Star Trek Regeneration

[JoeinAR 1,949]

go to www.treknation.com/episodes/season2/regeneration.shtml

I like the comment that it serves continuity.

it airs tomorrow night.

The show will go into next year with a whole new mission. The Enterprise will become a warship for next season. It will actually be taking on a more dark theme ala DS9. So much the better

[JoeinAR 1,949]

excellent, excellent episode.

continuity, and canon, all intact.

the borg were never named.

Phlox was infected with nanoprobes but used an ingeneous method, which once again stayed within the realm of canon, and continuity.

[Justin 2]

It looks really great. Unfourtunatly I don't get UPN.

Justin

[Wojo 2,453]

Ah, JoeInAir, you beat me to it. I was going to resurrect the post I had made a few months back

http://jwfan.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&f...iewtopic&t=2488

and then see what people's responses to this controversial yet totally canonical episode were.

Yes, I like the fact that the Borg are never named, just like the Ferengi never were either back in 1x19 Acquisition. And based on the way the episode ends, the two Tarkalian bodies ejected will probably depressurize, explode, and there won't be anything left to discover; the bodies will not survive re-entry to a planet or sun, or will float forever, so no finding Borg that way. I'm reminded of the way that Lore was discovered, floating in space, by Pakleds; not likely here, the way we know the Borg history as it exists. Likewise, the wreckage of the transport will also leave no trace of Borg.

It's likely that Starfleet classifies the entire encounter and possibly totally forgets about it by the time real first contact is made with the Borg by the second season of TNG in Q-Who. After all, Archer tells T'Pol (and we, the audience) that Zefram Cochrane did reveal the details of how Borg from the future almost sabotaged first contact, and the Enterprise-E of the future stopped them, even if he did repeal his comments. Add that to the fact that Starfleet classified the Enterprise-E's time travel incident of "First Contact" the film, and we've got a massive Starfleet cover-up on our hands. Purely speculation, though, because even if Starfleet (and/or its insidious and off-the-record department Section 31) knew that Borg from the future led to the wreckage found at the Arctic Circle in the 2150s, they'd have no way to know from what point they originated.

I think I've rambled a bit off course.

The ending was perfect, since it pretty much tells us that there'll be no more Borg in Enterprise (even if they left a few bodies at the Arctic, they know now to destroy them rather than revive them), and it brings the whole history of the Borg full circle, i.e. the man who goes back in time to become his own grandfather. By having the Borg of the 2150s complete the mission of "First Contact," namely to send a subspace message to the Borg Homeworld in the Delta Quadrant telling them of Earth, assuming they don't have the transwarp gate system set up until the 2370s, then it'd still take 200 years for Borg to travel from the Delta Quadrant and make it to Earth. Which puts them right on a scheduled invasion set in the 24th Century, as Archer predicted....which means that it makes sense now that Q's introduction wasn't necessarily the catalyst that introduced the Federation to the Borg. Remember that Federation and Romulan bases along the Neutral Zone had been destroyed by a powerful unknown alien, scooped up and removed entirely, and that was the final episode of the first season ("The Neutral Zone"), well before Q sending the D into Borg space. Thus, though Star Trek never confirmed it, that base scooper could've been an advance Borg guard, and all Q did was coincidentally send the Enterprise D in to say hi; the Borg were already on there way, since they'd had Earth's "address" since the 2150s, thanks to Borg sent there from the not-so-distant future......aye yai yai, time travel!

So now it's not likely that Borg technology led to upgraded Starfleet systems, since the Borgified transport was destroyed and all drones destroyed as well. The Borgified systems on the NX-01 will probably just be repaired, and the shield and warp technology isn't there, so it's altogether usless for advancing Starfleet with future Borg upgrades. It was also nice to hear of Dr. Phlox's familiarity with the Bynars, another little tidbit of Trek trivia that's pretty neat.

Two problems, though. If they've got Borg nanoprobes in the 22nd century, why don't they try to freeze some and make a weapon against future Borg incursions, or otherwise use them for good? Probably because they're so volatile, what with assimilating everything in sight and being programmed to complete the Borg Queen's mission. Oh well, no loss.

Also, Captain Archer refers to the section of space the Borg were sending their message to as the "Delta Quadrant." This is good and all, since that's what it's referred to as in the time of TNG, DS9, and specifically Voyager. Four quadrants: Federation in Alpha, Romulans and Klingons in Beta, Dominion and Wormhole's exit in Gamma, and Borg and Voyager's long journey home in Delta. BUT in all of TOS and the movies, the quadrant nomenclature is all screwed up, nothing is consistent. It's as if quadrant refers to the four big divisions of the Milky Way Galaxy, and can also refer to smaller sections of space, like quadrants of a sector or astrogation block or whatever. No big deal, since naming and number consistency has never been really keen in Star Trek, but we get by.

For those of you who I haven't bored to death with my 2 am rambling, I salute you!

[Lurker 5]

Archer tells T'Pol (and we, the audience) that Zefram Cochrane did reveal the details of how Borg from the future almost sabotaged first contact, and the Enterprise-E of the future stopped them, even if he did repeal his comments.

In "William Shatner's" book, Preserver it is revealed that the mirror universe was started in an alternate timeline when Zefram Cochrane revealed the truth about the Borg. In the "normal" Star Trek continuity that we know, Mr. Cochrane didn't tell anyone about the Borg.

I know that books are not "canon" but I always liked that explanation.

Neil

[Morn 8]

I agree about the continuity. It proves a long time trek theory that Q aided the federation by warning them of the borg and the technobabble was all very consistant with past episodes.

I did find 2 things in it questionable, Conchane telling people about the borg seems strange and rather just thrown together and the fact that the borg didn't use their usual "we are the borg, resistance is futile" etc speech, but just happened to conventantly not reveal their identity. But I was really surprised by this episode, the quality of the episode and the strong continuity. It seems their effort to increase ratings is being managed well.

[Guest]

I thought "First Flight" was more like "First Crash" (even though it's not the first episode to do so--just a fun play on words). Keith Carradine was a fine guest, but the fights he got in with Archer over Papa Archer's engines? Give me a break! If they were drunk, why wasn't it more like the fight between Gale and H.I. near the end of Raising Arizona? Strangely enough, that was a drunken fight even though they hadn't been drinking (in RA, not Enty).

Is it just me or was that episode WUI? (Written Under the Influence) Archer acted like a little kid in middle school, rather than a grown-up who was a couple years away from turning into a Starfleet captain. Kinda seemed like Bakula sensed that with the way he performed it.

I haven't caught too many episodes here lately. The other night, I read through all the synopses of the episodes this season on TrekNation and the episodes I thought I'd seen just in the past two months hadn't been aired since November. I guess some of them could've been reruns.

I'm pretty excited about next season, though. Sounds like they're trying to get their acts together. They have more than enough potential with Braga and Berman. Even though they've done crap so far with Enterprise, they've pulled off quite a bit of good stuff in the past. Try TNG (from Season 2 and on) and First Contact. They could pull it off again. Too bad Ron D Moore probably won't come back.

[ocelot 508]

I want to know who they bring on as the extra cast members... Anyone know who the actors are? But what I don't understand is T'Pol's new hair do and showing more skin... How much more can they show before they go to HBO?

[Guest]

Jolene Blalock as T'Pol is just a Jeri Ryan clone with a wig and pointy ears. I guess they figure by doing that, they can make Comic Book Guy-like fortysomethings exclaim "Saturn's rings!" when they will tune in weekly to the show just to see that and nothing else (just look at how much of a show is left without herl!). It's Galaxy Quest-syndrome, really (the TV guide interview of Sigourney Weaver's character on GQ).

I actually think John Billingsley (Dr. Flowers aka Phlox) is a reasonably well-known actor. Same goes for Jolene, but the others seem to be unknown and probably will be after Enterprise ends, unless the show has another maiden voyage and boldly goes where Star Trek's never gone before. I wish Captain Jellico's great-grandpa would take over Enterprise and make T'Pol wear a Starfleet uniform like his great-grandson did with Counselor Troi.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Scott Bakula is hardly an unknown actor.

Stefancos- who was always partial to him.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Lord, gotta disagree with you wholeheartedly.

Jolene Blalock is nothing like Jeri Ryan, not in looks, not in heat.

Her character isn't nearly as engaging as the Seven of Nine, nor is it as well written.

Your comments about the supporting cast members Billingsley, and Blalock are not on target. Neither is well known.

[Guest]

You're entitled to your opinion, Joe.

[Lurker 5]

Jolene Blalock as T'Pol is just a Jeri Ryan clone with a wig and pointy ears.  I guess they figure by doing that, they can make Comic Book Guy-like fortysomethings exclaim "Saturn's rings!" when they will tune in weekly to the show just to see that and nothing else (just look at how much of a show is left without herl!).  It's Galaxy Quest-syndrome, really (the TV guide interview of Sigourney Weaver's character on GQ.

And what's wrong with a little sex appeal? I don't watch the show but I can understand why they'd want to have a hot character on it and Star Trek has always been this way. Just look at some of the womens costumes designed for the original series by William Ware Theiss.

Neil

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yeah.

Stefancos-

[Lurker 5]

I once shared an elevator with Ms. Luna. It's a good thing she couldn't read my mind. She's still quite a knock out!

Neil

[JoeinAR 1,949]

You're entitled to your opinion, Joe.

since you're relatively new here, my opinion is to be taken as FACT here.

Joe, using a little Stefan like authority. Afterall Stefan and I are the Star Trek Kings here.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I once shared an elevator with Ms. Luna.  It's a good thing she couldn't read my mind.  She's still quite a knock out!

Neil

She's gotta be my fav classic Trek babe.

I'll never forget the first shot of her, standing in the doorway of Captain Kirk's quarters

"Oiling my traps, darling."

Stefancos-

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Afterall Stefan and I are the Star Trek Kings here.

The USA is not a Monarchy, Joe, so you can only be Star trek President.

To be replaced after 4 or possible 8 years by someone else. (Neil most likely)

Stefancos-

[Lurker 5]

I once shared an elevator with Ms. Luna.  It's a good thing she couldn't read my mind.  She's still quite a knock out!

Neil

She's gotta be my fav classic Trek babe.

I'll never forget the first shot of her, standing in the doorway of Captain Kirk's quarters

"Oiling my traps, darling."

Stefancos-

Actually I think she is first seen asleep in Kirk's bed.

Neil

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

In...bed...

Stefancos- feelin' kinda.....anxious.

[Guest]

And what's wrong with a little sex appeal? I don't watch the show but I can understand why they'd want to have a hot character on it and Star Trek has always been this way. Just look at some of the womens costumes designed for the original series by William Ware Theiss.

Sex appeal's just a cheap thrill and fake entertainment. It's just instant gratification and the enjoyment fades as soon as the show or movie are over. You can't take it with you after the show's over. It has no intellectual depth' date=' it's not uplifting, and it pretty much degrades your view of women after a while. They become objects, not people. They only have physical properties; nothing else. No feelings, no emotions, no desires. You get a shock when they show they have feelings and emotions and desires, when you assumed they were something like a robot. [i']That is what is wrong with sex appeal, my moderator friend.

Plots and character development are the true magic tricks of storytelling. You can get something inspirational and fulfilling out of it. You would watch it over and over again just to be reminded of the great virtues the plots and characters bring out and/or demonstrate. You might start thinking differently about how you live your life. Others may be impacted by the way they're treated by a person, just because that person chose to watch It's a Wonderful Life on Christmas Eve to take care of their depression rather than watch some seedy porno.

Oh...and TNG wasn't about sex appeal. It achieved maximum entertainment by just having a darn good writing staff. (Yeah, the first season or two resembled TOS, but after TNG found its own niche, it quickly became nothing like TOS in that aspect and many others.)

[Lurker 5]

You get a shock when they show they have feelings and emotions and desires, when you assumed they were something like a robot.

Well fortunately for me this girl is a robot.

Plots and character development are the true magic tricks of storytelling.  You can get something inspirational and fulfilling out of it.  You would watch it over and over again just to be reminded of the great virtues the plots and characters bring out and/or demonstrate.  You might start thinking differently about how you live your life.  Others may be impacted by the way they're treated by a person, just because that person chose to watch It's a Wonderful Life on Christmas Eve to take care of their depression rather than watch some seedy porno.

Both great films and porno have there place. Both can fun, but obviously in different ways. I watch and enjoy both, but I watch them for totally different reasons.

Oh...and TNG wasn't about sex appeal.  It achieved maximum entertainment by just having a darn good writing staff.  (Yeah, the first season or two resembled TOS, but after TNG found its own niche, it quickly became nothing like TOS in that aspect and many others.)

Marina Sirtis would probably disagree with you on that.

Neil

[Guest]

Both great films and porno have there place.

Yeah, they do have their places.

Great films=every VCR or DVD player in the world.

Pornos=the trash.

Oh...and TNG wasn't about sex appeal.

Marina Sirtis would probably disagree with you on that.

Yeah, but how much of the show did she write or produce or otherwise influence?

[Lurker 5]

Both great films and porno have there place.

Yeah, they do have their places.

Great films=every VCR or DVD player in the world.

Pornos=the trash.

Nice to see that you are tolerant.

Oh...and TNG wasn't about sex appeal.

Marina Sirtis would probably disagree with you on that.

Yeah, but how much of the show did she write or produce or otherwise influence?

Not much, but she did get to wear the costumes that just seemed to get lower and lower around the neckline.

Neil

[Guest]

Yeah' date=' they do have their places.

Great films=every VCR or DVD player in the world.

Pornos=the trash.[/quote']

Nice to see that you are tolerant.

The way I see it, why tolerate trash?

Oh...and TNG wasn't about sex appeal.

Marina Sirtis would probably disagree with you on that.

Yeah' date=' but how much of the show did she write or produce or otherwise influence?[/quote']

Not much, but she did get to wear the costumes that just seemed to get lower and lower around the neckline.

Yeah, it gave pornos a run for their money after "Chain of Command" came out, when Jellico made Troi where that see-through Starfleet uniform. The censors really dropped the ball on that one! :roll:

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Well, if I'm relatively new here, you should be too. And if your opinion=fact, then mine does too.  

No, I've been around since 1999. And IMHO (which is fact ) your opinion is just that your opinion.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Adam, are you one of those persons who thinks that women who dress and behave in a sexual provocative manner are unable to be anything else then a man's wet dream?

If so, then I kinda pity you

Stefancos- who has been here since the early summer of 2000

[Morn 8]

Jolene Blalock as T'Pol is just a Jeri Ryan clone with a wig and pointy ears. I guess they figure by doing that, they can make Comic Book Guy-like fortysomethings exclaim "Saturn's rings!" when they will tune in weekly to the show just to see that and nothing else

True, but she still looks good.

I actually think John Billingsley (Dr. Flowers aka Phlox) is a reasonably well-known actor.  Same goes for Jolene, but the others seem to be unknown and probably will be after Enterprise ends

Huh? Known from what? But Scott Bakula is well known, anyone who watches TV should recognise him from Quantum Leap easily. And since when did trek start using well known actors for main characters, hey? It made most of them well known.

pretty much degrades your view of women after a while. They become objects, not people. They only have physical properties; nothing else. No feelings, no emotions, no desires. You get a shock when they show they have feelings and emotions and desires, when you assumed they were something like a robot.

That's utterly absurd femistist propaganda.. While it might be so for some, I don't think you can make a generialisation here.

Anyway, there is nothing wrong with sex appeal, but to use it so obviously and excessively is indeed cheap.