of the author that I was rejecting up top and all that.
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 12:59pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

"I get to have my cake and eat it. That is one of the reasons why this is the superior interpretation: it encompasses everything. As I said, this is the more complex interpretation. It takes more factors into consideration. That is also why it is the more realistic approach. This is what we're actually seeing, if we are to take this in any way seriously."

Taking MORE factors into discussion is better, but what if some factors don't hold up. I just don't personally find it to be as powerful a message to learn to not be the morality police because you misunderstood/didn't wait for the facts as opposed to "Trip got the facts right, the Congenitor is oppressed and he STILL shouldn't be the morality police." To ME that's a deeper, more interesting message.

"It seems to me that it is you who "WANT" this to be merely a simplistic story, and only want to see part of what's going on. My interpretation gives you everything. Why not take it?"

I may see the story as simple, but I don't see the morality beyond it as simple. I guess THAT'S why I like the episode. I think it's a hard lesson to learn that can't save everyone and it's even harder to learn that you shouldn't always try. I just think that lesson is more interesting than don't jump without all the facts.

"Tucker simply cannot correctly assimilate what he is told in such a short period of time. That is why he jumps to conclusions. It is a paradox, but a very true and well-know one: too much information in too short time is also too little information. "

See now, I DO find this to be an interesting interpretation. And it's certainly a cool though, but I don't see the way the episode played out as being about this. I tend to think that Trip could spend 4 years with the Vissians and still make the same mistakes. Leading with his heart over his head is a character trait. I don't think Trip could ever get to a place where he accepts the subjugation of Congenitors. It's just not in his nature.

YOU (and perhps Q) might say that shows how limited we are, but Kirk and Gene would probably say that it's what makes humanity great.

"Being an expat myself, and having lived in various countries in Europe and Asia, this is perhaps why I tend to particularly like this episode. What Trip goes through is the absolutely typical response of anyone not understanding and not liking what he is experiencing in a sufficiently alien culture. He then jumps to conclusions. And he then gets carried away and plays morality police. "

I do really appreciate this point of view. And I can see it. I just don't think that's where the episode is coming from. These are little hour long drama pieces, right? We don't have more than 15-20 minutes to learn about the alien of the week because the episode doesn't allow it. I guess I just assume that what we learned in those 15-20 minutes was correct and that the conclusions we draw are those the writer meant us to draw. I think Trip's all to short crash course on the Congenitor is not the point at all, but besides the point and a limitation of the medium. We don't assume Lucy and Ricky were actually monochromatic, do we? ;)

I will concede that it's great and Star Trek worthy that this episode has caused you to think big thoughts about how alien is too alien, how we would be judged by aliens, how aliens would judge us, how we judge other cultures here on Earth and so forth. I STILL don't think it's what the episode is about, but ANYTHING that makes you think like that is great :)

I will definitely agree that Trips emotions get carried away. But I also know that if this was TNG and the Congenitor was attracted to Riker that Picard would have granted it asylum.
Andy's Friend - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 12:38pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Robert,

Very interesting. I missed your previous message, as I was writing to you. Perhaps you missed the folowing:

"Perhaps, but in your scenario Tucker learns not to jump to conclusions and in mine he learns not to play morality police."

Not really. In my scenario, Tucker learns NOT TO PLAY morality police because he learns NOT TO JUMP to conclusions.

I get to have my cake and eat it. That is one of the reasons why this is the superior interpretation: it encompasses everything. As I said, this is the more complex interpretation. It takes more factors into consideration. That is also why it is the more realistic approach. This is what we're actually seeing, if we are to take this in any way seriously.

It seems to me that it is you who "WANT" this to be merely a simplistic story, and only want to see part of what's going on. My interpretation gives you everything. Why not take it?

"If 2 is correct our failure to understand enough to judge the Congenitors is a lack of information, not a culture clash."

You are actually completely missing the point here: it is precisely because Trip receives TOO MUCH information that we see this culture clash.

Tucker simply cannot correctly assimilate what he is told in such a short period of time. That is why he jumps to conclusions. It is a paradox, but a very true and well-know one: too much information in too short time is also too little information.

Anything sufficiently "alien" to you will quite simply be misunderstood or not understood at all at first, in spite of the information amount, by any normal human being. It is an ages-old paradox, and one of the reasons why meeting and moving to sufficiently different cultures can be such a tricky business.

Being an expat myself, and having lived in various countries in Europe and Asia, this is perhaps why I tend to particularly like this episode. What Trip goes through is the absolutely typical response of anyone not understanding and not liking what he is experiencing in a sufficiently alien culture. He then jumps to conclusions. And he then gets carried away and plays morality police.

As I said, the cogenitor may or may not be oppressed. But the important thing is that Trip really doesn't know. Unlike what you claim, he's actually suffering from information overload which he cannot possibly assimilate in such a short period of time. i say again: it is possible that the cogenitor is opressed. But Trip can't know. And he wants to know. Because he's been told too much ― and not enough. He therefore loses emotional control, and starts acting clearly on his emotions.

Doesn't this seem a fair interpretation to you?
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 12:02pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

To phrase the question in another way. Even if the Federation has done away with inherited aristocracy you'd probably, if you were the head of the Federation, allow Mrs. Troi to keep the holy rings of Betazed, right? Because it'd be worth getting the Betazoids into the Federation.

But is there something a race could do that would give you pause? That would be non negotiable? Anything at all?
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 12:00pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

You accuse me of not thinking big enough, yet when I get to the point where I see your point and yet still tell you I think that reading of the episode is wrong you tell me my interpretation is naive.

I totally agree with you about the EU, but I ask you... would the EU accept a slave state. If the British slave trade still existed, should we allow them into the EU?

Since the ORIGINAL point of the discussion is if they'd be allowed in the Federation, it would be thinking big to discuss if there are lines that shouldn't be crossed. Could we allow Klingons in even though they treat women less well than men? Could we allow Vissians in when 3% of their population isn't allowed self determination? Could we allow Romulans in when they keep Remans as a slave caste.

You say we cannot judge alien cultures, I look at an episode like "The Void" and say eventually we're going to have to. And judging doesn't mean interfering, this episode paints the price of interfering quite high. Judging means deciding for ourselves who we ally with/do business with/whatever.

So I still come down on Interpretation 1. And that's not because I'm not thinking big enough or don't understand your point. It's just because I genuinely don't think that's what the writer was trying to say. I WILL say that it's GREAT that this stuff makes us all think big thoughts about the universe though.
stallion - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 11:20am (USA Central)
Re: TOS S3: Turnabout Intruder

A weak season that represent a dark side of Star Trek with Gene Roddenberry abandoning it due to network politic. It's a shame to because a lot of these episodes had some good concept and ideas.

Top Five

The Enterprise Incident.
Day of the Dove
Tholian Web
All our Yesterday
Light of Zeter - Would had been perfect if it an Uhura episode.
Andy's Friend - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 11:19am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Robert,

On a different note, you have of course a point regarding admission to the Federation, that “once you have HUNDREDS of worlds you can be pickier”.

But I gave you an actual, historical example of how such proceedings actually work in a real-world scenario, in a case where all the involved parties are actual human beings.

The United Federation of Planets is not, and cannot be, like the United States of America, a federation of rather homogeneous states with very little history and individual culture, and all sharing the most important common markers, including language.

The UFP will of course much rather resemble the European Union, a more loose confederation of very heterogeneous states, with millennial histories and different cultures and languages, composed of Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Latin, Slav, and a few other, more peculiar peoples, such as the two Finno-Ugric ones.

These are nations with much, much stronger national identities than the individual US member states, and therefore much more akin to the varied nature of the UFP worlds. I mean, even Albania has its own, very peculiar language and more than two thousand years of history. What has Alabama?

I come from a southern European EU member state, and at the moment I live in a northern European one. I essentially live in a proto-UFP. If anything, the multinational dynamics are greater at EU level than they would be at UFP level, because of the geographic proximity and the physical interconnectedness of the member states: an earthquake in Italy may disrupt electricity supply in France; a flood in the Netherlands, or a livestock epidemic in Germany, may affect food supplies throughout the EU in a matter of days. We actually depend on each other, in ways the UFP worlds cannot begin to compare.

I read regularly of the various issues concerning transnational or multinational cooperation at EU level on areas of key strategic interest to specific member states. It can be exasperating, at times: here are member states attempting to cooperate for the common good, while at the same time defending of course a minimum of national interest.

But I also read of simple cooperation on matters of less strategic importance, but very long and proud traditions, such as say, reforms of education systems at universities that are more than five hundred years old.

Imagine a EU proposition of reform that would force a few 700-year old faculties to close and be merged with others. How well do you think such a proposition would be received in the affected countries? These are ancient and almost sacred institutions in the respective EU member states. That is the power of history, and tradition, and culture: its beauty, and its disadvantage. It is what makes my Old World so incredibly beautiful. It is also what makes it so slow to change. Old habits die hard.

Now, if ancient European universities can make a fuss about standardization procedures and abandoning old traditions for the sake of a European common education policy, what would the universities on Bolias and Betazed and Benzar say? Why should they abandon their peculiar traditions, and change everything, or anything, to accomodate “HUNDREDS” of distant worlds, of which they probably only regularly interact with the closest dozen or so?

Again, Robert ― and I don’t know how many times I must say this ― you must raise your level of abstraction. You have to think bigger thoughts.

Suggesting that every member planet of the UFP has NOT its own, very specific memberships clauses, but just has signed on the same standard charter as everyone else, with no special provisions for its specific cultural characteristics, practices, and heritage, isn’t simplistic: it’s rather weak thinking. That could only have two interpretations:

1) The Federation charter is nothing but a vague and not legally binding declaration of intents, or
2) The Federation has a legal, educational, etc. framework which is identical in every single world, and once you've signed the charter, you must adopt that framework.

Either one of these suggestions is preposterous.

So even if you’re right in saying that “once you have HUNDREDS of worlds you can be pickier”, the Federation would still need to, as I wrote previously, “allow for some cultural peculiarities and idiosyncrasies to exist [...], even if TNG never showed them.” And this means also at the legal level. And this means negotiating terms of admission.

This is how the real world works. And we must debate Star Trek based on a minimum of realism.

You wrote: “I'm not saying I know the "truth". I'm saying that it's not an alien, it's an actor in an art piece.”

And this is your problem, and my point, ever and always: if we want to have serious talks about Star Trek, we have to stop pretending these are actors and start pretending it’s all actually true. And we have to debate it as such. Not in a concrete, literal sense, but in a more abstract manner, based on how reality actually works.

Ergo, what we see in this episode is a First Contact. Ergo, the cogenitor is an alien. And ergo, you ― or I, or Elliott, or Robert, or Yanks, or anyone ― have no clue whatsoever as to its true nature.

The episode doesn't lose its value as a result. Quite the contrary: it functions also as an important reminder of that old saying, "Don't judge a book by its cover".

So what will it be, Robert, of the two in my previous message? Interpretation 1, or interpretation 2?
stallion - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 11:14am (USA Central)
Re: TOS S1: Operation--Annihilate!

A strong season, but I got a little bit ahead of myself with my top five list.

Top five Season.

The Corbomite Manuever.
The City On The Edge of Forever.
Balance of Terror.
The Enemy within
Tomorrow is Yesterday.
Honorable mention goes out to The Naked Time and Shore Leave.
Stallion - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 11:10am (USA Central)
Re: TOS S2: Assignment: Earth

I enjoyed season two, but one thing that hurt it was that they had to many parallel earth. Not only that, but these parallel earth episodes were aired to close together. Ironically this is what Gene Roddenberry wanted to do with Trek is time parallel earth stories that mirrored problem of the present or past.

I love that fact that Scotty and Uhura got a lot more to do this season. Chekov was a great addition to the cast and I'm glad he didn't turn into boy wonder the wiz kid. I feel bad for George Takei who lost out on a lot of great moment for his Sulu character due to filming the Green Beret. It's pretty obvious a lot of great moments that he could have had went to Scotty and Chekov. Takei likes to blame Shatner for his shortcoming on Trek, but he obviously lost out on a chunk of good material because of Green Beret.

Top 5 episodes.

Amok Time
Doomsday Machine
Mirror, Mirror,
The Trouble With Tribbles.
Journey to Babel
Honorable mention goes out to Obsession.
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 10:57am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

And lastly, Elliott is still right. Sci-fi, and Star Trek in particular very rarely is about what it would be like to meet something alien and much more about shining a mirror on ourselves.

Even if Western liberal culture is the correct morality, going into the middle east and forcing it on them overnight is going to have some pretty horrible consequences. Trip learned a lesson that interfering has consequences, even if your morality is correct. At least that's how I see it. As I said, other interpretations may be valid, but don't kid yourself that yours is deeper.
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 10:51am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Agreeing that my view is simplistic and naive is meeting half way? You have quite the ego. I think we can all agree on that.

I will agree with you that both 1 and 2 are the two possibilities. At least that eliminates 99% of the rest of this discussion.

"Either way, the episode makes a lot of sense."

Perhaps, but in your scenario Tucker learns not to jump to conclusions and in mine he learns not to play morality police. Both lessons are pretty simple and useful to learn while exploring the stars. Both are pretty basic and simple. Your interpretation isn't some magic awe inspiring life altering lesson. Don't jump to conclusions is advice we teach to young children.

Now if the episode was about our inability to understand the aliens because of how alien they were, THAT might be interesting. But the episode CANNOT be about that. As you yourself said "We know next to nothing about it. And knowing so little, we have no means of really interpreting it."

If 2 is correct our failure to understand enough to judge the Congenitors is a lack of information, not a culture clash. You WANT this to be about the alien-ness of it all. About how we are not able to judge them because we're too human, too Western, too whatever. You want to think that you've expanded your abstraction enough to see this episode as some great truth... but if 2 is correct than Tucker was wrong because he judged without all the facts. Not because of any great truth.

And if 1 is correct Tucker learned something about not being an arbiter of morality. PERSONALLY, I find #1 more interesting, but your mileage may vary. Either way (1 or 2), the episode isn't about what you think it is.
Andy's Friend - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 10:33am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Robert,

Why don’t we meet each other half-way?

ROBERT ― ”But if you look at what the WRITERS are trying to say (or at least I will admit that it's what I THINK the writers are trying to say), the episode stops making sense if the Congenitor is not oppressed. And it REALLY stops making sense if the Congenitor is unbalanced.
[...]
I will agree with you that Archer's speech is the moral of the story. But we disagree on what it means. I think it means that it's not OUR PLACE to judge these aliens. You think it means that we CANNOT judge these aliens. I hope you are wrong.”

There are two possibilities here:

1 ― The Cogenitor is oppressed. Yet, it is not Tucker’s, or Archer’s, place to judge these aliens. “it's not OUR PLACE to judge these aliens”. And Archer tells Tucker that.

2 ― The Cogenitor may or may not be oppressed. We don’t know. We know next to nothing about it. And knowing so little, we have no means of really interpreting it. Yes, it may very well look opressed to us, but that may be our interpretation tricking us. Knowing so little about it and Vissian society, “we CANNOT judge these aliens”. And Archer tells Tucker that.

Either way, the episode makes a lot of sense. But one of these interpretations is for children, and the other is for grown-ups. One of them is simplistic, and childish, and the other is intelligent, and adult. You choose, Robert.

...and I had already written this, on May 10, 2014:

“As such, this episode is clever writing because it speaks to a Western audience with our present moral beliefs, and provokes reactions based on those Western beliefs.”

So what are the writers really trying to say? This episode is outstanding because it knows its broad viewer base, and reaches both the simple minds who can only make literal readings of everything they see, and the ones who can reach a higher level of abstraction. It thus fuels discussion between the two. Which is exactly what we are doing here. This does not change the fact that your interpretation is the simplistic and naïve one, and mine is the more complex and much more realistic one.

Can we agree on that?
todayshorse - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 9:32am (USA Central)
Re: TOS S2: Catspaw

Ludicrous. How this could follow the brilliance of the Doomsday Machine is beyond me. Somesort of Halloween special? It wasnt very 'special'. I did enjoy the ending though, ive never laughed so much at the actual forms of the fat bald bloke and the cat. What was that all about???
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 7:22am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

I guess my point is... I would hope the EU wouldn't accept "it's totally cool to fry the Jews" as a rule bending from a Nazi Germany that was trying to join. And yes I know you automatically lose internet arguments when you mention the Nazis, but I still think it's a good point here. Mostly because I'm not comparing the Vissians to Nazis.
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 7:19am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

Huh.... I lost the bottom there. Did I make it too long?

It should say

"Because (insert Archer's speech here). I will agree with you that Archer's speech is the moral of the story. But we disagree on what it means. I think it means that it's not OUR PLACE to judge these aliens. You think it means that we CANNOT judge these aliens. I hope you are wrong. I hope when we make the eventual Federation we don't allow the Vissians in while they are still oppressing their Congenitors, the Vidiians while they are still harvesting organs or the Cardassians while they are occupying Bajor. As a cautionary tale for building a Federation with the "wrong people" go watch the very excellent VOY S7 episode, "The Void"."
Robert - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 7:14am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S2: Cogenitor

"The spirit of this episode is that we should not interfere in that which we do not understand. The spirit of this episode is Archers fantastic final delivery to Tucker. YOU see a slave. I see an alien. And I recognize that I am in no way in a position to even begin to make an educated guess about its nature.

You seem to believe that you are not merely capable of making that educated guess, but in fact of knowing the Truth. You, Robert, must be a wiser man than I. "

I'm not saying I know the "truth". I'm saying that it's not an alien, it's an actor in an art piece.

I do agree that if we were watching a documentary about this incident there would be no way to no if the Congenitor was unbalanced, if the other Congenitors are happy, how oppressed they are, etc.

But if you look at what the WRITERS are trying to say (or at least I will admit that it's what I THINK the writers are trying to say), the episode stops making sense if the Congenitor is not oppressed. And it REALLY stops making sense if the Congenitor is unbalanced.

If the Congenitor is unbalanced and none of the other Congenitors are like this it stops being a story about Trip interfering wrongly and starts being a story about Trip getting supremely unlucky. Can we agree on that?

"I cannot possibly believe that something similar is not the case in the Federation, and that every single world has not specific clauses of membership, and specific local legislation that accomodates and respects its historical heritage."

Yet a small moon penal colony where former soldiers are pampered caused Picard to recommend that Angosia not be Federation members. It didn't matter that they were treated well or that the government deemed it necessary to make a bunch of super soldiers to fight a war. Picard deemed it wrong, so no soup for you!

I do agree that in the beginning Archer was likely bending over backwards to lick the Andorian's and Vulcan's boots to get the first few guys into the Federation, but once you have HUNDREDS of worlds you can be pickier. Now perhaps they SHOULDN'T be pickier, but I don't think I'm arguing that here.

"What you are implying, Robert et al., is a policy of admission to the Federation that would be narrow-minded to the extreme, and more akin to pure fantasy than anything resembling science-fiction. "

Actually I don't think I am. The Klingons are one of the quadrant powers. They nearly became Romulan allies multiple times during TNG. If I were the head of the Federation and they asked to join I'd lick their boots.

And now back to what the episode is about... and of course here we can agree to disagree.

To me the writer of the episode seemed to make a Congenitor that was oppressed (I understand I'm seeing this through human eyes, but the writer was human and wrote it with human hands) so that Trip could do the right thing and still be wrong. I mean, that's a helluva kicker right? You did the right thing and you were still wrong! Why were you wrong? Because
Logan - Tue, Nov 18, 2014, 2:34am (USA Central)
Re: VOY S5: Nothing Human

thanks for the review. I agree, the episode was pretty bad for most the reasons you stated.
Next »« PreviousPage 4 of 904
Copyright © 1994-2014, Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of any review or article on this site is prohibited. Star Trek (in all its myriad forms), Battlestar Galactica, and Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc., NBC Universal, and Tribune Entertainment, respectively. This site is in no way affiliated with or authorized by any of those companies. | Copyright & Disclaimer