QMX Star Trek General discussion thread

[jal76]

Really? Is that what people think? Is that seriously your profound opinion? Is that why TOS is such an iconic, groundbreaking phenomenon. Aye, but ya do know what they say about opinions, don?t you, laddie?[/QUOTE

Yes. Unfortunately that is what many people who consider themselves to be Star Trek ?fans? while Roddenberry?s message flies over their heads think. Star Trek has endured because of all of its traits and characteristics that it sounds like you may have missed. It was groundbreaking indeed in the tumultuous 1960s to promote gender and racial equality and over-all tolerance in large measures. Roddenberry had a very clear agenda and that is no opinion...well documented fact. Five minutes on Google will clear that up for you. The folks who actually get what Star Trek is trying to say have done an amazing job of keeping it alive for these several decades.

 

[NCC-1701 no bloody ABCorD]

Really? Is that what people think? Is that seriously your profound opinion? Is that why TOS is such an iconic, groundbreaking phenomenon?[/QUOTE

Yes. Unfortunately that is what many people who consider themselves to be Star Trek ?fans? while Roddenberry?s message flies over their heads...The folks who actually get what Star Trek is trying to say have done an amazing job of keeping it alive for these several decades.

Well, in that case, we be darn lucky, man, to have the likes of you, someone ‘who actually gets what Star Trek is trying to say,’ to enlighten poor, simple blokes like myself who has erroneously considered myself a Star Trek fan. I thought I often heard a swishing overhead when watching Star Trek. I always thought it was the Enterprise in the title sequence and my 5.1 surround system. But thanks to you it has now dawned on me that all along it has been Roddenberry’s message flying over my head!

Can ya hear yarself, man? “Where is Library?”

 

[davejames]

Great post... some think that the point of Star Trek was Captain Kirk getting into fist fights and love affairs with different aliens each week. People forget that Gene Roddenberry always intended for Star Trek to explore certain socio-political perspectives that were important to him as the show?s creator. Like it or not those are the same perspectives still being explored by current Star Trek. As far as figures go give me Captain Sisko.

Ha yeah, it always amazes me to see people get outraged over Trek being too "politically correct". Every show since the original has been as liberal as they could possibly get away with at the time, and now suddenly it's all too much? I guess because, what, gay people? Seems like that's what it usually comes down to. I just don't get it, and am very happy I wasn't raised to freak out over stuff like that.

As for the storytelling, I can see how the more kinetic, fast-paced style might not be for everyone, but for my money DSC and Picard are still at least lightyears better than the incredibly safe and formulaic VOY and ENT, which their recycled plots and bland characters. Seems like people have forgotten just how much criticism those Berman-era shows got from fans back in the day.

 

[jal76]

Well, in that case, we be darn lucky, man, to have the likes of you, someone ?who actually gets what Star Trek is trying to say,? to enlighten poor, simple blokes like us.

Can ya hear yarself, man?

But no one should need me to enlighten them my friend. Just watch the show and pay attention. They were not hiding any of this. It is all really overt and obvious. That?s why it always surprises me to be honest when people who actually claim to watch the show seem to miss all of this. I am not trying to be argumentative or flippant I am sincerely confused that anyone could watch the show and miss the message.

 

[jal76]

Ha yeah, it always amazes me to see people get outraged over Trek being too "politically correct". Every show since the original has been as liberal as they could possibly get away with at the time, and now suddenly it's all too much? I guess because, what, gay people? Seems like that's what it usually comes down to. I just don't get it, and am very happy I wasn't raised to freak out over stuff like that.

As for the storytelling, I can see how the more kinetic, fast-paced style might not be for everyone, but for my money DSC and Picard are still lightyears better than the incredibly safe and formulaic VOY and ENT, which their recycled plots and bland characters. Seems like people have forgotten just how much criticism those Berman-era shows got from fans back in the day.

Yep. This!

 

[Pauln6a]

It's an interesting, if circular debate, because the term 'political correctness' means different things to different people.

I don't see swearing as politically correct, although I don't think it adds anything and I wish they wouldn't bother.

I don't see gender equality as politically correct (Star Trek has always espoused gender equality in principle - are people annoyed they are actually started to show it on screen? That seems odd).

I don't see racial equality as politically correct (Star Trek has always espoused racial equality - we all love Uhura - are people annoyed because Star Trek should show a glass ceiling for black women? That seems odd as we had several Hispanic commodores in TOS and a black captain in STIV).

I don't see sexual equality as politically correct (Star Trek showed numerous incidents of people having sex with members of other alien species. If you weren't repulsed by that concept then relations between the same genders of the same species really shouldn't bother you).

Star Trek?s politics may or may not be politically correct but it hasn't been wholly consistent. The liberal Federation has a secret organisation breaking it's own rules for political gain. That's a bit distasteful as it implies that the liberal elite can only achieve nirvana on the back of deception, colonisation by the back door, and sometimes even murder. It's distasteful but it also gives our liberal heroes some to rise above, something to be better than, something to pit their wits against. It's good storytelling.

If you're a fan of right wing oligarchies, dictatorships, or corrupt democracies, look to the alien of the week, not Starfleet. This is where Picard are departing overtly from classic Trek. The Federation has to work to maintain its ideals. Our heroes must actively help in that endeavour. The goalposts have shifted slightly but a goal is still a goal.

The main protagonists are not thieves or murdering mercenaries (well, ok Seven is a bit but I digress).

I think it's fine to say that the direction in which they've decided to take Star Trek is not to your taste (I enjoy the Abrams' movies for their pace and spectacle but I feel that they largely missed the point). I think boldly declaring that it isn't Star Trek is just hyperbolic.

I do love that Star Trek is so diverse and invokes such passion in people that we take the time to have these conversations. In the 23rd century, we've learned not to fear words. ;-)

 

[NCC-1701 no bloody ABCorD]

Well, ya know what they says about opinions. Aka, going around in circles.

 

[Pauln6a]

Well, ya know what they says about opinions. Aka, going around in circles.

It's actually all downhill, but what a ride!

 

[NCC-1701 no bloody ABCorD]

It's actually all downhill, but what a ride!

Aye, much like Discovery spiraling down a strong-flushing toilet bowl—and not one of those useless low-flush ones of the politically correct “improved modern era.”

 

[ebor]

In my opinion Star Trek has gotten better since the first pilot episode wink1 and for me this rings true with Disco and Picard. I have been... and always will be a Star Trek fan.

 

[Scifi67]

So if I don't like Discovery (a.k.a. Woke in Space) it's because I'm homophobic. Wow who knew, or maybe I just didn't like the show. I did however enjoy Enterprise immensely (I just watched it for the first time over the last two months), I found it very entertaining and a lot like TOS. I'm sure it has to do with my lack of education and poor upbringing.

Picard should have been made 10 years ago. Poor Patrick Stewart looked lost in the few episodes I managed to get through, which is sad because I am a TNG fan.

Great special effects in both the new shows but they missed the mark in my book.

 

[abake]

It's an interesting, if circular debate, because the term 'political correctness' means different things to different people.

I don't see swearing as politically correct, although I don't think it adds anything and I wish they wouldn't bother.

I don't see gender equality as politically correct (Star Trek has always espoused gender equality in principle - are people annoyed they are actually started to show it on screen? That seems odd).

I don't see racial equality as politically correct (Star Trek has always espoused racial equality - we all love Uhura - are people annoyed because Star Trek should show a glass ceiling for black women? That seems odd as we had several Hispanic commodores in TOS and a black captain in STIV).

I don't see sexual equality as politically correct (Star Trek showed numerous incidents of people having sex with members of other alien species. If you weren't repulsed by that concept then relations between the same genders of the same species really shouldn't bother you).

Star Trek?s politics may or may not be politically correct but it hasn't been wholly consistent. The liberal Federation has a secret organisation breaking it's own rules for political gain. That's a bit distasteful as it implies that the liberal elite can only achieve nirvana on the back of deception, colonisation by the back door, and sometimes even murder. It's distasteful but it also gives our liberal heroes some to rise above, something to be better than, something to pit their wits against. It's good storytelling.

If you're a fan of right wing oligarchies, dictatorships, or corrupt democracies, look to the alien of the week, not Starfleet. This is where Picard are departing overtly from classic Trek. The Federation has to work to maintain its ideals. Our heroes must actively help in that endeavour. The goalposts have shifted slightly but a goal is still a goal.

The main protagonists are not thieves or murdering mercenaries (well, ok Seven is a bit but I digress).

I think it's fine to say that the direction in which they've decided to take Star Trek is not to your taste (I enjoy the Abrams' movies for their pace and spectacle but I feel that they largely missed the point). I think boldly declaring that it isn't Star Trek is just hyperbolic.

I do love that Star Trek is so diverse and invokes such passion in people that we take the time to have these conversations. In the 23rd century, we've learned not to fear words. ;-)

 

[NCC-1701 no bloody ABCorD]

So if I don't like Discovery (a.k.a. Woke in Space) it's because I'm homophobic. Wow who knew, or maybe I just didn't like the show. I did however enjoy Enterprise immensely (I just watched it for the first time over the last two months), I found it very entertaining and a lot like TOS. I'm sure it has to do with my lack of education and poor upbringing.

Picard should have been made 10 years ago. Poor Patrick Stewart looked lost in the few episodes I managed to get through, which is sad because I am a TNG fan.

Great special effects in both the new shows but they missed the mark in my book.

I agree with you 100%.

C‘mon, man, get woke already! And another thing, you’re from Kentucky! You ain’t where it’s at, Herbert! And Kirk is from Iowa, so that should tell you what he’s all about: fist fights and sleeping with a new alien girl every week! He’s much too toxically masculine and socially destructive for today’s “enlightened” Trek. Yet, I always did wonder why he’s the most favored Trek Captain. Now I know: Captain misogynist gets all those alien girls’ votes!

Amazing, isn’t it? Do Star Trek fans really think like that? I guess some do.

By the way, besides TOS, I, too very much enjoyed Enterprise. It definitely seemed most reminiscent of the original.

 

[greatlakes6]

Wow, this thread took a quick turn! I only like TOS, am I alone?

 

[Asta]

Wow, this thread took a quick turn! I only like TOS, am I alone?

.....

 

[Pauln6a]

.....

This is also how I feel about 1/6 Trek!

 

[Pauln6a]

So if I don't like Discovery (a.k.a. Woke in Space) it's because I'm homophobic. Wow who knew, or maybe I just didn't like the show. I did however enjoy Enterprise immensely (I just watched it for the first time over the last two months), I found it very entertaining and a lot like TOS. I'm sure it has to do with my lack of education and poor upbringing.

Picard should have been made 10 years ago. Poor Patrick Stewart looked lost in the few episodes I managed to get through, which is sad because I am a TNG fan.

Great special effects in both the new shows but they missed the mark in my book.

You don't have to be homophobic to dislike Discovery, but it helps.

I like some story elements but others make me grind my teeth. No version of Trek has ever been perfect though. TMP comes closest for me.

 

[Asta]

This is also how I feel about 1/6 Trek!

TOS and TNG are my favourite series.

TOS has that classic charm, and TNG has a great ensemble cast and a more expansive visual realisation owing to contemporary computer technology/filming techniques.

Enterprise was an interesting diversion. DS9 and Voyager felt like TNG for a while, but both became stale and overly drawn out.

Discovery looked wonderful, but the storytelling felt heavy. At times it was dense and impenetrable, pushing me away rather than drawing me in. Whereas TNG benefited from contemporary technology, since the series was set after TOS, it became detrimental to Discovery. It was jarring to see how slick and futuristic everything was prior to the more basic appearance in TOS.

I liked Picard. It's inevitable that elements of our present-day will guide the writing of a series, and that trusted institutions will not continue to live up to the expected ideal. Yet the characters we grew to know do continue to abide by those ideals to the best of their ability. In essence that's still true to Roddenberry's dream, even if the Federation as a whole could not.

 

[gin007]

TOS and TNG are my favourite series.

TOS has that classic charm, and TNG has a great ensemble cast and a more expansive visual ....

I agree with most of this but Picard also has heaviness, although it also has such great nostalgia and the ensemble is really great.

Also Babylon 5 was a much better DS9 than DS9 ever became, but even though the premise was ripped off by the Paramount, I don't think B5 would have done well in the ST universe, as it sort of straddles the gritty future into which ST has hurdled itself lately and the rosier, more optimistic vision of Rodenberry.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[Asta]

I agree with most of this but Picard also has heaviness, although it also has such great nostalgia and the ensemble is really great.

With Discovery the heaviness I felt was in the manner of its storytelling. With Picard it's in the story itself, which I felt was very well told.

Discovery was an effort to get through, whereas Picard was a 'page turner'.

TOS, as with much enduring science fiction, was an examination of contemporary society, putting forward ideals opposing the current less than favourable reality. At the core of the story are the heroes, who in turn are part of a greater organisation. It's always been about problem solving, and finding ways of curing problems in ethical ways, of protecting minorities and treating them as equals. Unless it conflicted with the Prime Directive, which sometimes appeared to be an unfair hand dealt by a superior, advanced society to a more backwards one - a benign imperialism of sorts.

In Picard the 'heroes' are still true to their ideals, though the greater organisation has failed as a whole. This is anti-Trek in that it's a loss of innocence and hope, though as long as the heroes remain true then the vision is still alive. It's still a reflection of our contemporary societies. Trek has never been fully Utopian, but has often shown the journey towards a better world. Essentially, Utopia is impossible to reach because there will be people in it, and they must have free will to a certain degree. Unless those people are regimented and uniform (as programmed as robots to conform to somebody's ideal) they will undoubtedly find themselves in disagreements in how their society should operate.

After all, Data was initially a regimented and uniform being, but with the capability to evolve. He wanted to be human. He wanted free will, and eventually the choice to end his own life.