If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Star Trek)   One Picard to rule them all   (startrek.com) divider line 164
    More: Obvious, Best Star Trek Captain, Picard, Picard Named, Star Trek, interplanetary space, Jean-Luc Picard, New General Catalogue, BorgQueen  
•       •       •

9760 clicks; posted to Geek » on 28 Feb 2012 at 6:54 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



164 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-28 04:51:03 PM  
I agree with this article and think any different opinion is invalid.
 
2012-02-28 05:01:49 PM  
I'll allow this as Sisko was a Commander for almost half of his run.
 
2012-02-28 05:04:37 PM  
From the article comments: While Captain Picard is the leader in this poll, partially for good reason, it is necessary to imprint the importance of Captain Kirk, the man who pioneered interplanetary space exploration. The rest followed after him. The bugs had been worked out, so to speak. The courage of the pioneer is never to be dismissed. This pioneering allows for superior success of predecessors.

Wouldn't that be an argument in favour of Archer, not Kirk?
 
2012-02-28 05:10:04 PM  
Is that a pic of him, or that impersonator that plays him. I can't really tell by that picture...
 
2012-02-28 05:19:48 PM  
Did I wake up in 1992 today?
 
2012-02-28 05:36:27 PM  
They needed a poll to figure this out?
 
2012-02-28 06:58:25 PM  

unyon: Wouldn't that be an argument in favour of Archer, not Kirk?


Yeah and there were two captains before Kirk on Kirk's Enterprise alone.

I WILL NOT GET ROPED INTO THIS

If Picard were captain in "In the Pale Moonlight" instead of Sisko, we'd all be speaking Dominion now.

That is all.
 
2012-02-28 07:04:05 PM  
No love for Sulu?
 
2012-02-28 07:05:49 PM  
Sisko
 
2012-02-28 07:06:28 PM  

Mugato: unyon: Wouldn't that be an argument in favour of Archer, not Kirk?

Yeah and there were two captains before Kirk on Kirk's Enterprise alone.

I WILL NOT GET ROPED INTO THIS

If Picard were captain in "In the Pale Moonlight" instead of Sisko, we'd all be speaking Dominion now.

That is all.


I knew there was a reason I favorited you.
 
2012-02-28 07:08:42 PM  
Picard
Sisko
Archer
Kirk
That one episode where a dog was captain
Janeway
 
2012-02-28 07:10:32 PM  

DamnYankees: Picard
Sisko
Archer
Kirk
That one episode where a dog was captain
Janeway


Pike was the best.
 
2012-02-28 07:11:01 PM  

Mugato: If Picard were captain in "In the Pale Moonlight" instead of Sisko, we'd all be speaking Dominion now.

That is all.


Fine. Promote him to Admiral. But I'll still take Captain Picard.
 
2012-02-28 07:11:56 PM  
What about Captain Pike?

/beep
 
2012-02-28 07:12:07 PM  
www.keyserdev.com

Capt. Pike had the best sense of humor, though.
 
2012-02-28 07:14:09 PM  

ib_thinkin: Fine. Promote him to Admiral. But I'll still take Captain Picard.


Whether he's still captain or not depends how how the court martial turns out, after Picard failed to send that Borg back into the collective with a virus that could have wiped all of them out but decided to get philosophical about it and let him go.

I know but I'm laid up with whiplash and the remote is across the room.
 
2012-02-28 07:14:54 PM  
What about Captain Pike?
 
2012-02-28 07:15:26 PM  
Also, this is a fun 15 minute diversion for Trek fans:

Worf gets denied again and again
 
2012-02-28 07:16:55 PM  
Sisko for the win. Beat the frakking Dominion and saved the alpha quadrant.
 
2012-02-28 07:17:58 PM  
He was a great captain in the show, but in the movies? Not so much. I'd argue that somehow Kirk took over Picard's body between the series and the first TNG film.
 
2012-02-28 07:22:22 PM  

MrEricSir: He was a great captain in the show, but in the movies? Not so much. I'd argue that somehow Kirk took over Picard's body between the series and the first TNG film.


Kirk never lost his shiat like Picard did in the films unless he was possessed or had some space sickness.
 
2012-02-28 07:25:22 PM  
Of course, given the established time travel rules of Star Trek, none of this matters anyway since only Kirk and his predecessors were ever even conceived in the Trek timeline, thanks to the latest movie.

Star Trek time travel does not work on the Many Worlds theory. Traveling into and altering the past does not spin off an alternate timeline, while leaving the original intact.

• "City on the Edge of Forever"
• "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"
• "Yesterday's Enterprise"
• Numerous others, including novels such as Imzadi II.

All of those involved the past being altered, and the "present" was also altered accordingly (albeit usually temporarily). No new timeline was spun off.

Alternate universes do exist (e.g. the Mirror Universe), but they are not temporal divergences.

So, because of the latest movie, Vulcan was destroyed in Kirk's early days, Kirk's own history was radically altered, so the Federation was likewise radically altered.

Thus: Picard, Sisko, Janeway, and the vast majority of their supporting characters, would never even be conceived. The history of the Federation would've been altered way too much to allow for the same sperm to meet the same ovum for any of them, or for that matter any of their parents or likely grandparents.

The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager series did not happen and will not happen in the new continuity. At all. Period. Ditto most of the novel-only properties such as New Frontier (M'k'n'zie of Calhoun would likely exist, but would never even hear of Starfleet, let alone join it as Captain McKenzie Calhoun) or Titan or I.K.S. Gorkon, etc.
 
2012-02-28 07:25:28 PM  
Picard was absolutely the finest captain overall. Archer had interesting personality but was by far the least thoughful, least experience and most emotion ruled (which is understandable considering Archer's place in the Star Trek timeline and humanities experience beyond our solar system).

Picard will always be my favorite- not a day goes by that I don't stare at someone with a steely gaze, lean forward and with a demonstrative, twisting gesture of the hand say "make it so." Typically people just stare at me, registering no response, no sign of recognition, and my heart breaks for them and the emptiness they must feel.

/i know, csb
 
2012-02-28 07:26:44 PM  

COMALite J: Star Trek time travel does not work on the Many Worlds theory. Traveling into and altering the past does not spin off an alternate timeline, while leaving the original intact.

• "City on the Edge of Forever"
• "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"
• "Yesterday's Enterprise"
• Numerous others, including novels such as Imzadi II.

All of those involved the past being altered, and the "present" was also altered accordingly (albeit usually temporarily). No new timeline was spun off.


Actually, in a many world theory *both* things happen. There are plenty of other Trek episodes that rely on the Many Worlds theory - most notably Parallels.
 
2012-02-28 07:29:42 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: DamnYankees: Picard
Sisko
Archer
Kirk
That one episode where a dog was captain
Janeway

Pike was the best.


BEEP!
 
2012-02-28 07:30:50 PM  

COMALite J: Of course, given the established time travel rules of Star Trek, none of this matters anyway since only Kirk and his predecessors were ever even conceived in the Trek timeline, thanks to the latest movie.

Star Trek time travel does not work on the Many Worlds theory. Traveling into and altering the past does not spin off an alternate timeline, while leaving the original intact.

• "City on the Edge of Forever"
• "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"
• "Yesterday's Enterprise"
• Numerous others, including novels such as Imzadi II.

All of those involved the past being altered, and the "present" was also altered accordingly (albeit usually temporarily). No new timeline was spun off.

Alternate universes do exist (e.g. the Mirror Universe), but they are not temporal divergences.

So, because of the latest movie, Vulcan was destroyed in Kirk's early days, Kirk's own history was radically altered, so the Federation was likewise radically altered.

Thus: Picard, Sisko, Janeway, and the vast majority of their supporting characters, would never even be conceived. The history of the Federation would've been altered way too much to allow for the same sperm to meet the same ovum for any of them, or for that matter any of their parents or likely grandparents.

The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager series did not happen and will not happen in the new continuity. At all. Period. Ditto most of the novel-only properties such as New Frontier (M'k'n'zie of Calhoun would likely exist, but would never even hear of Starfleet, let alone join it as Captain McKenzie Calhoun) or Titan or I.K.S. Gorkon, etc.


According to that logic, I guess we're stuck choosing between Kirk and Archer. That makes it easy.

On another note Mugato- it was Picard's unbending devotion to the prime directive and his own personal ethos that made him a great and compelling captain of an exploratory vessel. While he displayed some skill in battle (i.e. the Picard maneuver), for the most part he would have made a crappy war-time captain or captain of a battleship- his morals would have gotten in the way of winning more often than not.
 
2012-02-28 07:32:23 PM  
No love for Captain Garrett? Her sacrifice did change the course of history and prevented a Federation/Klingon war.
 
2012-02-28 07:33:07 PM  

Mugato: unyon: Wouldn't that be an argument in favour of Archer, not Kirk?

Yeah and there were two captains before Kirk on Kirk's Enterprise alone.

I WILL NOT GET ROPED INTO THIS

If Picard were captain in "In the Pale Moonlight" instead of Sisko, we'd all be speaking Dominion now.

That is all.


Romulans entering the war did not make a lick of difference considering the entire over-arching plot depended on Sisko literally invoking Deus Ex Machina by having the wormhole aliens destroy the Dominion reinforcement fleet.

In fact, given that little fact, not a damn thing that happened in DS9 mattered.
 
2012-02-28 07:34:41 PM  

Mugato: MrEricSir: He was a great captain in the show, but in the movies? Not so much. I'd argue that somehow Kirk took over Picard's body between the series and the first TNG film.

Kirk never lost his shiat like Picard did in the films unless he was possessed or had some space sickness.


KAHHNNNNNNNNN
 
2012-02-28 07:35:40 PM  

COMALite J: Of course, given the established time travel rules of Star Trek, none of this matters anyway since only Kirk and his predecessors were ever even conceived in the Trek timeline, thanks to the latest movie.

Star Trek time travel does not work on the Many Worlds theory. Traveling into and altering the past does not spin off an alternate timeline, while leaving the original intact.

• "City on the Edge of Forever"
• "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"
• "Yesterday's Enterprise"
• Numerous others, including novels such as Imzadi II.

All of those involved the past being altered, and the "present" was also altered accordingly (albeit usually temporarily). No new timeline was spun off.

Alternate universes do exist (e.g. the Mirror Universe), but they are not temporal divergences.

So, because of the latest movie, Vulcan was destroyed in Kirk's early days, Kirk's own history was radically altered, so the Federation was likewise radically altered.

Thus: Picard, Sisko, Janeway, and the vast majority of their supporting characters, would never even be conceived. The history of the Federation would've been altered way too much to allow for the same sperm to meet the same ovum for any of them, or for that matter any of their parents or likely grandparents.

The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager series did not happen and will not happen in the new continuity. At all. Period. Ditto most of the novel-only properties such as New Frontier (M'k'n'zie of Calhoun would likely exist, but would never even hear of Starfleet, let alone join it as Captain McKenzie Calhoun) or Titan or I.K.S. Gorkon, etc.


Mirror farking Universe........
 
2012-02-28 07:37:25 PM  

germ78: Also, this is a fun 15 minute diversion for Trek fans:

Worf gets denied again and again


Not what I thought it was going to be. (New window)
 
2012-02-28 07:40:38 PM  

imgod2u: KAHHNNNNNNNNN


That was just Kirk being awesome. Besides, he already had it set up that Spock would beam him up in two hours, he had to let Khan think that he won. He never cried like a biatch or throw a rifle into his display of little ships.
 
2012-02-28 07:41:22 PM  

imgod2u: Mugato: MrEricSir: He was a great captain in the show, but in the movies? Not so much. I'd argue that somehow Kirk took over Picard's body between the series and the first TNG film.

Kirk never lost his shiat like Picard did in the films unless he was possessed or had some space sickness.

KAHHNNNNNNNNN


Also
"Spock! You have to get out of there! Spock!" as he falls to his knees outside the dilithium chamber.
and
"You've killed my son! Klingon bastards you've killed my son!"
 
2012-02-28 07:41:53 PM  
Make it so.
 
2012-02-28 07:42:01 PM  

Mugato: He never cried like a biatch


See above.
 
2012-02-28 07:42:27 PM  
If you were hiring a Starfleet captain then without a doubt Picard is the most competent, reliable, and respectable. It's hard to imagine any finer portrayal of fine leadership.
 
2012-02-28 07:43:24 PM  

rickycal78: Mugato: He never cried like a biatch

See above.


Yeah, for like a second and then he blew up the ship. He didn't blather on for 20 minutes.
 
2012-02-28 07:44:09 PM  

Mugato: rickycal78: Mugato: He never cried like a biatch

See above.

Yeah, for like a second and then he blew up the ship. He didn't blather on for 20 minutes.


For a second? Half of Star Trek 6 was him biatching.
 
2012-02-28 07:44:45 PM  

Nem Wan: If you were hiring a Starfleet captain then without a doubt Picard is the most competent, reliable, and respectable. It's hard to imagine any finer portrayal of fine leadership.


Yep. Kirk goes off half-cocked all the time.
 
2012-02-28 07:45:58 PM  
30.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-02-28 07:47:12 PM  

Mugato: rickycal78: Mugato: He never cried like a biatch

See above.

Yeah, for like a second and then he blew up the ship. He didn't blather on for 20 minutes.


He didn't blow shiat up in the first scenario, Spock had just sacrificed himself to get the Enterprise out of the way of the Genesis device going critical after Khan activated it. He then proceeded to lose his shiat during Spocks eulogy.

The second scenario you could argue that he goes on to kick some Klingon ass, but he was pretty upset over it.
 
2012-02-28 07:47:12 PM  

imgod2u: For a second? Half of Star Trek 6 was him biatching


What? He made a captains log about his son and didn't shed a tear. He didn't

t1.gstatic.com
 
2012-02-28 07:47:58 PM  

DamnYankees: Picard
Sisko
Archer
Kirk
That one episode where a dog was captain
Janeway


images.cheezburger.com
 
2012-02-28 07:48:46 PM  
i might have cared about this 20 years ago.

/kirk, duh
 
2012-02-28 07:50:00 PM  
Sisko is the best wartime captain.

Picard is the best peacetime captain.

/just watched/rewatched all of TNG and DS9. On season 2 of VOY.
 
2012-02-28 07:50:47 PM  

Mugato: imgod2u: For a second? Half of Star Trek 6 was him biatching

What? He made a captains log about his son and didn't shed a tear. He didn't

[t1.gstatic.com image 195x229]


I'm sorry, did Kirk ever see 4 lights? The most he ever had to suffer was green syphilis.
 
2012-02-28 07:57:54 PM  
I use this argument why Picard is the best. It was my favorite episode where he learns to play that flute and lives two lives, one life in mere minutes.
 
2012-02-28 07:58:55 PM  

COMALite J: Of course, given the established time travel rules of Star Trek, none of this matters anyway since only Kirk and his predecessors were ever even conceived in the Trek timeline, thanks to the latest movie.

Star Trek time travel does not work on the Many Worlds theory. Traveling into and altering the past does not spin off an alternate timeline, while leaving the original intact.

• "City on the Edge of Forever"
• "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home"
• "Yesterday's Enterprise"
• Numerous others, including novels such as Imzadi II.

All of those involved the past being altered, and the "present" was also altered accordingly (albeit usually temporarily). No new timeline was spun off.

Alternate universes do exist (e.g. the Mirror Universe), but they are not temporal divergences.

So, because of the latest movie, Vulcan was destroyed in Kirk's early days, Kirk's own history was radically altered, so the Federation was likewise radically altered.

Thus: Picard, Sisko, Janeway, and the vast majority of their supporting characters, would never even be conceived. The history of the Federation would've been altered way too much to allow for the same sperm to meet the same ovum for any of them, or for that matter any of their parents or likely grandparents.

The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager series did not happen and will not happen in the new continuity. At all. Period. Ditto most of the novel-only properties such as New Frontier (M'k'n'zie of Calhoun would likely exist, but would never even hear of Starfleet, let alone join it as Captain McKenzie Calhoun) or Titan or I.K.S. Gorkon, etc.


I'm sorry, we're talking about real Star Trek here, not some pretty boys playacting in roles they shouldn't be in, in a movie written and produced by some talentless hacks.

Anyway, Sisko was the best. But, if you want to say "He was a commander for the first three years, he doesn't count", then I guess Picard does win.
 
2012-02-28 07:59:23 PM  
No votes for Captain Dunsel?
 
2012-02-28 08:00:35 PM  

Cuchulane: No votes for Captain Dunsel?


Was he Captain of the USS Lollipop?
 
Displayed 50 of 164 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report