SFDebris: Insurrection

The Next Generation

SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Captain Seafort » Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:31 pm

Aka, Chuck: 1, Rochey: 0. :P

Part 1

A good start, and I'm looking forward to him really starting to rip into the Luddites. :twisted:
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14966
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Mikey » Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:40 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:Chuck: 1, Rochey: 0.


There is no Rochey, there is only Zuul Sionnach Glic.
"We've been over this. We don't shoot first and ask questions later."
"Of course! We never ask questions."
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 33073
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Captain Seafort » Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:42 pm

There's neither, actually, and hasn't been for over a month. :? I wonder where he's got to this time.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14966
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Mikey » Sun Jun 26, 2011 12:38 am

Captain Seafort wrote:There's neither, actually, and hasn't been for over a month. :? I wonder where he's got to this time.


Maybe he sequestered himself to work on his INS script. :P
"We've been over this. We don't shoot first and ask questions later."
"Of course! We never ask questions."
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 33073
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Griffin » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:23 am

Mikey wrote:
Maybe he sequestered himself to work on his INS script. :P


So, we're never going to see him again?
Zagreus sits inside your head,
Zagreus lives among the dead,
Zagreus sees you in your bed,
And eats you when you're sleeping.
User avatar
Griffin
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 7:52 pm
Location: Yorkshire!

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Captain Seafort » Sun Jun 26, 2011 9:19 am

Griffin wrote:So, we're never going to see him again?


Guess not. Now it's a race between him and the heat death of the universe.

We also have the rest of Chuck's version:

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14966
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Lighthawk » Sun Jun 26, 2011 9:26 pm

I have to admit, I don't remember much of Insurrection. But looking back on it and on this review, it does rather seem like the movie had to bend over backwards and shove its head up its own ass in order to make the Son'a the bad guys and the Ba'ku the good.

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?
Image
User avatar
Lighthawk
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 4632
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 6:55 pm
Location: Missouri, USA, North America, Earth, Sol System, Orion Arm, Milkyway Galaxy, Local Group, Universe

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Graham Kennedy » Sun Jun 26, 2011 9:47 pm

Here's the book he mentioned about the writing of the movie, in PDF format : Link
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8104
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Mikey » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:36 am

Lighthawk wrote:I have to admit, I don't remember much of Insurrection. But looking back on it and on this review, it does rather seem like the movie had to bend over backwards and shove its head up its own ass in order to make the Son'a the bad guys and the Ba'ku the good.

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?


That was left rather fuzzy - intentionally, probably, so as not to let any inconvenient facts get in the way of the intended visceral pull of the poor abused Space Amish.

Captain Seafort wrote:Now it's a race between him and the heat death of the universe.


Well, heat entropy has a lot further to go... but it does tend to work more quickly than Rochey...
"We've been over this. We don't shoot first and ask questions later."
"Of course! We never ask questions."
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 33073
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Sonic Glitch » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:39 am

Mikey wrote:
Lighthawk wrote:I have to admit, I don't remember much of Insurrection. But looking back on it and on this review, it does rather seem like the movie had to bend over backwards and shove its head up its own ass in order to make the Son'a the bad guys and the Ba'ku the good.

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?


That was left rather fuzzy - intentionally, probably, so as not to let any inconvenient facts get in the way of the intended visceral pull of the poor abused Space Amish.

I always figured that it was in their space but unclaimed by the Federation. While the Feds may claim the sector and space surrounding it, the planet was ostensibly pre-warp so the Feds couldn't actually do anything with it. I would think they would leave the pre-warp civilizations go a bit, at least until they develop the technology to detect the presence of the Federation/warp drive. Make sense?
"All this has happened before --"
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
User avatar
Sonic Glitch
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 5820
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Any ol' place here on Earth or in space. You pick the century and I'll pick the spot

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Mikey » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:45 am

It would make sense, except the planet (meaning the inhabitants) weren't pre-warp. The non-interference principle applies to societies that haven't achieved warp, not to societies which have renounced it.
"We've been over this. We don't shoot first and ask questions later."
"Of course! We never ask questions."
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 33073
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Sonic Glitch » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:31 am

Mikey wrote:It would make sense, except the planet (meaning the inhabitants) weren't pre-warp. The non-interference principle applies to societies that haven't achieved warp, not to societies which have renounced it.

I was under the impression that Starfleet/the Feds were unaware of their technological past. I suppose it should be rephrase to an apparent pre-warp society. What's his face references their migration from their homeworld as 309 years ago, which would put it sometime in the 21st century. I doubt anyone was out there at the time to spot them (it has been established the Briar Patch seems to pose some sort of hazard to handling/navigation/magic technobabble).
"All this has happened before --"
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
User avatar
Sonic Glitch
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 5820
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 1:11 am
Location: Any ol' place here on Earth or in space. You pick the century and I'll pick the spot

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Mikey » Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:11 am

Hmm, good point.
"We've been over this. We don't shoot first and ask questions later."
"Of course! We never ask questions."
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 33073
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Graham Kennedy » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:34 am

Lighthawk wrote:I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?

This, to me, was actually the most important aspect of the film.

All the arguments for moving the Ba'ku focus on ideas like the fact that a government can have eminent domain and force purchase land to build a road, or a military base or whatever because the benefit to society outweighs the rights of a few. But that's really only true when dealing with your own citizens. We're part of a society, we have a voice in how that society is run, and that gives the society a moral right to exert authority over us.

That's the argument employed with the Maquis. Yes, the Federation basically screwed over some of its people to protect the greater number. That's fair enough, some Federation citizens got screwed so the rest didn't have to go to war. You can still argue whether this was a good thing to do, and even whether it's legal to essentially deny some of your citizens their citizenship, but at least the principle of harming some to help most does apply.

But the Ba'ku really do not seem to be Federation citizens. It's never baldly stated that they are or are not but for Pete's sake, they've never even heard of the Federation until Data shows up, they can't possibly be Federation members. They're apparently within Federation space, but we don't even know what that means - just how much territory does the Federation control, and how is it legally defined? We haven't a clue. But I find it very difficult to believe that they simply draw a big volume of space on a map and declare that they own everything and everyone within it. Which really makes the idea that they have any right to screw them over nonsensical.
Give a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a day. SET a man on fire, and you will keep him warm for the rest of his life...
User avatar
Graham Kennedy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8104
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Banbury, UK

Re: SFDebris: Insurrection

Postby Mikey » Mon Jun 27, 2011 11:35 am

Excellent point, GK. The idea of citizenship being based on the government owning a planet when the inhabitants aren't denizens of that government's sphere is ludicrous.
"We've been over this. We don't shoot first and ask questions later."
"Of course! We never ask questions."
User avatar
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
 
Posts: 33073
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:04 am
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA

Next

Return to TNG

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron