Spoilers STAR TREK: SECTION 31 - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Who cares?
Yeah I was wondering about that myself but I couldn't remember if that quote was from the "TV series" days or the movie release.
If it was in regards to the movie, it couldn't be much less true if they tried. The movie finishes in almost exactly the same place as where it started.
I'm sorry, but asking me to accept the existence of celestial anomalies that cause people to break out into song is a huge ask of me.
I'm sure they could've done so given infinite time and an infinite budget.
Something, something ... Million monkeys sitting at a million typewriters ...
"TAKE ME OUT TO THE HOLOSUITE" is a fun episode, and highlights Sisko's obsessive streak and shows that as a vulnerability.
"THRESHOLD" is a genuinely solid episode except for the last 5 minutes. The rest of the time, it was a good character episode for Tom and had a great horror element to it.
"SPOCK'S BRAIN" is pretty bad, but there are definitely worse episodes in just TOS. In the same season, no less. ("AND THE CHILDREN SHALL LEAD" and "THE WAY TO EDEN".)
SECTION 31 is definitely worse than these episodes.
However... "THESE ARE THE VOYAGES..." is an abomination, and it is definitely worse than SECTION 31.
(I had to go back and edit this because I posted this after just waking up, and only now realized that I was putting down the reverse of my meaning. My apologies if this lead to the wrong conclusion.)
Last edited:
...you also have lines in this movie...?
She may be the only thing worthwhile in this.
Suggested answers for a couple of continuity complaints made earlier in this thread (even though I hated the film):
It’s been suggested in non-canonical media that the Klingon-Cardassian Alliance swept away and enslaved -most- of the Terran Empire, but a small chunk of it still holds on to Earth’s Solar System and a very small amount of surrounding space. (Presumably, the chunk still held by the Empire a few decades later is where the ISS Cerritos serves.) If one accepts that, then that’s who’s trying to invade with the Godsend, and that’s probably the real reason they want to grab space in the Prime universe —they recognize they have little chance of retaking much space in the Mirror one.
As for Control, that’s now just what they call the apparent head of S31 (or possibly even just a given group’s handler). She’s not the AI, that’s gone.
It’s been suggested in non-canonical media that the Klingon-Cardassian Alliance swept away and enslaved -most- of the Terran Empire, but a small chunk of it still holds on to Earth’s Solar System and a very small amount of surrounding space. (Presumably, the chunk still held by the Empire a few decades later is where the ISS Cerritos serves.) If one accepts that, then that’s who’s trying to invade with the Godsend, and that’s probably the real reason they want to grab space in the Prime universe —they recognize they have little chance of retaking much space in the Mirror one.
As for Control, that’s now just what they call the apparent head of S31 (or possibly even just a given group’s handler). She’s not the AI, that’s gone.
Because they’re too sexy to live…too sexy for their shirt…so sexy it hurts.
I'm not convinced that JLC wasn't artificial. She changes position and demeanor in a split-second glitch.
At first I was like, they really did Control again after what happened??
Then I was like, oh, it's Jamie Lee Curtis now.
What was she supposed to be?
I wondered if she was a hologram and another AI? Or if those were like standard cybernetic implants on the side of her head (since “Discovery” introduced the idea that the Federation had people who were modified because of accidents)?
Or is the implication that Section 31 had contact with the Borg long before Q threw the Enterprise-D towards them, and this version of Control was someone Section 31 was able to save from the Collective?
Remember when a Section 31 movie or series sounded like a good idea? I mean, it was probably for, like, 3 weeks in in 1998, but...
Me, which is why I was asking. Seems pretty obvious.
Star Trek used be an important part of American popular culture. The show was a pinnacle of the entertainment industry in terms of its quality in writing, creativity, direction and general production. I do admit though that sometimes the acting could be something to be desired. Star Trek represented the positive and progressive aspects of American society and culture of the 20th century, yet at the same time giving optimism and inspiration for our entire global community, which is why the show became such a global phenomenon. Star Trek wasn’t always utopian or about trying to be perfect, no world ever is; the writing was about the intention of the betterment of humanity. Star Trek championed things such as social progression and cohesion, shared optimism for the future, showing how humanity can one day come together as one to explore the final frontier. Star Trek inspired scientists and politicians as well as every day folk such as you and I. Star Trek no longer inspires… instead, the show has more often than not become a dark generic sci-fi, written under the banner of Star Trek for brand recognition.
As the entertainment industry has become ever more increasingly saturated with both creatives and content, movies and television series all chasing to push boundaries and stand out has resulted…. Star Trek joined this ‘rat race’. Star Trek’s very concept has been distorted either through lack of understanding of what the show is all about, or by intention. Whatever those intentions were, I do not know.
I watched it again with subtitles and enjoyed it more. But I still think it's a terrible movie. I love Rachel Garrett. If I knew they would do something like this, I would have wanted to watch a series where she was the Captain of the Enterprise-C.
Also, it would have been better if they made this a mini TV series with 3 episodes, each 90 minutes long, instead of a 90-minute movie.
Also, it would have been better if they made this a mini TV series with 3 episodes, each 90 minutes long, instead of a 90-minute movie.
Last edited:
Well, colour me surprised!
I was going into this knowing I would HATE it, but... I didn't and I don't understand why.
After Deep Space Nine, they have never gotten Section31 right again. I never liked Philippa Georgiou as a character and I just knew, ever since they announced this series and then movie, I wouldn't like it at all.
Because I love Star Trek episodes like Duet and The Visitor and The Sound of Her Voice and Someone To Watch Over Me, The Measure Of A Man, Dear Doctor and Shuttle Pod One. Those slow, character driven ones...
But for some reason, I liked this one. Granted, it wasn't great. The writing, the acting, the special effects... It was all a bit meh, but I had fun and that's worth something in my book, at least a 6!
And I never ever thought I would say this, but I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more...
Oh dear, what is wrong with me?
I was going into this knowing I would HATE it, but... I didn't and I don't understand why.
After Deep Space Nine, they have never gotten Section31 right again. I never liked Philippa Georgiou as a character and I just knew, ever since they announced this series and then movie, I wouldn't like it at all.
Because I love Star Trek episodes like Duet and The Visitor and The Sound of Her Voice and Someone To Watch Over Me, The Measure Of A Man, Dear Doctor and Shuttle Pod One. Those slow, character driven ones...
But for some reason, I liked this one. Granted, it wasn't great. The writing, the acting, the special effects... It was all a bit meh, but I had fun and that's worth something in my book, at least a 6!
And I never ever thought I would say this, but I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more...
Oh dear, what is wrong with me?
Kurtzman's been saying an explanation for why Section 31 went from public to hidden has been coming for a while. First he said we'd get one during Disco S2, which we didn't. Then he said it when Section 31 was going to be a TV show, and it's been a common quote from him while promoting this movie. At this point, we should probably just accept we aren't ever getting such an explanation.
No. Even when Star Trek was at its peak popularity in the 1990s there were still plenty of other shows which were showing better writing and more creativity than it was.
