Not real Star Trek

Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by King Daniel Beyond, Sep 14, 2013.

  1. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Except for the Pegasus. The debatable methods of its CO just emphasized how lax and lame Adama handled his offenders in comparison. ;)

    Bob
     
  2. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    This. There's an old saying that "The golden age of science fiction is twelve" and I suspect that a lot depends on how old you were when you first encountered the original BSG.

    I was in college when BSG debuted, and, as an oh-so-sophisticated freshman, I found it hopelessly juvenile compared to the sf shows I'd grown up on: TOS, The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits. I remember bitching to my friends that TV sf had actually gone backwards, intellectually, and that Glen Larson was basically the second coming of Irwin Allen . . . .

    By contrast, the new show, although often bleak as hell, was, at its best, extremely intense and compelling television, featuring complicated, unpredictable characters that were a lot more messed-up and three-dimensional than their 70s counterparts. Heck, Roslin alone was more interesting than pretty much every character on the old show. IMHO.
     
  3. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    I see these everyday on TV in the news (and reality shows which I usually try to avoid), so I'm really at a loss to see why that was anything special or unusual about nuBSG.

    Bob
     
  4. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    So you're saying that science fiction shouldn't resemble reality as far as people are concerned?

    I'm not sure Rod Serling would agree . . . .
     
  5. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    No, I'm saying that science fiction should take real people, put them into "What if" scenarios and watch how they use imagination and creativity to overcome problems and handle challenging situations

    Since you mentioned Mr. Serling I think he wrote one episode which essentially wraps up what nuBSG was mostly about. It was called "The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street". ;)

    Bob
     
  6. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    Exactly. And that was a great episode!

    There's no rule that says that sf has to be about "overcoming problems" through creativity and imagination. There's a long tradition of grim, dystopian, often harrowing sf. Look at Wells, Dick, Bradbury, Sturgeon, etc. The dark side of humanity has always been part of sf's subject matter as well. Look at Planet of the Apes, etc.

    Just to be clear. I'm not saying that every show needs to be as grim and morally ambiguous as NuBSG. Nobody wants a dark and gritty version of FARSCAPE or CLEOPATRA 2525. But it worked for nuBSG, and produced some powerful television.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2013
  7. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    It's all real, even "Genesis" and "Threshold." Some of it's not as good as the rest, and some of it's outstanding. It's just how it is.

    Now, analyzing whether a particular series or film is true to the spirit of Star Trek, and indeed what that spirit actually is? Related, but separate, question IMO.
     
  8. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    Praetor: Love your sig line, btw. That's probably my favorite line in all of TNG, and the one that best encapsulates what I personally think of as the "spirit" of STAR TREK . . . .
     
  9. Khan444

    Khan444 Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    I think that a lot of the problem with claiming that something isn't "real" Star Trek is that, for many people, "real" Star Trek actually means "my" Star Trek, or the Star Trek "that I like." Those are NOT the same thing. TOS is not the same as TNG, and DS9 is much different than both. The movies don't have the same tone, themes, etc. There is no one "true" Star Trek.
     
  10. TheGoodStuff

    TheGoodStuff Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Location:
    Scotland
    And the last part, again, is laughable. I didn't state at any point that TOS had no sex or violence so...you're just debating with yourself there. All of that was completely pointless to state.
     
  11. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    Thank you sir, agreed. It was a great line in "Q-Who?" and is still a great and appropriate line now.
     
  12. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    Wasteful bastards! :lol:
     
  13. Ln X

    Ln X Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Location:
    The great gig in the sky
    It's real trek if it is set in the Star Trek universe; alternative, spinoffs, reboots or otherwise. Still Trek. JJ Trek is set at a point in the Prime universe's past, thus JJ Trek is Star Trek.

    So the question is not whether it is Star Trek, the question should be whether it is good Star Trek.
     
  14. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    And the answer for every episode and movie made since 1964 is 'Yes' and 'No'.
     
  15. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    Mostly "yes," sometimes "no."
     
  16. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    You are describing a franchise where anything labeled "Star Trek" automatically becomes Star Trek and that would make the original question of this thread somewhat meaningless and redundant.

    Gene Roddenberry created and produced Star Trek and its most popular representatives, i.e. TOS and TNG, so the "real" Star Trek comes down to the question "would he have approved".

    If this line isn't drawn than Star Trek is anything someone wants it to be and becomes indistinguishable from Star Wars and other series and franchises and their distinct properties.

    Bob
     
  17. iguana_tonante

    iguana_tonante Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Location:
    Italy, EU
    Perish the thought.
     
  18. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    But none of us know Roddenberry well enough to answer that question.

    I think Majel Barrett appearing in TNG, DS9, VOY and the first Abramsverse film is as close to knowing whether or not Gene "approved" as we'll ever get.
     
  19. Bad Thoughts

    Bad Thoughts Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Location:
    Containment Area for Relocated Yankees
    Every film or TV series could be described as an interplay between artistry, commercialism, and vision. With Star Trek, we known exactly what supplies that vision: Roddenberry's worldview. I don't think that it must be "Roddenberry approved," but it must be in dialogue with his worldview. There have been dark chapters and violent confrontations throughough Trek, but in general, they have problematized heroism, something that doesn't happen in JJ Trek.
     
  20. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter if he would approve? I seem to recall reading Gene saying something to the effect that he hopes the best days of Trek will be ushered in by someone other than him.

    We can argue if we're there or not, given we have our varying personal likes and dislikes but it's continuing to grow and evolve. I personally don't much care for the JJverse as it doesn't seem that original, but maybe the 3rd movie will be better.

    All drawing lines is going to do is put all the writers back into the Roddenberry box that turned out season 1 of TNG. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's not "real." Some may not like it, but those opinions don't constitute everyone else's reality.