"nobody tries to make us relate to what having to be moved at gunpoint feels like."
I'd agree. Picard makes two references to historical relocations but never goes into enough detail about it. It would have been good to express more about what these relocations are like.
"Maybe 600,000 or 6,000,000. But 600? They try real hard to make such a small number a big issue and it does not work."
I think that's actually one of the strengths of this film. We're so used to huge numbers of people being at stake in sci-fi/fantasy films making it feel more epic, so how do we handle it when it's a smaller number? Does it somehow become more moral when the number gets smaller?
Picard himself makes a point of "How many before it becomes wrong?"
"The reason for not being able to collect the magic radiation are too focused to be taken seriously. It is contrived, like it or otherwise."
They aren't any reasons given for why they can't collect the radiation. The Admiral himself says he doesn't understand the science and just says that many scientist couldn't find another way. That's about it.
"Kirk would have used diplomacy to make Picard look like a stooge. The benefits vs drawbacks are abundantly clear. Kirk's era was pro-life."
Not entirely sure of your point, but here it goes:
Picard would have used, diplomacy, in fact he did. He talked with the Admiral, and was basically told STFU. The So'na were clearly determined to get what they wanted and weren't in any mood to talk. The Ba'ku may have been happy to talk, but frankly were in danger from the outset and needed protection first and foremost.
You're forgetting the time element. The Federation was in trouble and needed something to help it, the So'na were happy to give it only if they did it their way. The controversy of the issue meant they had to be covert if they were going to get what they wanted, and when it comes to something like this, you either do it fast and be done, or be found out and have the plans come to a halt. Once Picard caught whiff of the plan (which was literally in its final stages at the time), it was either rush it to its finish or give up and face huge consequences when everyone found out (and wait years before diplomacy and debate let another opportunity emerge)
"Picard's is being anal about "following the rules as rigidly as possible". What happened to the spirit OF the law in justifiable cases?"
To be honest, I think Picard does. I've noticed many people have strong morals but cloak them in procedure and rules of law. The moment the two diverge, they go with their own morals.
Since StarFleet gave the order for what was to happen to the planet, and that the Prime Directive didn't apply since the people were warp capable, couldn't it be argued that a person who rigidly follows rules would follow orders and leave the people alone? Instead what does Picard do?
"Also, it's hard to believe Picard is quitting Starfleet"
I think the removing of the pips were more symbolic, he never even told anyone. It ends with him saying he'd prefer to continue to serve Starfleet then stay on the planet.
"And the self-destruct button toward the end was another cliché too."
True. (Though it was a pretty complex procedure, and the moment where Picard showed he was willing detonate with him still on it to save lives and the ideals he upheld had a lot of impact.)
reply
share