Quote:
Originally Posted by VisualEcho
I can't believe anyone picked the over-melodramatic Kirk, I mean, dude couldn't even act. All he was interested in was alien poontang, no way he would have made it to his own ship. Oh wait, we have DT as president :biggeseyerollyouveeverseen:
Picard, on the other hand, now he's a ship commander!
|
LOL your words ring true! But in Kirk's defense:
1. Kirk has a better character concept along with history. Look how his character roots are portrayed by Chris pine? Picard on the other hand..did he have a "young Picard" movie? nope because his younger self is probably uninteresting.. Picard was probably a young pompous private school kid with exceptional grades and a bossy know-it-all attitude who drinks tea. Probably just like the young Xavier. Kirk drank alcohol at bars!
2. Kirk's acting can be up for debate. I think he accurately portrayed the paradigms of society at the time. Just like Picard did at his time. However, look at Kirk's acting in the motion pictures? Who has seen Wrath of Khan and can still vote Picard?
3. A man who isn't interested in alien poontang cannot be trusted to lead! He who doesn't, does not have a level of transparency to him. Look at Zapp Brannigan from futurama. He's the opposite of a leader however he still has his position because of his one saving attribute which is his transparency for his exploits of alien poontang.
4. While we're on this subject of Kirk's attributes, Kirk would have slapped Wesley with a backhand and then French kissed Wesley's mother in the same scene. Kirk has a higher entertainment value because he easily doesn't hesitate todo what we want to do deep in our hearts. Picard also provides entertainment value but the kind of entertainment you get when playing a game like chess against someone who is almost as smart as you.
I rest my case.