I don't get it

[Darth Wong]

Indeed, Star Trek often stole things from other sources which were uncomfortably close to its own market. What really irks me about it is those legions of loyalist fans who think that it was some sort of great innovator even though the entire TV show format was lifted lock, stock, and barrel from the 1950s sci-fi classic "Forbidden Planet" with Leslie Nielsen.

The fans prided themselves on keeping Star Trek alive for a third season during its original run and then keeping the flame alive until TNG hit the airwaves, but to a large extent I think that they virtually took ownership of the franchise. Roddenberry's TNG version of Star Trek was far more politically correct and many blame Roddenberry, but let's not forget that this was preceded by two straight decades of Star Trek fans loudly and publicly claiming that Star Trek's greatest contribution to TV was its social awareness.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

The most egregious example of idea theft in Star Trek comes from the episode where Picard gets tortured and asked how many lights there are. I had recently read 1984 when I saw that episode, and it shocked me how blatant the ripoff was from a nearly identical scene in that book. It was almost word-for-word the same scene.

[Bounty]

I had recently read 1984 when I saw that episode, and it shocked me how blatant the ripoff was from a nearly identical scene in that book. It was almost word-for-word the same scene.

Which may have been, you know, precisely the point.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Of course they made a point of doing it. Doesn't change anything. It's bad form, and it indicates a lack of talent. If it was well executed it could have been considered an homage, but it wasn't.

[RThurmont]

Darth Wong wrote:

Indeed, Star Trek often stole things from other sources which were uncomfortably close to its own market. What really irks me about it is those legions of loyalist fans who think that it was some sort of great innovator even though the entire TV show format was lifted lock, stock, and barrel from the 1950s sci-fi classic "Forbidden Planet" with Leslie Nielsen.

Absolutely, a huge amount of ST was a rip off of Forbidden Planet. If you view Forbidden Planet and then The Cage, the similiarities are amazing. Visually, Star Trek also heavily ripped off the second half of This Island Earth, another classic 1950s SF film. A lot of other "off-ripping" occured as well in the Original series, however, TOS did have some originality, as some of the writers Roddenberry brought in, such as Harlan Ellison, were highly talented, visionary science fiction authors in their own right, who were highly respected within the elite realm of literary SF. Those authors contributed very high-quality content to the franchise, and in all probability were as much a part of the success of ST:TOS as Roddenberry himself.

I think in response to the incident that Arthur_Tuxedo mentioned, that does sound like an extreme bit of copycatting. Out of curiosity, was there any indication that he was being placed into a 1984-inspired world? Unless the episode was specifically written to be a sort of tribute to Orwell, and unless Orwell was credited, Bounty's objection would be more or less invalid.[/i]

[Darth Wong]

I had recently read 1984 when I saw that episode, and it shocked me how blatant the ripoff was from a nearly identical scene in that book. It was almost word-for-word the same scene.

Which may have been, you know, precisely the point.

You're quite the little apologist fucktard, aren't you? Back on page 2 you were saying that Star Trek writes purely futuristic stories rather than cribbing from classic mythologies and sticking them in a futuristic setting the way the "fantasy" Star Wars does, and now you're saying that Star Trek deliberately and artfully copies scenes lock, stock and barrel from old novels set on Earth.

[Darth Wong]

I think in response to the incident that Arthur_Tuxedo mentioned, that does sound like an extreme bit of copycatting. Out of curiosity, was there any indication that he was being placed into a 1984-inspired world? Unless the episode was specifically written to be a sort of tribute to Orwell, and unless Orwell was credited, Bounty's objection would be more or less invalid.

The episode took place on Cardassia after Picard was captured on some ridiculous mission where he was sent along with Worf and Dr. Crusher to infiltrate a Cardassian outpost with no backup (no, I'm not making this up; they really wrote this shit). The intent was to show how cruel the Cardassians are.

[petesampras]

Yes, that seems a bit unfair.

You could use the same argument on the Phantom Menace pod race -> Ben Hur chariot race.

Clearly, sometimes, copying is a tribute rather than shameless ripoff.

Where the line is is sometimes hard to decide.

[RThurmont]

You know its funny, this argument reminds me of a similiar argument I was having on Wireality, a private e-mail list for the branding and corporate identity sector. This one freelance graphics artist of relatively little recognition was ranting on and on about how its OK to copy the work that other graphics designers have done in the past, and was quoting Picasso's moronic statement "Good artists copy, great artists steal." He implied that none of us actually followed a formal creative process, but in fact were doing exactly that.

I called him an asshole (and nearly got banned, but it was definitely worth it) for having the audacity to suggest that most graphics designers who specialized in creating corporate trademarks did not follow a disciplined process and did not create original work. His remarks, aside from being inaccurate, were offensive. In the branding/corporate ID sector, if you rip someone else off, chances are, you'll get your ass sued off. Patent attorneys and intellectual property lawyers are not to be screwed with.

Now, lets enter a different world. the realm of television, and in particular, Star Trek. Quite apart from showing visionary creativity with every single episode and bit of content, we see other people's work routinely taken and redecorated. In reading some books about the making of Star Trek, one thing I've noticed is that there seems to have been a certain attitude in creating the series, one of lethargy. The attitude is basically that you have to make a TV show every week, so costs need to be minimized, and things more or less need to be simplified. Good enough, however, there seems to be this attitude that the less you do, the better. As a result, ST action sequences are never as grand or drawn out as those in SW or other science fiction series, the plots are always much less epic in scale, and in general, it seems like a smaller, draber, less interesting world. This approach seems to extend to the writing of the episodes, with the "work-minimalization" mentality provoking authors to look to literary science fiction of the past for storylines, plot ideas and what have you, rather than engaging in the soul-searching, agonizing process of coming up with original concepts.

Now, don't get me wrong, there is quite a lot about Star Trek to like. Some of it is amazing. However, when it comes to the ability to do things in a truly original, unique, and compelling way, ST just doesn't cut it.

Now when talking about duplication and rehashing of past ideas in an ST vs SW debate, it is only fair to go over the subject of Star Wars basing itself heavily on films from the past. The difference is, George Lucas readily admitted and talked about what inspired him, and what he was basing Star Wars on in terms of the storyline. He was directly inspired by the SF serials that were popular when he was growing up, he was directly inspired by a Japanese film from the early 1960s, The Hidden Fortress, and he actively sought to take those earlier works and make them more accessible to a broader audience. The attitude was always one of respect in trying to reinterpret and combine the various elements he was bringing together, and to use them as the raw materials with which to produce a new work. It is, in my opinion, quite a different approach from that of Star Trek, basically, its like the difference between a photocopy of a painting, and a mosaic.

[Darth Wong]

You could use the same argument on the Phantom Menace pod race -> Ben Hur chariot race.

Except that Star Wars proudly and unabashedly takes inspiration from the past. Star Trek is the one that's supposedly not like that, remember?

[RThurmont]

Darth Wong wrote:

The episode took place on Cardassia after Picard was captured on some ridiculous mission where he was sent along with Worf and Dr. Crusher to infiltrate a Cardassian outpost with no backup (no, I'm not making this up; they really wrote this shit). The intent was to show how cruel the Cardassians are.

I remember that one. It was kind of...unusual. I recall the Cardassian villain guy eating this soup out of a giant egg while Picard was hanging on this weird torture rack thing...it was more or less stupid.

I'm sure we can all agree that the idea of a Starship captian, a medical doctor and a tactical officer sent on an espionage mission is absolutely moronic, and taken in that context, I think it's more likely that instead of this being a deliberate artistic reblend, like what Lucas did with SW, (as Bounty suggested) it was a mere rip-off.

[Darth Wong]

I think that the concept of invention in literature is best examined from the concept of technological invention. If you simply copy a piece of technology, you have invented nothing. But, on the other hand, if you modify it in some significant way in order to give it new usefulness, then you have invented something, even though it is still largely similar to the earlier device. So the question becomes: was anything of significance added, or were things simply copied directly, without any real creativity?

[RThurmont]

Darth Wong wrote:

I think that the concept of invention in literature is best examined from the concept of technological invention. If you simply copy a piece of technology, you have invented nothing. But, on the other hand, if you modify it in some significant way in order to give it new usefulness, then you have invented something, even though it is still largely similar to the earlier device. So the question becomes: was anything of significance added, or were things simply copied directly, without any real creativity?

That's an interesting approach. I actually wrote (but never bothered to publish) a study on that aspect of creativity back in 2002, largely so that I could learn more and better understand my own creativity. My theory was similiar to yours, basically, the idea being that each individual creative work is best viewed as a treatment of a subject, and the idea being that whereas absolute originality was exceedingly unlikely, something could be considered original and creative if it presented a viable and original treatment of a subject. The idea being, that in treating a given subject, you seek to do it in different ways than previous works in the field, analyzing other aspects than other authors who have worked in that sector took a look at in the past, and maybe combining a few different subjects in producing the overall composition.

Creativity is fascinating stuff when you really get into studying the process of "lateral thinking", how the human mind actually comes up with ideas. The reality is, a huge amount of lateral thinking comes from seeing something that's currently out there, and trying to figure out ways of improving it. Other types of lateral thinking include provocation, where you deliberately attempt to provoke yourself into coming up with a new concept, and accidental creativity. It is not a coincidence that many of the major breakthroughs in thought over the years were triggered by a seemingly random event, as seeing an occurance when you're in the midst of thinking about something can often inspire a flash of creative brilliance.

Anyone has the capability to be creative, it just takes time, effort and dedication. I view those who rip off the works of others as being more or less lazy, undisciplined pigs, and I think a good many Star Trek writers fall into that category, versus George Lucas, where you can clearly see the level of lateral thinking applied to the work, and how is goal was to really piece together a mosaic of different subjects and to create an overall unique treatment.

[Darth Wong]

I think the most egregious example of Star Trek plagiarism was the Donnie Brasco rip-off episode of DS9. Not one recognizable new theme or wrinkle upon the original story; just the same exact story set in the Star Trek universe.

I defy anyone to watch "Donnie Brasco" and then watch the DS9 episode "Honor Among Thieves" and not be nauseated.

[RThurmont]

Is anyone who has seen it able to sum up the plot for us? I don't typically watch DS9 or VGR, and the chances of that particular episode being on TV anytime soon are slim, and frankly, if it was, I probably wouldn't see it...however, my curiosity is piqued, to some extent...

[Edward Yee]

I'm a lot, LOT less generous to Lucas... though I understand your praise for him in comparison to the Trek screenwriters.

I have a mild question. Darth Wong, I don't know if this contradicts your Nemesis four-parter, but does anyone feel that Patrick Stewart's "I'm Captain Jean-fucking-Luc Picard bitch" act (???) inadvertently screwed Tom Hardy's attempt to be a "villain to rival Khan" and made Shinzon look like a whiner? (In a nail in the coffin way; your Pictorial already lays out all the other reasons Shinzon sucks.)

RThurmont, here's my sum-up:

Donnie Brasco: Alias of an FBI agent who single-handedly nearly destroyed the Bonanno family by infiltrating a capo's crew; the movie shows him closer to another gangster who mentored and sponsored him to the point that the undercover agent sympathizes with him. (In reality, the capo was executed for incompetence, while the other gangster was bagged to save him.)

Honor Among Thieves: Starfleet Intelligence makes Miles O'Brien do the same with the Orion Syndicate, sympathizes with one in particular, and then blows his own cover, practically forcing the gangster onto a fatal suicide mission, with O'Brien promises to take take care of the gangster's family.

[Edward Yee]

Darth Quorthon: George Lucas does have the distinct advantage of being alive.

RThurmont: I never noticed anything about Goldsmith/Horner, so I have nothing to say, other than I like the two intros - or rather, ST:TMP was the first ST where it wasn't effects-wise hokey. (As a non-fan of TOS, I refuse to give "it's a classic!" generosity points.)

And just where did Roddenberry steal from Heinlein? (I only have read a bit of Starship Troopers.)

Darth Wong:Trying to interpret this:

The fans prided themselves on keeping Star Trek alive for a third season during its original run and then keeping the flame alive until TNG hit the airwaves, but to a large extent I think that they virtually took ownership of the franchise. Roddenberry's TNG version of Star Trek was far more politically correct and many blame Roddenberry, but let's not forget that this was preceded by two straight decades of Star Trek fans loudly and publicly claiming that Star Trek's greatest contribution to TV was its social awareness.

So, any idea what sparked the whole "Trekkie" phenomenon back when TOS was on the air? And are you saying that they were wrong to praise the original before TNG, and for that matter to have kept it alive? (I recall that the "mass" of fanfiction that came out kept it alive, and inadvertently created the infamous Mary Sue, but Gene Roddenberry actually thanked them for all this.)

[Noble Ire]

The most egregious example of idea theft in Star Trek comes from the episode where Picard gets tortured and asked how many lights there are. I had recently read 1984 when I saw that episode, and it shocked me how blatant the ripoff was from a nearly identical scene in that book. It was almost word-for-word the same scene.

A bit off-topic, but there is an episode of Babylon 5 ("Intersections in Real Time") which uses exactly the same scene that the Trek episode uses from 1984. For those who have seen the episode (Sheridan and the Earth Force interrigator), would you say that the episode is a homage, as was say the Ben-Hur scene in TPM, or a rip-off, as was the afformentioned ST episode? Was JMS open about his inspirations in the past?

[Darth Quorthon]

Darth Quorthon: George Lucas does have the distinct advantage of being alive.

Naturally.
However, Roddenberry had lost control of Star Trek, i.e. was relegated to the role of "Executive Consultant" a number of years before he died. Whether or not his involvement or lack thereof would have changed anything is open to debate, I suppose.

I do know that Roddenberry wanted TNG to be more politically correct and have no character conflict, which seems a recipe for blandness. He didn't want to "recycle" any of the villains from TOS, so they tried the Ferengi as villains. They sucked, so the Borg came next.

I think Roddenberry's vision of humanity's future was a cool thing, but it has mutated far beyond anything he originally intended.

As for "borrowing" or "copying" or "stealing" other ideas, I think that it is to a certain extent inevitable, because it is pretty tough to come up with a truly original idea. Just so long as the person doing the "borrowing" doesn't get defensive when they're called on it. If they do, they should be flamed into oblivion.

[RThurmont]

I'm just going to have to rip this post up a bit:

RThurmont: I never noticed anything about Goldsmith/Horner, so I have nothing to say, other than I like the two intros - or rather, ST:TMP was the first ST where it wasn't effects-wise hokey. (As a non-fan of TOS, I refuse to give "it's a classic!" generosity points.)

The similiarities are there, and anyone who has a decent appreciation of classical music should be able to recognize them easily. It actually took me quite a few years before I realized how badly Goldsmith had jacked John Williams in The Motion Picture, however, if you listen to the main intro theme, the similiarities are staggering, and the differences seem to be more or less cosmetic. If he had composed it for a non sci-fi film I wouldn't be as annoyed by it. Then, moving into the realm of James Horner, I figure that punk thought that if he just ripped off one relatively small section of Williams work in TESB, he could get away with it. So we hear orchestration throughout the Wrath of Khan that was more or less lifted from "Yoda and the Force", indeed, the entire soundtrack borrows heavily from that one piece in TESB. The result? A decided lack of originality.

If you listen to some of the more recent compositions of Goldsmith and Horner for other movies, notice how sucky they are compared to their work for TMP and TESB. The reason? They're apparently no longer ripping Williams off.

And just where did Roddenberry steal from Heinlein? (I only have read a bit of Starship Troopers.)

The Trouble With Tribbles storyline is a direct lift from a sequence in the second half of his mid-1950s juvenile novel, The Rolling Stones. The Rolling Stones (no relation to the stupid magazine of the same name) was about a family (named Stone, duh) that lived on the moon, and decided to take a multi-year vacation and buy a spacecraft, to travel into the outer solar system. While on Mars, they picked up a creature called a "Martian sandcat", a small, rounded, furry thing that was highly delightful to interact with (like a Tribble). It kept eating more and more, and then began explosively reproducing itself, with each litter, each new Sandcat would have 8 kittens, and that sandcat would eat and then have 8 more. The problem quickly escalated until their entire small ship was flooded with sandcats. Sound familiar?

[Darth Wong]

This would be one of those areas where it would be helpful to have music knowledge. My brother says he knows of a technique for manipulating a guitar riff to make it sound like a totally different riff even though the compositional elements are the same, and he says that once you know this trick, you can easily see how certain rock songs completely ripped off other rock songs. I'm sure there are similar tricks for classical music.

[RThurmont]

My mother does hold a PhD in music composition and theory, so I did pick up a small bit of knowledge from her on the subject. However, I'm no expert on the field by any means, much more of an avid listener. Perhaps I can ask her about this next time I speak with her. If anyone on this forum though does have formal training in the field, it might be useful if they could contribute something on this, as we're still in highly subjective territory. That said, I hear a similiarity in the music, I think others are likely to notice it if they listen to it, and I'd be very suprised if there wasn't something.

If you compare the TMP and the SW intros, they both start out with a brassy section, then have a middle section that is sort of sweeping and drawn out, and then and end with a finale that is modelled after the first section. If you compare the Yoda and the Force track with ST2, you'll notice that there is this very similiar brass orchestration in the background (and in the foreground) of the music...in particular, the scene where Spock has just sacrificed himself and they're flying through the wake of the Genesis device explosion is eerily reminscent of Yoda and the Force.

[Bounty]

My mother does hold a PhD in music composition and theory, so I did pick up a small bit of knowledge from her on the subject. However, I'm no expert on the field by any means, much more of an avid listener.

If you could ask her for a more specific explanation of how the music - particularly the TMP theme - is similar to Wiliams' work, I'd appreciate it. I've never heard a distinct similarity, but then again, I'm not a music expert.

[Darth Servo]

This would be one of those areas where it would be helpful to have music knowledge. My brother says he knows of a technique for manipulating a guitar riff to make it sound like a totally different riff even though the compositional elements are the same, and he says that once you know this trick, you can easily see how certain rock songs completely ripped off other rock songs. I'm sure there are similar tricks for classical music.

One method I've heard of is simply change the chord sequence but still use the same chords. Another is to use the same base sequence but add different flourishes.

[B5B7]

Dear USS Enterprise - you sound like a ST fan.
ST science is mainly fantasy eg Universal Translator [look at STV The 37s], transporter, Genesis Device, etc.

Many years ago Fredrick Pohl, an experienced SF author & editor, said that he could take any mythical story, eg Midas, & turn it into an SF story.
Its not the source of a story that determines if it is SF, but its treatment, eg Alien movie is SF, its source is basically the haunted house story.
Yes, SW is Space Opera, and SO is not fantasy [indeed many of the best hard SF novels currently coming out of principally Britain are SOs].

Oh, BTW The Silence and I - background is what makes something SF, the focus of the story can be anything.

Ender and Stark - I won't quote what you said [basically just humourous asides] - but look at my Username!

Forbidden Planet had better communicators than ST - as had video as well as audio [this in TOS was due to budget restraints - later series don't have that excuse].
As to "stealing" it could instead be considered "inspiration".
I think of FP as the ST pilot.