"Darmok" vs "Trials and Tribble-ations" better Trek tribute?

[MyCylon]

Zero Hour said:
[...] T&T really epitomizes the kind of inconsequential, inward-turned Star Trek I care very little for.

Zero Hour said:
^ But that 'eating up' of its own continuity is really what sets DS9 apart. What am I supposed to care about the Breen-Jem'Hadar alliance in the Chin'Toka system? And people wonder why the show is considered inaccessible.

So, essentially, you're complaining that "Trials" is inconsequential whilst also complaining about the fact that DS9 puts a premium on continuity i.e. is all about consequences and getting to the deeper meaning of ongoing stories and the characters? Isn't that a little inconsequent?

patlandness said:
But there's a point to made that it has *now* left a legacy of Trek nostalgia replacing quality Trek storytelling a'la Star Trek XI.

It's a terrific episode that is the symptom of a very bad problem for Contemporary Trek--looking backward rather than forward.

Ok, I see what you mean. However, I'm not sure how "Trials" is a symptom of this problem I also see. It's a total one out as far as DS9 is concerned. If anything, I think DS9 was very much about moving forward, pushing the boundaries and NOT resting on Trek's existing laurels.
At the same time, that doesn't mean throwing everything that was out of the window and ignoring the past. "Trials" is an acknowledgement of where it and Trek as a whole comes from - TOS. It's a statement to the fact that both the makers of DS9 and many, many fans of the show are also fans of the Original.
I'd agree with your assessment had DS9 started yanking out all sorts of reverential TOS or TNG references but it simply didn't. It continued on its path and told its stories. Granted, it did so within an existing universe that it helped flesh out further.
Personally, I've come to the point a long time ago where I don't see Trek as a whole anymore. There's DS9 and then there's shows such as VOY or ENT as well as some really bad movies of recent.
So, leaving DS9 out, I actually agree with you. IMHO VOY did nothing to add anything new to the formula. It was in my opinion a pretty bad rehash of what TNG was. I also think ENT had nothing new to offer. The only time it tried to stand on its own two feet in my view was in season 3 when it took a somewhat more daring approach although it was still a weak effort compared to other shows out there. Season 1 and 2 IMHO were a rehash of VOY. I won't comment on S4 since I haven't actually seen it (it doesn't matter to my view of the show as a whole since I'd long since lost any interest in the characters).
Interestingly, I'm not all that concerned about Trek 11. I don't see the movies getting any worse than 9 or 10 (granted, you never know...). I do hope, however, that the creators will take the liberties they need to create something new on the basis of the basic TOS characters. Let them reinvent it and turn it into something fresh and interesting that will get people interested again.
That's what I really hope for at this point.

[Deleted 2]

Justtoyourleft said:
So, essentially, you're complaining that "Trials" is inconsequential whilst also complaining about the fact that DS9 puts a premium on continuity i.e. is all about consequences and getting to the deeper meaning of ongoing stories and the characters? Isn't that a little inconsequent?

No, considering I wasn't talking about the consequences in a fictional universe.

You're making the same mistake the writers of DS9, VOY and ENT made time and time again. Their idea of writing an involving, engaging episode was to 'up the stakes'. Put not just the crew at risk, but the Federation. Or Humanity. Or the Entire Alpha Quadrant. Everything after TNG was very much subject to Maguffin inflation.

[Delta1]

The dreaded "form no longer valid" "feature" ate my reply, and Konqueror won't spit it back up. In brief:

1. Darmok isn't a tribute to anything. It's not a tribute to TNG, because reflexive tributes are tacky, and it's not a tribute to the TOS films, because it has little in common with them. It's not a tribute to TOS because it wasn't intended as such and has none of the hallmarks of a tribute episode. Just being similar to something does not make it a tribute.

2. You refer several times to what Trek XI will be, or will do. Have you read the script? I'd better go over to the T11 forum to see if it's been leaked.

[Brutal Strudel]

patlandness said:
^^
Again, I said "a tribute to Trek" not just TOS. It' the Alpha of Trek, but it's not the Omega.

To me this is going to be the problem with Trek XI. It's going to be nothing more than revisiting old nostalgic haunts like Enterprise's last season, rather than sticking to a philosophy, *any* philosophy and you know...EXPLORING and SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT THE HUMAN CONDITION with CREATIVITY.

I've had my issues with DS9, but when all was said and done, Ira Behr and Co. put out a good, quality product and expanded on the Trek Universe. What's come after doesn't come close.

"Trials and Tribble-ations" was a delicious dessert for the 30th Anniversary. But you can't *LIVE* on dessert. "Darmok" (and episodes like it) had nutritional value to keep the Trek franchise thriving for a while longer.

It's a shame that Paramount and lot of Trek fans don't see that.

Oh, I see it. I just think Trek is so played out that all it can offer, at this point, is dessert.

Besides, the cultural divide in "Darmok" just wasn't that deep and the mechanism for bridging it (lets fight te invisble slapce monster) was sorta goofy. It's Trek 101 or even Remedial Trek when we--as fans and as a society debating gay rights, abortion rights and the subtler forms of racism--are more than ready for Special Topics in Trek Theory.

T&T wasn't that, of course, but it was a fun little puzzle of a romp which showed us that one spin-off, at least, didn't think of TOS as its embarassing ancestor to be seldom spoke of.

[patlandness]

Brutal Strudel said:

Oh, I see it. I just think Trek is so played out that all it can offer, at this point, is dessert.

Besides, the cultural divide in "Darmok" just wasn't that deep and the mechanism for bridging it (lets fight te invisble slapce monster) was sorta goofy. It's Trek 101 or even Remedial Trek when we--as fans and as a society debating gay rights, abortion rights and the subtler forms of racism--are more than ready for Special Topics in Trek Theory.

T&T wasn't that, of course, but it was a fun little puzzle of a romp which showed us that one spin-off, at least, didn't think of TOS as its embarassing ancestor to be seldom spoke of.

Oh come on. Just because the TNG characters didn't fall all over themselves at the very mention of James T. Kirk, doesn't mean they weren't respectful of TOS. Read the "Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion".

...And Trek is played out? But comic characters like "Superman" and "Batman" are still hot properties for well over 60 years? Why is that?

And what's wrong with a little bit of goofiness if it makes for a good episode? My God, I never get tired of hearing the reverence for TOS's goofiness as endearing and timeless, but TNG's goofiness as being cringe-worthy.

[MyCylon]

Zero Hour said:

No, considering I wasn't talking about the consequences in a fictional universe.

Then I'm not quite sure what you mean. What consequences outside the fictional universe are you referring to?

Zero Hour said:
You're making the same mistake the writers of DS9, VOY and ENT made time and time again.

I'd say you're making a mistake by lumping those three together but I digress.

Zero Hour said:
Their idea of writing an involving, engaging episode was to 'up the stakes'. Put not just the crew at risk, but the Federation. Or Humanity. Or the Entire Alpha Quadrant. Everything after TNG was very much subject to Maguffin inflation.

TOS, the TOS movies as well as TNG often featured all-out threats at the very least to the Federation if not humanity and the known universe. The difference compared to DS9 (not talking about VOY or ENT here) is they'd introduce them in one episode and usually resolve them in that same episode.

For me, that made a lot of those threats seem, well, less threatening and "real" and essentially rather inconsequential.

[patlandness]

Delta1 said:
The dreaded "form no longer valid" "feature" ate my reply, and Konqueror won't spit it back up. In brief:

1. Darmok isn't a tribute to anything. It's not a tribute to TNG, because reflexive tributes are tacky, and it's not a tribute to the TOS films, because it has little in common with them. It's not a tribute to TOS because it wasn't intended as such and has none of the hallmarks of a tribute episode. Just being similar to something does not make it a tribute.

2. You refer several times to what Trek XI will be, or will do. Have you read the script? I'd better go over to the T11 forum to see if it's been leaked.

1. I consider "Darmok" a tribute to Trek IN GENERAL. The underlying philosophy of "seeking out new life and new civilizations". Maybe it's not OFFICIALLY a tribute of dare-I-say "valentine to the fans", but it would fit the bill nicely if it was.

2. I don't need to need to "taste it first before I make up my mind" if someone stirs manure into a glass of milk for me. Odds are I'm not going to like the outcome. From what I've seen so far Star Trek XI is going to be little more than a masturbatory fanboy movie just like season 4 of Enterprise and just as empty and pointless. There's no underlying vision to Trek anymore. If there were they wouldn't bother with prequels.

[aladinsane]

"T&T" is the better tribute, but "Darmok" is the better episode. I guess I don't know which way to vote.

[Smiley]

If you look at most of the other Season 5 episodes of DS9, then you will see that they are not "dessert." They tell human stories about politics, religion, crime, war, regret, and plenty of other topics. DS9 is just as much in the spirit of the original series as "Darmok."

As has been said before, these episodes were attempting to do vastly different things. A much better comparison would be "Unification" and "Trials and Tribble-ations."

[Brutal Strudel]

patlandness said:

Oh come on. Just because the TNG characters didn't fall all over themselves at the very mention of James T. Kirk, doesn't mean they weren't respectful of TOS. Read the "Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion".

...And Trek is played out? But comic characters like "Superman" and "Batman" are still hot properties for well over 60 years? Why is that?

And what's wrong with a little bit of goofiness if it makes for a good episode? My God, I never get tired of hearing the reverence for TOS's goofiness as endearing and timeless, but TNG's goofiness as being cringe-worthy.

I don't want this to be TOS vs TNG pissing contest any more than you want it to be a TNG vs DS9 one. I'm not saying "Darmok" was a bad episode--it's certainly one of TNG's better outings, though not a personal favorite. And I'm not saying goofiness doesn't have its place in Trek--you can't get much goofier than T&T. (TNG fans do tend to dump on TOS for goofiness when TNG gave us the K'leavage Sisters--that bugs me...) I'm just saying that "Darmok's" shoulders aren't quite as broad as some people would like them to be. I think many of its fans ascribe a greater heaviness to it than it can carry.

In a way, it reminds of what happens in the TOS forum when, say, "Balance of Terror" licks "City on the Edge..." for top honors in a poll: people are upset the "deeper" episode did not win. But the episode that did win has its merits and is more fun. What are you gonna do? (I vote BoT, btw.)

As for DS9: it had more than its share of heavy episodes, episodes which delved deep into issues of morality, understanding and accomodation. It also had this frothy gem which I enjoy far more than the somewhat infated and nonsensical "Darmok." You asked, I answered.

And as for Trek being played out: Trek is not a comic book. As much as I like comics, they can repeat themselves ad infinitum and they can chug along (though today's subliterate youth has little use for them). The movies and tv shows tend to re-embroider the same few themes and stories whenever the archetype has had a long enough rest. I expect more of Trek. To me, Trek should be more like other great tv dramas: once they tell their stories, it is best they go away before lousy stories begin to drive out the good. It happened with ER which, once upon a time, was actually worth watching. The Sopranos, which I adore above all else, including TOS, flirted with it but pulled out gracefully. Thanks to VOY, ENT and 3 out of 4 TNG movies, it has long since happened with Trek (4 out 6 TOS movies weren't so great, either...).

Oh, I have little hope that Trek XI will be any good, myself. Seems we agree on something.

[Anwar]

I myself also liked Balance more than City, mainly because I have trouble believing Kirk would fall that much in love with someone in a few days to the point he'd damn the rest of the universe for her.

Also, the original idea of him not doing anything would've destroyed his character in light of everything he did up to and after that episode.

As for TNG and goofiness, Patrick Stewart himself, being a "Red Dwarf" fan, did wish that TNG had been willing to do genuine comedic stuff.

Though "I am not a merry man" and the whole "prune juice, a warrior's drink" were great.

[Keith1701]

aladinsane said:
"T&T" is the better tribute, but "Darmok" is the better episode. I guess I don't know which way to vote.

I agree as well..... :thumbsup:

[STIntergalactic]

I voted for Darmok because I liked the episode better. But as a Trek tribute, I think TaT would be better.

[Nathan_Heller]

"Darmok" was an example of what made the Star Trek franchise great.

Nathan

[Tuvok]

Yeah have to go with TandT just for the Geek love , and the effort of the crew to seamlessy blend the two series together.

Plus how hilarious is it Uhura checking out Sisko!