www.ditl.org

Maybe basing it on something other than extremely dodgy morals and dropping the preaching would have been a start.

Something other than the "prodigal son" theme between the Son'a and Ba'ku would've been nice, too.

I thought Insurrection suffered through not being really clear on what the legal and political basis of the movie was. I know it's not often you hear somebody say a movie could be improved by adding more of that, but in this case it matters because it ties directly into what the story is about.

For instance, the whole conspiracy is operating under orders from the Federation Council. Picard questions how there can be such an order. Well... how can there? Picard frames it as a moral problem, but it's as much a legal one. The Baku are an alien culture, and pre or post warp they are still covered by the Prime Directive - there are ample examples where the Federation is unable to interfere in another advanced culture because of it. So how can the Council order Starfleet to violate Federation law? And surely Starfleet would be bound to disobey such orders if they were issued, wouldn't they?

The only take on this I can think of is that the Council acted illegally. My best guess is that some faction of the council conspired with Dougherty so he could ease his conscience and convince other officers to go along by claiming government backing. And Picard's actions in having Riker warn people about what was happening then make sense, because it would blow the conspiracy.

Only... if that's so, then what's the "Insurrection" exactly? Picard and the E-E crew are doing exactly what they should, legally and morally.

So option two is that the Council did some sort of end-around the law. I don't really see how they could do that without it being public knowledge, though. And if it is, then why have Riker warning people? The people already know and approve!

It just doesn't hold together very well. And since that legal dilemma is the entire basis of the movie... well that kinda makes it pretty sucky.

To be perfectly honest, we don't know how the PD is phrased, so we don't know for sure it they did violate it. There may be some sort of "...unless it benefits us" clause written in small print somewhere that justifies interference if it's of benefit to the UFP. Hell, given the amount of times Starfleet captains have violated it and not gotten so much as a slap on the wrist, there must be some sort of loophole somewhere.

Rochey wrote:To be perfectly honest, we don't know how the PD is phrased, so we don't know for sure it they did violate it. There may be some sort of "...unless it benefits us" clause written in small print somewhere that justifies interference if it's of benefit to the UFP. Hell, given the amount of times Starfleet captains have violated it and not gotten so much as a slap on the wrist, there must be some sort of loophole somewhere.

It's the "in case you feel like a dick" clause.

"In case," or "when?"

Definitely the latter, in most cases.

Bryan Moore wrote:What could have been done to make Insurrection more epic, then?

A complete re-write.

Rochey wrote:To be perfectly honest, we don't know how the PD is phrased, so we don't know for sure it they did violate it. There may be some sort of "...unless it benefits us" clause written in small print somewhere that justifies interference if it's of benefit to the UFP. Hell, given the amount of times Starfleet captains have violated it and not gotten so much as a slap on the wrist, there must be some sort of loophole somewhere.

We don't know enough to know that captains have gotten away with it, either. We know Picard remained respected and in command after violations. We have no idea if he received official reprimands, lost seniority, or any number of other things.

And while we don't know the wording of the PD, it would be rather incredible for it to have some clause on the end that basically read "only joking", considering how often it is invoked to prevent them doing what they want to.

We don't know enough to know that captains have gotten away with it, either. We know Picard remained respected and in command after violations. We have no idea if he received official reprimands, lost seniority, or any number of other things.

Fair point. Hell, maybe it's one of the reasons he wasn't really offered a promotion to admiral for a long time, despite being captain of the flagship.

And while we don't know the wording of the PD, it would be rather incredible for it to have some clause on the end that basically read "only joking", considering how often it is invoked to prevent them doing what they want to.

True. Maybe the clause can only be invoked by a high-ranking admiral or council member?

Rather than a clause, I'd guess that even members of the Council will follow the "it's not a crime if you don't get caught" philosophy.

And they just don't look to hard

I think a lot of it is that they just got greedy. The whole "If we say its ok people might think its ok" line of thought. Of course that does well when your own flagship turns against you.