Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down to ?

[Jimi_James]

To some people, like myself, the details matter.

[Timo]

I'm curious as for what you mean by details. Specifically, what sort of astronomical detail do you think the landscape on the previous page is missing?

Throwaway dialogue lines? "Look at the size of that moon, Spock!"

Plot-relevant musings? "Captain, it is the tidal forces caused by that satellite that make this world uniquely capable of creating ryetalin in its upper crust."

Graphics?

Timo Saloniemi

[Jimi_James]

For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color? Why is there no vegetation, other than those blue bushes and what appears to be grass? There are no trees or any other kind of plants anywhere. Are there any animals in the vicinity? Spock, have we been here before? This matte painting looks like the planet we visited a few weeks ago.


I'm kidding, sort of. More specifically though, I was referring to the previously comment about stumbling upon a planet that appeared to have no moons and orbit no star. Sure, they can get away with not explaining why the planet appears to exist on it's own, but some comment about other planetary bodies in the system and the star they're orbiting isn't too much to ask for.

It only takes a moment to include a throwaway line about the rest of the star system. And my point was that if you're going to go to the trouble of doing something, than why not go just a bit further and get the details right. Or at the very least include some details that sound right, even if you make them up. The existence of the Tech Manual suggest there are plenty of people who care about such details, even if they never make it into the show or add any great depth to the story.

[Nerys Myk]

Timewalker wrote:

---

The thing that always irritated me about the planets that the crew stumbled across mostly seem to just be there. They're rarely mentioned as having their own Sun, or being part of a solar system, or even having any moons. Same with asteroids they just stumble over.

I'm not saying there are never rogue planets, asteroids, and comets roaming the galaxy; it's just that the Enterprise ran across a helluva lot of them.

Examples? I think most of the planets were implied to be in solar systems with suns and other planets in them. Do we really need dialogue like "Mr. Chekov, plot a course to Quadrant 1, Sector 294, Gamma Triangula System, Planet IV. Oh and when we arrive make sure the sun is visible on the viewscreen. I like a good sun shot when entering orbit."

[BillJ]

Jimi_James wrote:

---

For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color? Why is there no vegetation, other than those blue bushes and what appears to be grass? There are no trees or any other kind of plants anywhere. Are there any animals in the vicinity? Spock, have we been here before? This matte painting looks like the planet we visited a few weeks ago.

But none of that is really important to the scene at hand and would feel unnatural.

[T'Girl]

If the landing party is walking around in sunlight, that would imply a sun. No?

[Delta Vega]

T'Girl wrote:

---

If the landing party is walking around in sunlight, that would imply a sun. No?

Or a big torch off camera

[Grant]

Janus 4 (the Horta planet) seemed lifeless on the surface and required generators to provide air beneath. Right?


To take one of the most iconic shots in Trek lore and nitpick?--I just don't get it.

Human colonies and planets with similar humanoids would require a sun and breathable air, similar gravity, etc.

I want story not dry exposition for my 50 minutes of entertainment. It's not Forbidden Planet where they have 100 minutes for McCoy to say "wow, look at that purple sky, and that warm sun and that nice clean air." Although he does, sort of, in paradise syndrome.

[Delta Vega]

Grant wrote:

---

Janus 4 (the Horta planet) seemed lifeless on the surface and required generators to provide air beneath. Right?


To take one of the most iconic shots in Trek lore and nitpick?--I just don't get it.

Human colonies and planets with similar humanoids would require a sun and breathable air, similar gravity, etc.

I want story not dry exposition for my 50 minutes of entertainment. It's not Forbidden Planet where they have 100 minutes for McCoy to say "wow, look at that purple sky, and that warm sun and that nice clean air." Although he does, sort of, in paradise syndrome.

As the OP here I think I am being picked up wrongly on this, I`m not nit picking iconic Trek imagery or demanding meaningless and meandering dialogue to explain why theres a certain type of foliage on a certain planet.

I was merely stating that it would have been more challenging for a crew or landing party to encounter a different type of world, one which demanded life support suits or whatever, to give any story another dimension. By using the word "convenient" I was merely saying that its always a sunny terrain, always warm, no need for a jacket eg.
Surely even other Class M worlds would not all be so hospitable weatherwise ?
As for information being given on planets and their Sun which they orbit, I have always believed that info to be in the dialogue.
Surely eg, Eminiar 7 is the seventh planet orbiting the sun Eminiar. surely Talos 4 is the fourth planet in orbit of Talos in the same way as Earth could conceivably be Sol 3 ?

[Ronald Held]

Perhaps, in the distant past, the Preservers or others terraformed planets in the Solar neighborhood to be more conducive to huminoid life?

[Grant]

Yes, I agree, it would have been cool to see many types of planets and landscapes/seascapes---it was, as others have stated, purely a money question.

Heck later they even began to really rely on 'paralell planets' with natives wearing on hand wardrobe.

I think we all wanted to see a little more 'outer space' in our outer space show!

[MacLeod]

Remember ST is a TV show and it has to be produced to a budget, as for it always being sunny, isn't that more a case of were the show was filmed.

[Grant]

MacLeod wrote:

---

Remember ST is a TV show and it has to be produced to a budget, as for it always being sunny, isn't that more a case of were the show was filmed.

Was there even one episode of TOS where it rained--on Earth or an alien world?

[Mr_Homn]

Grant wrote:

---

Was there even one episode of TOS where it rained--on Earth or an alien world?

Not that I can think of, off hand. Los Angeles is generally a dry region. Of course that doesn't mean they couldn't have simulated rain on the soundstage, but then it would probably mess up Spock's eyeshadow and Kirk's "Hair"!

Plenty of myst and wind, though.

I can scarcely think of many episodes where it Rained in TNG or DS9, either. It happened, but It wasn't all that common even in later trek.

[Nerys Myk]

KIRK: I should have brought a jacket!



SULU:Yeah, everything is fine here. Loving the weather



MCCOY: I thought the report said warm and sunny!!!!???