Topic: Star Trek: Pasture or Glue Farm...??? Part 1.  (Read 1089 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jayvt3

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 237
Star Trek: Pasture or Glue Farm...??? Part 1.
« on: June 20, 2006, 10:39:59 am »
Just as a reminder that this is a two part issue for me.  This is just the "for letting it die" argument.
I'm just gonna have this one up for a short time, a month at most.  Then can it and focus on the "for letting it live" argument.



Is it time to say enough is enough and just let this old horse go the way of Flash Gordon, Buck Rodgers and Rawhide???
Just to have them as pleasant memories and DVD collections?

TOS. 
The original series was full of campiness and not much in the way of real intellectual product.  Entertainment levels were just adequate. 
Even though some of the members of the original cast had really great potential the show itself and the stigma that associates with it just wouldn't let them prosper. 
Also, DeForest Kelley, James Doohan and some others have died.  Why not let them just be.  Let then enjoy their few years in dignity and grace.  With fond memories and adulations.
The pressure that the fans have burdened them for "One last Hurrah" with is not realistic at best, there will be NO adventures of Capt. Sulu folks.  Mr. Takei is not in good enough health for the endeavour and Paramount wants fresh flesh for the producers and investors not some Asian Ian McKellan, and at most it is absolutely selfish.  To have a bunch of overweight, underachieving, bespeckled, lobster headed trailer trash wanting someone else to do something that they cannot do, whether it be from lack of ability or talent or in most cases both to do is in its own way slavery.  "We made you!" says the trekkies.  "You owe us!" says the 35 year old man that lives in his parents attic living off unemployment.

TNG.
The series started off with better special effects but save for that it was just TOS part duex.  The cast itself was balanced.  If you consider one third needed, one third not necessary and one third just being there and collecting a check.  To be balanced.  For the needed.  Patrick Stewart taking the "Cerebral" Kirk role, Data as the Spock outsider role, the fiesty doctor, played by Gates McFadden.
For the "go either way" crowd.  Worf, Yar, Laforge and Riker.  Were these characters really needed???  Was a "KLINGON WARRIOR SON OF THE HOUSE OF MOGH!!!!!!!!!!!!" really needed???  Worf was the Fax Machine of Star Trek.  One by itself served no purpose.  So he served as a door into the Klingons as a race.  But due to poor screen writing the true ideology and racial identity of that race was sorely lacking.  Unless you live in your parents basement.
Yar.  A woman as chief of security is nothing new nor to be lauded.  The show got along great when they killed her off.   Damn contract negotiations.
Riker.  Started off as the philandering stud and got married.  Casanova with a conscience.
Laforge.  The belief by the producers and writer held was that a black man should be in a position of authority.  This, IMHO, showed a lack of the knowledge of the Trek universe by those who really didn't care for it one way or another.  The failure to remember Dr. M'Benga.  He was more versed in Vulcan physiology than Dr. McCoy.  Dr. Richard Daystrom, the creator of the M1 through M5 computers.  His character was in reality more versed, knowledgeable and believable than, say Soong.  The character though that sticks in my mind the most was  the Admiral overseeing the Courts Martial in the episode Court Martial.  As a former member of the military if I had a commander like him my kids would have been spit-polished.

It also brought new characters that for lack of a better term just left a bad taste in most peoples mouths.
Counselor Troi.  A telepathic empath.  It doesn't matter if she signed a waiver or contract or swore an oath of office.  Would YOU want someone to be able to read you mind and know your emotions.  Honestly think of it.  Your darkest fear, your deepest hate.
Those are personal just as your highest love or your brightest joy.  They are yours.  Not even GOD stands in your way with them.  So how would you like to be out of a job because of the emnity for a co-worker or in jail because of an emotional flare you felt for a screaming baby.  Luckily they toned her down.
Wesley Crusher.  The boy-god.  Gene Rodenberry's alter-ego.  Makes you wonder what the hell he and L.Ron were talking about on that yacht in the Bahamas.

Deep Space Nine. 
In a nut shell it "Came in as a Lion" and went out like a bad lounge act.
The poor Bajorans.  The poor Cardassian oppressed Bajorans.  The poor Cardassian children murdering Bajorans.  The poor alien worshipping, ideologically misguided Bajorans.  Lines have been made to equivilate the Bajorans with the Palastinians in a socio-ecomic sense and Muslims with their religion.  So would then the Cardassian be the Israelis and the Dominion be the United States????

The characters were overall decent.  The Chief still always got the shaft.  Dr. Bashir was good.  An augment just wanting to be normal.  But Dax.  If it was a new individual then why the "old Man" nickname?  Who was really in control and other than a longer healthier life what was the true benefit?  Would you give up all that you are.  Your failings and successes, you dreams and fears, your loves and hates.  All that make up YOU to be a slug's hosts and a few extra years???
I'd take a trill. 
On a plate medium rare.

VOYAGER.
This show had potential.  I found it to be entertaining and the only episodes I didn't care for were the "social message" ones.  These, IMHO, just took away from the actors and their characters and the continuity of the episodes.
But a paycheck is a paycheck.

ENTERPRISE.
The showed so many lapses in continuity.  Ship design, weapons technology, user technology.  You really need seat belts folks.
Ship design was not really an issue for me.  All Federation ships are built badly.  The bridge was and still is a hood ornament.
Weapons tech.  If you follow the 100 years before TOS, say with the "new" phase pistols, then we would still be using single shot breach loading rifles and percussion cap pistols.  "Just can the laser guided bombs boys!  We got lever action rifles now!"
User technology in regards to the transporter.  Then if relevant technological evolution takes a normal course there would be no such thing in the 23rd century as a transporter "malfunction".
But due to the vicious trekkies and the negative stereotype associated with trekkies.  The show waned and died.  Even the Vulcan body suit didn't save it.
Too bad though.  I have a story line about how the Federation rescuses the Defiant.  Boarding parties.  Lots of Boarding Parties.

Now on to the movies...  :popcorn:  :popcorn:  :popcorn:  :popcorn:  :popcorn:

The Motion Picture.  Started it all and set the stage, IMHO, for a better 23rd century style. IMHO only/

The Wrath of Khan.  Dark and dangerous.  Loved it.  The introduction of the human flaws and strengths were best.

The Search for Spock.  I could see the exploration of the Genesis world and even it's destruction but why kill of David Marcus???  Children are our future.  That is why we have them.  The fans wanted a "Next Genration"?  Well David Marcus was it, but like an unwanted pregnancy the character got aborted.  Also the resurrection of Spock was just a bad idea.

The Voyage Home.  "WHALES SAVE THE WORLD"!!!  Well if whales can save it then Cockroaches will conquer it.  What gets me is why they just didn't go to one of the 2031 tourist kiosks that San Francisco has to get a map and some bus tokens.  Also the Klink ship must have something in the way of a precious metal used for repair parts.  A pound of "scrap" gold is still worth 500 an ounce folks.  Info-mercial be damned.

The Final Frontier.  Was probably the worst overall of the original cast movies.  Even the critics were heartless in this case to refer that the replictors be made to sustain geritol.
The stroy line sucked and when I walked from the showing I wanted my money back.  Did I mention the Kabuki Klingon???

The Undicovered Country.  This one had star power.  The quality of actors made this one shine.  Christopher Plummer as Chang.  Paul Rossilli as Kerla.  Also the chance to see the true Klingon was in the strong if distant emotional bond between Azetbu and Kerla.  Now there is your Klingon Opera folks.
The downfall was the Shakespearian gobbldy-gook.  What would GOD want with starship?  What would a Klingon want with "Taming of the Shrew"???
Julius Ceaser I could understand.  Even Enrique Quatros through Octovos.  Hegemona Lear would be required reading.  So there is reason for Klingons liking Shakespeare but then you couldn't swing a dead cat at a Gen-Con with out hitting a lobster head quoting, badly mind you, from the Bard.

The "Next Generation" movies all did poorly at the box office and none could bring to mind any redeeming quality.  Well the destruction of that Galaxy Class behemoth did bring a chuckle.  Insurrection just made me think of WTF were the writers thinking and  First Contact just sledgehammered the TOS lore of Cochrane being from Alpha Centauri.
For those of you that don't know.  Befor the Eugenics Wars, Earth sent out colony ships.  One went to Alpha Centauri.  It established a colony among the natives and flourished.  While there the colonist intermingled with the natives and Zephram Cochrane was born.  He invented warp speed travel and the desendants weh back to Earth to pull it from the desparity of post Eugenic War life.
As for Nemesis.  Glad they whacked Data and too bad B4 didn't go with him.  But it did reinforce the notion that seat belts are need on a starship.

Every undertaking by associated with Star Trek has met with modest success at best, dismal failure at worst.  From TV to comics to movies and even games.  Nothing is original and the lessons of the past are flung away.

Is it time to let it Die.
Just think of Ben Affleck playing an academy age Kirk.









Offline Villa64

  • NCC-64E
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 5672
  • Knuckle Dragger
Re: Star Trek: Pasture or Glue Farm...??? Part 1.
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2006, 09:42:15 pm »
I dont understand how I can disagree with most of your points, but still agree with your conclusion.

Engaging the precious snowflakes of the world.

Offline jayvt3

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 237
Re: Star Trek: Pasture or Glue Farm...??? Part 1.
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2006, 12:32:56 pm »
FOR Villa:

this is just my argument for the end of Star Trek and it's franchise.  You are welcome to agree or disagree.
just let me know with what you agree or disagree with.

Offline Dash Jones

  • Sub-Commander of the Dark Side
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6477
  • Gender: Male
Re: Star Trek: Pasture or Glue Farm...??? Part 1.
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2006, 05:06:06 pm »
I disagree with most of your points, and don't live in my parents basement.

I thought Star Trek was brilliant and MOST of it's appeal IS with it's intellectual investigations of the human psyche.  Last I checked Sulu was enthusiastic about a series too, Paramount was not enthusiastic about using him...OR ANY asian (shows how far we have come in that racist arena) as a main Captain or central character for a Star Trek show.

ST:TNG wasn't quite as vigorous and was more special effects, but was still pretty awesome.

ST:DS9 actually started REALLY slow...and got better till the end it was great.  Less human psyche and human condition exploring nearer the end however, and more action, flash, bang.

ST:Voyager was what I grew up with, and it was rather cool.  However I can see what people complain about in relation to it now.  Love it still, but understand why people had problems.

In fact the problems got Bigger with Enterprise...perhaps one of the WORST WRITTEN shows I've ever seen on TV.  It also had massive continuity problems, and relied MUCH TOO HEAVILY on SEX and things related to it as plot devices, which killed some of the family audience (though other treks had adult items and themes, Enterprise seemed to have it hot and heavy almost every episode for a while, and even tried to cater in that direction...which is hard for families to actually ignore).  Hell, I think 24 counted more towards family viewing than Enterprise...and did better in the ratings coincidentally I think.

I too think it should be put to pasture for a while...but because I think they need something fresh and new whilst keeping the charm of the old...and they have a distinct lack of being able to do that from what I've seen.  Until they CAN do something like that, I say let it rest.  Personally I thought that them killing off Data in the last movie was one of my less favorite parts...and yes, though repititious of the Spock comes to life type repeat of ST3, I'd like to see them bring him back...but that's just me and that particular opinion isn't shared by a ton of people I don't think.

Other than that, I am of the opinion some of your post was made to antagonize?  Either that or you have some odd opinions on the particulars of Trek.  I am curious from your tone though, it appears that you didn't like any part of Star trek except for Star Trek 2...and maybe Star Trek 6.  What actually brought you to the board...are you a SFB fan or SFC fan(though regarding your comment on Video/computer games based on Trek)I'd find that hard to believe either unless you were being facecious. To the counter of that however I would gather you like SFC however from comments of yours in the Models Forums.

So I gather you meant most ST games but not inclusive of SFC?  And that's what you actually like in ST as well?
"All hominins are hominids, but not all hominids are hominins."


"Is this a Christian perspective?

Now where in the Bible does it say if someone does something stupid you should shoot them in the face?"

-------

We have whale farms in Jersey.   They're called McDonald's.

There is no "I" in team. There are two "I"s in Vin Diesel. screw you, team.

Offline jayvt3

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 237
Re: Star Trek: Pasture or Glue Farm...??? Part 1.
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2006, 03:03:27 am »
FOR Dash:

I brought this topic out not as a bashing and if you read the preamble you'll see where I will be post the "positive side".

This part was the easiest though.  It's easier to tear down than to build up.  Easier to wound than to heal.

Next month I'm going to post the pro side I just need to make sure of some facts and get the right credits.

Lastly I am a die hard fan.  Not fanatic.  There is a difference.