[DS9] Lynch's Spoiler Review: "The Ship"

10 views
Skip to first unread message

Timothy W. Lynch

unread,
Oct 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/12/96
to

WARNING: This is *my* review of DS9's "The Ship", and I want
it back.

In brief: An uncertain start, but fantastic execution and a killer ending.
Very, very strong.

======
Written by: Hans Beimler (teleplay); Pam Wigginton & Rick Cason
(story)
Directed by: Kim Friedman
Brief summary: When Sisko finds a crashed Jem'Hadar warship, he
considers it a great intelligence find -- but circumstances change when
a Jem'Hadar expedition arrives to collect the ship.
======

"The Ship" was a truly unexpected pleasure. Based on the premise
(more Jem'Hadar, a villain I tend not to find that interesting) and
based on the preview, I didn't have many expectations for the episode
-- but what I got was as solid a tale of stress under siege as you're
likely to find in Trek, and without the many pitfalls which have sunk
other, similar tales.

Early on in the show, I wasn't so sure -- as I said, it had an uncertain
start. The idea of a Jem'Hadar crash was good enough, but the initial
exploration of the ship had me a little worried about logic. After all,
we (and Sisko et al.) know that the Jem'Hadar can do their little
invisibility "phase" thing, so simply peeking around corners may not
be the most efficient use of resources. There was also a little bit of
engineering technobabble, which made me fear that I might be in for a
lot of tech-induced problems and tech-induced solutions.

That opinion changed very, very quickly. For one thing, some of the
tech that I heard actually made sense -- when O'Brien mentioned
inertial dampers failing, the Jem'Hadar deaths made perfect sense. (It
didn't hurt that I'd just started mentioning inertia in my classes this
past week; I was primed for something like this. :-) ) However, the
more important changes came along with the Jem'Hadar destruction of
the runabout. Suddenly, it was no longer an intelligence mission -- it
was a ship under siege and a fight for survival, with everything that
entailed.

What precisely that entailed contains a lot of the real strength of the
show, and "The Ship" succeeded precisely where Voyager's "The
Chute" failed for me. (I no longer review the show, or even watch it
-- but I did watch the first few episodes this season.) "The Chute"
had to artificially create its conflict between characters with "the
clamp"; whether it's because the writers honestly believed that Paris
and Kim wouldn't get ticked off at each other no matter what or
because they weren't allowed to do anything with lasting
consequences is not something I can say, but the upshot of it was that
the drama felt forced and false to me. "The Ship" did not fall victim to
that; rather, it showed that the simple differing of philosophies over
how to treat a wounded comrade combined with the stress of the
situation can make almost any disagreement boil over. Does O'Brien
really think Worf is "some bloodthirsty Klingon looking for an excuse
to murder [a] friend?" Does Worf really think O'Brien is "just another
weak human afraid to face death?" Probably not in their heart of
hearts, no -- not about each other. But I'm sure both of them have
their prejudices about the other's culture, and I'm equally sure that in a
situation like theirs I'd behave no better. (If you think you would ...
well, perhaps you're right. But I suspect that the vast majority of us
would be fooling ourselves to think so.) This is the way to handle
character conflict, and the way to handle differing cultures in the
regular characters: if having shipmates actually get angry at each other
is against the (alleged and oft-misquoted) spirit of Trek, then "the
spirit of Trek" is as bound as Marley's ghost.

In case it wasn't glaringly obvious, I liked the O'Brien/Worf dynamic
-- a lot. However, it was by no means the only solid characterization
in the show. Virtually all of the characters worked, and worked quite
well. O'Brien's friendship with Muniz shone through the banter -- I
have an officemate whom I consider a friend, yet neither one of us
would pass up the attempt to slip in a barb the way both of them did to
each other. (For that matter, that would describe a lot of my friends.
Hmm ... this probably means something, but I'm not sure I want to
know what.) Dax, meanwhile, was stuck in a position I'm sure lots
of people find themselves in: being the one whose comments are
meant to be humorous, yet are decidedly unhelpful in getting the angry
people to calm down or see things differently. Sisko's "in case you
hadn't noticed, no one's laughing" is something I've heard variations
of myself at times, and I suspect that most people have been in a
situation where they either were the Dax of the group or one of the
ones bristling. Again, just like the other character traits we saw this
episode, it felt real and it felt strong.

As for Sisko, he was stuck with all the hard choices. The deaths of
those under his command were on his head; he was the one who had
to decide whether Kilana was trustworthy or not; he was the one who
had to keep a cool enough head to retain command of the mission; and
basically, he's the one who was stuck blaming himself at the end for
all the problems. Dax was not only good as the person whose
sarcasm gets him/her into trouble, but she really served properly as
Sisko's confidant this time around -- a role she hasn't really played
properly for quite a long time. Her quiet response of "maybe nothing
should [make Sisko feel any better]" spoke volumes, and Sisko's
musings over the crew he's gotten to know personally and lost made
the nameless deaths seem a little less nameless.

Lest I leave out the plot, however, it improved by leaps and bounds
once the Jem'Hadar showed up. The only real "issues" the plot had to
resolve were whether Sisko et al. would get the ship or not (since their
survival was necessary for the series), whether Muniz would survive,
and what exactly Kilana and the Jem'Hadar wanted aboard the
derelict. All three were kept in doubt as long as possible. Although I
was fairly certain that the Jem'Hadar would not end up with the "item"
they wanted, I was on the fence for a long time about whether they'd
end up with the ship or not; enough of me really wanted Muniz to
survive as a character that I wasn't sure whether the writers would feel
the same way (though in the end, they made the better dramatic
choice, which is why they're writing the show and I'm not :-) ); and I
really had very little idea what it was Kilana was searching for so
desperately until it was revealed.

As for what said item turned out to be, I was pleased. I can take or
leave Changelings as a concept, but in this case the (presumably
injured) Changeling gave us an interesting window into both the
Federation/Dominion distrust and into Dominion society. Sisko is,
for all intents and purposes, absolutely right when he says that all the
death could have been avoided if they'd simply been able to trust each
other -- technically the Jem'Hadar would have had to make the first
move in that regard by not toasting the runabout, but that's partly the
point. The fact that Kilana worried about the Changeling being killed
or taken hostage said a lot more about how the Dominion would
operate than it does about the Federation -- or, quite possibly, it says
something about how the Founders educate those under their
dominion (pun intended) about potential enemies. The Jem'Hadar
suicide upon the death of the Changeling was also an excellent touch:
for one thing, it implies that the Founders have no intention of ever
letting the Jem'Hadar get totally out of control -- if the
Romulan/Cardassian assault had succeeded, for example, it could well
be that most of the Jem'Hadar would have died by their own hand that
day as well. More importantly, though, it drives home just what a
sense of loss the Jem'Hadar and Vorta felt upon the loss of "one of
their gods", and gave Kilana an equally sorrowful pedestal to compete
with Sisko's. I must say, I'm impressed.

There really isn't much to dislike in "The Ship" at all. There were a
few minor loose ends and unanswered questions (what exactly the
"sensor-like device" O'Brien found did, for instance, and why exactly
the Changeling chose to stay in hiding rather than attacking), but
nothing was left hanging that I would consider important. Similarly,
while there was really one "fluff" scene back on the station, it was
both brief and necessary to establish that the Defiant was en route. (I
also appreciated that Kira was taking the Defiant out rather than
someone else; pregnant or not, the character's still an instrumental part
of the station.) All in all, "The Ship" is pretty potent stuff.

So, a few shorter spots:

-- I had a couple of "B5 echoes" this week. Dax's sarcasm causing
people to bristle reminded me a bit of Garibaldi causing a stir during a
tense moment in "Divided Loyalties", and Sisko's musing over his
crew's "personal touches" called to mind a conversation early in
"Severed Dreams" about how in this war, "we know everyone we
kill." I don't consider either one remotely lifted, however; I just
found them similarly powerful scenes with similar themes, so I was
struck by it.

-- We saw a little more diversity on the show this week, which I liked.
For one, we had Muniz actually speaking a fair bit of Spanish (gasp!);
and for another, there seemed to be a few more "exotic" humanoids on
Sisko's mission than usual. Granted, all of the latter were killed in the
first one-quarter of the episode, but everyone has to start somewhere.
:-)

-- One unanswered question that I would very much *like* to have
answered is exactly what happened to the Jem'Hadar ship in the first
place. Why was it so far from Dominion space, and was the inertial
damper failure anything but an accident?

-- Muniz lapsing into hallucination was probably the single saddest
moment on the show for me: that's when I knew he wasn't going to
make it. (I also thought for a moment, right before the O'Brien/Worf
fight, that someone was going to slip Muniz a drug to kill him, both as
a mercy and to keep everyone else from being distracted. Perhaps
that's a little too brutal.)

-- "Commander Worf, see if you can get that turret to rotate." Was I
the only one to hear an implicit "use your teeth if you have to" in that?

-- Kilana's question to Sisko about whether he had gods was also an
interesting question, and I rather liked the fact that there was no
specific answer given.

That about covers it. Just as last season had a reasonable to good
opening followed by an absolutely stellar episode, this season's "The
Ship" beats "Apocalypse Rising" by a comfortable margin. Let's
hope it stays that way.

Wrapping up:

Writing: A couple of questions here and there, but good solid conflict
and cultural clashes without anything forced.
Directing: Claustrophobic, to say the least. Marvelous.
Acting: Some of Dorn's best work in quite some time, along with
Farrell's. Meaney and Brooks were as marvelous as always,
and F.J. Rio was terrific as Muniz.

OVERALL: 10, I think -- it might slip back, but I don't think so.
Tremendous work.

NEXT WEEK:

Quark gets into serious S&M games -- oh, no, wait, he's just training
to be a Klingon.

Tim Lynch (Harvard-Westlake School, Science Dept.)
tly...@alumni.caltech.edu <*>
"Do you have any gods, Captain Sisko?"
"There are ... things ... I believe in."
"Duty? Starfleet, the Federation? You must be pleased with yourself;
you have this ship to take back to them. I hope it was worth it."
"So do I."
--
Copyright 1996, Timothy W. Lynch. All rights reserved, but feel free to ask...
This article is explicitly prohibited from being used in any off-net
compilation without due attribution and *express written consent of the
author*. Walnut Creek and other CD-ROM distributors, take note.

Kevin Johnston

unread,
Oct 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/12/96
to

SPOILER WARNING

SPOILER WARNING

SPOILER for DS9 episode "The Ship"

SPOILER WARNING

SPOILER WARNING


> "The Ship" was a truly unexpected pleasure.

I was *quite* pleased with it. This is just great TV, great drama, GREAT
STAR TREK!

Offhand thought.... Immediately afterwards, I was thinking: if they had
needed to kill off a main character, this would have been a stellar way to
do it. INCREDIBLY more effective than Yar's demise in TNG.


> In case it wasn't glaringly obvious, I liked the O'Brien/Worf dynamic
> -- a lot. However, it was by no means the only solid characterization
> in the show. Virtually all of the characters worked, and worked quite

> well. O'Brien's friendship with Muniz shone through the banter ...

I *really* liked the O'Brien/Munez interplay. I wish we had more of that
on the show in general. (We used to have more-- Odo/Quark in the first
two seasons, Dax/Bashir a little bit, too.)


> There really isn't much to dislike in "The Ship" at all. There were a
> few minor loose ends and unanswered questions (what exactly the
> "sensor-like device" O'Brien found did, for instance, and why exactly
> the Changeling chose to stay in hiding rather than attacking)

I got the impression it was wounded (from the crash).


Kevin

Franklin Hummel

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

In article <53n6s1$i...@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
One of the many, many things I found extremely bad about the
writing of DEEP SPACE NINE's "The Ship" was the "artifically created
conflict between characters" which Mr. Lynch complains of in VOYAGER,
in this case between the characters of Worf and OBrien.

I did -not- believe for a single second, not even a tenth of a
second, that Worf would say the things he did to OBrien with regards to
their dying crew member.

This -is- WORF. A Klingon raised on Earth by humans. A Klingon
who graduated from Star Fleet Academy. A Klingon who we saw for seven
years serving on a starship with countless humans.

Certainly Worf has a differing philosophy from OBrien, from
humanity in general. But this is not some Klingon who thinks that The
Klingon Way is the ONLY way to do things. This is a Klingon who is well
aware, from years and years of personal experience, that humans live
their lives -- and humans die -- in different ways from Klingons. Humans
who have allowed Worf many, many times -his- right to live -his- life
-his- way as a Klingon in their human society. Worf who serves in Star
Fleet where the basic respect for the differing ways of aliens and their
right to live their lives that way is a central principle.

Worf would NOT have said these things to OBrien. He -KNOWS- that
human ways are NOT his way. He -KNOWS- that they have as much right to
live and die in their ways as he has been given by these same humans to
live his way.

Having Worf suddenly proclaiming such Klingon philosophy as if it
were unquestioned fact to his fellow Star Fleet crewmembers -- and his
friends -- turned Worf into some backward, ignorant, country-bumpkin
Klingon who has never encounted a single human being before.

It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and
completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse
than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.

It was bad, bad, BAD writing.


-- Franklin Hummel [ hum...@netcom.com ]
--
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
* NecronomiCon, 3rd Edition: The Cthulhu Mythos Convention *
August 15-17, 1997 - Providence, Rhode Island
For info: http://www.oneworld.net/sf/companies/necropress/necronomicon.html

Matthew Murray

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

On Sun, 13 Oct 1996, Franklin Hummel wrote:

> One of the many, many things I found extremely bad about the
> writing of DEEP SPACE NINE's "The Ship" was the "artifically created
> conflict between characters" which Mr. Lynch complains of in VOYAGER,
> in this case between the characters of Worf and OBrien.
>
> I did -not- believe for a single second, not even a tenth of a
> second, that Worf would say the things he did to OBrien with regards to
> their dying crew member.

[Lots of good arguments snipped]

I hadn't really thought of this, but now that you mention it,
that was a problem in this episode. I understand that Worf is part
Klingon and all that, but he really did revert in this episode. In all
his seven years on TNG, did we NEVER see him once convince someone that
they might improve in health? (I'm afraid I don't remember... Can
someone help me?) Worf was generally kind, and although his Klingon side
did always shine through, his practical, human-raised side was always
there, too. That's something that the TNG writers were able to do that
they seemed to have failed with in DS9--levels. The characters on DS9,
with very few exceptions, are flat and boring, without different levels
of character or belief. That's one of the main reasons I don't like DS9
as much as TNG--the characters aren't as layered. I'm not saying that
TNG was perfect in this regard, either, but the Picard/Crusher
relationship which was burning away quietly for season upon season is one
example. Data's intense desire to be human, while not wanting to give up
his android qualities was another. Worf struggling to find a balance
between his Klingon heritage and his human upbringing was another. (It
even resulted in his discommendation for a season and a half which is
the type of real story development we seldom see on Star Trek.) Even
though these were the exceptions rather than the rule, it's more than
anything we've seen on DS9.

> It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and
> completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
> such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse

Oh my... If you thought THAT during the Worf lines, I'm surprised
you survived the Vorta/Sisko scenes. Incomparably ridiculous dialogue
coupled with easily some of the worst acting ever seen in Star Trek made
digesting those scenes almost impossible for me.

> than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
> whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
> watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
> behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.

This is DS9 we're talking about here. Are you surprised?
For seven years on TNG, they developed Worf, even starting,
toward the end, to have him involved with Counselor Troi. For even ONE
brief portion of a scene, have we ever seen him communicating with Troi?
No. Their relationship has been forgotten. Or his human foster
parents? Any of his friends from the Enterprise? No.
Franklin, you shouldn't be surprised by any of this. This is
typical Star Trek policy. They do only what's necessary for the quick
thrill, for the one episode payoff. When they brought Worf onto DS9, it
was as if they were introducing a new character, and erased his
background, established through seven seasons of TNG accordingly. All
for the sake of ratings. He doesn't even DO anything on the show, for
God's sake. Shouldn't ODO have been on the mission instead? Why was
Worf there? WHY IS HE ON THE STATION? For no reason. It's that simple.

> It was bad, bad, BAD writing.

Well, yeah it was, but I thought that, overall, the idea of the
episode was good. The idea was fun, and some of the things that happened
(except with than Muniz character--sorry, I didn't care about the
character (seeing him once tends not to let me do that) so I didn't care
when he died) were interesting, and the ending potentially dramatically
powerful. If the main plot point of the episode, the Founder on the ship
hadn't been flawed in so many ways, then this might very well be DS9's
best episode. The problems you mention with Worf were part of the
problem as a whole, a problem that was exemplified in Avery Brooks'
incompetent acting in the rest of that scene, as well as the woman that
played the Vorta. When they were in scenes by themselves, it was so bad,
I could barely stand to watch, and I could not keep from laughing.
So, this episode had lots of problems. What I don't get about
DS9 is why they take what could be really good ideas ("The Ship," "Hard
Times," and "The Visitor") and inject them with the typical ST dogma that
we've had forced upon us for years now, so that the original ideas are
lost, and the episodes are unentertaining, and all but unwatchable. When
the DS9 writers are able to get their ideas across without having to
sacrifice all sense of story and continuity as a result, I think DS9 may
once again be as good as it once was. But until they rediscover what the
show is really supposed to be about, it simply will not happen. I'm not
holding my breath.

===============================================================================
Matthew Murray - n964...@cc.wwu.edu - http://www.wwu.edu/~n9641343
===============================================================================
The script calls for fusing and using our smarts,
And greatness can come from the sum of our parts.
From now on, I'm with you--and with you is where I belong!

-David Zippel, City of Angels
===============================================================================


Scott Moon

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

PLANET X MAGAZINE
A sci-fi/pop culture escape from a world gone mad!

In the next issue PLANET X goes underwater
-1960'S TV show DIVER DAN, interviews, great photos
-Rhino Video's JOHNNY LEGEND
-Ed Wood's pal, PAUL MARCO
-An interview with the men in the monster suits from
ATTACK OF THE GIANT LEECHES
-SEA MONKEYS
And much much more!
Check out our website: http://www.planetxmagazine.com

Micheal Keane

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

In article <hummelDz...@netcom.com>,
Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote:
[snip]

> It was bad, bad, BAD writing.

Even in this respect they were copying Babylon 5...
--
Micheal Keane(ae...@u.washington.edu) Join the Church of Last Thursday!
"Q: What goes bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,
bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud,bang,thud?
A: A Time Lord committing suicide." -- Set Piece, Kate Orman, Doctor Who

Scott Moon

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

Scott Moon

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

Travers Naran

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

Franklin Hummel (hum...@netcom.com) pontificated:

>
> One of the many, many things I found extremely bad about the
> writing of DEEP SPACE NINE's "The Ship" was the "artifically created
> conflict between characters" which Mr. Lynch complains of in VOYAGER,
> in this case between the characters of Worf and OBrien.

A friend pointed out to me what a waste of time it is to try and point
out the weaknesses in The Franchise incarnations. But I was
heartened, Franklin, to see you noticed that "odd" thing about the
episode.

> I did -not- believe for a single second, not even a tenth of a
> second, that Worf would say the things he did to OBrien with regards to
> their dying crew member.
>
> This -is- WORF. A Klingon raised on Earth by humans. A Klingon
> who graduated from Star Fleet Academy. A Klingon who we saw for seven
> years serving on a starship with countless humans.

And having served with O'Brian for a number of years with both having
faced death, destruction and wounded crew members. It was almost as
though the writers of this episode had forgotten just who the f---
Worf was. I mean, Worf became the stand-in for a generic Klingon in
this episode. The writers on DS9 have no concept of what TNG
characters are or were.


> Certainly Worf has a differing philosophy from OBrien, from
> humanity in general. But this is not some Klingon who thinks that The
> Klingon Way is the ONLY way to do things. This is a Klingon who is well
> aware, from years and years of personal experience, that humans live
> their lives -- and humans die -- in different ways from Klingons. Humans
> who have allowed Worf many, many times -his- right to live -his- life
> -his- way as a Klingon in their human society. Worf who serves in Star
> Fleet where the basic respect for the differing ways of aliens and their
> right to live their lives that way is a central principle.

Yeah, but this is Deep Space 9: "We don't care about TNG, because we
don't have to." The writers on DS9 have no sense of continuity with
their parent show.

> Worf would NOT have said these things to OBrien. He -KNOWS- that
> human ways are NOT his way. He -KNOWS- that they have as much right to
> live and die in their ways as he has been given by these same humans to
> live his way.
>
> Having Worf suddenly proclaiming such Klingon philosophy as if it
> were unquestioned fact to his fellow Star Fleet crewmembers -- and his
> friends -- turned Worf into some backward, ignorant, country-bumpkin
> Klingon who has never encounted a single human being before.

Oh, but the worst offense was the final scene of that episode where
Worf walks in to the storage room. The dialog they made Michael Dorn
speak, the way they made him act... MY God, that was *not* the Worf we
cared about in TNG as he faced having a son, a broken spine, defending
his right to be Klingon after being raised by humans. The writers of
this episode have not watched TNG because they treated Worf like the
cardboard Klingons they've been writing about for the past two
seasons!

> It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and
> completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
> such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse
> than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
> whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
> watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
> behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.
>
> It was bad, bad, BAD writing.

But you know the DS9 fanatics are going to swarm all over you telling
you what a bad man you are for daring to say anything bad about
DS9....

You know, maybe someone should give the DS9 writers a copy of Mark
Twain's "Fenemore Cooper's Literary Offenses" and highlight the page
about making sure your character's dialog remains consistant.


Bamfer

unread,
Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96
to

Timothy W. Lynch (tly...@alumnae.caltech.edu) wrote:
: WARNING: This is *my* review of DS9's "The Ship", and I want

: it back.
:
: In brief: An uncertain start, but fantastic execution and a killer ending.
: Very, very strong.

I have to admit that I was actually *stunned* by how good it was.

:
: ======
:
: In case it wasn't glaringly obvious, I liked the O'Brien/Worf dynamic

: -- a lot. However, it was by no means the only solid characterization
: in the show. Virtually all of the characters worked, and worked quite
: well. O'Brien's friendship with Muniz shone through the banter -- I
: have an officemate whom I consider a friend, yet neither one of us
: would pass up the attempt to slip in a barb the way both of them did to
: each other. (For that matter, that would describe a lot of my friends.

I have to admit that as soon as I saw Munez, I had him labeled as
dead meat (he had an air of Ensign Redshirt about him at first
glance). However, as the story progressed, I wasn't so sure anymore,
and when he actually died, I was very surprised.

: As for Sisko, he was stuck with all the hard choices. The deaths of

: those under his command were on his head; he was the one who had
: to decide whether Kilana was trustworthy or not; he was the one who
: had to keep a cool enough head to retain command of the mission; and
: basically, he's the one who was stuck blaming himself at the end for
: all the problems. Dax was not only good as the person whose
: sarcasm gets him/her into trouble, but she really served properly as
: Sisko's confidant this time around -- a role she hasn't really played
: properly for quite a long time. Her quiet response of "maybe nothing
: should [make Sisko feel any better]" spoke volumes, and Sisko's
: musings over the crew he's gotten to know personally and lost made
: the nameless deaths seem a little less nameless.

I loved Dax in this episode. She's always been a character I wanted to
like, but the writers never really seemed to get a good handle on
her. But here, she was great (by not being such a perfect person,
oddly enough).

: Federation/Dominion distrust and into Dominion society. Sisko is,

: for all intents and purposes, absolutely right when he says that all the
: death could have been avoided if they'd simply been able to trust each
: other -- technically the Jem'Hadar would have had to make the first
: move in that regard by not toasting the runabout, but that's partly the
: point. The fact that Kilana worried about the Changeling being killed
: or taken hostage said a lot more about how the Dominion would
: operate than it does about the Federation -- or, quite possibly, it says
: something about how the Founders educate those under their
: dominion (pun intended) about potential enemies. The Jem'Hadar
: suicide upon the death of the Changeling was also an excellent touch:
: for one thing, it implies that the Founders have no intention of ever
: letting the Jem'Hadar get totally out of control -- if the

Really agree, the Dominion just hasn't been too terribly interesting
to me, until this episode. They give a lot of insight into the Vorta,
the Jem'Hadar and the Changeling society, and in very powerful way.
Again, it's not often that a Trek episode surprises me so much, and
the Jem'Hadar suicide, while it makes perfect sense, still shocked
me.

: There really isn't much to dislike in "The Ship" at all. There were a

: few minor loose ends and unanswered questions (what exactly the
: "sensor-like device" O'Brien found did, for instance, and why exactly

I was really convinced as soon as they found that thing, and as soon
as everyone was bickering with each other, that it was some kind of
gizmo that worked on our heros brains to make them irritable and start
attacking each other. Then there'd be the typical Trek scene: "Wait
a minute, aren't we all acting strangely? Why are we fighting one another?
Ah, ha! It's an alien trick so we'd all kill each other! I've found
it, Captain! It's sending out <insert Technobabble (TM)> that stimulate
the violent and primitive centers of our brain!" Well, you get the idea.
But it didn't happen. Neither was there a heart-to-heart at the end
between the characters apologizing to each other about their snapping
at each other in the ship. Just Dax and Sisko being themselves, and
Worf and O'Brien sitting by Muniz coffin. All that other stuff is
understood and doesn't have to be stated. I really liked that (unlike
the Paris-Kim scene at the end of the Voyager ep (the one where they
were in prison)... just didn't work, didn't ring true).

I kind of liked that the gizmo was left unexplained. Probably the Star
Fleet team that takes apart the ship will figure it out, but O'Brien
had other important things to worry about.

: the Changeling chose to stay in hiding rather than attacking), but

I assume that the Changeling was too injured to attack and it took
everything "it" had to hold it's shape. Again, there's a little
mystery here, and that's ok with me. It makes sense that not everything
is going to be understood Sisko and Co. until further investigation
is conducted (if ever).

: nothing was left hanging that I would consider important. Similarly,

: while there was really one "fluff" scene back on the station, it was
: both brief and necessary to establish that the Defiant was en route. (I
: also appreciated that Kira was taking the Defiant out rather than
: someone else; pregnant or not, the character's still an instrumental part
: of the station.) All in all, "The Ship" is pretty potent stuff.

Yes! I was, again, flabbergasted. Kira took out the Defiant, despite
being visibly pregnant. Wow. I'm impressed with this episode just
about every which way you look at it.

: -- I had a couple of "B5 echoes" this week. Dax's sarcasm causing

: people to bristle reminded me a bit of Garibaldi causing a stir during a
: tense moment in "Divided Loyalties", and Sisko's musing over his
: crew's "personal touches" called to mind a conversation early in
: "Severed Dreams" about how in this war, "we know everyone we
: kill." I don't consider either one remotely lifted, however; I just
: found them similarly powerful scenes with similar themes, so I was
: struck by it.

I also had those "B5 echoes", but again, not for this episode copying
anything, but for not taking the easy way out, by showing people
faced with hard choices and there being no easy answers, and by things
sometimes ending on a ugly note. I found Sisko remarking about their
medals as particularly ironic.

: -- One unanswered question that I would very much *like* to have

: answered is exactly what happened to the Jem'Hadar ship in the first
: place. Why was it so far from Dominion space, and was the inertial
: damper failure anything but an accident?

Yes, indeed. Maybe that will be answered later in the season? This
might just be an intentional teaser, to be brought up later (if this
was B5, I'd be sure of it. Here I'm not sure).

: Writing: A couple of questions here and there, but good solid conflict

: and cultural clashes without anything forced.
: Directing: Claustrophobic, to say the least. Marvelous.
: Acting: Some of Dorn's best work in quite some time, along with
: Farrell's. Meaney and Brooks were as marvelous as always,
: and F.J. Rio was terrific as Muniz.

Yep. I'm not a big fan of Worf or the Klingons, but he was great (as
was Dax). I'm used to great work from Brooks and Meaney.

: OVERALL: 10, I think -- it might slip back, but I don't think so.
: Tremendous work.

I agree. Definitely a 10.

Sonja
--lans...@scf.nmsu.edu bam...@acca.nmsu.edu
"There are worlds out there where the sky's burning, and the sea's asleep,
and the rivers dream; people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere
there's danger. Somewhere there's injustice. Somewhere else the tea's getting
cold. Come on, Ace. We've got work to do!" -- Doctor to Ace, "Survival"


Ceth Eslick

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to


Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote in article

> It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and
> completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
> such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse
> than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
> whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
> watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
> behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.

Nonsense. I can't believe I'm reading this nonsense.

Worf condemned a Romulan to death because of his heritage. He murdered
Duras in a fit of rage. He thinks women are "weak." His stock reply to
everything is "attack." NONE of those things are what the stereotypical
"Star Fleet Officer would do." He knows that. Yet he still said, and did
those things.

THAT'S Worf. THAT'S his personallity. I don't know who YOU are talking
about.

> It was bad, bad, BAD writing.

If this is bad writing, I hope we see more bad writing in the future. What
you want IS artificial. Good friends DO get into brawls, ESPECIALLY in
tense, LIFE AND DEATH situations. Contrary to popular belief, Starfleet
Academy doesn't come with a complimentary halo.


Jeff Jacques

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

Matthew Murray (n964...@rowlf.cc.wwu.edu) writes:
> Well, yeah it was, but I thought that, overall, the idea of the
> episode was good. The idea was fun, and some of the things that happened
> (except with than Muniz character--sorry, I didn't care about the
> character (seeing him once tends not to let me do that) so I didn't care
> when he died) were interesting, and the ending potentially dramatically
> powerful.

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, Muniz was seen in one or two previous
episodes, and since the character had already been established, this made
his death all the more tragic. He wasn't just some crewman-of-the-week
who died.

> So, this episode had lots of problems. What I don't get about
> DS9 is why they take what could be really good ideas ("The Ship," "Hard
> Times," and "The Visitor") and inject them with the typical ST dogma that
> we've had forced upon us for years now, so that the original ideas are
> lost, and the episodes are unentertaining, and all but unwatchable.

Interesting....Those three episodes you just mentioned are three of the
BEST episodes of DS9 to have ever aired, IMO. Each well-acted,
well-written, moving, entertaining and immensely watchable.

--Jeff

--
**********************************************************************
"Who the hell are YOU?"
-- Capt. Sulu to Capt. Janeway, "Flashback" --
**********************************************************************

Franklin Hummel

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

>Ceth Eslick (marr...@cs.montana.edu) wrote:
>: Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote in article
>: > It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and
>: > completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
>: > such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse
>: > than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
>: > whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
>: > watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
>: > behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.
>
>: Nonsense. I can't believe I'm reading this nonsense.

>: Worf condemned a Romulan to death because of his heritage. He murdered
>: Duras in a fit of rage. He thinks women are "weak." His stock reply to
>: everything is "attack." NONE of those things are what the stereotypical
>: "Star Fleet Officer would do." He knows that. Yet he still said, and did
>: those things.


Nonsense. I can't believe I'm reading this nonsense.

Those were WORF's choices, choices on how HE would live HIS life,
not on how humans must live their lives and how they must die. Choices he
has been allowed to make for himself by humans in their society and in
Star Fleet.


>: THAT'S Worf. THAT'S his personallity. I don't know who YOU are talking
>: about.


No, that isn't Worf. And the fact you don't know what I am
talking about is the same problem, the same lack of understanding that
lead to such a terrible, awful characterization of Worf by the lousy
writers of this episode.

Andy Kim

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

In article <hummelDz...@netcom.com>,
Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote:

I think you missed (or distorted) what Tim meant by _artificial_. Both
"The Chute" and "The Ship" attempted to show how extreme circumstances
affect the interaction among people. In "The Ship", however, the conflict
was from the different beliefs and cultures inherent in characters, whereas
"The Chute" had to introduce an _external_ device which is the clamp that
is not part of character. While it can be argued the clamp merely enhances
certain aspects of brain and does not introduce anything new by itself, it
is all too easy to point finger at it and say, "Without it, they wouldn't
have done it." I accepted the clamp because there was only a short period
of time to elevate the conflict between Paris and Kim to the point of
killing each other in a hurry (it took a _long_ time for O'Brian in "Hard
Times"), but it was forced nonetheless.

Now are you saying that Worf and O'Brian should always behave themselves
regardless of the situation they are in? Or do you have a problem with
writers creating a high tension environment?

-ak
--

Andrew Kim | Area Formerly Known as .sig
and...@panix.com |
ak...@ml.com |

John Paulus

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

Ceth Eslick (marr...@cs.montana.edu) wrote:


: Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote in article

: > It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and

: > completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
: > such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse
: > than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
: > whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
: > watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
: > behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.

: Nonsense. I can't believe I'm reading this nonsense.

: Worf condemned a Romulan to death because of his heritage. He murdered
: Duras in a fit of rage. He thinks women are "weak." His stock reply to
: everything is "attack." NONE of those things are what the stereotypical
: "Star Fleet Officer would do." He knows that. Yet he still said, and did
: those things.

: THAT'S Worf. THAT'S his personallity. I don't know who YOU are talking
: about.

But what about Worf's loyalty to his friends? His respect of them? i think
the problem is that Worf's comments were just out of the blue and waaay out
there. i think i see where the writer was trying to go: how stress can
emphasize certain quality traits. Another example was Dax's sarcasm [that
Sisko scolded], which worked better (i.e. more "believeable") than Worf's
comments.
Personally, i think his comments to O'Brien in the end were more consistent
to his personality & character.


: > It was bad, bad, BAD writing.

: If this is bad writing, I hope we see more bad writing in the future. What


: you want IS artificial. Good friends DO get into brawls, ESPECIALLY in
: tense, LIFE AND DEATH situations. Contrary to popular belief, Starfleet
: Academy doesn't come with a complimentary halo.

You're right--this isn't Star Trek Voyager, where Maquis & Starfleet work
together wonderfully, except when they have the standard Maquis vs.
Starfleet episode, every season or so.

--jp--

--
j.p. paulus 4625 N. Kenmore Avenue #2
sha...@ripco.com Chicago IL 60640-5024
http://pages.ripco.com:8080/~shadowm/index.html 312/784-5640
********************** GO GOD!!!!! ************************

Ceth Eslick

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to


Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote in article
>

> No, that isn't Worf. And the fact you don't know what I am
> talking about is the same problem, the same lack of understanding that
> lead to such a terrible, awful characterization of Worf by the lousy
> writers of this episode.

O'Brien was the one who started this. It was his line that "he wasn't some
blood thirsty Klingon out to murder his friends." That was the first
insult. In tense situations, people DO get angry with their friends, and
say things that they don't wish they did.

Worf certainly wouldn't be the one to keep his opinions to himself. He's
never done it before (during staff meetings, during poker games, and
especially during Worf's stint as first officer in "Gambit). That's HIS
character.

Worf's response to O'Brien's insult was perfectly IN character for a person
with his temper, with his background, in this situation. To expect someone
to act like little angels under all circumstances is ridiculous, especially
when Worf has acted even more irrational in the past.


Tony Li

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

Jeff Jacques <co...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:

>
>Matthew Murray (n964...@rowlf.cc.wwu.edu) writes:
>> Well, yeah it was, but I thought that, overall, the idea of the
>> episode was good. The idea was fun, and some of the things that happened
>> (except with than Muniz character--sorry, I didn't care about the
>> character (seeing him once tends not to let me do that) so I didn't care
>> when he died) were interesting, and the ending potentially dramatically
>> powerful.
>
>Actually, if I'm not mistaken, Muniz was seen in one or two previous
>episodes, and since the character had already been established, this made
>his death all the more tragic. He wasn't just some crewman-of-the-week
>who died.

Correct. He actually appeared two times before. Muniz was one of
two engineers who was harassed by Worf in "Starship Down".
In "Hard Time" he was the one who appeared to be the default Chief of
Operations while O'Brien was recovering from his ordeal with an
implanted memory. I loved his line to O'Brien, which sounds something
like what O'Brien probably once said to him before.

I got the impression that O'Brien really likes Muniz and might have
been grooming him to become a chief engineer someday. So, in "The Ship",
when Worf made those comments about honorable death, O'Brien may have
remembered how Worf once treated Muniz, and became angry despite
everything he knew about Klingon culture. Don't forget that Worf
and O'Brien once had a fight (with poor Bashir in the way) in "Bar
Association" last season over Worf's crossing over the picket line
into Quark's bar.

Tony Li

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine--On the edge of the final frontier.
Its mission:
To protect the sector from threats, and explore the unknown,
to prepare Bajor for entrance into the Federation,
to meet new people boldly going where they've never gone before.

Tony Li

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

Ceth Eslick <marr...@cs.montana.edu> wrote:

>O'Brien was the one who started this. It was his line that "he wasn't some
>blood thirsty Klingon out to murder his friends." That was the first
>insult. In tense situations, people DO get angry with their friends, and
>say things that they don't wish they did.
>
>Worf certainly wouldn't be the one to keep his opinions to himself. He's
>never done it before (during staff meetings, during poker games, and
>especially during Worf's stint as first officer in "Gambit). That's HIS
>character.
>
>Worf's response to O'Brien's insult was perfectly IN character for a person
>with his temper, with his background, in this situation. To expect someone
>to act like little angels under all circumstances is ridiculous, especially
>when Worf has acted even more irrational in the past.

I agree. Even under better circumstances, like during Nog's strike against
Quark's bar in "Bar Association", Worf and O'Brien had a brawl when the
Klingon crossed the picket line, probably to get his usual prune juice.
Maybe Worf was puzzled by the concept of a strike, and just saw O'Brien
trying to block his way.

Junsok Yang

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

In article <53u91u$p...@agate.berkeley.edu>, to...@pawnee.CS.Berkeley.EDU
says...
>Ceth Eslick <marr...@cs.montana.edu> wrote:

>>O'Brien was the one who started this. It was his line that "he wasn't
some
>>blood thirsty Klingon out to murder his friends." That was the first
>>insult. In tense situations, people DO get angry with their friends, and
>>say things that they don't wish they did.

>>Worf's response to O'Brien's insult was perfectly IN character for a

person
>>with his temper, with his background, in this situation. To expect
someone
>>to act like little angels under all circumstances is ridiculous,
especially
>>when Worf has acted even more irrational in the past.

>I agree. Even under better circumstances, like during Nog's strike against
>Quark's bar in "Bar Association", Worf and O'Brien had a brawl when the
>Klingon crossed the picket line, probably to get his usual prune juice.
>Maybe Worf was puzzled by the concept of a strike, and just saw O'Brien
>trying to block his way.

Or, trying to get into the head of a Klingon, you either take it, or you
smash it. You take whatever the boss dishes out, or you kill him. You
don't do a willy-nilly thing like go on a strike. From a Klingon's point of
view, it may not be "honorable."

As for Worf's original statement on "The Ship", it's consistent with his
way of thinking, which, while tempered by Federation ideals, is still
Klingon. Why the hell would you want your friend to be weak and helpless,
waiting to die? Put him out of his suffering. That's perfectly logical
given Worf's beliefs.

As for Franklin's original statements where he states Worf should have
been brainwashed and homogenized into Federation standard way of thinking:
Then I guess Vulcans should be all emotional now, or all Bajorans should all
be atheists now? From all past characterization, Worf has tried to retain
his Klingon beliefs, while tempering some of the most excessive aspects of
Klingon beliefs. In "The Ship" Worf has reflected his Federation influence
and showed *restraint.* He argued with O'Brien and stood by rather than
actually going in and killing Muniz.

--
**************************************************************************

"We want to reach everyone. People who aren't open to rational
arguments; people who only respond to emotional assaults, such as the
illiterate - or the intellectuals." ...Victor Koman "The Jehovah Contract"

Junsok Yang (yan...@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu)
(yan...@minerva.cis.yale.edu)


MKS

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

Jeff Jacques wrote:
>
> Matthew Murray (n964...@rowlf.cc.wwu.edu) writes:
> > Well, yeah it was, but I thought that, overall, the idea of the
> > episode was good. The idea was fun, and some of the things that happened
> > (except with than Muniz character--sorry, I didn't care about the
> > character (seeing him once tends not to let me do that) so I didn't care
> > when he died) were interesting, and the ending potentially dramatically
> > powerful.
>
> Actually, if I'm not mistaken, Muniz was seen in one or two previous
> episodes, and since the character had already been established, this made
> his death all the more tragic. He wasn't just some crewman-of-the-week
> who died.

We have seen him before, but I can't remember which episode(s). I think
we saw him in "Starship Down". I thought his death was done very well.
We see crewmen get killed, but we've never seen the rest of the crew
deal with it except for "Skin of Evil", and that wasn't one that well in
the first place...



> > So, this episode had lots of problems. What I don't get about
> > DS9 is why they take what could be really good ideas ("The Ship," "Hard
> > Times," and "The Visitor") and inject them with the typical ST dogma that
> > we've had forced upon us for years now, so that the original ideas are
> > lost, and the episodes are unentertaining, and all but unwatchable.
>

> Interesting....Those three episodes you just mentioned are three of the
> BEST episodes of DS9 to have ever aired, IMO. Each well-acted,
> well-written, moving, entertaining and immensely watchable.
>
> --Jeff

I think they're three of the best as well. They are all excellent
episodes that showed growth for the series.

-MKS

Ray Yang

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

In article <01bbba06$7f68df10$0f02000a@big-bertha>, "Ceth Eslick"
<marr...@cs.montana.edu> wrote:

> Worf certainly wouldn't be the one to keep his opinions to himself. He's
> never done it before (during staff meetings, during poker games, and
> especially during Worf's stint as first officer in "Gambit). That's HIS
> character.
>

> Worf's response to O'Brien's insult was perfectly IN character for a person
> with his temper, with his background, in this situation. To expect someone
> to act like little angels under all circumstances is ridiculous, especially
> when Worf has acted even more irrational in the past.

With all respect, Worf's character is that of a person (I won't use the
term man, since it seems a little inappropriate) who has gone through a
lot. He has accepted discommodation to save the Empire. He played a
critical role in the politics of the Empire concerning Kahless. He served
for years next to Jean-Luc Picard, one of the most diplomatic captains in
Starfleet. He played poker with Riker, who bluffed all the time. Finally,
in DS9, he turned his back on the Empire for human loyalties.

My point is that a) I found his lack of self-restraint in the scene
where he and O'Brien go at each other utterly unbelievable. It could have
been a lack of build-up. It just came a little too suddenly: the
atmosphere wasn't quite right, but I think Worf would have had more
discipline in any case. b) Worf shouldn't have those prejudices about
humans. He's seen Picard in action a lot. He's served under every ideal
commanding HUMAN officers scriptwriters could come up with. These
prejudices, after all these years of living among courageous, determined,
willing-to-die humans, just seem a little out of line.

Ray Yang
syac...@ucla.edu
"To be ignorant of one's own ignorance
is the malady of the ignorant."
---A.B. Alcott, Table Talk

Christopher B. Stone

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

In article <01bbb96b$61d726f0$0f02000a@big-bertha>,

Ceth Eslick <marr...@cs.montana.edu> wrote:
>Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote in article

>> It -WAS- artificial. It was -WRONG-. It was totally and

>> completely out-of-character. My mouth fell open in disbelief as I heard
>> such badly-written lines come out of Michael Dorn's mouth. It was worse
>> than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
>> whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
>> watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
>> behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.

>Worf condemned a Romulan to death because of his heritage. He murdered


>Duras in a fit of rage. He thinks women are "weak." His stock reply to
>everything is "attack." NONE of those things are what the stereotypical
>"Star Fleet Officer would do."

Not only that, but when Worf was paralyzed, he expected Riker to kill him,
and when Riker refused, Worf asked *Alexander* to kill him.

What's more, in "The Ship," Worf didn't even *expect* O'Brien to kill
Munez -- he merely said to O'Brien, "if you are his friend, you will
consider this option." Furthermore, Starfleet is the product of many
cultures, not just human culture -- and even human culture in the 24th
century condones euthanasia, as we've seen in VOY "Death Wish" and
elsewhere.

I have come to the conclusion that Hummel simply wants to bash Trek as
much as possible because he mistakenly believes that bashing Trek makes B5
look good.
--
Chris Stone * cbs...@princeton.edu * http://www.princeton.edu/~cbstone
"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been
granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger.
I do not shrink from this responsibility. I welcome it." -JFK

John Paulus

unread,
Oct 14, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/14/96
to

Travers Naran (tna...@van-as-03b03.direct.ca) wrote:
: Franklin Hummel (hum...@netcom.com) pontificated:
: >

: Oh, but the worst offense was the final scene of that episode where


: Worf walks in to the storage room. The dialog they made Michael Dorn
: speak, the way they made him act... MY God, that was *not* the Worf we
: cared about in TNG as he faced having a son, a broken spine, defending
: his right to be Klingon after being raised by humans. The writers of
: this episode have not watched TNG because they treated Worf like the
: cardboard Klingons they've been writing about for the past two
: seasons!

i really disagree with you about the FINAL scene--i actually think it was
Worf, in character. O'Brien has been one of the few friends Worf has had
over the years (i.e. he was with Worf at his Ascension ceremony in the
Holodeck a few years back, Worf delivered Molly, etc.). Worf used his
culture to try to comfort O'Brien.

It was just Worf's complete and utter pessimism, with no respect to O'Brien,
that was truly unbelieveable. If anything, Worf could have mentioned the
Klingon philosophy from 1st Season TNG, "A dead body is merely an empty
shell".

Well, overall, i think it was a pretty good
episode.

Ted McCoy

unread,
Oct 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/15/96
to

In article <hummelDz...@netcom.com>,
Franklin Hummel <hum...@netcom.com> wrote:
> I did -not- believe for a single second, not even a tenth of a
>second, that Worf would say the things he did to OBrien with regards to
>their dying crew member.
>
> This -is- WORF. A Klingon raised on Earth by humans. A Klingon
>who graduated from Star Fleet Academy. A Klingon who we saw for seven
>years serving on a starship with countless humans.

I felt that some of the Worf-O'Brien scenes were overplayed a bit, but in
principle they were credible enough.

Would Worf have acted like that on TNG? Probably not, IMHO -- but things have
changed since TNG, the primary change being the resumed Federation-Klingon
hostilities. Old and ugly prejudices are always dragged back to the surface
during wartime, even cold war, and that can only serve to widen the separation
between Klingon and human culture -- a separation which Worf never seemed
entirely uncomfortable with in the first place. But, more significantly,
Worf has changed. These new Klingon-Federation conflicts have rekindled
doubts and questions about Worf's loyalties and "Klingon-ness" as never before.
He is more of an outcast now than ever before, and yet he seems more distant
from most of the other non-Klingons on DS9 than he was on TNG. (Remember that
business about Worf wanting to live alone in the Defiant?) Under ordinary
day-to-day circumstances, none of this would be as likely to sway Worf over
the edge as it was in "The Ship," but the circumstances of "The Ship" were
anything but ordinary.

>It was worse
>than anything thing I have seen on VOYAGER, because it took a character
>whose nature, whose personality, has been established over years of
>watching by fans -- and within the space of several seconds has him
>behaving and saying things he would never, ever have said.

Ah, there you go again. Some people just delight in self-destructing their
own arguments.


Ted

Duane

unread,
Oct 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/15/96
to

Jeff Jacques wrote:
>
> Matthew Murray (n964...@rowlf.cc.wwu.edu) writes:
> > Well, yeah it was, but I thought that, overall, the idea of the
> > episode was good. The idea was fun, and some of the things that happened
> > (except with than Muniz character--sorry, I didn't care about the
> > character (seeing him once tends not to let me do that) so I didn't care
> > when he died) were interesting, and the ending potentially dramatically
> > powerful.
>
> Actually, if I'm not mistaken, Muniz was seen in one or two previous
> episodes, and since the character had already been established, this made
> his death all the more tragic. He wasn't just some crewman-of-the-week
> who died.

I have to disagree here. Muniz may have been seen, but just because the
same actor is seen and bit lines given, he's not established; he's just
there, an overblown extra. They tried to establish him in the beginning
of the episode, and that was so much like one of those bad WWII movies
where you hear about the young kid who just got married and has his
whole life ahead of him (and you're just waiting for the gunshot to ring
out and kill him off so the star can be all upset over the "terrible
loss" of the guy's life). You want to create shock or real concern, kill
off O'Brien, kill off Worf, or kill off Dax. I like all of these
characters, but the point is: until you do something of this magnitude,
it's going to seem like just another red shirt security officer who was
killed off. If O'Brien had been killed off in the earlier episodes where
we just saw him in the Enterprise's transporter room (or on the bridge
like in the opening show), there would have been no concern had he died,
or very little. Once he got married to Keiko and started becoming
someone we cared about, that's when it got important.

>
> > So, this episode had lots of problems. What I don't get about
> > DS9 is why they take what could be really good ideas ("The Ship," "Hard
> > Times," and "The Visitor") and inject them with the typical ST dogma that
> > we've had forced upon us for years now, so that the original ideas are
> > lost, and the episodes are unentertaining, and all but unwatchable.
>

> Interesting....Those three episodes you just mentioned are three of the
> BEST episodes of DS9 to have ever aired, IMO. Each well-acted,
> well-written, moving, entertaining and immensely watchable.

I'll give you that. I liked those episodes as well. I thought they could
have been better, but I was more pleased with them than I was
disappointed.

Duane Gundrum
du...@sfsu.edu

CRR

unread,
Oct 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/16/96
to

Jeff Jacques wrote:
>
> Matthew Murray (n964...@rowlf.cc.wwu.edu) writes:
> > Well, yeah it was, but I thought that, overall, the idea of the
> > episode was good. The idea was fun, and some of the things that happened
> > (except with than Muniz character--sorry, I didn't care about the
> > character (seeing him once tends not to let me do that) so I didn't care
> > when he died) were interesting, and the ending potentially dramatically
> > powerful.
>
> Actually, if I'm not mistaken, Muniz was seen in one or two previous
> episodes, and since the character had already been established, this made
> his death all the more tragic. He wasn't just some crewman-of-the-week
> who died.
>
> > So, this episode had lots of problems. What I don't get about
> > DS9 is why they take what could be really good ideas ("The Ship," "Hard
> > Times," and "The Visitor") and inject them with the typical ST dogma that
> > we've had forced upon us for years now, so that the original ideas are
> > lost, and the episodes are unentertaining, and all but unwatchable.
>
> Interesting....Those three episodes you just mentioned are three of the
> BEST episodes of DS9 to have ever aired, IMO. Each well-acted,
> well-written, moving, entertaining and immensely watchable.
>
> --Jeff
>
> --
> **********************************************************************
> "Who the hell are YOU?"
> -- Capt. Sulu to Capt. Janeway, "Flashback" --
> **********************************************************************


Mel Gibson and Patrick Stewart in new movie.."The Conspiracy"
Steward plays a FBI agent...Gibson a computer hacker....

Timothy W. Lynch

unread,
Oct 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/20/96
to

A few minor comments here, since I seem to have sparked some
discussion (or perhaps just provided a convenient staging ground for
Franklin Hummel, but at least some semi-reasonable discussion came out
of it):

To those saying that Worf's attitude towards O'Brien and fatalistic
attitude about Muniz was incredibly out of character -- I completely
disagree. Worf has been known to be utterly condemnatory and utterly
absolute in his beliefs at times, the halcyon days of Fed/Klingon
peace during TNG are over, and this was an extremely high-stress
situation. Do I think Worf would have said anything like that over
drinks at Quark's? Of course not. But here? You betcha.

To the many notes I've gotten about Worf's "keeping the predators
away" comment and its apparent contradiction of the "empty shell"
belief seen in early TNG, I'd give three possibilities:

1) The early-TNG stuff might be ignored. Given that one of those
same episodes also referred to the Klin homeworld as "Kling", this
seems possible.

2) Perhaps different Klingons have different beliefs (gasp!), and
Worf is being selective in what he brings up.

3) Or, my favorite, perhaps Worf is simply making it up out of whole
cloth. He can't bring himself to simply apologize to O'Brien, so he
makes amends the only way he can -- by assisting in a "ritual".

Any strike me as reasonable options.

Lastly,
syac...@ucla.edu (Ray Yang) writes:

>Worf shouldn't have those prejudices about
>humans. He's seen Picard in action a lot. He's served under every ideal
>commanding HUMAN officers scriptwriters could come up with. These
>prejudices, after all these years of living among courageous, determined,
>willing-to-die humans, just seem a little out of line.

To which I say: Prejudices often do seem "a little out of line".
That's why they're prejudices.

Tim Lynch

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages