Second Edit

Discussion on TNG Season 2, Episode 7: "Unnatural Selection"

Overview of the Episode

• The episode revolves around the investigation of the USS Lantry's crew deaths due to old age. It first aired on January 30, 1989, and was written by John Mason and Mike Gray, directed by Paul Lynch.

Critique of Dr. Pulaski

• Adam expresses strong disapproval of Dr. Pulaski as a medical officer, labeling her as potentially the worst in Starfleet history. This sets a critical tone for the discussion about her character throughout the episode.

• The conversation shifts to a comparison with Anakin Skywalker from "Revenge of the Sith," highlighting issues with character establishment and backtracking in storytelling that parallels Pulaski's portrayal in this episode.

Character Development Issues

• There is criticism regarding how Pulaski is presented; despite being described as an excellent physician, previous episodes have not established her competence effectively, leading to inconsistencies in character development.

• The dialogue suggests that instead of telling viewers about Pulaski’s skills through exposition, they should have shown her capabilities through action (e.g., saving someone during a medical emergency). This aligns with the principle of "show don't tell."

Plot Mechanics and Procedures

• The narrative includes procedural elements where protocols are followed when dealing with emergencies aboard another ship (USS Lantry), showcasing Starfleet's operational standards but also highlighting Pulaski's dismissive attitude towards these procedures.

• A significant plot point arises when it is revealed that all crew members died from natural causes linked to genetic engineering research at Darwin Station, which raises ethical questions about such practices within Starfleet regulations.

Conclusion on Episode Dynamics

• The discussion emphasizes how characters like Picard should be more proactive in understanding their crew members' backgrounds rather than relying solely on hearsay or assumptions from others (like Betazoids). This reflects broader themes of trust and leadership within Starfleet dynamics.

Exploring the Super Kids in Star Trek

The Intriguing LinkedIn Profile and Character Motivations

• Discussion about a character's impressive LinkedIn profile, hinting at her ambition to join the Enterprise.

• Clarification that the genetic research is not the cause of issues; children with super immune systems should be evacuated.

Overpowered Humans and Their Abilities

• Commentary on humans possessing telepathy and extraordinary antibodies, raising questions about their capabilities.

• Speculation on how these super antibodies function, questioning if they can cure diseases through blood transfusions.

Medical Protocols and Risky Decisions

• Critique of a medical professional's disregard for protocols when handling a body covered in shielding material.

• Concerns raised about exposing the Enterprise to potential disease transmission due to reckless decisions made by the doctor.

Logical Flaws in Episode Structure

• Observations on wasted time arguing over shuttlecraft usage instead of utilizing available technology effectively.

• Mention of an android aboard who could have been used to handle potentially infectious materials safely.

Character Development and Scene Highlights

• Notable scene between Picard and Palaski where underlying tensions are revealed despite logical flaws in their argument.

• Introduction of O'Brien as a character, marking his first appearance in this episode while highlighting budget constraints affecting set design.

Discussion on Ethical Issues and Character Dynamics

Ethical Dilemmas in Science

• The conversation highlights the ethical oversight of scientists who fail to recognize that their own children are causing harm, raising questions about responsibility and awareness in scientific communities.

• A critique is made regarding the lack of urgency among children on the planet, suggesting a disconnect between their actions and consequences.

Character Development and Trauma

• Palaski's character arc illustrates how individuals without significant trauma may seek out new issues to confront, as seen when she becomes more empathetic towards Data after her infection.

• The term "prevalence induced concept change" is introduced, explaining how people shift focus to less pressing issues when faced with real challenges.

Solutions and Plot Devices

• A humorous suggestion is made about resolving the episode's conflict by simply destroying the science station, reflecting frustration with narrative choices.

• Discussion arises around the impracticality of beaming Data into space for decontamination, questioning standard procedures in crisis management.

Search for DNA Evidence

• The characters struggle to find any biological samples from Palaski, highlighting absurdities in Starfleet's sterile practices and raising doubts about their efficiency.

• Riker and Dao’s search for DNA evidence emphasizes a lack of proper tools or methods, showcasing a comedic yet critical view of their investigative approach.

What Are We Doing? Discussion on Writing and Character Development

New Writers and Consistency

• The writers of the episode are unfamiliar to the speaker, raising concerns about consistency in storytelling. They suggest that for continuity, the new writers should double-check previous material.

• A reference is made to a past episode titled "The Chase," where ancient DNA was discovered, highlighting a potential oversight in the current writing.

Primordial Species and Beliefs

• The conversation shifts to primordial species and how their existence could challenge beliefs about human origins, contrasting scientific discovery with indigenous perspectives.

• There's an emphasis on how without proper understanding of our progenitors, people might revert to mythological explanations for human existence.

Character Reactions and Makeup Quality

• A scene involving Picard's reaction to old Pulaski showcases strong makeup effects; his disgust indicates effective character portrayal through visual means.

• The discussion highlights Patrick Stewart's performance as elevating the script's quality, suggesting that good acting can compensate for weaker writing.

Ethical Dilemmas in Science Fiction

• Picard’s handling of ethical dilemmas throughout the episode is noted as a solid narrative thread, reinforcing his authority amidst chaotic situations. He expresses commitment to resolving crises effectively.

• The concept of a "fountain of youth" is introduced humorously; it raises questions about mortality and self-replication in science fiction narratives. This leads to discussions about practical implications if such technology existed.

Plot Holes and Character Logic

• The dialogue critiques inconsistencies within the plot regarding resurrection capabilities; characters could easily recreate themselves using DNA samples, creating significant narrative issues.

• Observations are made about character interactions—specifically Pulaski’s refusal to shake O'Brien's hand—which hints at underlying biases or conflicts within character dynamics. This adds depth but also confusion regarding her motivations.

Scientific Credibility vs Narrative Choices

• There’s skepticism towards Pulaski’s reluctance to use transporters despite being a medical professional; this inconsistency undermines her credibility as a scientist within the story context. Additionally, real-world parallels are drawn with doctors testing vaccines on themselves for expediency, which complicates her character arc further due to poor execution in writing choices.

Discussion on Episode Writing and Character Development

Critique of Character Representation

• The speaker expresses concern that writers may not fully understand the characters' abilities and attributes, leading to inconsistencies in episodes.

• They note that while the episode showcases protocols effectively, it ultimately undermines itself with poor decision-making, particularly regarding character portrayals.

Writer Background and Impact

• Reference is made to John Mason, a writer for this episode, highlighting his limited experience as he only contributed to one episode.

• The discussion suggests that the lack of experienced writers may contribute to the overall quality of the episode.

Plot Decisions and Their Consequences

Wastefulness in Starfleet's Actions

• A critique is made about Starfleet's decision-making process, suggesting they could have salvaged a ship by simply venting its contents instead of destroying it.

• The speaker reflects on how this wasteful act illustrates a broader theme of excess within the Federation.

Changes in Script Drafts

• Fun fact: An earlier draft included more extensive scenes aboard the Lantry, which were cut from the final version.

• Another change involved removing a female character named Reena who was meant to create comedic situations; her role was replaced by O'Brien.

Production Insights and Creative Choices

Controversial Creative Decisions

• Fun fact: There was an original plan for Darwin children to appear nude, which was scrapped due to practical concerns about transparent furniture.

• Makeup designer Michael Westmore noted that creating old-age makeup for this episode was easier than previous attempts due to different character features.

Retrospective Issues with Genetic Experiments

• A retrospective issue arises concerning a ban on genetic experiments introduced later in DS9; this creates continuity problems for this episode's narrative.

Comparative Analysis with Other Episodes

Similarities with Previous Storylines

• The current episode shares themes with "The Deadly Years," where crew members face aging issues; both involve risky medical decisions by characters close to death.

• Mention is made of Tagert’s daughter being referenced in expanded universe materials, showcasing how novel writers connect various storylines creatively.

Discussion on Episode Quality

General Impressions of the Episode

• The speaker expresses a casual attitude towards the episode, suggesting it was created without much thought or care.

• A contrasting perspective is presented, emphasizing a more nuanced approach to evaluating the episode's quality.

• The speaker rates the episode highly, indicating a strong positive reaction with phrases like "big fat juicy one."

• There is an agreement between speakers regarding their ratings and thoughts on the episode's quality.

Critique of Episode Content

• One speaker describes their experience as "horrendous," citing numerous plot holes and missed opportunities for improvement.

• Despite their dissatisfaction, they still believe this episode surpasses those from "Discovery," highlighting a comparative analysis of Star Trek series.

• The discussion reflects a shared sentiment that even poorly received episodes from earlier Star Trek series are preferable to recent productions.