View Single Post
Old May 30 2013, 12:52 PM   #63
Re: AFT NACELLE (Spoilers)

I listen to what other people say, I consider what they say, and, I ask myself, does it make sense not to me, but to society as a whole? I can see where Plinkett is going, and I can see where others are going, for I see this general trend in entertainment. I can relate to what is happening now to what was happening in the fifties. Movies dominated the visual medium for the first half of the 20th century. Then, with the advent of TV, for movies to be profitable, they had to change, and change they did. Movies today are competing with so many different visual media, and these visual media are influencing one another. So, the criteria for what makes a movie good in 1979 - the year the first ST movie came out - is not the same today. Translation: What makes a movie good? That changes with the times and with peoples' expectations.

I was reading Aristotle's On Rhetoric, where he discusses briefly the transition from one style of play writing to another style of play writing. We can see that shift, from Aeschylus' plays to Euripides' plays. The writing became less bombastic, more natural. While the older books, films, and music are being read in school, so that we can be educated and know something of our origins, it is the newer stuff that interests people. This process is happening to Trek. To appeal to a newer audience, CBS invested money into adding new special effects to the first series so as to make it appealing to the younger generations who didn't grow up with it.

I know what Star Trek was about - or what I have read it to about - and that was about people settling the frontier. Star Trek was coming up in a time when Westerns were big, on TV and on movies. Yes, they did consult science experts, just as the people involved in the latest movies did, and did write stories that would appeal to a wide audience. They created compromises so that they wouldn't go over budget - the transporter was created for that reason.

I am reading people arguing over two words uttered by a single character. This is nit-picking to an extreme. I doubt the writers spent as much time as people here are doing about these two words, I believe they were working long hours to craft the story, and mistakes like this crept into the story, and the mistake was not noticed by those involved in the making of this film.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote