StarDestroyer.Net BBS

There's a reason why Star Trek isn't very popular with the mainstream anymore, and it's pretty obvious what needs to be done.

I mean, with regards to Star Wars, it's obvious why it's such a success. You don't just have the Jedis, you have characters like Hans Solo, Chewbacca as well. The cool guys who don't have to be major geeks.

If the Star Wars trilogy HADN'T Hans Solo in it, it would have been too apparent what twats the Jedi could be. As it was done, the balance worked and they made sense in their opposing roles. Not everyone had to be a Jedi to be a hero, so it's cool.

In Star Trek EVERYONE'S a Jedi. The only interesting character in recent Trek like that(of the last 10 years) I can think of was Tom Paris, who was subsequently punished.

The original Trek series has Captain Kirk. Kirk was cool. He didn't always do things by the book. Neither did Picard, really. Not saying that Janeway, Cisko and Archer always did, but they just didn't seem as inherently rebellious.

And none of the next gen era guys were quite like a "Hans Solo" anyway.

What the next Trek series NEEDS to be is some kind of Firefly type thing with a bunch of non-Federation, non-Klingon/Romulan/Cardassian whatever slightly shady dudes, on some new ship of pretty unknown capabilities, doing their own thing. It'd still be set in the Trek universe, with Trek races, Trek technology, with Trek Next Gen ships, but the characters and show would have actual personality.

The Next Generation was good but it still felt too "conservative" somehow. That was fine for doing it just that once, in the series. When DS9 and Voyager(despite efforts otherwise) felt too much like clones of that, the "reserved" nature of the Federation and it's adherents, even the "Rebels" became annoying.

I hope I'm not the only one that feels that way. Star Trek is just too damn geeky for it's own good, and there are a lot of interesting stories to be told that just won't be in it's current state. It needs some real personalities, some self awareness, and a much quirker and generally more entertaining atmosphere.

This is the only way Trek will gain back respect with the mainstream and alienated sci-fi fans(hehe a pun of soorts), as far as I'm concerned. I think it's hard to explain exactly what I mean, I don't want Trek to go XTREEEEM but at the same time I'm sick to hell of the Federation.

PS: Also, they need Giant Robots. Everything is better with Giant Robots.

Or to simplify it even further, the writers suck ass.

General Zod wrote:Or to simplify it even further, the writers suck ass.

Hit the nail right on the head. That's pretty much it.

Also, Kittie, the name is "Han Solo" not "Hans Solo". He wasn't a solitary German dude. He was Han! He's the fucking man.

Not that Stargate didn't manage to make fun of that anyway.

Oh man. I major typo'd. I typed all that out in a bout 3 minutes so I never even stopped, I feel like such a bad nerd right now :/ I'll go fix it.

Kittie Rose wrote:Oh man. I major typo'd. I typed all that out in a bout 3 minutes so I never even stopped, I feel like such a bad nerd right now :/ I'll go fix it.

Since there's no edit feature in the vs forums, you can't.

About as much versus as talking about Kirk's toupee.

To be hair I was contrasting it quite a bit with Star Wars more than anything else...

Kittie Rose wrote:To be hair I was contrasting it quite a bit with Star Wars more than anything else...

And that somehow in any form or fashion makes it a versus topic other then the arbitrary choice of contrast?

The original poster has a very good point, one that I have given some exploration in other writings of mine. The Trek universe focuses around a government that allows no variation in self-determination or self-expression. It is very much akin to the Alliance of Firefly. They are not telling us what to think, after all, they are just trying to show us how.

I think I have said elsewhere that a show focusing on the Federation's less-than-ideal population, the people who are not wandering the vast spaces of our galaxy, would be watched with interest by me. The trick is how you get it off to a good start (not letting James Cameron produce would be one pointer I can give after Dark Angel).

Darth_Bastard wrote:The Trek universe focuses around a government that allows no variation in self-determination or self-expression.

How do you figure? If that were true, then VOY Author, Author couldn't have happened; a hologram writes a holo-novel about the oppression of holograms, and then gets into a fight with his publishers in the Federation. If anything were going to be suppressed, it would be that work.

Darth_Bastard wrote:The original poster has a very good point, one that I have given some exploration in other writings of mine. The Trek universe focuses around a government that allows no variation in self-determination or self-expression. It is very much akin to the Alliance of Firefly. They are not telling us what to think, after all, they are just trying to show us how.

I think I have said elsewhere that a show focusing on the Federation's less-than-ideal population, the people who are not wandering the vast spaces of our galaxy, would be watched with interest by me. The trick is how you get it off to a good start (not letting James Cameron produce would be one pointer I can give after Dark Angel).

The biggest problem with series post TOS can be simplified even more than just shitty writing. It started focusing more on fancy technology and technological problems/aliens of the week than ethical dilemmas and character interaction, which is what TOS is most known for.

Kittie Rose wrote:Star Trek is just too damn geeky for it's own good, [. . .]

And yet Star Trek, in its various iterations, consistently outlasts competing sci-fi series including Firefly. No, it's not too damn geeky, it's simply geeky enough for its target audience. Actually, its deliberately geeky.

Obviously you aren't the target audience. Neither am I as I much preferred Firefly too. Yet as much as ST writing sucks, it goes on and on and on. . .

Kittie Rose wrote:To be hair I was contrasting it quite a bit with Star Wars more than anything else...

The VS debate isn't about which sci-fi franchise you prefer. It's about which franchise would kick the other's ass and why. That's why this thread is not suitable for the VS forum.

General Trelane (Retired) wrote:

Kittie Rose wrote:Star Trek is just too damn geeky for it's own good, [. . .]

And yet Star Trek, in its various iterations, consistently outlasts competing sci-fi series including Firefly. No, it's not too damn geeky, it's simply geeky enough for its target audience. Actually, its deliberately geeky.

Define "outlasts". No single Star Trek series has had more than 7 or 8 seasons to its name. On the other hand, the X-Files and Stargate SG-1 have had 9+ seasons. I won't even bother mentioning Dr Who as its been on the air for vastly longer than Trek. . .then there's BSG which came back after what, a 30+ year dearth? I'm sure there's more out there if I bothered looking.

General Zod wrote: Define "outlasts". No single Star Trek series has had more than 7 or 8 seasons to its name. On the other hand, the X-Files and Stargate SG-1 have had 9+ seasons. I won't even bother mentioning Dr Who as its been on the air for vastly longer than Trek. . .then there's BSG which came back after what, a 30+ year dearth? I'm sure there's more out there if I bothered looking.

Can't say BSG really counts. It came back as something vastly different from what the original was about, hasn't outlasted anything more than maybe TOS in either incarnation yet (and I doubt it will), and Trek has been around 40+ years altogether. I can't really see BSG being more successful in any meaningful way than Trek has been.

Somewhere along the way Trek just simply became dumbed down to the level of a potato. The characters were morons, never thinking of the obvious solution. The writers thought the audience were morons, who long had figured out the plot and how it would end before the theme and credits rolled in the beginning, and Starfleet principles were never in the wrong.

I'm particularly struck by the latter while rewatching Voyager. Season 4's 7 of 9 brings up some really justified points about how shitty Janeway's command is. Instead of exploring it further, we get the "I'm right, you're wrong" Janeway, and episodes which have situations that only prove the "Starfleet is God" opinion.

But in the final analysis, what is wrong with Trek is that Chuck isn't doing the OVEGs anymore, damn it! And when I most need them, while I relive the horror of Voyager on Spike.

CaptJodan wrote:
Can't say BSG really counts. It came back as something vastly different from what the original was about, hasn't outlasted anything more than maybe TOS in either incarnation yet (and I doubt it will), and Trek has been around 40+ years altogether. I can't really see BSG being more successful in any meaningful way than Trek has been.

It came back after being out of commission for longer, though. I'm not entirely sure what whether or not its similarities to the original BSG have to do with anything, because by the same logic TNG and Voyager aren't similar at all to TOS.

Somewhere along the way Trek just simply became dumbed down to the level of a potato. The characters were morons, never thinking of the obvious solution. The writers thought the audience were morons, who long had figured out the plot and how it would end before the theme and credits rolled in the beginning, and Starfleet principles were never in the wrong.

It's not that the writers thought the audience were morons per se. It's that the writers themselves were morons.

General Zod wrote: It came back after being out of commission for longer, though. I'm not entirely sure what whether or not its similarities to the original BSG have to do with anything, because by the same logic TNG and Voyager aren't similar at all to TOS.

TNG felt more like TOS than anything afterward. The first couple seasons in particular still had the standard "super alien of the week" thing that TOS had on occasion.

Keeping in mind that, unlike many around here, I still like (to some degree) TNG. I grew up with it so I have fonder memories of it (though can look back at it now and see many of its errors).

It's not that the writers thought the audience were morons per se. It's that the writers themselves were morons.

See, I can't agree that it's JUST that the writers were morons (though I do think this is true). Sometimes you have whole pages of dialogue in which the characters stand about a foot away from each other, each of them in the other's face, talking about a problem. They have to explain every possible aspect and tiny detail of the problem as if we ARE morons. It just seemed a lot of times like the writers didn't expect the audience to be able to follow where they were going with the plot or their specific problem or whatever. Maybe that was because the writers were morons and they felt that they couldn't keep up with their own bad writing without page after page of discussion and exposition. But many Voyager episodes just seem like the problem they face could have been solved in the beginning if someone had just jumped to the most logical conclusion, rather than taking this convoluted path, and discussing it in the "magical meeting room" that Chuck describes.

CaptJodan wrote: See, I can't agree that it's JUST that the writers were morons (though I do think this is true). Sometimes you have whole pages of dialogue in which the characters stand about a foot away from each other, each of them in the other's face, talking about a problem. They have to explain every possible aspect and tiny detail of the problem as if we ARE morons. It just seemed a lot of times like the writers didn't expect the audience to be able to follow where they were going with the plot or their specific problem or whatever. Maybe that was because the writers were morons and they felt that they couldn't keep up with their own bad writing without page after page of discussion and exposition. But many Voyager episodes just seem like the problem they face could have been solved in the beginning if someone had just jumped to the most logical conclusion, rather than taking this convoluted path, and discussing it in the "magical meeting room" that Chuck describes.

If the writer weren't total imbeciles they would have been able to realize that treating your audience like idiots is not a smart way to keep them watching your show.

The technobabble writing wasn't so much a question of bad or even intelligence-insulting technobabble as it was a question of motive. The writers would write themselves into a corner and use technobabble to extricate themselves from it.

Somewhere along the lines I think Star Trek became less about exploring and fun to being about being preachy and technobabbling about nothing. As cheesey as the first few seasons of TNG was, it was actually about meeting aliens, much like the TOS. Somewhere along the lines humans and the federation became very self righteous and were always veiwed as correct. (Unlike TOS which let us question humanity slightly more.)


I have actually been thinking of writing a fan fiction much like suggested, basically taking place aboard an Orion vessel commanded by a human (A former Maquis and which was captured and held prisoner by the cardassians after the Dominion invaded.) I wanted to show modern Orionian social structure, and how the Orion empire has become almost extinct, how most of the populous have been intigrated into other empires, ect...ect...

I was going to take the route that an Orion Starship is actually leased to the captain with a Letter of Marque, and captians had fairly free reign. Only nine Orion Blockaderunners actually remain operational.

The Ferengi were to be hell bent on destroying any competition, especially the remain Orion, trying to dominate the "Free Trade" market place. I was going to show them as a little more ruthless and cut throat.

Sam Or I wrote:Somewhere along the lines I think Star Trek became less about exploring and fun to being about being preachy and technobabbling about nothing.

TOS episodes were primarily space adventure stories, but like many such stories, they often contained a moral element. In TNG, they forgot that. They believed that the moral element was the whole point of the episode.

That TNG+ 'moral elements' had you go 'you gotta be fucking kidding me' a lot of the time sure didn't help.

Sam Or I wrote:Somewhere along the lines I think Star Trek became less about exploring and fun to being about being preachy and technobabbling about nothing. As cheesey as the first few seasons of TNG was, it was actually about meeting aliens, much like the TOS. Somewhere along the lines humans and the federation became very self righteous and were always veiwed as correct. (Unlike TOS which let us question humanity slightly more.)

Actually, TNG's self-righteousness started almost off the fucking bat with "Code Of Honour" —somewhat hypocritically ironic considering that this episode was the one taking place on the Planet of the Racist African Stereotypes.

And yes indeed, TOS did point to a flawed humanity as seen in the final showdown between Kirk and the Organians in "Errand Of Mercy" when he's shown up to be very little different from the "evil" Klingons when somebody's threatening to take their war away from them.

One area in which TOS was far more explicit was its condemnation of bureaucracy. Specifically, high-ranking bureaucrats were almost invariably idiots and assholes on TOS, which is very much true to life. Meanwhile, in TNG there may have been mavericks in the system who broke the rules, but the administration was by and large portrayed as a benevolent organization of well-meaning conscientious people whose primary interest was the betterment of mankind.

Uraniun235 wrote:

Darth_Bastard wrote:The Trek universe focuses around a government that allows no variation in self-determination or self-expression.

How do you figure? If that were true, then VOY Author, Author couldn't have happened; a hologram writes a holo-novel about the oppression of holograms, and then gets into a fight with his publishers in the Federation. If anything were going to be suppressed, it would be that work.

On the contrary, the most effective kind of oppression is the most subtle. Publishing a creative work and then making sure it does not find an audience, or an audience outside of what we primitives refer to as preaching to the choir, is a time-honoured trick. The RIAA and MPAA, among other monopolies that do not look like monopolies, do it all the time.

Edit: A lot of the problem stems from the fact that the consequences of the main cast's actions are never displayed outside of the main cast's own little microverse. How many civilisations Janeway and her "I am right about everything all the time" attitude made contact with do you think suddenly spawned anti-Starfleet or anti-Human movements, characterised by such things as Suicidal Tendencies-style music and bad fashions? Kirk and Picard might look at us as savages, but our Presidents don't throw hissy fits when we write songs like I Shot Reagan.