Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

This forum is for discussing Chuck's videos as they are publicly released. And for bashing Neelix, but that's just repeating what I already said.
User avatar
FakeGeekGirl
Officer
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:53 am

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by FakeGeekGirl »

This is the first review I've ever been disappointed in. I disagree with the final rating of plenty of episodes but this bothered me because there was a lot of really fascinating discussion left on the table. Like I really would have liked more than one sentence about the AIDS allegory or Star Trek's views on euthanasia. Some more commentary on how important this episode was for Bashir's character development would have been nice.

Hell this review could have gone back to back with "Confessions and Lamentations" with a companion video about AIDS allegories in science fiction comparing and contrasting how hopeful Trek was and how bleak B5 was. In my opinion both were necessary - Confessions and Lamentations is a dire warning about denialism, The Quickening is a life affirming reminder that it's not hopeless, and it may be too late for this generation but we can save the next one (in real life, by spreading awareness about the need for safe sex, offering antiretrovirals to prevent maternal transmission, and fighting to make sure people have access to proper medication while scientists continue to try to find a proper cure). Or it could have brought up other works that tackled the topic.

And I know that this part is extremely subjective but ... I teared up just watching the clips used in this review. I bawl at this episode, so I'm kind of stunned to hear it described as not engaging. I guess my experience was really different ... maybe it's because I work in medical research so I relate more both to Bashir and the general plot? I don't know.
bronnt
Officer
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by bronnt »

Wait, did Kira say she was taking the Runabout to hide in the Gymkata nebula? :lol:
User avatar
PerrySimm
Captain
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:37 am

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by PerrySimm »

Much like "...Nor the Battle to the Strong", Bashir has been proven as a real Doctors Without Borders-style hero. Only this time we get to see it up close and personal.

A lot of Star Trek episodes aspire to say something about the human condition, but this one manages to confront life and death, hope and despair, and ultimately gives the satisfaction of snatching an unexpected victory from the jaws of defeat. With science!
UGxlYXNlIHByb3ZpZGUgeW91ciBjaGFsbGVuZ2UgcmVzcG9uc2UgZm9yIFJFRCA5NC4K
G-Man
Officer
Posts: 484
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 3:59 am

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by G-Man »

The only thing that disappointed me about the review was that Chuck did not relate it to the morphogenic virus plot at the end of the series - really, the Dominion were given a taste of their own medicine.
"You say I'm a dreamer/we're two of a kind/looking for some perfect world/we know we'll never find" - Thompson Twins
User avatar
Linkara
Officer
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2018 9:44 am

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by Linkara »

I do see where Chuck is coming from with this one - there's nothing WRONG with it, but it's just one of those outings that's just not that engaging. I see it all the time - TV shows or movies that aren't actually bad, but there's nothing clever or interesting enough about them to really comment on. I do agree that some other points could be brought up in regards to both the allegories and Bashir's character development, but I think that just elevates it to a 5.
User avatar
CareerKnight
Officer
Posts: 186
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2017 3:49 pm

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by CareerKnight »

MerelyAFan wrote:I just wish its events could have either been referred to or at least been a bit more relevant later on.
Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges calls back to it but not in any meaningful way (just a discussion on the quickening virus). I'd have to watch this one again to be able to weigh in on whether I agree with Chuck's rating or not. Only have seen this once and before the review all I could have told you was the setup.
bronnt
Officer
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by bronnt »

This episode felt like a huge turning point for Bashir. In late season 4, he would still sometimes fall into that annoying egocentrism, where he'd try to dominate conversations or just try to make them about him. This was a humbling experience for him. Siddig's speech actually captures the growth of this character, who spoke loudly and quick in the early seasons, but later on, he's speaking in a softer and slower cadence more often.

I'd honestly put this as one of the 3 most important episodes in Bashir's character arc, after "Dr. Bashir, I presume," but ahead of "Distant Voices" ("Armageddon Game" was also very significant, but mostly for establishing the bedrock of the O'Brien/Bashir relationship). One of the things that I loved most about this episode is that, at the end, after he's triumphed and defeated the virus, he's still agonizing over the data he gathered because he couldn't find a cure, and an entire generation of people are still going to die from this. It's a bittersweet mixture of hope and sorrow. He'll keep looking for a cure even though he doesn't really have much hope of finding one.
MerelyAFan wrote:I just wish its events could have either been referred to or at least been a bit more relevant later on.
As mentioned, the Quickening Virus receives a callback later. This is also the episode that introduced Kukalaka, who would return at least a few more times afterward. And as I said, I think Siddig's performance carries a bit of the gravitas from this episode forward. We're fine with his transition into being a more mature, wiser character because his journey gives him the sense that he earned it.
User avatar
FakeGeekGirl
Officer
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:53 am

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by FakeGeekGirl »

G-Man wrote:The only thing that disappointed me about the review was that Chuck did not relate it to the morphogenic virus plot at the end of the series - really, the Dominion were given a taste of their own medicine.
It also came right after "To the Death" which is probably when the audience's sympathy for the Jem'Hadar was highest. This episode was likely placed here to say "Okay but don't feel too bad for them or anyone else in the Dominion, this is the kind of stuff they inflict on innocent people."
Sir Will
Officer
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:30 am

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by Sir Will »

zardox78 wrote:Wow. The way you were talking, I was expecting like an apologetic 7, or maybe even a 5 at the lowest. But a 3? Because... it's not fun to re-watch over and over? Hmm. Interesting criteria. There are a lot of movies and shows I would rate fairly highly that I'd never really want to watch a second time. Then there are mediocre movies and shows that I've watched over and over that I would rank half as high as the ones that I have no interest in re-watching. Guess it's the exact opposite for you. I never really understood how much re-watchability factored into your ratings before.

As far as being engaged, the birth scene at the end is both heartbreaking and heart-warming at the same time... which is hard to do. You gotta forget about the Starfleet POV for an episode, and consider her POV, and the baby's future POV, learning that his mother not only saved his life but probably saved their entire species through her sacrifice for him. This story is more engaging than 90% of all other episodes. Not saying it's better than 90% of all other episodes, but it definitely brings the emotional goods.
Yeah I do think it probably should have been a 5.
User avatar
PapaPalpatine
Officer
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2018 8:56 pm

Re: Star Trek (DS9): The Quickening

Post by PapaPalpatine »

THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post Reply