Soval Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 T'Pol was one of the most exilirating and controversial characters to appear in Star Trek in this decade. Even Seven of Nine didn't compare. Should T'Pol be in the next Star Trek? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S0V13T Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I don't really see how she was "exilirating and controversial". Without more information as to what you're getting at here, it's hard to say wether or not Seven of Nine 'compairs'. Compairs in what way? Bocci ball? Endurance running? baloon animals? As for her being in the next series, first of all, there hasn't been any plans announced for another Trek series, and second of all, traditionally speaking, I can't think of a single instance in the Trekverse where a charecter from show a became a regulare in show b (aside from O'brien and Worf). If she was to be in the next series, that would imply that the next series would be set between enterprise adn TOS, wich I don't think would be the most likely timeframe for another Trek series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 I agree S0V...but to set the record straight...he said "Should T'Pol be in the next star trek production" (in the topic title) and "Should T'Pol be in the next Star Trek? (in the body of his message) - not series. But it's a small point. At any rate, it's T'Pol who does not compare (plz make note of correct spelling ;D ) to Seven Of Nine. 7of9 was far and away a better developed character than T'Pol ever was. I did like the character of T'Pol mainly because of the inter-play between her and Trip and her portrayal in the 2 part mirror EP and Carbon Creek. Other than that...run of the mill IMHO. One the other hand...7of9 (although dressed unnecessarily inappropiately throughout the series) was a much stronger, fleshed out character. Watching her develop from drone to human being was interesting and very entertaining. T'Pol simply can not measure up (IMHO). Your comparison is not logical. :P c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vektram Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Oh come on, the only reason anyone likes T'Pol is because they think she's attractive, everyone knows it, not everyone admits it. Trek needs more strong female characters and less female characters chosen just for their "bodily attributes". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 T'Pol and 7of9 were both brought into the ST saga to grab horny male viewers by their brass clackers... ...the fact is they both had interesting histories and stories developed around them as well. If I'd watched more of the Voyager series I might have a preference towards 70f9 but it never really got my attention... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 T'Pol was one of the most exilirating and controversial characters to appear in Star Trek in this decade. Even Seven of Nine didn't compare. I'd have to agree. Season 3 and 4, in paticular, saw her character really develop. She had to deal with new situations, such as the episodes involving her mother, or her trilliam D addiction. However, i think that's exactly what 7of9's character was about. She had to deal with becomming human again, and ultimatly, i think she was a stronger character to work with and we saw more from her as she dealt with humanity and her past. I don't think T'Pol should be in the next series, but that doesn't mean we don't have to see her again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 T'Pol's was as "exhilarating and controversial" nature was directly proportional to her catsuits - a lot like 7 of 9. Sure they tried to toss a bunch of story lines at her but none of them were particularly interesting or credible... more than 7 of 9 but that's not exactly saying much. Making her a Vulcan was really rather foolish... simply because it meant that she was so unemotional and that they had to come up with excuses for her to act out more, which simply detracted from the character. I'd say - don't bother with her. I'm sure a younger, prettier, bustier girl could be stitched into an even tighter catsuit if it was required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 "exhilarating and controversial" not really if you ask me...yeah her character was intresting at times, but I wouldnt actually say it was controversial at all, what was was michele nicolls being one of the first black main characters, now that was ground breaking for its time. Does she deserve to be in any new form of star trek, well no more than say captain sisko, Dax, cheif o brein and so on and so on, there are alot of characters within the star trek franchise that it could be said deserved a role in any new form of star trek lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now