TNG Grade Report: "True Q"
Michael Rawdon
One of the two most annoying and useless characters in the Star Trek
universe returns... to a decidedly dull story. A quick character rundown:
Q: Acting an even bigger boor than usual, pompously full of himself and
peculiarly returning to his "Encounter At Farpoint" days of ostensibly
having no interest at all in humanity, and having nothing but contempt for
Picard and company. (Never mind that this attitude directly contradicts
his character as presented in "Q Who", "Deja Q" and "Qpid".)
Amanda Rogers: Nothing much to say about her. A schoolgirl struck by
omniscience (and by Will Riker) who goes through some angst before finally
deciding that Q is right.
Captain Picard: The best line in the episode was Q's put-down of Picard's
sometimes annoying tendency to pontificate. Along with the rest of the crew,
Picard was never really able to get a word in edgewise here. They were
mainly just bystanders.
I'm not really sure what TNG's obsession with omnipotence in the form of Q
is, but it really *doesn't* work, guys! Q is far too much of a blowhard to
pull it off regularly (the "omnipotent blowhard" routine having been done
oh-so-much better in Classic Star Trek's "The Squire Of Gothos"). The only
time he was really used to good effect was in "Q Who", where his character
acquired a bit more depth and his actions were more deliberate, less
capricious. I think it's long past time he be jettisoned from the Star
Trek ouvre (even if it means losing the pleasure of seeing John De Lancie
act once a year; it's just not worth it).
Amanda's dilemma was not especially innovative, nor cleverly handled. The
last five minutes where she comes to her decision in a flash was truly
rushed and completely unconvicing.
The area where this episode showed promise was in the question, "What right
does the Q have to kill Amanda, or her parents?" And not only are we given
any answer to this question (or even a proposed answer), but there's not
even any real debate over it. There are at least two other omnipotent
races in the cosmos (Trelayne's people and the Organians, and possibly
the Excalbians and the race of the title character of "The Survivors" as
well); by what authority are the Q the policemen of omnipotence? And if
the Q care so damned little for humanity, why should they give a fig if
Amanda is unleashed into the universe? There's a fundamental inconsistency
here, which this episode doesn't even TRY to address.
No, this wasn't an outright BAD episode like "Qpid" (which has the "honor
of being IMO the worst Star Trek story ever broadcast), as it certainly
didn't make me squirm waiting for it to be OVER. But it was just, well,
*dumb*. Annoying, shallow characters, asinine plot, unbelievable resolution,
and poorly handled themes. It could have been worse, but, lord, it
wasn't good.
Now I guess we get to look forward to this season's Lwaxana Troi episode...
Grade: D-
SEASON SIX AT A GLANCE:
Time's Arrow II: B-
Realm Of Fear: C
Man Of The People: C
Relics: B+
Schisms: B-
True Q: D-
---
Total Points: 13 1/3
Season Average: 2.222 (C+)
(Fall of 0.311 from last episode)
--
Michael Rawdon raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
"...I guess I'd rather have mediocre Star Trek then none at all."
- A friend, about the ST:TNG episode "Legacy"
Brian Kendig
>One of the two most annoying and useless characters in the Star Trek
>universe returns...
Aww, c'mon, surely you don't think that Q is more annoying and useless
than Lwaxana and Alexander?
The WORST Star Trek episode, imho, was the one which featured both of
these illustrious characters (not) teaming up: "The Cost of Living".
--
_/_/_/ Brian Kendig Je ne suis fait comme aucun
_/_/ bske...@netcom.com de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
_/ n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
"Sex is DEATH!" Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
-- Barbara Bush -- Rousseau
Khartoum
Spoilers for the TNG episode "True Q"...
>
Yes, exactly! Isn't he great at it. This is what makes Q so good.
>peculiarly returning to his "Encounter At Farpoint" days of ostensibly
>having no interest at all in humanity, and having nothing but contempt for
>Picard and company.
>
>Grade: D-
Can you give a good reason why Q wouldn't have "nothing but contempt" for
the human race. In my own personal oppinion, we (humans in general) are
not any great thing to cherish.
As far as your grade of D-, I feel I have to stand up for this episode. I
admit it wasn't one of the best ones that they have come up with, but it was
certainly better than a D-. I think I will give the episode a C+ and your
grading abilities a D-.
-Trey
Jonathan Theodore Casser
I admit, that this season has not been the best of ST:TNG, but I think you
are overreacting. I haven't seen several of the episodes (the curse of
not having a television at college), but I enjoyed the few that I saw. I
think that True-Q deserves at least a B-, and I personally give it a B+
IMHO. Give the show some time, for crying out loud!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
T.J. Casser <theo...@wam.umd.edu>
"It's not what you know, it's who you know..."
Let's go Terps!
(301)314-8554 7114 Elkton Hall, College Park, Md 20742
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Rawdon
>raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>>One of the two most annoying and useless characters in the Star Trek
>>universe returns...
>Aww, c'mon, surely you don't think that Q is more annoying and useless
>than Lwaxana and Alexander?
Whoops... sorry... that should be the THREE most annoying and useless
characters in the Star Trek universe! :-)
(I think Q might be the least annoying of the three, but it's a close call.)
>The WORST Star Trek episode, imho, was the one which featured both of
>these illustrious characters (not) teaming up: "The Cost of Living".
Nah; "Qpid" was MUCH worse than that!
Michael Rawdon
>In article <rawdon.7...@cs.wisc.edu> raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:
>> SEASON SIX AT A GLANCE:
>> Time's Arrow II: B-
>> Realm Of Fear: C
>> Man Of The People: C
>> Relics: B+
>> Schisms: B-
>> True Q: D-
>> ---
>> Total Points: 13 1/3
>> Season Average: 2.222 (C+)
>> (Fall of 0.311 from last episode)
>I admit, that this season has not been the best of ST:TNG, but I think you
>are overreacting. I haven't seen several of the episodes (the curse of
>not having a television at college), but I enjoyed the few that I saw. I
>think that True-Q deserves at least a B-, and I personally give it a B+
>IMHO. Give the show some time, for crying out loud!
I've given it 5+ seasons, and I was probably as enthusastic - if not more
so - than anyone when it began. (My reaction to "Encounter at Farpoint" was
"A good start, a lot of potential there.") How much more time am I expected
to give it? Classic Star Trek, Blakes 7 and The Prisoner all accomplished
a lot more (and were a lot more entertaining, IMO) in fewer seasons than
TNG has in its time.
I feel that this season is just... extremely uninspired. I might be able
to see giving "True Q" as high as a C-, but certainly no better than that.
Michael Rawdon
>In article <rawdon.7...@cs.wisc.edu>, raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:
>> Spoilers for the TNG episode "True Q"...
>> One of the two most annoying and useless characters in the Star Trek
>> universe returns... to a decidedly dull story. A quick character rundown:
>So YOU say.
(Looking closely at my article.) Yes, it does indeed appear that I said that.
In those very words even. Darn, I can't debate your logic on this one.
>> Q: Acting an even bigger boor than usual, pompously full of himself and
>> peculiarly returning to his "Encounter At Farpoint" days of ostensibly
>> having no interest at all in humanity, and having nothing but contempt for
>> Picard and company. (Never mind that this attitude directly contradicts
>> his character as presented in "Q Who", "Deja Q" and "Qpid".)
>Nope, not as presented in "Q Who," or even "Deja Q" where right after he
>gets his powers back , the first thing he wants to do is quish the
>Calamorain (spelling?)
This most likely explains why Q decided to take refuge in "Deja Q" with the
Enterprise, or why he decided to come and do Picard a "favor" in "Qpid",
right? He doesn't give a fig for humanity, so he not only keeps showing up
time after time to visit them, but he actually trusts his existence to them
at one point.
Nope, that makes no sense to me.
>> Amanda Rogers: Nothing much to say about her. A schoolgirl struck by
>> omniscience (and by Will Riker) who goes through some angst before finally
>> deciding that Q is right.
>Sorry if a real person faced with an awesome decision isn't interesting
>to you. It was to me.
I didn't find her to be much of a "real person"; really just a cardboard
cutout. As for her decision, well there are "good" awesome decisions and
"bad" awesome decisions, from a dramatic standpoint. This was the latter,
I think, at least as far as they handled it.
>> Captain Picard: The best line in the episode was Q's put-down of Picard's
>> sometimes annoying tendency to pontificate. Along with the rest of the crew,
>> Picard was never really able to get a word in edgewise here. They were
>> mainly just bystanders.
>And what's wrong with that? And while we're about it, I see you've totally
>glossed over Dr Crusher's surprisingly large role this week.
The one where she mainly acted as a generic counselor? I glossed over it
because there wasn't anything to say about it.
>> I'm not really sure what TNG's obsession with omnipotence in the form of Q
>> is, but it really *doesn't* work, guys! Q is far too much of a blowhard to
>> pull it off regularly (the "omnipotent blowhard" routine having been done
>> oh-so-much better in Classic Star Trek's "The Squire Of Gothos"). The only
>> time he was really used to good effect was in "Q Who", where his character
>> acquired a bit more depth and his actions were more deliberate, less
>> capricious. I think it's long past time he be jettisoned from the Star
>> Trek ouvre (even if it means losing the pleasure of seeing John De Lancie
>> act once a year; it's just not worth it).
>Now we get to the root of the problem. You're still one of these unbalanced
>people who thinks TOS is better than TNG, and no matter what TNG does
>to argue against you, there is nothing that can shift you from your
>basic philosophical premise, i.e. TNG sucks in comparison with the great
>glory that is the original series.
Which no doubt explains the fact that I loved "11001001", "Time Squared",
"Contagion", "The Survivors", "Sins Of The Father", "The Best Of Both
Worlds Part I", "Family", "Remember Me" and "Darmok", right?
TNG could do a lot to change my attitude toward the series. The fact is
that it DOESN'T. It insists on muddling along with underdeveloped
characters and more-often-than-not dull stories.
>> Amanda's dilemma was not especially innovative, nor cleverly handled. The
>> last five minutes where she comes to her decision in a flash was truly
>> rushed and completely unconvicing.
>OK, let's see you come up with a completely original and innovative
>character and/or problem/decision. Dare you.
When I'm on the TNG payroll, I'll put some thought into it. Meanwhile, I'll
entertain myself with the array of comic books currently being published
which meet those criteria better than TNG does.
>> The area where this episode showed promise was in the question, "What right
>> does the Q have to kill Amanda, or her parents?" And not only are we given
>> any answer to this question (or even a proposed answer), but there's not
>> even any real debate over it. There are at least two other omnipotent
>> races in the cosmos (Trelayne's people and the Organians, and possibly
>> the Excalbians and the race of the title character of "The Survivors" as
>> well); by what authority are the Q the policemen of omnipotence? And if
>> the Q care so damned little for humanity, why should they give a fig if
>> Amanda is unleashed into the universe? There's a fundamental inconsistency
>> here, which this episode doesn't even TRY to address.
>I didn't see any inconsistencies. Q addressed your concerns in a convrsation
>with Picard. Perhaps you were out of the room at the time, getting a
>sandwich or something...
Nope, I didn't leave my chair (or even nod off) from the opening credits
to the conclusion. It just wasn't there. Well, his handwaving about
"superior morality" was there, but that was content-free.
>> SEASON SIX AT A GLANCE:
>> Time's Arrow II: B-
>D
>(Yes, Michael, I can see why you gave it a B-, it must have brought back
>a lot of memories of those TOS episodes where Kirk would say "We come in
>peace, shoot to kill!")
Which ones would those be? Name names here, okay? Or are you just waving
your hands, too? (That's what it looks like.)
>"I guess I'd rather have a great series built on a terrible one than none
>at all." - Me about TNG and TOS.
That would be nice; if you happen to find one, let me know, huh?
ph9991...@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
>
> One of the two most annoying and useless characters in the Star Trek
> universe returns... to a decidedly dull story. A quick character rundown:
So YOU say.
> Q: Acting an even bigger boor than usual, pompously full of himself and
> peculiarly returning to his "Encounter At Farpoint" days of ostensibly
> having no interest at all in humanity, and having nothing but contempt for
> Picard and company. (Never mind that this attitude directly contradicts
> his character as presented in "Q Who", "Deja Q" and "Qpid".)
Nope, not as presented in "Q Who," or even "Deja Q" where right after he
gets his powers back , the first thing he wants to do is quish the
Calamorain (spelling?)
>
> Amanda Rogers: Nothing much to say about her. A schoolgirl struck by
> omniscience (and by Will Riker) who goes through some angst before finally
> deciding that Q is right.
Sorry if a real person faced with an awesome decision isn't interesting
to you. It was to me.
>
> Captain Picard: The best line in the episode was Q's put-down of Picard's
> sometimes annoying tendency to pontificate. Along with the rest of the crew,
> Picard was never really able to get a word in edgewise here. They were
> mainly just bystanders.
And what's wrong with that? And while we're about it, I see you've totally
glossed over Dr Crusher's surprisingly large role this week.
I can just see Gates McFadden's look of surprise as she first read the
script..."It's got Q in it, and I actually have LINES?"
>
> I'm not really sure what TNG's obsession with omnipotence in the form of Q
> is, but it really *doesn't* work, guys! Q is far too much of a blowhard to
> pull it off regularly (the "omnipotent blowhard" routine having been done
> oh-so-much better in Classic Star Trek's "The Squire Of Gothos"). The only
> time he was really used to good effect was in "Q Who", where his character
> acquired a bit more depth and his actions were more deliberate, less
> capricious. I think it's long past time he be jettisoned from the Star
> Trek ouvre (even if it means losing the pleasure of seeing John De Lancie
> act once a year; it's just not worth it).
Now we get to the root of the problem. You're still one of these unbalanced
people who thinks TOS is better than TNG, and no matter what TNG does
to argue against you, there is nothing that can shift you from your
basic philosophical premise, i.e. TNG sucks in comparison with the great
glory that is the original series.
>
> Amanda's dilemma was not especially innovative, nor cleverly handled. The
> last five minutes where she comes to her decision in a flash was truly
> rushed and completely unconvicing.
OK, let's see you come up with a completely original and innovative
character and/or problem/decision. Dare you.
>
> The area where this episode showed promise was in the question, "What right
> does the Q have to kill Amanda, or her parents?" And not only are we given
> any answer to this question (or even a proposed answer), but there's not
> even any real debate over it. There are at least two other omnipotent
> races in the cosmos (Trelayne's people and the Organians, and possibly
> the Excalbians and the race of the title character of "The Survivors" as
> well); by what authority are the Q the policemen of omnipotence? And if
> the Q care so damned little for humanity, why should they give a fig if
> Amanda is unleashed into the universe? There's a fundamental inconsistency
> here, which this episode doesn't even TRY to address.
I didn't see any inconsistencies. Q addressed your concerns in a convrsation
with Picard. Perhaps you were out of the room at the time, getting a
sandwich or something...
>
> No, this wasn't an outright BAD episode like "Qpid" (which has the "honor
> of being IMO the worst Star Trek story ever broadcast), as it certainly
> didn't make me squirm waiting for it to be OVER. But it was just, well,
> *dumb*. Annoying, shallow characters, asinine plot, unbelievable resolution,
> and poorly handled themes. It could have been worse, but, lord, it
> wasn't good.
Reminds me of your review....
>
> Now I guess we get to look forward to this season's Lwaxana Troi episode...
>
> Grade: D-
>
I'll give it an A-
> SEASON SIX AT A GLANCE:
> Time's Arrow II: B-
D
(Yes, Michael, I can see why you gave it a B-, it must have brought back
a lot of memories of those TOS episodes where Kirk would say "We come in
peace, shoot to kill!")
> Realm Of Fear: C
B
> Man Of The People: C
Agreed.
> Relics: B+
A
> Schisms: B-
B
> True Q: D-
A-
> Michael Rawdon raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu
> University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
>
> "...I guess I'd rather have mediocre Star Trek then none at all."
> - A friend, about the ST:TNG episode "Legacy"
Steve/usedtobeIain
University of Wisconsin - River Falls, River Falls, WI
Marguerite Petersen
>In article <rawdon.7...@cs.wisc.edu> raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu
>(Michael Rawdon) writes:
>>
>>
>> True Q: D-
>> ---
>> Total Points: 13 1/3
>> Season Average: 2.222 (C+)
>> (Fall of 0.311 from last episode)
>>
>> --
>> Michael Rawdon raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu
>
>are overreacting. I haven't seen several of the episodes (the curse of
>not having a television at college), but I enjoyed the few that I saw. I
>think that True-Q deserves at least a B-, and I personally give it a B+
>IMHO. Give the show some time, for crying out loud!
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>T.J. Casser <theo...@wam.umd.edu>
The show has had 5 years to get its act together! How much time should
we give it? I personally think it was more of a C but then I'm a TOS fan!
Marg
--
*************************************************************************
"Insufficient facts always invites danger, Captain."- Spock in Space Seed
Marg Petersen pet...@jacobs.cs.orst.edu
*************************************************************************
Marguerite Petersen
My SO (who is not a Trek fan but watches it with me because I have
the "clicker" :-) said to me after watching True Q. "Well, that was
certainly uninspired. Are they saving all their good scripts for
DS9?"
ph9991...@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
>>So YOU say.
>
> (Looking closely at my article.) Yes, it does indeed appear that I said that.
> In those very words even. Darn, I can't debate your logic on this one.
Well done. You've mastered simple reason. Now for the next rung on the
evolutionary ladder....
>
>>Nope, not as presented in "Q Who," or even "Deja Q" where right after he
>>gets his powers back , the first thing he wants to do is quish the
>>Calamorain (spelling?)
>
> This most likely explains why Q decided to take refuge in "Deja Q" with the
> Enterprise, or why he decided to come and do Picard a "favor" in "Qpid",
> right? He doesn't give a fig for humanity, so he not only keeps showing up
> time after time to visit them, but he actually trusts his existence to them
> at one point.
>
> Nope, that makes no sense to me.
Whoops. Fell down a rung. Before you climb into a tree and try to type
out the complete works of Shakespeare, let me tell you that the reason Q
asked to go to the Enterprise in "Deja Q" was certainly not because he
liked humanity, but because he knew Picard and Co. would protect him even
though he'd done all these nasty things to him in the past.
As for "Qpid," well, maybe you have something there, but he still wasn't
being exactly "nice" to the crew, only endangering their lives in a
fantasy world....
>
>
>>Sorry if a real person faced with an awesome decision isn't interesting
>>to you. It was to me.
>
> I didn't find her to be much of a "real person"; really just a cardboard
> cutout. As for her decision, well there are "good" awesome decisions and
> "bad" awesome decisions, from a dramatic standpoint. This was the latter,
> I think, at least as far as they handled it.
Not a good decision?
The usual direction a plot with a happy ending would take here, I think,
would have Amanda choosing to go with Picard and Crusher, i.e. get her
wish to stay human. This was not the usual direction, and it deserves
some credit for that.
>
>>And what's wrong with that? And while we're about it, I see you've totally
>>glossed over Dr Crusher's surprisingly large role this week.
>
> The one where she mainly acted as a generic counselor? I glossed over it
> because there wasn't anything to say about it.
Or how about the one where she acted as a friend to someone. That's usually
what friends do for each other, counsel them. I wouldn't expect you to
understand, seeing as you probably don't have any.... (OK, that's below
the belt, but I couldn't resist :)
>
>
>>Now we get to the root of the problem. You're still one of these unbalanced
>>people who thinks TOS is better than TNG, and no matter what TNG does
>>to argue against you, there is nothing that can shift you from your
>>basic philosophical premise, i.e. TNG sucks in comparison with the great
>>glory that is the original series.
>
> Which no doubt explains the fact that I loved "11001001", "Time Squared",
> "Contagion", "The Survivors", "Sins Of The Father", "The Best Of Both
> Worlds Part I", "Family", "Remember Me" and "Darmok", right?
But as you next admit, these seem to be exceptions that prove the rule
in your mind...
>
> TNG could do a lot to change my attitude toward the series. The fact is
> that it DOESN'T. It insists on muddling along with underdeveloped
> characters and more-often-than-not dull stories.
OK Mike. Next season, the TNG staff will only write episodes the way
YOU want them.
>
>>OK, let's see you come up with a completely original and innovative
>>character and/or problem/decision. Dare you.
>
> When I'm on the TNG payroll, I'll put some thought into it. Meanwhile, I'll
> entertain myself with the array of comic books currently being published
> which meet those criteria better than TNG does.
So, you believe characters in comic books are more fully rounded than those
we meet in TNG?
>
>>I didn't see any inconsistencies. Q addressed your concerns in a convrsation
>>with Picard. Perhaps you were out of the room at the time, getting a
>>sandwich or something...
>
> Nope, I didn't leave my chair (or even nod off) from the opening credits
> to the conclusion. It just wasn't there. Well, his handwaving about
> "superior morality" was there, but that was content-free.
It was content-free because, as Picard points out, they don't have any!
That's the point! "Morality? I don't see it!"
>
>>> SEASON SIX AT A GLANCE:
>>> Time's Arrow II: B-
>
>>D
>
>>(Yes, Michael, I can see why you gave it a B-, it must have brought back
>>a lot of memories of those TOS episodes where Kirk would say "We come in
>>peace, shoot to kill!")
>
> Which ones would those be? Name names here, okay? Or are you just waving
> your hands, too? (That's what it looks like.)
OK. Here's one example:
Original Enterprise investigating something that eventually turns out to
be Nomad. Recall, if you will, what the LAST option Kirk tried was...
it wasn't firing at it, it wasn't even running away, it was TALKING to it.
Opening the hailing frequencies was the last thing he tried on that
occasion, seeming to indicate a propensity to break out the phasers before
trying to talk things over. Not the kind of Captain I'd want, nor the
kind of series I'd like to watch.
>
>>"I guess I'd rather have a great series built on a terrible one than none
>>at all." - Me about TNG and TOS.
>
> That would be nice; if you happen to find one, let me know, huh?
We've all found one Mike, and we've been trying to contact you about it.
You're too busy firing your phasers to hear us.....
Jonathan Theodore Casser
I realize that it has been five years. However, every show has a slow
year or two. Give me a break, already!!!!
01fo...@ac.dal.ca
>
> One of the two most annoying and useless characters in the Star Trek
> universe returns... to a decidedly dull story. A quick character rundown:
Who's the other one?
>
> Q: Acting an even bigger boor than usual, pompously full of himself and
> peculiarly returning to his "Encounter At Farpoint" days of ostensibly
> having no interest at all in humanity, and having nothing but contempt for
> Picard and company. (Never mind that this attitude directly contradicts
> his character as presented in "Q Who", "Deja Q" and "Qpid".)
It is Q's nature to be a boor and a bully. He wouldn't be Q otherwise.
>
> Amanda Rogers: Nothing much to say about her. A schoolgirl struck by
> omniscience (and by Will Riker) who goes through some angst before finally
> deciding that Q is right.
Kinda cute.
>
> Captain Picard: The best line in the episode was Q's put-down of Picard's
> sometimes annoying tendency to pontificate. Along with the rest of the crew,
> Picard was never really able to get a word in edgewise here. They were
> mainly just bystanders.
One thing I like about this series is that the main characters is that they
ARE the main characters, not the only charaters, like its predecessor.
>
> I'm not really sure what TNG's obsession with omnipotence in the form of Q
> is, but it really *doesn't* work, guys! Q is far too much of a blowhard to
> pull it off regularly (the "omnipotent blowhard" routine having been done
> oh-so-much better in Classic Star Trek's "The Squire Of Gothos"). The only
> time he was really used to good effect was in "Q Who", where his character
> acquired a bit more depth and his actions were more deliberate, less
> capricious. I think it's long past time he be jettisoned from the Star
> Trek ouvre (even if it means losing the pleasure of seeing John De Lancie
> act once a year; it's just not worth it).
Oh sure it is. What, would you give up an opportunity to regularly dump on
an episode?
>
> Amanda's dilemma was not especially innovative, nor cleverly handled. The
> last five minutes where she comes to her decision in a flash was truly
> rushed and completely unconvicing.
>
I've rarely seen a Star Trek episode whose roots couldn't be found in some
other story.
> The area where this episode showed promise was in the question, "What right
> does the Q have to kill Amanda, or her parents?" And not only are we given
> any answer to this question (or even a proposed answer), but there's not
> even any real debate over it. There are at least two other omnipotent
> races in the cosmos (Trelayne's people and the Organians, and possibly
> the Excalbians and the race of the title character of "The Survivors" as
> well); by what authority are the Q the policemen of omnipotence? And if
> the Q care so damned little for humanity, why should they give a fig if
> Amanda is unleashed into the universe? There's a fundamental inconsistency
> here, which this episode doesn't even TRY to address.
>
Inconsistency, probably. However, to badly paraphrase someone : No sufficiently
powerful race of beings is distinguishable from a spoiled child or a school
bully. Neither feels the need to explain himself.
> No, this wasn't an outright BAD episode like "Qpid" (which has the "honor
> of being IMO the worst Star Trek story ever broadcast), as it certainly
> didn't make me squirm waiting for it to be OVER. But it was just, well,
> *dumb*. Annoying, shallow characters, asinine plot, unbelievable resolution,
> and poorly handled themes. It could have been worse, but, lord, it
> wasn't good.
>
Not so bad, really. I always thought the first series episode with the mock
nazis was the worst of either series. I also thought the idea of the captain
beaming down on every bloody landing party was really stupid.
> Now I guess we get to look forward to this season's Lwaxana Troi episode...
hip hip hooray!
>
> Grade: D-
>
> SEASON SIX AT A GLANCE:
> Time's Arrow II: B-
> Realm Of Fear: C
> Man Of The People: C
> Relics: B+
> Schisms: B-
> True Q: D-
> ---
> Total Points: 13 1/3
> Season Average: 2.222 (C+)
> (Fall of 0.311 from last episode)
>
> --
> Michael Rawdon raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu
> University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
>
> "...I guess I'd rather have mediocre Star Trek then none at all."
> - A friend, about the ST:TNG episode "Legacy"
How does your rating system work, by the way? Me, I never rate critique
TV shows. They're rarely built for critical analysis.
Enjoy. :-)
Joe Chiasson
01fo...@ac.dal.ca
IO2...@maine.maine.edu
take the trouble to grade the episodes and all that. I mean, they show
TOS in syndication on just about every station in the world, so why not
just watch that if you think it's so much better?
No flame, just a question.
Michael Rawdon
>One question -- If you think TNG is so uninspired, why do you watch it and
>take the trouble to grade the episodes and all that.
If I did that (and I *have* done that), then every time I said something
about it here, the response would be, "How can you criticize the show when
you haven't even seen the latest season, which was much better than all the
earlier ones??" This is what happened before.
> I mean, they show
>TOS in syndication on just about every station in the world, so why not
>just watch that if you think it's so much better?
I do watch it. I'll probably the essentials from both series on videotape
whenever I get around to getting a VCR.
--
Michael Rawdon raw...@colby.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI
"It is a fool's prerogative to utter truths that no one else will speak."
- Dream, "A Midsummer Night's Dream"
Dennis Heffernan
A couple of reasons:
a) There's not much SF on television nowadays; it's pretty much TNG
and Quantum Leap.
b) It's on when I'm either cooking dinner or eating it, so I really
can't get anything productive done at the time anyway.
c) Peer pressure. Everyone I know watches it, and when they're
talking about it I want to be part of the discussion. Doubly so when you
take into account that I run a SF/F discussion base on a local BBS.
None of this means I have to excuse its flaws.
Dennis F. Heffernan dfra...@tronsbox.xei.com e446...@apollo.montclair.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't understand why you make such a big deal out of everything...haven't
you learned; if it's not happenning to me it's not important?" -Murphy Brown