ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Best Star Trek Captain

Report this
Created by: t.bexon

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Jun. 02 2011, 8:13 am

Quote: DammitJim6200 @ May. 14 2011, 8:12 am

>

> Only one answer..Jean Luc Picard, he set the standard for Leadership, strength and goodwill, Star trek was nothing until TNG came into play.

>


Huh? What sort of crack are you smoking with that ridiculous statement?
Millions of fans didn't write in to save TOS from cancellation for nothing.
And then lead up to a film franchise revival beginning with Star Trek The Motion Picture followed by some of the greatest adventures seen on screen with TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TUC and yes, even ST09.
The spin offs may have been amusing but in the end they did nothing more then choke the life out of Star Trek with bland characters and been there done that already story telling.

"Thank Pitch Forks and Pointed Ears"

DammitJim6200

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6876

Report this Jun. 03 2011, 12:52 pm

 


Your Idiocy will always be your defining moment, TNG and Captain Picard SAVED THAT FRAKIN franchise, After Star Trek 5 nearly BOMB to death the studio didn't wanna do another Star Trek with OLD Kirk, Spock and Bones, all Captain kirk did was HOP around the GALAXY SLEEPING WITH BIMBO AFTER BIMBO FOR 5 Fraking years, The OUTSTANDING Jean Luc Picard, was a bold diplomatic leader who didn't need to hop out of his seat, rip of his uniform and go down to a planet to get into fights ALL THE TIME, Picard used his mind, THE HALLMARK OF A LEADER, Picard stopped the Civil War with the Klingons, Picard stopped the Borg and saw Zephram Cochranes first flight SAVING EARTH.. KIRK DID SOME good things, But Picard's achievements is much wider.

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Jun. 03 2011, 3:09 pm

There is no such thing as the best inventor, best artist, best president, or best captain. In such fields there are many greats but no greatest. Sisko was great where he was as was Janeway but they wouldn't have worked in the other's series. A great person may fail in a different situation. We praise Washington and Lincoln but would we consider them the greatest if they were in modern politics?

The poem Prospice says "for sudden the worst turns the best to the brave" not the brave to the best.

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1297

Report this Jun. 03 2011, 4:03 pm

Your problem Dimwit Jim isn't that JJ made a great movie, it's that it proves once and for all despite what you may say that fans and the general public don't want to see your personnel hero Picard prancing about the galaxy, they want to see the further adventures of the great Capt James T. Kirk.
TNG didn't save anything, it rode the wake of the now classic TOS Movies series and once those were finished, the franchise slowly dwindled.
Why?
Because the life and breath of TOS series was officially gone.
It would only be a matter of time before the franchise, lead by TNG would slowly stagnate and fade away.
A solution to this problem was needed. A return to the roots, but done in such a way as to not erase what was, namely TOS.
It was a gamble, there would be die hard imbeciles completely negative to that idea, but there was only ever really one center one core to Star Trek and that was with TOS most famous and time enduring characters.
It doesn't matter if YOU didn't like ST09, what matters is it worked brilliantly creating an entire new time line for these characters that wouldn't upset or conflict what came before.
Unfortunately for you it proves once and for all, that the greater captain, the greater series is TOS and no matter what you say, how you say it and what lengths you berate it...what sits badly for you is the truth. TOS and Captain James T. Kirk is simply the best.
You may return to your predicable constant whining, berating and slander.
Naturally this does show your supreme immaturity, no one here can ever take that away from you.

Ghostmojo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1826

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 3:34 am

I'm at a loss to see why there needs to be a great spat between these two positions.


Although it wasn't a great film (poor resolution etc.) Generations did show the two most significant leaders working together.


Possibly out of respect for Shatner/Kirk - Stewart/Picard did seem to follow the former's more hands-on approach and take his lead to some extent.


After all, Picard recognised he had suddenly found himself in league with one of the greatest legendary figures in the galaxy (which he himself was not (yet - if indeed he would ever be seen that way)).


Kirk's name is constantly dropped throughout the franchise. You hear it from time to time in all of them except ENT (for obvious reasons). He has a deep cultural impact not only outside the stories with a worldwide audience over what is now approaching 50 years - but also within the stories and the Star Trek universe itself.


I find any antagonism towards the Kirk character (and Shatner) disappointing and very misdirected - when it is coming from the support base of another character who obviously admired his predecessor, and gleaned something from the experience of working with him.


It is also something of a red herring, this continual insistence by some on this forum, that ST:TNG saved the franchise. It did nothing of the sort. Up until that point there wasn't any franchise - there was just the continuing development and presentation of Star Trek (Kirk & Co) in the only form we knew it - either on TV or latterly via the cinema. TNG was the beginning of the transformation of Trek into a franchise. Thereafter it became an ongoing project to further explore its potential via Picard & Co - and later yet other incarnations.


Even if TNG had never appeared - Trek would have continued in some form. It had become bigger than Roddenberry. It had its own potency and despite the fact that STV-TFF was poorer than its predecessors, the studios still realised there was mileage in this business. GR was given the go-ahead to develop a new TV series purely because there was all this interest out there. And because TOS had migrated to the big screen, and because of the aging of its actors etc. it was deemed more practical to keep TOS in its new - larger than life - format and allow it to return to TV in a newer less prescribed form.


But make no mistake - ST:TNG was a direct offspring from TOS and particularly the plans for ST-Phase II. Had the latter been allowed to manifest itself in the late 70s there would have been no TNG. Many of its stories migrated into TNG as did some of its characters (Decker becoming Riker - Ilia becoming Troi etc.). Both series are directly interconnected. To try and separate them as opposing and competing forces is quite wrong.


Picard was a great character. He was deep, thoughtful, somewhat troubled, at odds with his own role and his limited social skills. Outwardly he projected cool, reserve and stoic resolution. His was the classic British stateman type presence (even though he was supposed to be French). Inwardly he was trying to resolve a very mixed bag of emotions - lack of familial back-up; issues with his brother; residue from Locutus etc. He was a fascinating character who we could really feel for...


But he was no Jim Kirk. And he knew it.


Kirk had (for the most part) tremendous self-belief. He led and others followed. Occasionally his ego was forced into some kind of pause where he briefly became introspective - but usually events proved his actions to be correct. Picard was more of a team player. The former was like the CEO of an organisation who made the ground rules - the latter more like the Chairman who lightly managed all around him.


Picard was never meant to be Kirk. The Kirk role was split between Picard and Riker. It took both of them to equate to what Kirk managed to embody himself. The difference was that Kirk drew upon his support base of Spock and McCoy (and Scott) but ultimately realised that command was a lonely affair.


to boldy go where no man has gone before

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 8:36 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>Your Idiocy will always be your defining moment, TNG and Captain Picard SAVED THAT FRAKIN franchise, After Star Trek 5 nearly BOMB to death the studio didn't wanna do another Star Trek with OLD Kirk, Spock and Bones, all Captain kirk did was HOP around the GALAXY SLEEPING WITH BIMBO AFTER BIMBO FOR 5 Fraking years, The OUTSTANDING Jean Luc Picard, was a bold diplomatic leader who didn't need to hop out of his seat, rip of his uniform and go down to a planet to get into fights ALL THE TIME, Picard used his mind, THE HALLMARK OF A LEADER, Picard stopped the Civil War with the Klingons, Picard stopped the Borg and saw Zephram Cochranes first flight SAVING EARTH.. KIRK DID SOME good things, But Picard's achievements is much wider.

>

So you admire Picard because he didn't sleep with anyone for 5 years???


Gee, I wonder why that is?  I can guess one  reason.


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 8:44 am

 


Your Idiocy will always be your defining moment, TNG and Captain Picard SAVED THAT FRAKIN franchise,


On the contrary, with INS and then NEM, TNG and Captain Picard helped kill the franchise.  NEM was the franchise's last chance and TNG failed spectacularly, both critically and commercially.  So, you're totally wrong there.


 After Star Trek 5 nearly BOMB to death the studio didn't wanna do another Star Trek with OLD Kirk, Spock and Bones,


They didn't?  So what was TUC?  Also, TFF didn't bomb.  It was a critical failure and did terribly at the box office compared to the huge success of TVH, but it did make a profit and was the #1 film in its opening week.  In contrast, NEM totally bombed and is the only ST film not to carry its openign weekend, being beat out by "Maid in Manhattan."  It was a total embarassment, and it killed the franchise.


 


all Captain kirk did was HOP around the GALAXY SLEEPING WITH BIMBO AFTER BIMBO FOR 5 Fraking years,


What's wrong with that?  You have something against having sex with beautiful consenting women?  And he obviously did more than just that, so, again, you're obviously wrong.


The OUTSTANDING Jean Luc Picard, was a bold diplomatic leader who didn't need to hop out of his seat, rip of his uniform and go down to a planet to get into fights ALL THE TIME,


Bold diplomatic leader?!!  Well, ok, whatever.


And of course Picard didn't want to get into fights all the time.  We saw why in GEN.  Because he couldn't take down one mad scientist, he had to drag Kirk out of the Nexus to fight for him.


Picard used his mind, THE HALLMARK OF A LEADER,


Kirk used his mind too.  Remember, he had a genius IQ (and didn't fail on his entrance exam for SF Academy the first time, like Picard did). 


 


KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 8:46 am

As for me, I vote for Kirk as the best, with Sisko a strong runner up.  Of all the other captains, Sisko strikes me as the best of them all.  I like Picard more, but Sisko was better imo.


 

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 9:16 am

Quote: DammitJim6200 @ Jun. 03 2011, 12:52 pm

>

>Your Idiocy will always be your defining moment, TNG and Captain Picard SAVED THAT FRAKIN franchise, After Star Trek 5 nearly BOMB to death the studio didn't wanna do another Star Trek with OLD Kirk, Spock and Bones, all Captain kirk did was HOP around the GALAXY SLEEPING WITH BIMBO AFTER BIMBO FOR 5 Fraking years, The OUTSTANDING Jean Luc Picard, was a bold diplomatic leader who didn't need to hop out of his seat, rip of his uniform and go down to a planet to get into fights ALL THE TIME, Picard used his mind, THE HALLMARK OF A LEADER, Picard stopped the Civil War with the Klingons, Picard stopped the Borg and saw Zephram Cochranes first flight SAVING EARTH.. KIRK DID SOME good things, But Picard's achievements is much wider.

>


 


It's too bad that "diplomacy" and "use of the mind" are two traits that your hero possesses that apparently did not rub off on you.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 9:19 am

Votre montage

edwardleung39

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 19

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 9:43 am

I must go with Sisko. He is more than a captain, but a regional administrator caught between Federation and Bajor, and he handles such delicate situation well being the sole Federation representative in a remote system. DS9 is like the sci-fi version of Casabalnca, with political forces and subversion forces from all directions to handle, and any misjudgement(like with Klingon) can slip Federation into all out war too early and too easily. DS9 is the only ST series which politics and interaction pre-dominant over amazing visual effects.

commander_phoenix202

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 246

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 10:02 am

Janeway. Because she was A WOMAN for crying out loud! Good role model for us girls. (and by the way her name is spelt Kathryn.)


Picard is a close second. His shakespear quotes make me melt.


Tilek svi'khaf-spol t'vathu - tilek svi'sha'veh. (The spear in the other's heart is the spear in your own)

trekgurl54

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 57

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 1:58 pm

They are all good, each one had their own style and way of dealing with an intense situation and how to solve it. But if I had to pick one I think I'd go with Archer, becoz he was the first out there. He had to learn as he went, and many times he had to go against the Vulcan High Counsul and Admiral Forest's orders. He had to fly by the seat of his pants.

trekgurl54

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 57

Report this Jun. 04 2011, 1:58 pm

They are all good, each one had their own style and way of dealing with an intense situation and how to solve it. But if I had to pick one I think I'd go with Archer, becoz he was the first out there. He had to learn as he went, and many times he had to go against the Vulcan High Counsul and Admiral Forest's orders. He had to fly by the seat of his pants.

Ghostmojo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1826

Report this Jun. 05 2011, 3:40 am

Janeway was a captain - a leader - an adventurer?


I thought she was a retired schoolmistress who was on a guided tour of Voyager prior to its departure - who fell asleep in the captain's chair - nobody noticed and she managed to wing it thereafter because her even duller and less-inspired crew didn't even realise ...

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum