The problem with Star Trek

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2007-03-10 02:58am

Patrick Degan wrote:
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.

Conceded about being self righteous. Something about the Early TNG vs the Late TNG seems to be vastly different in my opinion. Maybe it was still beaming down to planets and finding something new, vs Klingon politics. It just had an extremely different flavor. (Even before GR passed). Maybe it is that when Star Trek let politics dominate story telling is when they started falling flat on there face. I will have to ponder on it.

phred · Post by **phred** » 2007-03-10 05:45am

Ive felt for a long time that there should be a Trek series based on the Klingons simply because it would force the writers to try something different and hopefully reduce their tendncy to be so preachy. (Also I have a soft spot in my heart for the Bird of Prey)

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2007-03-10 10:23am

phred wrote:Ive felt for a long time that there should be a Trek series based on the Klingons

No.

(Also I have a soft spot in my heart for the Bird of Prey)

Now, THAT is something else...

One of those 'What Ifs' I ask myself on occasion is, what if Kirk never surrendered himself at the end of ST IV? Or to put it another way, what if the Whale Probe never came to Earth, and ST IV never happened? The adventures of Pirate Captain Kirk! The BoP is small enough to have the principal cast, as well as having a couple more extras. Easy value.

You could do something like that in TNG, hell they did, with that two parter in season 7. Pirate Captain Picard! Gave Patrick Stewart a chance to act as something other than a stuffy, overbearing bureaucrat in love with the Prime Directive.

Burak Gazan · Post by **Burak Gazan** » 2007-03-10 10:24am

phred wrote:Ive felt for a long time that there should be a Trek series based on the Klingons simply because it would force the writers to try something different and hopefully reduce their tendncy to be so preachy. (Also I have a soft spot in my heart for the Bird of Prey)

Only if it was John Ford's Klingons, not the Space Vikings

And if it included "Battlecruiser Vengance" it would be worth the price of admission

ShadowSonic · Post by **ShadowSonic** » 2007-03-10 10:31am

You know, I've often heard John Ford's name around, but I've never been able to find any of the writings he did on Klingons. What are "John Ford Klingons"?

Burak Gazan · Post by **Burak Gazan** » 2007-03-10 10:39am

ShadowSonic wrote:You know, I've often heard John Ford's name around, but I've never been able to find any of the writings he did on Klingons. What are "John Ford Klingons"?

"The Final Reflection" by John M Ford is probably one of the few trek fiction books still in my bookshelves; available still at Amazon.ca

*NOT space vikings

phred · Post by **phred** » 2007-03-10 01:36pm

Stofsk wrote:
phred wrote:Ive felt for a long time that there should be a Trek series based on the Klingons
No.

Well, Klingons for the reason stated above. Any other group would be a start. Romulans Cardassians Ferangi.. Maquis would probably be a bit limited for a series but who knows?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2007-03-10 01:47pm

Here's what I'd like:

A daily TOS Star Trek serial newspaper comic strip.

Even if it ended up being something like Gil Thorp, it'd still be awesome. That's the direction I think Star Trek should go, in the long run.

consequences · Post by **consequences** » 2007-03-10 02:15pm

Stofsk wrote:
phred wrote:Ive felt for a long time that there should be a Trek series based on the Klingons
No.

(Also I have a soft spot in my heart for the Bird of Prey)
Now, THAT is something else...

One of those 'What Ifs' I ask myself on occasion is, what if Kirk never surrendered himself at the end of ST IV? Or to put it another way, what if the Whale Probe never came to Earth, and ST IV never happened? The adventures of Pirate Captain Kirk! The BoP is small enough to have the principal cast, as well as having a couple more extras. Easy value.

You could do something like that in TNG, hell they did, with that two parter in season 7. Pirate Captain Picard! Gave Patrick Stewart a chance to act as something other than a stuffy, overbearing bureaucrat in love with the Prime Directive.

One of the comic book timelines was a divergence from the events of ST:IV, if only because the Mirror universe decided to attempt to invade at that moment, and the Whale Probe never showed. After the dust clouds settled, you had Admiral Kirk officially in command of the Excelsior.

No Pirate King Kirk though, even if Mirror-Kirk did steal the Excelsior, followed by normal Kirk stealing Mirror-Kirk's Enterprise, having it get blown up, and then stealing back the Excelsior.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2007-03-10 09:06pm

Maybe Pirate King Kirk is too much, I agree. But I still find the idea of an independent Kirk, in his own ship (well, he did steal it... but from people who were trying to murder him and his friends), especially a smaller ship with a cloak, to be more than a little intriguing.

It would give us a chance to explore the Star Trek universe from another perspective. Rather than be on the biggest and baddest ship in the Federation, he's on one of the smallest ships in the whole area, and it happens to be a Klingon ship. I just really like that idea.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2007-03-10 10:21pm

Strikes me a little too much like Blake's 7 and Captain Harlock, personally...

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2007-03-10 10:48pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Strikes me a little too much like Blake's 7 and Captain Harlock, personally...

Neither one of which I've seen. But so what? Does every single Star Trek series have to take place on the bridge of a mighty starship, take place in the Federation, and involve the Prime Directive? Star Trek, condensed down to the most basic format possible, is about a small cadre of people who are highly intelligent and heroic and involve themselves in exploring the galaxy. You don't need a battlewagon to do that. A small ship that can cloak actually might make more sense, if you're only interested in exploration and scouting.

And I already conceded Pirate King Kirk wasn't what I had in mind. It's not like he's fighting against the totalitarian Federation like in Blake's 7, and I'm not advocating grittiness.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-03-11 11:08am

What people need to understand is that Star Trek is, at heart, a space adventure serial. People who think it's about big starships, or wars, or morality, or even high-minded terms like "exploration" are missing the point. Those are part of the setting of these space adventure stories, but there is a difference between the story and the backdrop for the story.

They're missing the forest for the trees, and I think a lot of it has to do with snobbery. You see, you could say the exact same thing about Star Wars and many other "low-brow" fiction franchises, and Trekkies don't like that. They want to think that their show is something more than that, and it isn't. Watch TOS. It's just a space adventure serial that happens to be set in a particular environment. That environment is different from Star Wars or other franchises so the stories will hinge on different kinds of plot points, but the basic nature of it is the same. This is a huge intellectual stumbling block for a lot of Trekkies who seem to have completely lost track of what Star Trek is.

ShadowSonic · Post by **ShadowSonic** » 2007-03-11 02:11pm

He's right, and it's what VOY could've been if not for those UPN idiots who kept interfering and keeping the writers from actually using the premise and be WRITERS.

Tired of the high and mighty Federation the guys report to? Fine, they're a galaxy length away and the crew report to no one, even though they will try to be cautious so as to not piss off guys who could kick their keisters.

Tired of all the stuffy authority types? Half the crew are rebels/terrorists/civilian "observer" who don't have to obey the chain of command and can do what they want, although there should be some consensus otherwise they get tossed off on some backwater planet for endangering everyone for little reason.

Want to see new stuff and new worlds and everything? They're in a new area of space with no one to call for help or anything so they can see new stuff and pay the consequences for tresspassing.

And thanks to UPN all we got was a get-along crew who were all stuffy types who never paid the consequences for their actions and only met a bunch of bumpkins (although that did make sense, the Borg would've assimilated everyone worth assimilating and left behind only the backwards bumpkins), and the only worthwhile guys they met disappeared after a few episodes because UPN ordered no continuous stories or arcs.

Ron Moore is just damn lucky that he put his show on Sci-Fi where they don't mess around, and when they do it usually makes for the better (telling Farscape to make the show a little darker, but otherwise no interference). If he tried to put BSG on UPN they'd have made everyone smiling all the time, brighter colors, no shaky cam, and have there be teenager fighter pilots and more kiddies.

Post by **Steve** » 2007-03-11 03:19pm

Darth Wong wrote:What people need to understand is that Star Trek is, at heart, a space adventure serial. People who think it's about big starships, or wars, or morality, or even high-minded terms like "exploration" are missing the point. Those are part of the setting of these space adventure stories, but there is a difference between the story and the backdrop for the story.

They're missing the forest for the trees, and I think a lot of it has to do with snobbery. You see, you could say the exact same thing about Star Wars and many other "low-brow" fiction franchises, and Trekkies don't like that. They want to think that their show is something more than that, and it isn't. Watch TOS. It's just a space adventure serial that happens to be set in a particular environment. That environment is different from Star Wars or other franchises so the stories will hinge on different kinds of plot points, but the basic nature of it is the same. This is a huge intellectual stumbling block for a lot of Trekkies who seem to have completely lost track of what Star Trek is.

Having recently gotten into Stargate SG-1 (buying used copy of the DVD season sets for cheap) and having gotten to Season 6, I can say I think that what makes Stargate avoid Star Trek's problems and thus makes it a better show (At least at this point, I've heard that by Season 10 they have the "Ran Out of Material" syndrome) is that the show, and the fandom, don't take themselves that seriously. Hell, they poke fun of themselves (just look at "Wormhole X-treme!").

Maybe if Star Trek did the same thing it wouldn't have gotten so horrible. But it seemed to be too full of itself, frankly, and the story-telling suffered.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2007-03-11 05:08pm

ShadowSonic wrote:He's right, and it's what VOY could've been if not for those UPN idiots who kept interfering and keeping the writers from actually using the premise and be WRITERS.

Oh man, you sure as hell don't know what you're talking about.

Don't blame the network, they just aired the damn thing. Blame the producers and the writers themselves. Berman and Braga, and ultimately the writers for Voyager are responsible for keeping the show at the level of "McSci-Fi," preferring to stay in the cushion of comfort and predictability rather than take any creative risks for fear of audience alienation and abandonment.

Blaming UPN for the whole mess is just laughable...

CaptJodan · Post by **CaptJodan** » 2007-03-11 06:00pm

Darth Wong wrote: They're missing the forest for the trees, and I think a lot of it has to do with snobbery.

I never thought about it like that, but it makes a lot of sense. When you see Star Trek Special after Star Trek Special, they drill into you how many scientists and engineers were "inspired by Star Trek" to become what they are today, and somehow that gets turned into "Star Trek uses real science and engineering principals" by the fans. The specials talk about how revolutionary they were with civil rights, and so to the fans it should be about something more than just cowboys in space. They talk about Gene's grand vision of the future, and suddenly we get these flawless, cookie cutter characters. But it seems to me as if Gene is as responsible for this kind of trend as anyone else is. TNG laid the groundwork for what we have today.

Big Orange · Post by **Big Orange** » 2007-03-11 09:08pm

The mostly non-pretentious and fairly easy going attitude of TOS is the primary reason why I vastly prefer it over the plodding and surprisingly badly dated TNG - but what's pretty damning was that Voyager was badly criticised by critics because it was essentially the continuation of TNG and that DS9 was more lauded because it deviated away from TNG (they even had the cheek of making a TNG character more interesting).

ShadowSonic · Post by **ShadowSonic** » 2007-03-11 11:33pm

Well, I found the first two seasons of TNG dated, but I still enjoyed the 3-7 seasons, although it was clear by S7 they were burning out.

VOY got slammed for bland characters and that it was so generic and didn't bother being anything but a TNG clone, whereas at least DS9 did its' own damn thing, and did it well.

As for UPN, yes they did interfere, considering it was them who ordered the writers to have the Maquis and Feds get along fine with little to no tension, and not to tell arc stories so as to not confuse the viewers. At least according to Michael Piller and that overview of "Year of Hell" in the Trek Magazine.

LITNDARC · Post by **LITNDARC** » 2007-03-12 04:15am

I would much rather see a star wars T.V. show.

It is such a diverse collection of cultures.

No limit to the stories you could tell

ShadowSonic · Post by **ShadowSonic** » 2007-03-12 09:22am

I thought all the people in Star Wars (humans and non-humans) all acted pretty much the same as they've all been a part of one mass culture for over 25,000 or so years and there wasn't much in the way of diverse cultures, at least not that we've seen in the movies.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-03-12 01:22pm

ShadowSonic wrote:I thought all the people in Star Wars (humans and non-humans) all acted pretty much the same as they've all been a part of one mass culture for over 25,000 or so years and there wasn't much in the way of diverse cultures, at least not that we've seen in the movies.

Are you saying that the wookies, the sandpeople, and downtown Coruscant all have the same culture?

ShadowSonic · Post by **ShadowSonic** » 2007-03-12 02:11pm

Well, with Tatooine "the Republic doesn't exist out here", and we don't know exactly where Kashyyk is but it's probably in the outer worlds as well. But aside from a few outer worlds where the Republic hasn't bothered setting up a permanant presence, aren't most of the planets all mostly similar due to thousands upon thousands of years of co-existance under the Republic, the Holo-Net, unified space travel-ways, etc?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-03-12 02:20pm

ShadowSonic wrote:Well, with Tatooine "the Republic doesn't exist out here", and we don't know exactly where Kashyyk is but it's probably in the outer worlds as well. But aside from a few outer worlds where the Republic hasn't bothered setting up a permanant presence, aren't most of the planets all mostly similar due to thousands upon thousands of years of co-existance under the Republic, the Holo-Net, unified space travel-ways, etc?

No. Go read some of the supplemental books out there. But nice shifting goalposts to change it from "Star Wars" to "The Republic".

drachefly · Post by **drachefly** » 2007-03-12 02:59pm

consequences wrote:One of the comic book timelines was a divergence from the events of ST:IV, if only because the Mirror universe decided to attempt to invade at that moment, and the Whale Probe never showed.

Oh, the whale probe showed up all right. Just not right then.

Just like ST III happened in between issues 9 and 10 (or so), with the severe damage on the side of the lower hull coming not from Khan, but from a romulan plasma torpedo. There were a few other conversational hooks to indicate that Khan was still reverbrating in their psyches, to explain certain dialog elements in ST III.

Similarly,
Issues 11-50 (or so) managed to lead in a big circle. In the beginning of the circle is Kirk and crew on Vulcan, helping Spock recover, and coming back to Earth on a BoP to face charges.

Mirror universe storyline intercedes. Things diverge.

At the end of the circle, Spock has been knocked out by the virus, having a second Fal-Tor-Pan, and them being in that very same Bird of Prey, on Vulcan, heading back to Earth to face charges for the same offenses (the Klingons had insisted that the charges be pressed after all).

That's why suddenly there's a break and the scene shifts from Excelsior back to Enterprise around issue 55. ST IV happened in between two issues.

Note: this is not the same series of comics as I mentioned a few minutes ago. That was set after ST V, and was in a rebooted comic series.
Odd that I'd randomly have cause to mention both in such proximity.