This is probably the nerdiest poll ever, but here goes... Forget about Janeway, Cisco & Archer. Everyone knows that by far the best two captains in the Star Trek universe have been Captain James T. Kirk and Captain Jean-Luc Picard. Both had their good points and bad points. James Kirk was a straight-shooting cowboy, ready to plow through any obstacle he encountered. He wouldn't think twice about punching someone in the face; in fact, just about every episode of the original Star Trek had Kirk involved in some sort of fight scene. Hot-headed and proud, Kirk often made decisions based on his emotions rather than thinking things through (that's what Spock was for). When there was a dangerous mission to be done on a planet or busted-up space station, Kirk was always the one to go, taking along only Spock and McCoy (and sometimes one or two security guards who were usually killed). Kirk was also the quintessential lady's man. If there was a beautiful alien diplomat's daughter around (which was the case more often than not), chances are he'd end up in the sack with her. Kirk was a brilliant tactician, and managed to scrape his way out of a ton of tight places. Whether escaping from a fleet of Romulan warbirds or battling with a giant lizard creature on a deserted planet, Kirk knew how to win, and would do anything to achieve his goals, pushing everything to the limit. With Captain Kirk, what you see is what you get, and that's a big part of his appeal. Jean-Luc Picard was generally a calmer and more intellectual Captain than Kirk. He tended to rely on the skills of his crew more so than Kirk did. He was also more cautious; he rarely ever beamed down himself on away missions, instead delegating these tasks to Riker, Worf, Data, etc.. Instead of treating the Enterprise crew like he was the coach of a team (as Kirk did), Picard ran his ship as if he were the owner of a business, relying on others to "keep up their ends" while he looked at the big picture. Though more cautious than Kirk, Picard was not at all cowardly but was in fact quite brave, albeit without Kirk's streak of recklessness. The character Picard was also far less one-dimensional than Kirk, with a cornucopia of eclectic interests: he played the flute, studied archeology and was a proficient fencer. He lacked Kirk's charm with the ladies, and generally appeared tense or awkward in the few romantic endeavors he had in his career, but despite this, always seemed sure of himself, whatever he did. He was a complex man, with more to him than meets the eye. This depth, coupled with the respect he commanded and his overall "likeability" made Picard a very popular character. It's a tough call. I started out watching The Next Generation and never got around to the original Star Treks until this year (gotta love Space Channel re-runs). I thought about it a lot, and while Picard is certainly the more well-balanced choice, I ended up making the decision based on one simple question: "If I were on the Enterprise stranded deep in Romulan space, with a burnt out warp core and 25% shield power, who would I want in charge to get me out of the situation?" No doubt -- Captain Kirk. He could get out of anything.
Picard wins this one every time -- intelligent, fascinating, intense and oh-so-attractive. Not to mention the charming accent ... Kirk is just a caricature of machismo. No appeal whatsoever.
Picard, for sure. He is the ultimate captain - honest, honorable, tough, smart, wise. I tell ya' though, Jonathon Archer is growing on me. <font size=1>and yes, this is the geekiest post ever. </font>
Going with the Brains over the Brawn - Picard wasn't prone to taking stupid risks, or trying to solve things with violence, or ignoring the advice of his crew. Kirk had his good qualities, but I'm going with Picard.
I'm a Picard man, myself. I could never get into the original series. Part of the reason is that I just don't like Kirk. Picard, on the other hand, is just plain cool. The Borg Queen seems to have thought so too. I tried to come up with some kind of profound answer, but I just couldn't. I try not to think too hard about my entertainment.
Captain Kirk Why? Because he is OLD-SCHOOL, baby! Plus he is the only captain mentioned in 99 Luftballoons by Nena.
I'd have to go with Kirk. Take away the crew, especially the science officers, Spock and Data, and let them fend for themselves and Kirk destroys Picard. Kirk would never get assimilated. I do like TNG because everybody is an integral part of solving the problem...a good solid team.
I just broke the tie in favor of Picard! I have to say though, that if you compare the captains in the series, Picard wins. If you compare the captains in the movies, I'd have to go with Kirk. I can understand not including Janeway in the poll (she sucked), and I can understand ignoring Archer (too little data), but why don't you have an option for Sisko? Sisko was a badass, and anyone who doesn't think so should watch "In the Pale Moonlight".
I know it's unorthodox, but let's look at the actors themselves.... Hmmmm. T.J. Hooker vs. a Shakespearean actor. One plays the title role in The Tempest and A Christmas Carol. The other does Priceline commercials. One played the role of Gurney Halleck in Dune (and you should know that I love Dune). The other does stupid cameos as himself on crappy TV shows. Gosh. Decisions... decisions... For those of you who can't guess the answer or don't know what I'm talking about, I'm going with Picard in a landslide...
I'm sure this won't be a shocker, but gotta go with James T. Kirk. I think several others have had the sense to point out that if you were off in deep space in some serious Kobiyashi Maru (however you spell it) there is NO WAY you survive with Picard, while you are almost guaranteed to have an ace up your sleeve with Kirk. Fact #1: Picard had a chance to destroy the Borg and choose not to, resulting in the destruction of hundreds of Federation ships and billions of lifeforms across the galaxy. Kirk faced with the same situation would have clearly recognized the proper option and taken them downtown. Fact #2: The Borg Queen and Jean-Luc's treason. As Falcon Talon said, Kirk would never have allowed himself to be assimilated. In fact, it is well known that faced with a similar problem, Kirk would either have ****ed the Borg Queen, or killed her outright (which is usually how he got out of those sticky situations). Fact #3: For all you 'Picard is so much smarter' types out there, how exactly did humans get their introduction to the Borg? Oh yes, it was your intellectual superhero Picard boasting to Q that there was nothing he could throw at the Enterprise that they couldn't handle. That's quite a brainy move...LOL! Bottom line, Picard is the most overrated Captain of ANY ship in the history of television. No personality, bad decisionmaking, too chicken**** to go on away missions, and on and on...
I echo Mrs. JB's sentiments on this, well, except for the attractive part. Picard don't look that good.
All right, Hayes! Embrace your nerdiness. I disagree with you, though. I think Picard had a great deal of personality, probably more so than Kirk. Both were great captains, albeit for different reasons. goophers: Cisco...? eh, well... he's okay I guess, but he's no Kirk! (or Picard!) vescey: Why did you conveniently leave Jeffrey off the list of Patrick Stewart's acting accomplishments? Or perhaps you purposely blanked it out of your mind (I know I tried; many, many times). He was great as Ahab in "Moby Dick", though.
Ask yourself this. Piccard vs Khan? Piccard barely bested that scrawny guy on Generations, and he couldn't have done it without Kirk. I think Riker has more of Kirk's personality, and that's why Piccard gets the save so often. Like I said, Piccard success is from a team effort. Kirk could do it on his own.
Dude, we're not talking about the actors, we're talking about the captains...Besides, TJ Hooker would bust a cap in old Scrooges ass!!!
Cisco would kick both of their asses. I can't stand TNG for all of the nerdy Brandon Braga 'dream sequences' and lame ass holodeck episodes. Piccard and his crew were a bunch of effete pencil-pushers (excluding Worf and O'Brien, who both happened to split over to DS9). The first series had alot of good moments, but many were generally unfocused and contradictory. On the whole it was good for what it was. Voyager had the best premise, but threw it all away. I was really looking forward to a show that for it's entire run would be along the lines of the 'year of hell' episodes which magically disapeared. Instead I was treated to endless love affairs, and the lame ass holodeck 'Fairhaven' crap. Blech. The Borg could have been the best villans in all of Star Trek. They started out as 'Night of the Living Dead' in space, sort of a mindless, droning, interchangable, eternal force, chipping away as they moved along. Instead they created 'Hugh', and the 'Borg Queen', and '7 of 9' and completely castrated them. DS9 was the best show, especially when it dealt with the interactions between the 'high and mighty' Federation, and the baser elements of society, such as the greedy Ferenghi, the Nazi-esque Cardassians, and the war-toughened Bajorians. Unrelated: Enterprise has gotten off to a good, if erratic start. As I had hoped to see with Voyager, the show depicts people with high ideals, limited resources, and baser instincts. I have a hunch, for those of you who have been paying attention, that the dude from the future, seen in the first and third(?) episodes was a Vulcan! They've been playing up the Vulcan-Human conflict for the whole show, and I'm betting that it's some sort of Vulcan who believes that the Vulcans should have dominated/created the Federation, not the humans. I predicted correctly that the 'good guy' from the future was, in fact, a hologram projection and that he would return (as he supposedly does in the season finale). Anybody agree with me about the bad guy?
In his defense, 'that scrawny guy' was also this guy: Who would've preformed a bit of the 'ol ultraviolence on that devotchka Kirk, tolchocked him in the gulliver, and viddied the krovvy on the sidewalk for a bit.
