RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,759
Posts: 5,216,454
Members: 24,217
Currently online: 966
Newest member: Vger23

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 24 2013, 10:01 PM   #91
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Call me old fashioned, but I think a movie should begin with the story, with a writer who actually has something to say.
Has Hollywood ever really operated that way though? Especially in regards to big budget movies?

Did Harve Bennett go to Paramount with The Wrath of Khan? They went to him. I'm also sure that they had a checklist of things that had to be accomplished by the films story (including killing off Spock). Much like Moore and Braga were given a checklist of things that had to be done in Generations.

I think when you have smaller, independent films the writers are much more a driving force. In big-budget or franchise films, the directors and the studios have a much bigger say in the product.

Is it the right way? I don't know? But it has been this way for a really long time.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 10:09 PM   #92
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
Im aware, from my years of lurking here, how many fanboys of TOS are here. As much as I love it, I view TOS as more of a nostalgia-trip than anything even close to TNG, DS9, VOY. It simply isn't as deep, as clever, as moving, as sharp...
As a reader of science-fiction, I appreciate what TOS did far more than what the spin-offs later did. They weren't afraid of any idea, no matter how outlandish it looked on paper. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. But that is why I find TOS to be one of the absolute best TV series of all time.

Modern Trek simply became 'very safe'. Very little of what was done during those twenty-five seasons fired my imagination the way the original Star Trek did.


Some of the tones in response to my comment is disappointing. I really dont think it is deserving of 'eye-rolls' or 'I need a drink' comments to say: 21 seasons of TNG, DS9 & VOY are far better than anything the 3 of TOS produced.
Be prepared for some ribbing no matter what statements you put forth here. This is a very eclectic collection of people with wildly varying viewpoints.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 10:12 PM   #93
Bad Thoughts
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Disguised as Reb Bad Thoughts
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Call me old fashioned, but I think a movie should begin with the story, with a writer who actually has something to say.
Has Hollywood ever really operated that way though? Especially in regards to big budget movies?

Did Harve Bennett go to Paramount with The Wrath of Khan? They went to him. I'm also sure that they had a checklist of things that had to be accomplished by the films story (including killing off Spock). Much like Moore and Braga were given a checklist of things that had to be done in Generations.

I think when you have smaller, independent films the writers are much more a driving force. In big-budget or franchise films, the directors and the studios have a much bigger say in the product.

Is it the right way? I don't know? But it has been this way for a really long time.
That's some major parsing. Hober Mallow wrote much more about what he thought about the scripting process. Moreover, I don't think that the fact that filmmaking is a collaborative process, involving many people, negates his point.
Bad Thoughts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 24 2013, 10:16 PM   #94
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

Bad thoughts wrote: View Post

That's some major parsing. Hober Mallow wrote much more about what he thought about the scripting process. Moreover, I don't think that the fact that filmmaking is a collaborative process, involving many people, negates his point.
I usually don't quote a posters entire post, only what's relevant to a point I'm making. It bothers me to have to scroll again through a complete post after having already read it. It's a pet peeve of mine.

I'm not trying to negate his point. Only state that different types of films are driven by different objectives.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 01:06 AM   #95
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: Way back of nowhere
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
Im aware, from my years of lurking here, how many fanboys of TOS are here. As much as I love it, I view TOS as more of a nostalgia-trip than anything even close to TNG, DS9, VOY. It simply isn't as deep, as clever, as moving, as sharp....
Yes TOS fanboys are just lame whereas TNG, DS9 and VOY fanboys are deeper, cleverer, more moving and sharper.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 01:10 AM   #96
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
Im aware, from my years of lurking here, how many fanboys of TOS are here. As much as I love it, I view TOS as more of a nostalgia-trip than anything even close to TNG, DS9, VOY. It simply isn't as deep, as clever, as moving, as sharp....
Yes TOS fanboys are just lame whereas TNG, DS9 and VOY fanboys are deeper, cleverer, more moving and sharper.
People who take shots at other people for liking differing things are so classy. It's really great and in tune with the message of Star Trek that all differences are to be scorned and ridiculed.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 01:10 AM   #97
Bad Thoughts
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Disguised as Reb Bad Thoughts
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

BillJ wrote: View Post
Bad thoughts wrote: View Post

That's some major parsing. Hober Mallow wrote much more about what he thought about the scripting process. Moreover, I don't think that the fact that filmmaking is a collaborative process, involving many people, negates his point.
I usually don't quote a posters entire post, only what's relevant to a point I'm making. It bothers me to have to scroll again through a complete post after having already read it. It's a pet peeve of mine.

I'm not trying to negate his point. Only state that different types of films are driven by different objectives.
Not the actual cut and paste, but the fact that you reduce Hober Mallow's argument to this one sentence, when his complete thought went on.
Bad Thoughts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 02:05 AM   #98
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

Much like Moore and Braga were given a checklist of things that had to be done in Generations.
And we know how well that turned out.

I think what Moore and Braga did back then is akin to what goes on now with set-pieces. Don't get me wrong, it clearly is a winning formula for putting butts in theater seats. I don't like them much, but clearly many do. But is anyone going to be talking about this last year's worth of Hollywood action flicks in ten years time? I doubt it.
Bad thoughts wrote: View Post
Not the actual cut and paste, but the fact that you reduce Hober Mallow's argument to this one sentence, when his complete thought went on.
I can't complain. I do that, too.
BillJ wrote: View Post
Modern Trek simply became 'very safe'. Very little of what was done during those twenty-five seasons fired my imagination the way the original Star Trek did.
Same here. Yes, there were parallel earths in TOS, but is that really any different than virtually every alien in the Berman era looking like a bumpy-headed human with virtually identical and, astoundingly, compatible technology (communications, warp speed, UT, transporters, etc.).
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 02:18 AM   #99
The Old Mixer
Vice Admiral
 
The Old Mixer's Avatar
 
Location: Connecticut
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
1. Super powered being threatens the ship. [Charlie X, Trelane, Abe Lincoln, Mitchell]
Abraham Lincoln didn't threaten the ship.
The Old Mixer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 02:26 AM   #100
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

The Old Mixer wrote: View Post
TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
1. Super powered being threatens the ship. [Charlie X, Trelane, Abe Lincoln, Mitchell]
Abraham Lincoln didn't threaten the ship.
"Drop your shields and surrender or I shall suspend the writ of habeas corpus."
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 02:30 AM   #101
J. Allen
Squeaky Clean
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

Bad thoughts wrote: View Post
^Thanks for the ad hominem.
See my response to Hober Mallow below.

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
J. Allen wrote: View Post
They're fundamentalists, but instead of a classic religion, they've chosen their favorite Trek as their idol, and the heretics be damned.
I've no doubt that describes some fans. Then there are others, like me, who simply think the Abram's films are dull.
Of course. I'm not blanketing every detractor with that statement, only those who fit the bill of a fundamentalist. There are a number of reasons some people aren't going to like the film, and that's perfectly okay. Tastes vary, people vary. I'm talking about the people who aren't just people who dislike elements of the film, and may be disappointed overall, I'm talking about people who have an avid fan hate for Abrams, the writers, the movies themselves, the best boys, and the caterers. There are people who refute every point with "only an idiot likes this movie," or "of course since it's big dumb action, brainless illiterates will love it."

See, that's not disliking a movie, that's disliking people for liking a movie; it's hatred for something that people love, and everything associated with what those people love. There are those fundamentalist fans who treat Star Trek like it's a religion; where anything made after their coveted favorite series is an abomination, and yes, I've seen the word "abomination" thrown at a movie.

I think when it gets to that point, one needs to step back, take a deep breath, and stay off the internet for a year.

So if one isn't a fundamentalist, if one doesn't fit that bill of goods, then one has nothing to concern oneself about my statement.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom, where all of your wildest dreams will come true.
:: :: ::

-= All fantasy teaches me is that reality sucks. =-
J. Allen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 02:35 AM   #102
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
1. Super powered being threatens the ship. [Charlie X, Trelane, Abe Lincoln, Mitchell]
Yeah, that never happened on TNG...Q, "Ardra" Edo god,Douwd
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 11:41 AM   #103
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: Way back of nowhere
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

R. Star wrote: View Post
CommishSleer wrote: View Post
TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
Im aware, from my years of lurking here, how many fanboys of TOS are here. As much as I love it, I view TOS as more of a nostalgia-trip than anything even close to TNG, DS9, VOY. It simply isn't as deep, as clever, as moving, as sharp....
Yes TOS fanboys are just lame whereas TNG, DS9 and VOY fanboys are deeper, cleverer, more moving and sharper.
People who take shots at other people for liking differing things are so classy. It's really great and in tune with the message of Star Trek that all differences are to be scorned and ridiculed.
So its OK to take potshots at 'TOS fanboys' who are here. I thought that was meant as an insult. I can call myself a fanboy but I don't like others calling me it. Just because I prefer TOS over other Star Trek things I don't think I need to be scorned or ridiculed either.

I actually like lots in the other Treks and probably agree that Star Trek in the 90s was at its peak in volume on screen at least. I remember somewhere Wil Wheaton saying how his parked his flash car near Stewart's flash car at the parking lot and thinking that sort of think wasn't happening for the TOS cast in the 60s.
I just don't agree all the writing and stories and ideas in DS9, TNG and VOY were superior to that of TOS. Technobabble is not superior writing even though the words are longer IMHO
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 05:38 PM   #104
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
R. Star wrote: View Post
CommishSleer wrote: View Post

Yes TOS fanboys are just lame whereas TNG, DS9 and VOY fanboys are deeper, cleverer, more moving and sharper.
People who take shots at other people for liking differing things are so classy. It's really great and in tune with the message of Star Trek that all differences are to be scorned and ridiculed.
So its OK to take potshots at 'TOS fanboys' who are here. I thought that was meant as an insult. I can call myself a fanboy but I don't like others calling me it. Just because I prefer TOS over other Star Trek things I don't think I need to be scorned or ridiculed either.

I actually like lots in the other Treks and probably agree that Star Trek in the 90s was at its peak in volume on screen at least. I remember somewhere Wil Wheaton saying how his parked his flash car near Stewart's flash car at the parking lot and thinking that sort of think wasn't happening for the TOS cast in the 60s.
I just don't agree all the writing and stories and ideas in DS9, TNG and VOY were superior to that of TOS. Technobabble is not superior writing even though the words are longer IMHO
Oh my comment was aimed at both of you taking potshots at each other's likes and dislikes, worry not.

Even if like GoodStuff apparently I think that TOS was the foundation of the franchise that bigger and better things were built upon, that doesn't justify talking down to a person who enjoys something different than you.

I will agree that especially by Voyager and Enterprise the technobabble had spun out of control that we had entire scenes of people sputtering gibberish.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 25 2013, 06:46 PM   #105
TheGoodStuff
Lieutenant Commander
 
TheGoodStuff's Avatar
 
Location: Scotland
Re: The 90's Golden Age.

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
TheGoodStuff wrote: View Post
Im aware, from my years of lurking here, how many fanboys of TOS are here. As much as I love it, I view TOS as more of a nostalgia-trip than anything even close to TNG, DS9, VOY. It simply isn't as deep, as clever, as moving, as sharp....
Yes TOS fanboys are just lame whereas TNG, DS9 and VOY fanboys are deeper, cleverer, more moving and sharper.
Now that is pure inferal. I never said that. I said the shows are better written, acted etc. There was no attack on the intellect of fans. I simply meant that many here seem to have a 'TOS uber alles' mentality.


Nerys Myk wrote:
Yeah, that never happened on TNG...Q, "Ardra" Edo god,Douwd
Which is a handful of of examples out of hundreds of episodes. TOS recycled that same plot repeatedly.



CommishSleer wrote:
So its OK to take potshots at 'TOS fanboys' who are here. I thought that was meant as an insult. I can call myself a fanboy but I don't like others calling me it. Just because I prefer TOS over other Star Trek things I don't think I need to be scorned or ridiculed either.

I actually like lots in the other Treks and probably agree that Star Trek in the 90s was at its peak in volume on screen at least. I remember somewhere Wil Wheaton saying how his parked his flash car near Stewart's flash car at the parking lot and thinking that sort of think wasn't happening for the TOS cast in the 60s.
I just don't agree all the writing and stories and ideas in DS9, TNG and VOY were superior to that of TOS. Technobabble is not superior writing even though the words are longer IMHO
Now I will correct you right away: I am taking potshots at nobody. I love TOS [have the entire 3 seasons & movies on DVD and Blu-Ray] and am a fan myself. However some seem blinded to its weaknesses. I wish some would stop being so...hyper sensitive.

I said, cumulatively, TNG, VOY & DS9 have far better scripts, plots and acting. I fail to see how that can be argued. They have a vast amount of memorable episodes that were great. Im not saying TOS had none [though I think of the 3 seasons there are about 4 truly great episodes] simply that those 3 combined had far more.

I dont know why you are mentioning technobabble. If you count 'The Inner Light', 'Best of Both Worlds', 'Far beyond The Stars', 'Year of Hell' etc etc to be just technobabble then fair enough.

Its intriguing to see how many have taken my level-headed critique of TOS so personally. I apparently hate TOS and look down on others opinions because I dared to say the show is somewhat repetitive and not as good as the '90's shows.

Definitely not so.
__________________
#1. DS9 #2. TNG #3. VOY #4.ENT #5.TOS
We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing, all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes. - Gene Roddenberry
TheGoodStuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:14 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.