Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > Ten Forward
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Ensign
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 22
# 21
02-09-2013, 08:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by westx211 View Post
And to all you haters of the doctor I say, do you also hate Data?! Its the same concept!

I agree... I loved Data, and I consider him an mechanical life form! The doctor could also technically count as that too, even if he was a little bit pompous for my tastes.

For this reason I never had any beef with the doctor at all.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 152
# 22
02-09-2013, 08:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by westx211 View Post
And to all you haters of the doctor I say, do you also hate Data?! Its the same concept!
Since you asked, yes. Data is a toaster.

I liked the character, mind you. But its a matter of, I guess perception....robots and androids have been in Sci-Fi forever. We can't make a data, but there are ronots on Earth right now. Even humanoid ones.

But holograms that need projectors and even as the doctor admits at times function on his "program"? Its pushing the boundary of suspense of disbelief to declare him a "life form". I can just as well declare my PC and laptop "life" forms. Its an example of magic technology that really I think hurts Star Trek more than helps it.

So yeah, if you wanna throw Data in the mix, it could be said that he is unique. No one in the Federation has succeeded in making anyone...er...anything...like him. They had an entire episode about that. Sinceholograms arenot really unique in the federation its a stupid idea to say that the Doctor is "sentient. His existence has to be supported by Voyager's computer, so is Voyager sentient now? Honestly, I can consider Astro Boy a life form before the Doctor.

Thats in my opinion has always been a problem with trek....they've extended technology ...fantasy tech, to be sure...to the point where they've hurt any drama in the story. Transporters could realistically (in their universe) cure anything except for the plot device of the week, holograms can take over a ship even though the ship's computer memory is what allows them to even be. (I hate the concept of holgram ship the Keldon class uses...because realistically wouldn't the powers that be just use holgram ships all of the time? As a game mechanoc, its fine. As something that feels right in even trek, no...its BS).

YMMV.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,060
# 23
02-09-2013, 09:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by westx211 View Post
And to all you haters of the doctor I say, do you also hate Data?! Its the same concept!
My only problem with Data is the same I had with Seven: Too much of him. Becoming the Poochie. It happens with fan favorites, including the Doctor.

(I do feel that Voyagers problems all lay with the writing staff most of whom were also the show-runners. Fans turned show-runners produce bad results 90% of the time in any medium. Too much time was spent trying to recapture previous TNG lightning in their bottles and not enough pushing what Trek is given the premise. Regardless, its obvious why Robert Beltran decided to half-ass his job like we all do when we feel the bosses are morons and I don't hold it against him.)
_________________
Nebula coffee is the best coffee

Last edited by twg042370; 02-10-2013 at 12:58 AM. Reason: Safari and board hate each other.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,100
# 24
02-09-2013, 09:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by captnurntumber View Post
Thats in my opinion has always been a problem with trek....they've extended technology ...fantasy tech, to be sure...to the point where they've hurt any drama in the story. Transporters could realistically (in their universe) cure anything except for the plot device of the week, holograms can take over a ship even though the ship's computer memory is what allows them to even be. (I hate the concept of holgram ship the Keldon class uses...because realistically wouldn't the powers that be just use holgram ships all of the time? As a game mechanoc, its fine. As something that feels right in even trek, no...its BS).

YMMV.
I don't exactly agree, but I can see where you're coming from. Robotic characters is one of the few things that Star Wars did much better than Star Trek ever really did. In TOS they were either evil, or naive beautiful women. In TNG they were either monsters or props of the week, sure it had Data, but other than the Doctor, there aren't really any robotic characters.

Contrast that with Star Wars (the original trilogy at least) which had robots of every possible size and purpose. Robots like R2-D2 and C3PO are great because they added a sense of futurism and fantasy while still seeming reasonably realistic. While I love the Doctor, I agree that sometimes the technology behind him seemed rather silly.

This I why I wish Star Trek had done more with the Exocomps or things like them. I want my Exocomp bridge officers damnabits!

Quote:
Originally Posted by twg042370 View Post
I my only problem with Data is the same I had with Seven: Too much of him. Becoming the Poochie. It happens with fan favorites, including the Doctor.

(I do feel that Voyagers problems all lay with the writing staff most of whom were also the show-runners. Fans turned show-runners produce bad results 90% of the time in any medium. Too much time was spent trying to recapture previous TNG lightning in their bottles and not enough pushing what Trek is given the premise. Regardless, its obvious why Robert Beltran decided to half-ass his job like we all do when we feel the bosses are morons and I don't hold it against him.)
I agree. That relationship with Seven was... weird.



As for my least favorite character, that would have to be half the cast of Enterprise. So many of them just... bother me.
http://i1151.photobucket.com/albums/o633/centersolace/189cux9khvl6ojpg_zpsca7ccff0.jpg

So inhumane superweapons, mass murder, and canon nonsense is okay, but speedos are too much for some people.

Last edited by centersolace; 02-09-2013 at 09:11 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,060
# 25
02-09-2013, 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by captnurntumber View Post
I always find it interesting to hear what other people thought. Different strokes and all, some people dislike characters I liked and vice versa.

I can almost give Chapel a pass because of the time when the show was written. But you're right, and I always wondered why she had a crush on SPock, who didn't even bother to try showing interest in her. Maybe its one of those "Once you go Vulcan you never go back" things....



I think I read once that Denise Crosby left the show because her character was really not developing and served the same function as Worf. I could be wrong. She does have the distinction of the first regular trek cast member to be killed off. Pulaski was nothing more than a McCoy clone, and as someone said she was forgettable. Hey, be careful what you say about Gene Roddenberry. Back when the game launched I commented on how I thought some of Gene's ideas and concepts were a bit silly and hardcore fans would have been on my lawn with torches and pitchforks if they knew where I lived. . (For the record, I agree with what you said....I think the franchise got better once they "kicked Gene upstairs".)



I dunno...I think Jake was okay. He could have probably used a bit more development (he seemed like a lazy slacker as he got older) but I didn't dislike him.



VOY became the 7of9 show and I really did not like that. I prefer a 7of9 episode over a Neelix episode still. Someone mentioned Chakotay, and I can only say his characters failing was that he wasn't given enough to do. I did not like Kim very much, but he wasn't a bad character....I didn't like Belanna Torres much because she was too much like Worf Lite 2.0.




I still think Travis was the worst.
I do give the way women were portrayed in TOS a pass because of the era as well as NBC shooting down the original Number One being a woman. But TNG-era had no such excuse. I sometimes see Janeway scapegoated as the reason Voyager did poorly in the ratings, but anyone with more than a fifth grade education could tell the writing was bad.

Enterprise was even more recent in our cultural advancement from the 1950s but the only thing they could think to do with their women is rubbing blue jelly on them. STO, at least with NPCs make no difference between male and female and in that regards the game is admirable. The game fails with the PC 's models and the bridge bunnies.

I didn't dislike Jake. I just found him to be a non-entity. Overall DS9 was so well made even the Dabo girls were interesting. Not Jake. Never Jake.
_________________
Nebula coffee is the best coffee

Last edited by twg042370; 02-09-2013 at 09:21 PM. Reason: The forums software hates iOS.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 152
# 26
02-09-2013, 09:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by centersolace View Post

As for my least favorite character, that would have to be half the cast of Enterprise. So many of them just... bother me.
I can totally understand why you feel that way....in my opinion again, here is what sunk Enterprise..

By the time ENT was aired TV shows were either fully changed or changing into the "arc" format. ENT tried to do the whole "one episode than rest to zero" thing. I'm sure they thought "we have a captain, a first officer, a doctor thats an alien, a vulcan....its gold!". But its not that simple...at least it isn't now and wasn't even then.

They also had to dance on eggshells about "trek history" so that restricted a lot of things. Personally I didn't have an issue with them rewriting some canon if the story was good. (the episode where CPT. Archer is tried by the Klingons...not good. It was so "we've seen this before in a better movie" feeling was strong in that one) I've said here or in another thread the "temporal cold war" was a bad idea...from what I hear though that was "executive meddling". Its a sahme because if you think of the premise, ENT had a lot of potential.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 199
# 27
02-09-2013, 09:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by centersolace View Post
As for my least favorite character, that would have to be half the cast of Enterprise. So many of them just... bother me.
I often felt that the ENT casting director must have been getting a lot of... how do I say this without being vulgar... "favours" . It's unbelievable how many gorgeous women appeared on that show without possessing an ounce of acting ability. To some degree I'm talking about the main cast, but for the most part, I'm thinking of the guest stars. There is no way that talent was the main concern during the audition process for that show. The law of averages just isn't that cruel.

Of course, there were some sub-par male actors as well, but I find that it's more noticeable among the women. These terrible casting choices were a big part of what killed the show.

Well, that, and deciding to make the main theme for a sci-fi series a country song about faith. Seriously, what were they smoking out there at Paramount?
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,060
# 28
02-09-2013, 10:14 PM
Faith Crack. It's why they turned a serious, hard working man who deeply loved the people around him, who was also at the center of a galactic crisis trying to keep his culture from dying, into Space Jesus instead of keeping him around in a post war leadership role.
_________________
Nebula coffee is the best coffee

Last edited by twg042370; 02-10-2013 at 01:00 AM.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 100
# 29
02-09-2013, 11:41 PM
TOS: None of the main cast, certainly. How about Mudd? The recurring character of the crazed Starfleet Admiral?

TNG: I dunno. Wesley kind of falls into "so bad it's good" territory. Even the obvious choice of Pulaski was still alright even if she was no Crusher.

DS9: Ezri Dax. This is the first one I thought of when I saw the thread title. It's really nothing against the character, but as the successor to the Dax legacy she really had a high standard that "nervous ensign" could never hope to live up to.

VOY: Kes. It's too long ago for me to really articulate why, but I was glad when she left.

ENT: I've just recently started watching the series, and I'm somewhere in season 2. I might have said Hoshi at first, but the character has developed to the point where no one stands out. I guess Malcolm Reed is my least favorite, but only because I haven't found him too notable--which I suppose is what he wants.
__________________
Ann Manistee Traverse - Human Science ~~ Oken Miquat - Saurian Tactical
Exin Jor - Joined Trill Engineer ~~ Vartox - Romulan Science

Dn'Dok, son of Ladok - Klingon/Romulan Engineer ~~ Mosa M'ren-faa - Ferasan Tactical
Krushan Twinn - Orion Science

Last edited by flatmatt; 02-09-2013 at 11:47 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,918
# 30
02-10-2013, 12:05 AM
TOS:Chekov, a pointless comic relief character designed to poke fun at the Russians.
TNG:Welsey Crusher, an annoying snot nosed wiz kid, Reg Barkley, a neurotic basket case that should never have survived the academy let alone end up on the flagship. Sometimes Data, the whole Pinocchio routine got old fast.
Voyager:Neelix, a rash that never stopped itching.
DS9:Jake Sisko, the most non existent character in the show, started as nothing and went nowhere from there.
Enterprise:Malcom Reed, for a security officer he was a sniveling coward, whenever things got tough he would be the first to give up and whine fatalistically.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:43 AM.