PDA

View Full Version : Star Trek:TNG "Q Who" (S2E16)


doom1701
11-27-2011, 06:09 PM
It's interesting to go back and watch this one again. So much has been done with the Borg, and seeing their introduction is a little humbling. But before getting to that...

Is it ever discussed what the deal is between Q and Guinan? And why does Guinan look like she's going to go all supernatural on Q at one point? It was an interesting way to use the Guinan character, and Whoopi did a pretty good job...but there did seem to be some unanswered questions.

But back to the Borg. Their introduction almost felt weak--but probably because they were turned into such a big bad in the future. Granted, they were unstoppable even in this episode, but future incarnations of the Borg, especially in First Contact and Voyager, were much more monster like. One thing that did pack a punch that was essentially reconned out in the future were the Borg babies.

Bryanmc
11-27-2011, 11:38 PM
I've gotten a little ahead in the series (which is why I've not really kept up with the discussions) but one thing about the Borg that I've noticed is that the idea of assimilating other races seems to have been something not thought out from the beginning. There are tons of mentions about how the Borg aren't interested in humans, only their technology.

And in Best of Both Worlds the idea of assimilating humans into the collective seems to be something new the Borg are doing, or at least out of the ordinary. We see the Borg now as a race that assimilates everything in their wake, but it's pretty clear this was not the case in their early appearances.

As for Guinan, no it's never explained in the TV show or movies what her relationship with Q is. On that point, she also quite often refers to the fact that Picard saved her from a really bad situation at one point in her past. We eventually learn what that was, but compared to how she describes it the actual events seem pretty darned weak. It's as if they wanted to allude to some huge deal for years, then at one point decided to cram that history into a couple of episodes and it was pretty poorly done.

So I'm not really upset they didn't flush out the history between her and Q, it probably wouldn't have lived up to expectations anyway.

LoadStar
11-28-2011, 01:09 AM
I found it interesting to see how much of Guinan they changed over the years. Hinting that she had some sort of supernatural ability to be an adversary of Q was a little odd... it was something that to my knowledge was never followed up on after this episode, and sort of came out of the blue here. I'd be curious to learn what the thought process was behind including that in this episode. Her backstory, and that of her species, never became clear. In fact, it became more and more convoluted as the series went along. The fact that she says she wasn't there when the Borg invaded doesn't see to mesh with the fact that she was on a pair of ships carrying a large number of refugees from her species in the 23rd century.

There were other things that were glaringly dropped after this episode, most obviously the idea of the Borg procreating. Now, it's possible they chose to assimilate infants from some species, but that doesn't seem practical. We never saw Borg infants again after this episode. Also, in that same scene, you could see a plate on the wall with what appears to be a Borg insignia or seal, also an idea that is never repeated after this episode (fortunately - the idea of the Borg needing or wanting a logo seems unlikely.)

I don't get why they included the character of Sonja Gomez in this episode. She was annoying as all hell and served no functional storytelling purpose. She was also so unrealistically written... I can't see anyone, even a nervous ensign, thinking it would be a good idea to try to dry the Captain's uniform off by feeling it up. After that scene, I was already eager for the Borg to assimilate her. Unfortunately, that didn't happen.

doom1701
11-28-2011, 06:20 AM
I just watched this a few days ago, and I had already pushed the entire Sonja Gomez thing out of my mind.

DougF
11-28-2011, 09:00 AM
I haven't watched yet, but I do remember Gomez seeming way out of her element and out of place. I have no idea, but I'd guess there were efforts at some point to expand the cast a bit. I've heard many times that they offered Ashley Judd a permanent role and she turned it down. Was the Gomez character an earlier attempt to add another lady and it just didn't work?

doom1701
11-28-2011, 09:08 AM
The character almost felt like an adult Wesley. Nervous, curious, unsure of herself. I remember Wesley being in the episode, though--it's not like Wheaton wasn't available so they threw someone from central casting into a role and changed the name on the script.

doom1701
11-28-2011, 09:09 AM
Oh, forgot to mention that this episode has one of my favorite FX from the series--the Borg slicing a chunk of the saucer section out and pulling it away. Something like that would be simple using CGI, but they had to do it with a model, so I'm curious how it was done.

Bryanmc
11-28-2011, 09:45 AM
Oh, forgot to mention that this episode has one of my favorite FX from the series--the Borg slicing a chunk of the saucer section out and pulling it away. Something like that would be simple using CGI, but they had to do it with a model, so I'm curious how it was done.

Yes, I remember that looking very cool when I first saw it.

LoadStar
11-28-2011, 12:46 PM
According to Memory Alpha, a Star Trek wiki, Gomez was supposed to be a recurring character to add comic relief.

What a dumb idea on a show like TNG.

JYoung
11-28-2011, 02:19 PM
There were other things that were glaringly dropped after this episode, most obviously the idea of the Borg procreating. Now, it's possible they chose to assimilate infants from some species, but that doesn't seem practical. We never saw Borg infants again after this episode. Also, in that same scene, you could see a plate on the wall with what appears to be a Borg insignia or seal, also an idea that is never repeated after this episode (fortunately - the idea of the Borg needing or wanting a logo seems unlikely.)



Did you forget about the Children of the Borg (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Collective_%28episode%29)?



I don't get why they included the character of Sonja Gomez in this episode. She was annoying as all hell and served no functional storytelling purpose. She was also so unrealistically written... I can't see anyone, even a nervous ensign, thinking it would be a good idea to try to dry the Captain's uniform off by feeling it up. After that scene, I was already eager for the Borg to assimilate her. Unfortunately, that didn't happen.

She's too cute to be assimilated.
I liked the idea of a female engineer recurring character and the actress but the execution was flawed in this episode.
She came off better in Samaritan Snare though.

Fish Man
11-28-2011, 03:09 PM
Oh, forgot to mention that this episode has one of my favorite FX from the series--the Borg slicing a chunk of the saucer section out and pulling it away. Something like that would be simple using CGI, but they had to do it with a model, so I'm curious how it was done.

Agreed.

Awesome, given the FX technology of the day and TNG's budget. I remember being impressed when I saw it in first run, and I still am.

LoadStar
11-28-2011, 03:13 PM
Did you forget about the Children of the Borg (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Collective_%28episode%29)?

Yeah, I did. That said, Voyager really mucked up the continuity when it came to the Borg. On that show, they established that Starfleet knew about the Borg before this episode (and for that matter, well before the era of TNG), and even sent out a ship (the Raven) to investigate them.

JYoung
11-28-2011, 07:08 PM
Yeah, I did. That said, Voyager really mucked up the continuity when it came to the Borg. On that show, they established that Starfleet knew about the Borg before this episode (and for that matter, well before the era of TNG), and even sent out a ship (the Raven) to investigate them.

But I was repeatedly told on this very forum that those things are unimportant as the later shows are the superior ones!

Fish Man
11-29-2011, 09:41 AM
But I was repeatedly told on this very forum that those things are unimportant as the later shows are the superior ones!

You certainly didn't hear that from me!

IMHO, in terms of writing and acting, everything that followed ST:TNG was downhill (DS9, VOY, and ENT).

I found "Enterprise" particularly maddening. For every awesome bit of Star Trek Canon continuity, they'd have something that was just atrocious.

The awesome:


The development of the early relationship with Andorians and Tellerites, and various events that shaped the federation, epsecially the episodes featuring Shran.
The depiction of "T'Pau" (described by Kirk in her old age as "all of Vulcan, in one package") as a young woman, and leading a movement to end Vulcan's philosophy of douchbaggery and restore Sarek's philosophies that we had been exposed to in the other series.
Strong hints that the freighter that Mayweather grew up on was the one that left "Chicago Mobs of the 20's" on Iotia. (Reference to TOS: "A Piece of the Action").


The atrocious:


Archer knew about the Borg.
Archer knew about the Ferengi.
Archer continuously dealt with Romulans but it wasn't until Kirk's enterprise 100 years later that Humans or Vulcans actually found out what Romulans looked like and figured out that they were essentially renegade Vulcans.
The asinine explanation for Klingons without head ridges. Worf's "We don't talk about that" line from DS9 should have been the last word on that.
The Vuclan "******baggery" was a problem for me at first, until they nicely explained it (see "the awesome" above).


(Sorry for the minor thread hijack.)

doom1701
11-29-2011, 10:16 AM
I actually watched a little bit of Enterprise last night (Netflix has been sticking it in my face for months, I finally gave in). There were a ton of issues with it, like Fish pointed out...but the main thing that I've noticed now that we're starting to get into some good TNG is the quality of the acting.

Patrick Stewart is a given...he's incredible. Once they let the show take a consistent dramatic tone in later seasons, he just blows away anything on screen. But the rest of the cast was quite good as well. Brent Spiner is awesome. Frakes really came into the role of Riker and gave it some serious gravitas. Even Levar Butron and Michael Dorn got really good.

While I'm not a fan of DS9, I think it carried on this tradition in the major characters (Avery Brooks is good--although really quirky, Rene Obujajobingbong is a solid actor, even Nana Visitor was pretty good), but it kicked the legs out from under the solid acting that TNG started by throwing in those aweful Ferengi characters.

Voyager took a nose dive, and then, watching Enterprise last night, it was like watching a high school play. There were plenty of story problems in Enterprise, no doubt...but there were a TON of issues just in front of the camera.

LoadStar
11-29-2011, 10:42 AM
I would've been with you on VOY and ENT, but IMO DS9 was a far superior series from TNG... it started off about as strong as TNG, and just skyrocketed from there.

You mention the "awful Ferengi characters" but I think DS9 actually took what were a laughably weak and one-dimensional race and turned them into something. I'm not saying there weren't bad Ferengi episodes ("Profit and Lace" specifically) but thanks to outstanding work from actors like Armin Shimmerman and Aron Eisenberg, they became *real*.

MikeAndrews
11-29-2011, 12:25 PM
I would've been with you on VOY and ENT, but IMO DS9 was a far superior series from TNG... it started off about as strong as TNG, and just skyrocketed from there.

You mention the "awful Ferengi characters" but I think DS9 actually took what were a laughably weak and one-dimensional race and turned them into something. I'm not saying there weren't bad Ferengi episodes ("Profit and Lace" specifically) but thanks to outstanding work from actors like Armin Shimmerman and Aron Eisenberg, they became *real*.

I never could stick with DS9 because it seemed to be endless "those awful Nazis Cardassians." I should give it another look. Why is DS9 not available in syndication (or is it?)

The ex-GF acted with Armin Shimmerman. It's funny to see him and only recognize Quark's voice.

LoadStar
11-29-2011, 12:42 PM
I never could stick with DS9 because it seemed to be endless "those awful Nazis Cardassians." I should give it another look. Why is DS9 not available in syndication (or is it?)

It isn't, and I'm not sure why. There was also something odd about the show, possibly involving the syndication rights, that prevented it from being made available on Netflix at the same time as the rest of the Trek series as well. (It is available now... I've already raced through and I'm up to season 3.

Win Joy Jr
11-29-2011, 09:05 PM
Add in another voice for DS9! The major story arcs, character development, and watching tables turned on entire races was quite enjoyable. To me, it built on TNG and exceeded it.

allan
11-30-2011, 08:47 AM
Add in another voice for DS9! The major story arcs, character development, and watching tables turned on entire races was quite enjoyable. To me, it built on TNG and exceeded it.

My problem with DS9 is, they started playing games with the schedule, moving show times, and this was pre-tivo. I missed quite a few eps because of that. I thought the early eps were meh, the later ones were great, but I'm not sure when it changed.

DougF
11-30-2011, 09:19 AM
My problem with DS9 is, they started playing games with the schedule, moving show times, and this was pre-tivo. I missed quite a few eps because of that. I thought the early eps were meh, the later ones were great, but I'm not sure when it changed.

You can blame that on the station you were watching it on. DS9 (like TNG) was a syndicated show, so the stations that bought it all aired it when they wanted. Our local NBC affiliate showed it after SNL on Saturday nights.

kaszeta
11-30-2011, 09:33 AM
Add in another voice for DS9!

Another voice here. DS9 had a rocky start, and some unevenness, but it also had some really good work. One of my favorite episodes of any Trek show is DS9's "In the Pale Moonlight". For that matter, Garek is one of my favorite Trek characters, another example of one intended mostly as throwaway character where the invented some real depth.

"Duet", "Treachery, Faith and the Great River", and "The Wire" were all good, too.

allan
11-30-2011, 09:49 AM
Another voice here. DS9 had a rocky start, and some unevenness, but it also had some really good work. One of my favorite episodes of any Trek show is DS9's "In the Pale Moonlight". For that matter, Garek is one of my favorite Trek characters, another example of one intended mostly as throwaway character where the invented some real depth.

"Duet", "Treachery, Faith and the Great River", and "The Wire" were all good, too.

Is "In the Pale Moonlight" the one where Sisko got the Romulans to fight the Dominion? That was a fantastic episode!

kaszeta
11-30-2011, 09:52 AM
Is "In the Pale Moonlight" the one where Sisko got the Romulans to fight the Dominion? That was a fantastic episode!

Yes, that's the one.

It also has one of my favorite dialogs (between Sisko and Garak):


"Who's watching Tolar?"
"I've locked him in his quarters. I've also left him with the distinct impression that if he attempts to force the door open, it may explode."
"I hope that's just an impression."
"It's best not to dwell on such minutiae."

Bryanmc
11-30-2011, 10:04 AM
Yes, I can't wait to get through TNG (on season 5 now) and get rolling with DS9. Unlike TNG I know there are a handful of DS9 episodes that I've missed. Can't wait to find them.

DougF
11-30-2011, 10:14 AM
...Unlike TNG I know there are a handful of DS9 episodes that I've missed. Can't wait to find them.

Same here.

gchance
11-30-2011, 11:20 AM
My problem with DS9 is, they started playing games with the schedule, moving show times, and this was pre-tivo. I missed quite a few eps because of that. I thought the early eps were meh, the later ones were great, but I'm not sure when it changed.

That's just the nature of syndication. Our local station used to pre-empt shows for basketball games and replay them at 3am. Sometimes they'd give a warning scroll a week in advance, but many times they did not.

When Babylon 5 was at the climax of the series, the last 4 episodes of Season 4, they moved it to 3am and put Xena in its place. I called the station, and their reason was, "It's being cancelled at the end of the season, so we need to think about the future." I swear, a friend of mine didn't see a couple of those episodes until it was finally released on DVD.

It's all about the money.

Greg

DougF
11-30-2011, 09:27 PM
I'm about 10 minutes in and cannot believe how much screen time Sonya Gomez has had already. She got quite the intro for someone who was dumped shortly thereafter.

DougF
11-30-2011, 09:34 PM
Data just said "It is identical to what happened to those outposts along the Neutral Zone". I guess that answers my question from that episode:


Does anyone know definitively if the Borg angle was ever something official from the writers or just an attempted sort of fanboy retcon?

LoadStar
11-30-2011, 09:47 PM
The other interesting thing that I learned about this episode: apparently the original intent was to make the Borg more of an insectoid race, and have them be the "mother race" of the parasites from "Conspiracy." This episode would have then been the resolution to the ending of that episode, answering whom the homing beacon signal was intended for. When the design for the race evolved to be cybernetic rather than insectoid, that idea was scrapped.

If they would have gone with their original intent, that would have meant that the story would have originated in "Coming of Age," continuing through "Conspiracy" and "The Neutral Zone," and resolving with this episode, "Q Who."

DougF
11-30-2011, 10:07 PM
That was good. Haven't seen that in several years and I very much enjoyed it, aside from the Sonya Gomez stuff. It's certainly a very important episode in the history of Star Trek.

DougF
11-30-2011, 10:12 PM
...The atrocious:


Archer knew about the Borg.



Why was that atrocious? I remember some people at TrekWeb being absolutely furious about it when it first aired. I didn't understand the anger then and still don't.

LoadStar
11-30-2011, 10:32 PM
Why was that atrocious? I remember some people at TrekWeb being absolutely furious about it when it first aired. I didn't understand the anger then and still don't.

Mostly because it continued the trend of later Star Trek shows butchering what was seemingly established canon. It's obvious in this episode that the Federation had yet to learn about the Borg.... either that, or they are horrible at communicating really really important stuff to the ships in Starfleet. (I mean, the friggin' bartender had to clue in the captain of the flagship!)

As I mentioned upthread, not only did Voyager rewrite that, establishing that apparently the Federation knew about the Borg, but even sent out the Raven as a scoutship to learn more about them. Then, Enterprise rewrote that further, apparently establishing that Earth knew about the Borg before the Federation even existed, yet apparently did little or nothing with that information for another few hundred years.

It also was a huge letdown, because going into Enterprise, there was a bit of a relief among many fans that we finally would be going into a show where the overused alien species of the TNG era could be shelved for a while... particularly the Borg, which Voyager pretty much destroyed with how much they overused that species. However, it seemed to take no time at all before they gave in and went back to those old TNG species, even though they shouldn't even be around yet. It was incredibly lazy on the part of everyone involved in Enterprise.

DougF
11-30-2011, 10:38 PM
Right, but the events (First Contact) that resulted in the Borg showing up in "Regeneration" happened after the events of "Q, Who".

LoadStar
11-30-2011, 11:01 PM
Right, but the events (First Contact) that resulted in the Borg showing up in "Regeneration" happened after the events of "Q, Who".

Granted.

First let me point out that I don't remember that episode of Enterprise. In fact, I may not have ever watched it in the first place. I sort of bailed on Enterprise pretty quickly because, frankly, it just wasn't a very good show.

That said, from everything I remember from "Star Trek: First Contact," I don't remember them showing any indication that there would or could have been Borg that would have landed on Earth. The Borg Sphere was blown up pretty good by the Enterprise-E early on in the movie, and the chances of any fragment of it surviving re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere is nearly nil... and for Borg bodies to survive completely intact? Laughable. The only Borg that appeared to survive into the 21st Century were all aboard the Enterprise-E.

Now, even if we go with the theory that somehow, under some laughably remote chances, a part of the Borg sphere survived with Borg bodies inside, and they manged to make it all the way to the surface for the events of "Regeneration" to occur... when the Enterprise E returned to it's own time in the 24th Century, they should have instantly noticed *major* changes in their universe resulting from the discovery of the Borg in the era of Enterprise. If there were no changes, that's even sadder yet - because that means they discovered 24th century Borg in the 22nd Century, with their associated technology... and did *nothing* with it at all.

Frankly, the only reason that I can come up with for the Borg to be in the 22nd Century on Enterprise is as I mentioned - the people behind the show were lazy and just wanted it to happen, continuity be damned.

JYoung
11-30-2011, 11:51 PM
Why was that atrocious? I remember some people at TrekWeb being absolutely furious about it when it first aired. I didn't understand the anger then and still don't.

Do you really want to get me started?
:mad:

The main problem is with the premise of that episode is that it assumes that Picard and company are total idiots.

First, they're TOO STUPID to scan for or they're STUPID enought leave the Borg debris on Earth at First Contact (must not contaminate the time line) and then they're too stupid for not recognizing them at J25 after one of them beams into Engineering.

The Enterprise-D is one of the premier Explorer vessels. You don't think that Starfleet might mention to be on the look out for cybernetic aliens from the Delta quadrant that might be invading about now?
And not to mention that Starfleet got all sorts of records of the Borg .

Also, The Borg were shown as being more resistant to the "more primitive" Phase Pistols than they were to 24th Century Phasers.
And Reed increasing the power yield is enough the flummox the Borg?

And yet Reed and Archer can still shoot the other Borg after they adapted?

And Phlox was able to whip a cure for 24th Century Borg nanoprobes faster than Voyager's EMH?

The show was flailing ratings wise so they decided to cash in on those "popular" Borg episodes with this ratings stunt.

Too bad they had to abandon whatever semblance of story logic they had left.

And yet I got a lot of flak on this very forum over these sentiments.

doom1701
12-01-2011, 07:55 AM
JYoung, I have to wonder if we did an Enterprise re-watching (and people actually participated--I wouldn't) if most (if not all except Doug :)) viewers would fall on the "Enterprise Sucks" side of the fence now.

Fish Man
12-01-2011, 08:57 AM
Thanks for all the responses as to why it was atrocious that Archer knew about the Borg.

The episode that this thread is about unambiguously establishes that this is the very first time Humans (or indeed, any Federation member) encountered any Borg face-to-face, or saw a Borg ship.

The events in that Enterprise episode were approximately 200 years before this!

It's irrelevant that the events of the movie "First Contact" were after this because that movie is unambiguous that the timeline was restored perfectly. The very first ever timeline "split" in Star Trek canon occurs in the 2009 movie "Star Trek".

Now, from a practical point of view, it's quite understandable why they decided to have a timeline split in the 2009 movie: continuity was becoming too hard! So they "re-booted" the Star Trek "canon" so that they wouldn't have to worry about such things in the future.

"Enterprise" finding the Borg is an egregious continuity error, period. Either that, or we're expected to believe that in the uber-digital age depicted in the Star Trek universe, historical record keeping utterly sucks. That's ludicrous, and totally unbelievable, in the context of the other depictions of the Star Trek universe.

Archer encountering Frengi has an identical problem, in that the first time Enterprise D encountered them, Data states, "They have been little more than legend and rumor up until know", (rough "from memory" quote) and states unambiguously that Enterprise D was the first Federation crew to ever see one. Furthermore, dialog in that episode spells out that the Ferengi only recently "acquired" (literally, through purchasing it) faster-than-light travel, which means they wouldn't have had FTL when Archer encountered them. Another horrendous continuity error.

Also, that Archer's Enterprise established visual contact with every species they encountered EXCEPT the Romulans, and that they had many, many, many, dealings with the Romulans is another credibility problem. Also, that T'Pol is depicted as being a virtual encyclopedia on Romulans, except for the one minor detail that they're friggin' renegade Vulcans, is not credible.

However, "Enterprise's" depiction of early encounters with Andorians, Telerites, and a few other species mentioned in the other series, and the evolution of Vulcan philosophy indicates that the series was supposed to be in the same timeline as TNG, DS9, and TOS. So, their occasional use of alien species that Star Trek canon clearly established had not been encountered until much later can only be attributed to very lazy writing. Inexcusably lazy, IMHO.

busyba
12-01-2011, 12:13 PM
[...]
The asinine explanation for Klingons without head ridges. Worf's "We don't talk about that" line from DS9 should have been the last word on that.
[...]


I bailed on Enterprise very early on, so could you explain what they ended up using for an explanation for the Klingon head ridges?

kaszeta
12-01-2011, 12:22 PM
I bailed on Enterprise very early on, so could you explain what they ended up using for an explanation for the Klingon head ridges?

A virus that caused Klingons to look more human.

Myself, I even wish they hadn't done Worf's throwaway line. I'm much happer with their treatment of Romulans, where they just kinda ignore the fact that TOS Romulans don't look like TNG and later ones.

DougF
12-01-2011, 12:34 PM
What happened in the JJ's Star Trek is the same thing that happened in "Regeneration", IMO. Something happened in the past which changed events we have already seen on-screen.

Why is it OK for Vulcan to have been destroyed in the past, therefore negating many, many things we have seen over the last 45 years but it is not OK for Borg to have been on Earth in the past therefore negating this episode?

Fish Man
12-01-2011, 03:58 PM
What happened in the JJ's Star Trek is the same thing that happened in "Regeneration", IMO. Something happened in the past which changed events we have already seen on-screen.

Why is it OK for Vulcan to have been destroyed in the past, therefore negating many, many things we have seen over the last 45 years but it is not OK for Borg to have been on Earth in the past therefore negating this episode?

The difference is clear:

J. J. Abrams movie is about time travel causing a split in the timeline. That's one of the primary plot points of the movie.

"Regeneration" does not indicate or imply that any time line split was supposed to have occurred. As I said in my earlier post, "Regeneration", and indeed the entire ENT series, was clearly supposed to be in the same timeline as TOS, TNG, and DS9. The writers and producers said so, clearly, many times.

So:

JJ Abrams' "Star Trek" is specifically about time-travel causing a "split" in the time continuum (and, therefore, giving the writers another continuum to dramatically explore).

"Regeneration" is a continuity error. Pure and simple. Apologists trying to explain it away by saying "Oh, um, yeah, the writers must have intended this to be yet a third time continuum, yeah, that sounds good, that must be it" doesn't make it so. That clearly wasn't the writers intent. It was an error on their part. (Or, as I said before, they expect us to believe that the keeping of historical records sucks worse in the 22nd - 24th centuries than at any other time in human history.)

JYoung
12-01-2011, 04:20 PM
What happened in the JJ's Star Trek is the same thing that happened in "Regeneration", IMO. Something happened in the past which changed events we have already seen on-screen.

Why is it OK for Vulcan to have been destroyed in the past, therefore negating many, many things we have seen over the last 45 years but it is not OK for Borg to have been on Earth in the past therefore negating this episode?

Please stop trying to excuse piss poor writing.

The stated goal of the new movie was to create a new timeline to play in and that was clearly stated in the movie.

As Fish Man says, Regeneration is supposed to take part in the TOS/TNG/VOY continuity.
(Otherwise, why are Riker and Troi in These Are the Voyages?)

And it still makes the assumption that Picard and the crew of the Enterprise-E are TOO STUPID to even check for the large amount of debris and the Borg drones seen in Regeneration.

(Heck, this was handled better in Justice League Unlimited's The Once and Future Thing (Part 1): Weird Western Tales.)

And it was also stupid that Seven of Nine demonstrated knowledge of the Borg being at First Contact in Year of Hell but at least that was a throwaway line.

gchance
12-01-2011, 05:48 PM
A virus that caused Klingons to look more human.

Myself, I even wish they hadn't done Worf's throwaway line. I'm much happer with their treatment of Romulans, where they just kinda ignore the fact that TOS Romulans don't look like TNG and later ones.

What I hoped they would do (and didn't) would be to have Worf magically look like the OTHER Klingons when in the past, and like himself in the present. Yes, it would have been over the top funny, but we're talking Tribbles here.

Greg

pteronaut
12-01-2011, 06:01 PM
Why is DS9 not available in syndication (or is it?)SpikeTV ran DS9 for about 2 full rotations a few years back.

DougF
12-01-2011, 08:15 PM
...As Fish Man says, Regeneration is supposed to take part in the TOS/TNG/VOY continuity.
(Otherwise, why are Riker and Troi in These Are the Voyages?)...

Why wouldn't they be? How does a couple of drones crash landing in Santa's backyard prevent that?

JYoung
12-01-2011, 09:28 PM
Why wouldn't they be? How does a couple of drones crash landing in Santa's backyard prevent that?

The Butterfly Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect).

Or you could simply reread Loadstar's points:


Now, even if we go with the theory that somehow, under some laughably remote chances, a part of the Borg sphere survived with Borg bodies inside, and they manged to make it all the way to the surface for the events of "Regeneration" to occur... when the Enterprise E returned to it's own time in the 24th Century, they should have instantly noticed *major* changes in their universe resulting from the discovery of the Borg in the era of Enterprise. If there were no changes, that's even sadder yet - because that means they discovered 24th century Borg in the 22nd Century, with their associated technology... and did *nothing* with it at all.

DougF
12-01-2011, 10:06 PM
That doesn't answer the question at all. Did I misread or was your point not that the events of "Regeneration" should have changed the timeline so drastically that Riker and Troi should not have been in "These are the Voyages"? What am I missing?

JYoung
12-02-2011, 01:43 AM
That doesn't answer the question at all. Did I misread or was your point not that the events of "Regeneration" should have changed the timeline so drastically that Riker and Troi should not have been in "These are the Voyages"? What am I missing?

The fact that nothing changed for Riker and Troi in spite of them being in the same timeline as Regeneration.

They were still on the Enterprise and the events of The Pegasus still happened.
No changes to the timeline at all.

Fish Man
12-02-2011, 08:06 AM
The fact that nothing changed for Riker and Troi in spite of them being in the same timeline as Regeneration.

They were still on the Enterprise and the events of The Pegasus still happened.
No changes to the timeline at all.

Even more importantly, at the end of First Contact, when they returned to the 24th century. It was completely unchainged!

Had Picard and crew really left the Borg ship on the earth of the 21st century, when they returned to their own time they would have found it unrecognizable.

So, the fact that Picard and crew returned to a totally unchanged 24th century proves that the events of the 22nd century depicted in "Regeneration" could not possibly have happened.

And, now, I'm at least the 3rd person to have explained this.

DougF is being obtuse.

DougF
12-02-2011, 08:08 AM
I'm not being obtuse, I'm just trying to follow your logic.

So, nothing was changed in the 24th century. What did you expect to see?

Fish Man
12-02-2011, 08:11 AM
And I'll say this again:

Enterprise apologists (like the one we have here) sometimes say, "Well, we have the 'prime' timeline, and we have the JJ Abrams timeline, and we have the 'Mirror Universe', so, I guess the writers of Enterprise must have simply meant it to be occurring in a third timeline or another parallel universe."

NO! If that were the case they would have said so!

Stop creating your own apocrypha to explain or excuse their bad writing! :mad: :rolleyes:

DougF
12-02-2011, 08:15 AM
I'm not an apologist. I enjoyed the show for the most part, but I'm certainly not passionate about it. I just can't understand why fanboys like yourself get so angry about it. It's just a TV show.

Anyway, if you don't have an answer, maybe someone else does. What changes did you expect to see in the 24th century, given what happened in "Regeneration"? I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm genuinely curious because I'm apparently missing something.

Fish Man
12-02-2011, 08:16 AM
I'm not being obtuse, I'm just trying to follow your logic.

So, nothing was changed in the 24th century. What did you expect to see?

The humans of the 22nd century (Archer's time) were exposed to the Borg and their technology according to "Regeneration".

You really think that profound experience wouldn't have changed Picard's 24th century?

The apocryphal explanation, that I think you are trying to put forward doesn't cut it either. I think you're saying that the events depicted in Regeneration were simply supposed to be part of Picard's past.

The events of "Q-Who" state unequivocally that this was Humanity's first encounter with the Borg.

If the events of Regeneration were part of Picard's past, then someone on the Enterprise D would have done a search in the computer and discovered, "Oh, look, we've encountered this species before, in the 22nd century."

So, to believe your apocryphal explanation, we have to believe that the historical records of the 24th century are badly damaged.

doom1701
12-02-2011, 08:25 AM
I'm not going to be an Enterprise apologist by any means...but I will be a First Contact basher. FC was a poorly conceived time travel story, and it isn't surprising that it would lead to all sorts of confusion in future stories.

Even pretending that there was no Borg presence on Earth during/after FC, the interference that the Enterprise crew played in the past with Cochrane and his townsfolk had to have left ripples in the timeline. The Enterprise crew didn't show up and pretend that they were visiting engineers from another city. They seemed to blather on to anyone that would listen that they were from the future. How am I supposed to believe that all of these townsfolk, working with these people from the future, probably using some future tech, talking about things like how there's a statue of Cochrane and how schools were named after him and blah blah, are just going to keep this quiet going forward?

Personally, I prefer to believe that nothing after "All Good Things" is canon...it just makes me sleep better at night.

Fish Man
12-02-2011, 08:45 AM
doom1701 makes some very good points.

I liked the movie, in that it "showed" a Human's first warp flight, which was a cool milestone.

But the point is well taken that all the open talking about the future would almost surely have changed it.

But, again, if you use this problem with the writing in "First Contact" to explain that the events of "Regeneration" were simply "supposed to be" part of the past in the TNG timeline, it doesn't follow that the Enterprise D's computer wouldn't contain any record of having encountered the Borg before. Even if they didn't have the name "Borg" at the time, the computer would have had a record of the characteristics of the species.

Finding cyborg/humanoid hybrids like this in the arctic in the 22nd century would have been a major historical event, that would have been in the Enterprise D's computer.

doom1701
12-02-2011, 10:06 AM
You're still assuming that this was some problem with Enterprise...I put the blame on First Contact for that screwup. Enterprise had it's problems (enough that I only watched a few episodes), but all of this Borg in the past mumbo-jumbo was the result of FC being a poorly executed storyline.

Heck, if we want to focus on details missing from the future...why didn't Cochrane take a minute to warn Kirk and Crew about an impending Borg invasion in TOS? :)

JYoung
12-02-2011, 02:03 PM
I'm not being obtuse, I'm just trying to follow your logic.

So, nothing was changed in the 24th century. What did you expect to see?

That something major was changed.
You can't have a large change to the timeline and expect nothing in the future to have changed.

I'm not an apologist. I enjoyed the show for the most part, but I'm certainly not passionate about it. I just can't understand why fanboys like yourself get so angry about it. It's just a TV show.



You forgot about the movies.
:rolleyes:

I'd like to point out you use the term "fanboys" in what could be interpreted as a pejorative fashion.
(And here you are posting and participating in a fan rewatch. Hmmmmm.)

What you seem fail to understand is that Star Trek was always considered a "smart" TV show.
They didn't always succeed in making "smart" episodes but for the most part, they tried to.

At least until Enterprise.

Even though Voyager bored me at times, I never watched an episode of Star Trek and felt like my intelligence had been completely insulted

Until I watched crap like "A Night in Sickbay" and "Regeneration".

It seemed obvious to me that the idiots in charge thought I was stupid and I personally found that to be insulting.

And to this day, Rick Berman thinks that "A Night in Sickbay" was a great episode and "Nemesis" was a great movie.

No, "Ooopss, we screwed up" from him. It's "The fans just don't get it" and "We made a great movie. I don't know why the fans didn't go see it."

Yeah, sell your crazy over there. I ain't buying.




The Enterprise crew didn't show up and pretend that they were visiting engineers from another city.


Actually, they did have a cover story but they weren't get anywhere with Cochrane by using it.



They seemed to blather on to anyone that would listen that they were from the future. How am I supposed to believe that all of these townsfolk, working with these people from the future, probably using some future tech, talking about things like how there's a statue of Cochrane and how schools were named after him and blah blah, are just going to keep this quiet going forward?


The only people who they were shown talking to about the future were Cochrane and Lilly.
There's no evidence to suggest any other of the locals knew.

That said, I think that there were enough people killed in the Borg salvo on Bozeman, that there should be some effect.



Heck, if we want to focus on details missing from the future...why didn't Cochrane take a minute to warn Kirk and Crew about an impending Borg invasion in TOS? :)

Supposedly, Cochrane talked about about "Cyborgs from the future" when he was loaded.
Which according to T'Pol, was frequently.

daveak
12-02-2011, 02:36 PM
This is actually a pretty good thread. The discussion (depending how you view it) almost borders on religion and politics. This talk of Canon, Regeneration, Apocrypha, and historical events is fascinating. Actually, it really is - some of you are pointing out a few things I haven't thought much about and I appreciate it.

*Disclaimer* The only Star Trek I have never really watched was the Enterprise series (well a couple eps once).

cwerdna
12-02-2011, 09:03 PM
I bailed on Enterprise very early on, so could you explain what they ended up using for an explanation for the Klingon head ridges?
A virus that caused Klingons to look more human.

Myself, I even wish they hadn't done Worf's throwaway line.
WAY before Enterprise aired and I think even before that Tribbles DS9 ep, I remember reading an "official" Star Trek book that the the Klingons we see in TOS were genetically engineered to look more human to be better infiltrate the Federation. It stated that it wasn't until the V'ger incident did the Federation discover what Klingons really looked like.

doom1701
12-03-2011, 04:42 AM
There are no "Official" Star Trek books. The closest are the Chronology and Tech Manuals put out during the TNG-Voyager era, but even those are not officially considered canon.

Personally, I think they should have just left the Klingon thing at Worf's explanation. It doesn't need an explanation, just like the meaningless panels of flashing lights on the TOS bridge needs no explanation. If it were done today, they would be able to do it differently. In the late 60's, they did what they could do then.

Fish Man
12-03-2011, 05:50 AM
There are no "Official" Star Trek books. The closest are the Chronology and Tech Manuals put out during the TNG-Voyager era, but even those are not officially considered canon.

Personally, I think they should have just left the Klingon thing at Worf's explanation. It doesn't need an explanation, just like the meaningless panels of flashing lights on the TOS bridge needs no explanation. If it were done today, they would be able to do it differently. In the late 60's, they did what they could do then.

I totally agree. All of us fans know the real reason: Television budgets and theatrical makeup technology of the 60's. Duh.

So, simply leaving it as a Star Trek "in joke" with Worf's comment being the most that was ever said about it was perfect, IMHO.

As to the book the previous post was referring to, I used to have it (my copy was destroyed by the Katrina flood, in fact.)

I don't remember the exact title, but it was something like, "The Complete Book of Federation Member Species" or something like that. It had a section on Federation Members, Federation Allies, Neutral Species, and Hostile Species. It was basically an outline of each species.

It was published in the 3rd or 4th season of TNG, so it didn't even have Cardassians yet. Klingons were under "Allies".

The book was and independent work and definitely not canon.

cwerdna
12-03-2011, 05:59 AM
There are no "Official" Star Trek books. The closest are the Chronology and Tech Manuals put out during the TNG-Voyager era, but even those are not officially considered canon.

As for official, even books like http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Chronology-History-Future/dp/0671536109, http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Next-Generation-Technical/dp/0671704273/ref=pd_sim_b_2 and http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Encyclopedia-Michael-Okuda/dp/0671536095/ref=pd_sim_b_1 both aren't "official" and aren't canon? Mike Okuda is known for his work (Okudagrams) on TNG, for instance.

Fish Man
12-03-2011, 06:05 AM
As for official, even books like http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Chronology-History-Future/dp/0671536109, http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Next-Generation-Technical/dp/0671704273/ref=pd_sim_b_2 and http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Encyclopedia-Michael-Okuda/dp/0671536095/ref=pd_sim_b_1 both aren't "official" and aren't canon? Mike Okuda is known for his work (Okudagrams) on TNG, for instance.

Gene Roddenberry always stated that no books about Star Trek were canon even if he wrote them himself. Berman and Braga made similar statements.

Bryanmc
12-03-2011, 11:08 AM
This thread is making me want to watch Enterprise. :eek:

I gave up on it at the end of season 2, I think.

LoadStar
12-03-2011, 11:46 AM
Gene Roddenberry always stated that no books about Star Trek were canon even if he wrote them himself. Berman and Braga made similar statements.

I would say that the ST:TNG Tech Manual holds a status as quasi-canon, as it was heavily used as a reference material when writing scripts for the show, and written by the people who served as technical advisers for the show.

Other than that, you're right, books are definitely non-canon.

doom1701
12-03-2011, 07:25 PM
I would say that the ST:TNG Tech Manual holds a status as quasi-canon, as it was heavily used as a reference material when writing scripts for the show, and written by the people who served as technical advisers for the show.

Other than that, you're right, books are definitely non-canon.

The problem with the books (and really, the problem with previous series and the entire concept of "canon") is that the newest iteration of the story is always the "Most Canon". So while the TNG Tech Manual is a great book and served as a reference for multiple series (and, BTW, I used to read it to my daughter when she was an infant), if a Voyager episode throws out something totally contradictory, the Voyager episode is canon.

With that in mind, the TNG Tech Manual is probably the most potentially canon of the books. The Chronology is close, but since things screw up the timeline after books are authored, it can never really be canon.