View Single Post
Old April 28 2013, 09:32 PM   #12
LancerKind
Ensign
 
Location: XiaMen, China
View LancerKind's Twitter Profile Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to LancerKind Send a message via Yahoo to LancerKind
Re: Let's get back to Roddenberry's trek

The Roddenberry vision goes beyond "did Spock etc act like the historical character." I'm now realizing the Trek Purity Test is character heavy, but those transgressions are easy to evaluate.
What makes Roddenberry's vision unique beyond other fiction was something heavily discussed in Why Trekkies hated the 2009 movie. The short answer is this: Roddenberry didn't want the future to be another damn dystopia. He felt progress means progress of not only technology but that of social progress too. (This is why there's no caveman fiction genre about them developing nukes to wipe out a neighboring tribe: it's not believable. It's impossible to develop only science without social maturity.)

This is a very big idea! JJ Abrams is doing a "fall from utopia" which honestly is a lot easier to write as there's conflict everywhere. So if you're lazy, you just turn the Trek universe around 180degrees and you can churn out tons of conflict where writing about a utopia with few problems, your going to work a lot harder to find a good conflict.
(Like all the pseudo-historical war movies set in ancient China. It's easy to write because there's upheaval happening everywhere.)

This is what made Roddenberry's Trek unique and these new films are now very well done action films, AKA cheats. :-) And I'll of course watch and enjoy them and hope that it'll score a 6 of 11 because if it can't do ANYTHING that made Trek unique, then we're just going to be watching another Space Opera like Star Wars.
__________________
==>Lancer---
Science Fictionist
LancerKind is offline   Reply With Quote