Why TNG will never surpass TOS - Page 2

Drago-Kazov · September 20 2012, 10:11 PM

They did that in many other ways. They hit you on the head with it in The Neutral Zone.

King Daniel Into Darkness · September 20 2012, 10:12 PM

Doug Otte · September 20 2012, 10:14 PM

izarian wrote:

Yeah right, whenever somebody says the truth they're a troll. What I'm sayin' is pretty damn obvious. Why then the slouching back to TOS with the 2009 Abrams movie??? Why the half-assed attempt to get back to basics? I'll tell ya why. Because the liberals in Hollywood and paramount went too far with the cerebral unisex longjohns HS, that's why. You got women acting so uptight they seen frigid and men scared to death to look at any woman in a sexually suggestive way for risk of offending their human dignity. What liberal hypersensitive HS. You sure didn't have that hypersensitive politically correct BS overshadowing the production of TOS back in the 1960s. That is why TOS will always be better. But that's the way paramount wanted it. Who told them to put TOS out to pasture with Undiscovered Country? Nobody. Who told them to knock off Kirk in Generations? Nobody. Now Shatner is too old and fat to play Kirk. I'm open-minded. Put some 30-ish actors in front of some spiffy ipanels and have them act like men and I'll buy it....and some space babes with enough basic intelligence to keep their mouths shut while the men handle things and I'll buy that too. This hyper-progressive Aldous Huxley crap just ain't gonna work anymore...but you can't tell paramount that. They'll blow another 200 million on a 2nd Abrams movie before they'll learn.

p.s. I'm a troll for sayin' all this, right?

Right. But I'm confused. Are you implying that it was HS, or BS, or both, and how do they differ?

Doug Otte · September 20 2012, 10:15 PM

izarian wrote:

Why didn't Data and the boyishly handsome Riker never get married?

I would think that someone with antiquated views of gender roles such as yours would also oppose gay marriage, but with that double negative, I'm not sure if you mean it or not.

Maple Dog · September 20 2012, 10:25 PM

C.E. Evans wrote:

Maple Dog wrote:

The worste thing in TNG,was in the first season,guys wearing girls uniform,WTF was that about?

To show that it wasn't the 20th-Century anymore and that people in that time didn't make a big deal about it.

Didn't they shown that in TOS,with the weird fashion of the future?

C.E. Evans · September 20 2012, 10:29 PM

Maple Dog wrote:

C.E. Evans wrote:

Maple Dog wrote:

The worste thing in TNG,was in the first season,guys wearing girls uniform,WTF was that about?

To show that it wasn't the 20th-Century anymore and that people in that time didn't make a big deal about it.

Didn't they shown that in TOS,with the weird fashion of the future?

The same costume designer was responsible for both. "Weird" fashion is to be expected in a show set in another time and another place.

Maple Dog · September 20 2012, 10:32 PM

Guess you're right,some 1950s sci-fi had the "Intergalactic cheerleaders uniforms" for the women,took a few decades to remove that stereotypes.

NrobbieC · September 20 2012, 10:40 PM

Maple Dog wrote:

The worste thing in TNG,was in the first season,guys wearing girls uniform,WTF was that about?

Never heard of tranvestites?

Maple Dog · September 20 2012, 10:43 PM

NrobbieC wrote:

Maple Dog wrote:

The worste thing in TNG,was in the first season,guys wearing girls uniform,WTF was that about?

Never heard of tranvestites?

Aren't transvestites going full disguise,with fake boobs?

manboobs are i guess ugly in a dress.

NrobbieC · September 20 2012, 10:45 PM

Maple Dog wrote:

NrobbieC wrote:

Maple Dog wrote:

The worste thing in TNG,was in the first season,guys wearing girls uniform,WTF was that about?

Never heard of tranvestites?

Aren't transvestites going full disguise,with fake boobs?

manboobs are i guess ugly in a dress.

It doesn't have to be a full on drag queen

in the future if a guy wants to wear a dress no one cares.

CaptainStoner · September 20 2012, 10:52 PM

Ok fine, let's do this.

izarian wrote:

Yeah right, whenever somebody says the truth they're a troll.

Here is a concept. There is a difference between relative truth, and absolute truth. Absolute truth is something that is true no matter the context/perspective, and may not even exist in the physical world. And it is very common to have two, completely contradictory things that are both "true".

What I'm sayin' is pretty damn obvious.

It is obvious that you prefer TOS.

Why then the slouching back to TOS with the 2009 Abrams movie???

To make money from a still viable franchise.

Because the liberals in Hollywood and paramount went too far with the cerebral unisex longjohns HS, that's why.

"The Cage".

You got women acting so uptight they seen frigid

except, as you pointed out, all the leading females on the show. And most of the crew. And everybody in 10-forward. Otherwise, you are fucking spot on.

and men scared to death to look at any woman in a sexually suggestive way for risk of offending their human dignity.

William T. Riker. Worf. Picard. Geordi. Wesley. Fuck, even Data gets some...

You sure didn't have that hypersensitive politically correct BS...back in the 1960s.

I think the word you're looking for is professionalism. Which is well on display on Kirk's ship, and even Kirk is no pig.

Who told them to put TOS out to pasture with Undiscovered Country?

Time. It catches up with us all.

Who told them to knock off Kirk in Generations?

You're right, nobody. It was the writer's and producers decision. What's with the authority issues?

Now Shatner is too old and fat to play Kirk.

He was willing to reprise Kirk if it made sense to the story and was a decent part. As for old and fat, at 80+ he could probably still kick your ass.

I'm open-minded.

lol

Put some 30-ish actors in front of some spiffy ipanels and have them act like men and I'll buy it....

keep your porn preferences to yourself please

and some space babes with enough basic intelligence to keep their mouths shut while the men handle things and I'll buy that too.

If you don't like girls, just say so. Nobody cares.

This hyper-progressive Aldous Huxley crap

best part of your post

They'll blow another 200 million on a 2nd Abrams movie before they'll learn.

...before they'll learn if they've made enough for a 3rd movie? Yes.

p.s. I'm a troll for sayin' all this, right?

That, or just, you know, plain dumb. I admit it can be hard to tell sometimes.

Maple Dog · September 20 2012, 11:02 PM

I think not counting the TOS uniform in the new Trek movie,i think the women of the 23rd century,won't be as they were represented in the 1960s,they now shown for some time now,that they can kick ass.

CaptainStoner · September 20 2012, 11:14 PM

Maple Dog wrote:

I think not counting the TOS uniform in the new Trek movie,i think the women of the 23rd century,won't be as they were represented in the 1960s,they now shown for some time now,that they can kick ass.

Yes. Well said.

CoveTom · September 20 2012, 11:42 PM

There is simply no question that TOS has a place in our culture that is unrivaled by any other entry into the Trek franchise. TNG was ridiculously popular at the time of its airing, and still commands decent sales figures in things like DVD's. But the overall cultural phenomenon that surrounds TOS just isn't there for whatever reason. Oh, there are some elements of TNG that have made it into pop culture to a degree. The Borg and "resistance is futile" come to mind. But when people think Trek, they still think Kirk and Spock. And, for that matter, William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy.

NrobbieC · September 21 2012, 12:01 AM

CoveTom wrote:

But when people think Trek, they still think Kirk and Spock. And, for that matter, William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy.

And laugh.

September 20 2012, 10:11 PM	#16
Drago-Kazov Fleet Captain	Re: Why TNG will never surpass TOS They did that in many other ways. They hit you on the head with it in The Neutral Zone.

September 20 2012, 10:12 PM	#17
King Daniel Into Darkness Admiral Location: KingDaniel has fallen Into Darkness (in England)	Re: Why TNG will never surpass TOS __________________ Star Trek Imponderables, fun video mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors. Episode One Episode Two

September 20 2012, 10:32 PM	#22
Maple Dog Lieutenant Commander Location: Montreal Canada	Re: Why TNG will never surpass TOS Guess you're right,some 1950s sci-fi had the "Intergalactic cheerleaders uniforms" for the women,took a few decades to remove that stereotypes. __________________ MapleDog's Blog

September 20 2012, 11:02 PM	#27
Maple Dog Lieutenant Commander Location: Montreal Canada	Re: Why TNG will never surpass TOS I think not counting the TOS uniform in the new Trek movie,i think the women of the 23rd century,won't be as they were represented in the 1960s,they now shown for some time now,that they can kick ass. __________________ MapleDog's Blog

September 20 2012, 11:42 PM	#29
CoveTom Rear Admiral Location: CoveTom	Re: Why TNG will never surpass TOS There is simply no question that TOS has a place in our culture that is unrivaled by any other entry into the Trek franchise. TNG was ridiculously popular at the time of its airing, and still commands decent sales figures in things like DVD's. But the overall cultural phenomenon that surrounds TOS just isn't there for whatever reason. Oh, there are some elements of TNG that have made it into pop culture to a degree. The Borg and "resistance is futile" come to mind. But when people think Trek, they still think Kirk and Spock. And, for that matter, William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy.

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US