all 42 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 91 points 3 months ago* (21 children)

Hey boomers: retire, pass on the Enterprise to someone who will learn the responsibilities and have more of their prime ages to run things.

We don't need to worship the past, we don't need to keep boomer badasses going in spin offs.

We need steady episodic progress.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 3 months ago (14 children)

    Hey Starfleet, maybe have more than one ship that can make a difference in any situation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    "We're the only ship in this [sector/quadrant/galaxy] that can get there in time."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Worst offender was The E warping in from the romulan neutral zone to sector 001 in less than 5 minutes what should have been a weeks long journey. How did they go 75-100 light years in such a short time without becoming salamanders? First Contact was a section 31 cover up!!!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Really wrote themselves into a corner with that one. Coulda solved the dilemma in Academy, but wouldn't ya know it, they're in the middle of repairs or some such.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Time and again it was shown þe Enterprise made a difference because of þe captain and crew. TBF, a couple of times Kirk got lucky because þe Enterprise got þere second and he learned from þe previous captain's... maybe "mistakes" is too strong. But still.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    As you wish...

    Wait. Wrong show.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    And when they move you up to Admiral, idk what happens but you're almost guaranteed to turn evil

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

    Kirk never turned evil! He just got into an ego-driven power struggle with his old ship's captain, almost derailing a vital mission to save Earth. Then he authorised the creation of a doomsday weapon, which he left unguarded and undefended. Then he tried to fix that mistake by rushing over with a training ship full of cadets, only to get attacked by another old mistake he never kept tabs on. Then he stole that same ship...

    Oh, shit, you're right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    But he made up for all that by breaking the chronological prime directive, losing control of his ship to mutineers, and allowing his racism to nearly start a war with the Klingon empire.

    So really, who are we to judge.

    I could do the same analysis for Admiral Janeway, but I'm afraid she would shoot me, Tuvix me, or write me out of history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    “When they move you up to admiral, steal a ship, blow it up, travel back in time, save Earth and then they’ll let you be Captain again.”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 3 months ago*

    gets promoted

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    This is like the one good character moment in the whole movie.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    I REALLY hate how this potentially pivotal character moment was ignored in Picard.

    I feel like much of the conflict, especially in the first season could have been avoided if he had just stayed in command. It's clear that Riker was able to go on some kind of extended sabbatical while retaining his command, I'm not sure why he chose not to do that?

    I'm also I'm not sure if this was on purpose, but I feel like the three seasons of Picard was a meditation on what happens if you disregard this piece of advice from Kirk.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Iirc, Picard was pressured out. If it wasnt outright said, we can at least imagine it that way by the hostility he gets from admiral potty mouth and various other elements of the population.

    He might not have had that option.

    Tbf, I only rewatch Picard when I'm rewatching Voyager, and only for the bad ass Seven of Nine moments on The Titan.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    At the very least, he was seen as the face of the Wolf 359 massacre, and wasn't seen in a good light because of it. A lot of Starfleet outright hate him, and we saw concerns being floated that he was compromised by the Borg now, and might betray Starfleet for them, hence his being kept out of the battle in First Contact.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    It’s clear that Riker was able to go on some kind of extended sabbatical while retaining his command, I’m not sure why he chose not to do that?

    Picard retired as a protest. A protest sabbatical just wouldn't hit the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    I had an old friend years ago who worked in a paper mill. He had been there for over 30 years in all kinds of positions and at the time he was on the verge of becoming a manager with a desk job and big responsibilities. We told him to avoid the management job and to just stick to whatever he was doing until retirement which wasn't that far away from him at the time. Management would have meant more pay, more perks, more money ... but also more responsibility and more opportunities for people to blame him if anything went wrong. Besides, he was making a ton of money in the position he had at the time. We all told him to just stay where he was and he did. He was fine, he had enough money, he had enough responsibilities and he was in a great team of people he had known all his life and he was a senior level worker that everyone looked up to anyway. Within five years of making that decision, he was diagnosed with cancer and he died shortly after. But during all that time, he was happy at work, made a fortune for his family and he got to spend his free time with his family and friends. If he had taken the management job, he would have gone through tons of stress, and probably been blamed for a dozen things and a high likelihood he would have been fired and lost his benefits. It was a company tactic to place long term workers in management positions, give them too much responsibility, and get the excuse to fire them so that the company wouldn't have to pay into an expensive retirement package. It was a high risk position.

    Moral of the story is ... if you get to place in life where you get to have some measure of control and you are comfortable ... stick with it because it might not get any better than that.

  • source