Star Trek Continues (TV Series) Embracing the Winds (2016) User Reviews

Captain Kirk...the feminist...and a Kobayashi Maru-type ending.

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 11 November 2019]

While some might think that this installment of "Star Trek Continues" is a bit preachy and indicative of our times, it must be remembered that the original show did NOT shy away from cultural issues such as racism. So, the fact that this is a strongly feminist episode seems appropriate considering the pedigree.

When the show begins, Kirk and Spock are meeting with Commodore Gray (Erin Gray of "Buck Rogers" fame). It seems that there was an accident with the life support system on the Hood*....and the entire crew is dead. Because of that they need a new crew and commander...and she wants Spock for that job. However, a woman who also seems very qualified objects and demands a hearing--saying that although women are in Star Fleet, command of a Constitution-class ship has always eluded them. Kirk, surprisingly, seems very sympathetic...even a feminist. Not QUITE the same Kirk of the original series fame, huh?

While this episode DID still feel a bit preachy, it was enjoyable and had a good point to make. While you see female commanders often in series such as "Star Trek the Next Generation" and "Star Trek Voyager", in the original series universe, you did rarely see women in charge.

The ending was interesting, as many ways it reminded me of the Kobayashi Maru scenario in which Kirk somehow avoids making a forced choice...and in this case, a miracle happened to save him once again from having to make the choice between Spock and the lady Commander. Worth seeing.

*If you care, the HMS Hood was a very famous British cruiser sunk by the German battleship Bismarck during WWII...and nearly every crew member perished in the incident. Of the more than 1300 crew members, only three managed to escape.

I'm Not Angry.

[michael-04313 · 8/10 · 19 March 2020]

I'm not angry, and I'm happy about that. Someone finally managed to make a preachy piece of pop culture that doesn't rub it in the viewers face (Chris Chibnall, lesson to be learned). What I liked about the episode in it's political views was that it raises the question of gender equality (or lack thereof), but it doesn't make the preachy character out as the protagonist, though she does bring up good points. The acting was quite good, and it was nice to see Chekov shine in this episode. It was also good to see the return of the Starfleet dress uniform. One thing this episode brings up is Starfleet's problem with ships. Unlike Star Wars where ships are pumped out of the factory at breakneck speed, Star Trek gives one a sense that it is not easy to build or attain the resources to build a starship. Starships are seen with great value, because Starfleet doen't have many of them (the scene in commodore Grey's office).

Over all, it was a good episode.

Trek at it's Finest

[tedchaynes · 10/10 · 14 May 2019]

The cause of all the debates and arguments over what is or is not Star Trek.. are to some degree.. a result of the legal status of current versions of Trek, ( ie, Discovery and the reboot films). Because of the split between Paramount and Viacom, neither released films nor CBS (current television rights) hold legal realm over images and content necessary to fully bring us the Star Trek that we all know and love. But it goes deeper than that. Current Trek in both mediums panders to a modern audience, which means greater emphasis on action, fights and explosions instead of story and character development. As, I suppose it must in order to gain a core audience and reap a profit. Numbers are, after all, the deciding factor in any franchises continued survival. The problem with that equation is that Star Trek.. at it's core... The FINEST and best stories of Star Trek have ALWAYS been it's characters and philosophies. Which requires a love and respect for the continuity of the franchise in all it's past incarnations. Ron Moore, who has written some of the best Star Trek episodes ever, has often stressed the problems of pleasing the fans is the vast amount of canon amassed over the years, and the difficulty of keeping up with it, and thus not pissing off the fans. This led to him praising the reboot films, stating publicly on several occasions that starting the franchise over was exactly what it needed. And while I praise Vic and company for their politics in embracing and respecting the reboots in general... and Discovery in particular.. I do not agree with them. The work these people have done with this series shows that embrace to be false. The love and care.. as well as their respect for canon shows.. and is painted with many multi-colored brush strokes.. onto every aspect of every episode. The fact that it is all done for the fans ( something that is totally absent from current professional productions).. and not for profit.. makes it all the more special. Saying that, of course.. one HAS to admit that it is not perfect, but neither was the original series.. which we all know had it's fair share of warts and lemons., most of which have grouped themselves into the third season of TOS. Which brings me to this story. The episode Turnabout Intruder ended the third.. and last season of TOS. It's story line involved the slightly insane Dr. Janice Lester switching bodies with Kirk, fueled by the motivation of her jealousy of Kirk's captaincy , and that " Your world of Starship captain's doesn't admit women " This line, in dialogue as well as story wise, has been one of things that has made that series ender seem silly and irrelevant (Shatner's hamming aside). After all.. we have seen so many females in command since that show, it was seen to be a flub, or something that must be regarded as non-canonical .I wince everytime I hear Lester utter that line. After all.. the capability of Women VS Men.. the so called "Battle of the Sexes " had been rendered pretty much moot by the late 20th century. Certainly, there would be no issue with Women being granted command of a Starship by the 23rd century ! But, Turnabout Intruder was made at a time when women were still very much in a struggle for their basic rights, and the Women's movement was largely regarded as a silly annoyance. Within the next five years.. what changes would come !.. resulting in Lester's insane motivation impossible to take seriously But hear comes James Kerwin and Vic, who have created a brilliant and entertaining episode out of a plot hole that, for decades.. made no sense, and explains Starfleet's policy. It seems a slight reason for praise.. but it's not. It shows the love that this company has for Star Trek to put a band aid on this small.. but annoying little wound that has driven fans crazy for decades. If only the same kind of love and respect was shown in the official productions today. Thank you James, and most especially, Vic. And to the fans.. if you really wanna know what Star Trek is supposed to be.. here's a modern production that proves there are still people who knows how to get it right.

What a miserable episode

[machrf · 5/10 · 16 July 2023]

This is shocking after the great and wonderful episode before this one. This one, I would have voted against the woman candidate then and today, her hostility makes her an unfit candidate for any position. The ending also does not fit the unfit stance she took during her attempt at command.

She clearly did not respect her superiors and was adversarial in her dealing with anyone that questioned her. Leadership is full of people questioning you. She also avoided valid questions which shows evasiveness and lack of respect to the person asking the question. People such as this make for a lousy leader.

So, the point that may have been trying to be made was not made. I vote for Spock and not the hostile woman.

It's not the message, it's the poor handling

[skinnybert · 4/10 · 10 July 2022]

Don't get me wrong: it was right for STC to pursue this story. This just wasn't the way to present it. Almost everything in it fails to provide adequate rationale, with each detail serving just to bring up plot points. I notice John & Mary Black are no longer overseeing the scripts, and can only lament the sudden fall in quality from the six episodes they supervised.

What do I mean? Well (to pick one) would you congratulate someone on a promotion, and then tell them there are complications, and then reveal that actually it isn't at all settled? Why congratulate someone when you know it isn't actually settled yet?

Sure, people get excited and jump the gun sometimes, but that wasn't the point of this episode. And the script didn't seem too sure what it wanted its point should be, only the issue it wanted to bring up .... to no actual conclusion. So there is no actual story here.

Of course, some will still want to defend this, and say "hey, at least they tried, and their hearts were in the right place." And YES: original Trek was sometimes preachy, sometimes clumsy, sometimes hamhanded. But bad writing in the past doesn't change the fact that bad writing in the present is, well, *bad* -- especially when it's specifically attempting to redress the error made in a previous (TOS) episode, but then makes it worse by sloppy handling and poorly-thought arguments.*

*I'm being generous here; this episode has no real arguments, just people making declarations, asserting conclusions and challenging straw-man assumptions -- none of which are adequately demonstrated, and all entirely failing to point toward any understanding. Very sub-par Trek.

Extra bonus quiz:

Q. Why is Spock on the shuttlecraft in the first place?

Q. Why is Kirk interviewing a candidate for captain on another ship?

Q. Why would command placement have to take place faster because a candidate got upset?

Q. Why would an officer get to decide what constitutes enough answer regarding an action where people died?

Q. Why is there someone present just to turn on/off a computer, but one of the judges at the command interview has to act as comm officer for a subspace message?

(These are just off the top of my head; there are more)

A Senior Trekker writes..................

[celineduchain · 5/10 · 9 February 2022]

To my mind, Embracing the Winds is the weakest of all the Star Trek Continues episodes as its arguments over the validity of allowing a woman to take command of one of the most important ships in the fleet, a Constitution Class Star Ship, were hackneyed and irrelevant in 2016 never mind by the 23rd Century when this story is set. Given its release two months before the US election, it may even be viewed as a hastily put together piece of political propaganda.

The issue wasn't even settled in this story, with the selection proceedings being offered a free pass by an intervention seconds before Captain Kirk was called upon to cast the deciding vote. The ship with a vacant captaincy conveniently destroyed, we are left with hopeful words and high minded intentions for a more inclusive future.

The crew members aboard the Enterprise and those on the away mission to the Hood are far more watchable than the monumentally embarrassing official hearing scenes taking place on the Starbase. The actors playing Scotty, Chekov and Uhura are given plenty to do for once and the shipboard scenes are so well realised that we could almost be watching Star Trek of 1968. It's a pity they couldn't have been put to the service of a better story.

Following a legal case by the studio, effectively shutting down all fan-made productions, these full-length episodes were hastily concluded in 2017. The creator, Vic Mignogna, subsequently became embroiled in a series of personal law-suits concerning his behaviour towards female cast-mates. Claims and counter claims abounded and, as of 2022, no effective conclusion has yet been reached.

In true Roddenberry fashion, the "message" episodes covered such subjects as: inter-cultural marriage, child abuse, human (or alien) trafficking and the promotion of women to positions of high office. Does this really seem like the oeuvre of a man who disrespects women?

Best watch for yourself.

Fails on two huge fronts

[hurleybird-2 · 2/10 · 29 July 2020]

ST:C is great, but this episode betrays Gene's legacy and feels out of place.

First, humanity in the 23rd century is supposed to be more evolved than the present day, and that's kind of the point of Star Trek. The federation isn't a foil for modern society, it's an example of what it might someday achieve. Simply transplanting modern issues into that future society feels forced and inauthentic, and whenever Star Trek has flirted with this, it's comes out worse for it. The appropriate foil for modern society, and the one that works and is used all of the time in Star Trek, is found in alien cultures and planets.

The second big fail is the moral lesson itself, because there's an easy answer that is readily ignored: Simply, *the ends don't justify the means*, and it's impossible that Spock wouldn't point this out forthwith. When (at least pre-Kurtzman) Star Trek reverses this dictum it's only thanks to astronomical stakes, and coincides with major self reflection (see: In the Pale Moonlight), as opposed to something petty like a promotion. Gene Roddenberry understood this back in the day, but lately there's an unfortunately illiberal strain of progressive ideology that rejects the notion, as is seen here.

Weakest episode by far

[vonnoosh · 4/10 · 21 September 2022]

Kirk's superior is a woman so it is not difficult to imagine other ships had women for Captains which i did. This episode tries too hard to make a point that the show never showed a woman being a Captain in TOS. Personally it doesn't make sense to me for the reason I mentioned and flagging it made this episode very poor. The performances are fine. The production values continue to mimic that of TOS but the story is not up to the standard they already established. They did a better job exploring social issues with What Ships Are For and Lolani because tue issues were centered around aliens. The point was the human race resolved its conflicts with itself. A hopeful vision for the future of earth. That's Star Trek.

Embracing 2016 - This Stinks!

[StuOz · 16 April 2021]

Generally regarded as the least pleasing episode of the series as it deals with modern gender issues that never took place in the 1960s.

Younger viewers might find this hour rather pleasing but the older crowd (like me) will find it a struggle.

In fact, I would just skip this episode all together as it is the sort of thing that lingers in your memory and watching it might damage your memories of STC. There is a nice, very brief, subplot with Chekov (too bad he was not more featured in the series) but other than that - "Embracing 2016" is a stinker.

Note: I have watched all eleven episodes of this series. It seems the makers of the show learned from their mistakes and never went down this sort of road again - in fact the last three episodes are great!

Weak episode

[aqueckboerner · 3/10 · 17 August 2022]

The issues brought up in this episode are ones that seem to be focused on in today's world not during the late 60s with Gene Roddenberry so this episode seemed out of place. I can also tell you that in the late 60s nobody would have ever referred to a woman officer as "Sir" as they did in this episode. I thought the episodes of the show was supposed to reflect what it would have been like if there had been a four season of the original show. I wish they would keep things in that context.