• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Why The Huge Gap Between TMP & WOK?

He has to be. He's an author.

Even those authors that make their stories up whole cloth have to do research so the stories they tell are believable to the widest variety of audience. Just because it's pure fantasy doesn't mean that descriptions of sword fights can say any old thing. They have to make sense to those readers that know how to sword fight, or it takes them out of the story. And that is always bad.

It is?
 
I always took it to mean that it referred to the Enterprise being the top ship in the fleet.

But the issue is that that's the civilian usage of the term, and it clashes with the different use that applies in a naval organization. So it comes off as a failure of research on the writers' part, no matter how much you try to handwave it after the fact.
 
But the issue is that that's the civilian usage of the term, and it clashes with the different use that applies in a naval organization. So it comes off as a failure of research on the writers' part, no matter how much you try to handwave it after the fact.

Fair enough, although, IMHO, this is making a mountain out of a molehill, at best.
 
Isn't the issue here about how the average, civilian audience member would understand it at home? It seems to me they gauged it about right.
 
Isn't the issue here about how the average, civilian audience member would understand it at home? It seems to me they gauged it about right.
So playing to "the audience is dumb" which is the opposite of what Roddenberry initially aspired to with Trek.
 
So playing to "the audience is dumb" which is the opposite of what Roddenberry initially aspired to with Trek.
Not at all, rather playing to how the general audience understands things. I've always understood it in the civilian sense and I'm educated to PhD level. Simplicity doesn't necessarily mean dumb.
 
Not at all, rather playing to how the general audience understands things.

It's very easy to explain new things to the general audience. It's not like the general audience in 1966 already knew what a phaser or a transporter was, or the general audience in 1987 already knew what a holodeck or a replicator was. The terms needed to be defined, and "flagship" in the naval sense could've been just as easily defined. Dumbing a story down isn't just about underestimating what the audience already knows -- it's about underestimating their ability to learn new things.
 
It's very easy to explain new things to the general audience. It's not like the general audience in 1966 already knew what a phaser or a transporter was, or the general audience in 1987 already knew what a holodeck or a replicator was. The terms needed to be defined, and "flagship" in the naval sense could've been just as easily defined. Dumbing a story down isn't just about underestimating what the audience already knows -- it's about underestimating their ability to learn new things.

IMO, dumbing things down is for example resorting to technobabble as a cure all or deus ex machina if you will.
 
TWOK had to explain why the Enterprise was no longer the star of the fleet but an old vessel relegated to training missions and it wanted one of its themes to centre around the ageing of Kirk, so instead of ignoring the gap between TOS and TMP like TMP did, they presented the gap as occurring between TMP and TWOK. Which, according to special features on the blue ray, was a bit of a fight - Shatner did not want to be portrayed as his actual age.
When I was young I hated how they portrayed Kirk in TMP not being able to let go, and then him saying, eh, it's a game for the young in WOK. I thought it's so weird and inconsistent. Then I got older and thought, yeah, men do that as they age.
 
When I was young I hated how they portrayed Kirk in TMP not being able to let go, and then him saying, eh, it's a game for the young in WOK. I thought it's so weird and inconsistent. Then I got older and thought, yeah, men do that as they age.
But he wasn't letting go in TWOK. And all of his friends knew it. It's probably about how he acted right before the Vejur emergency.
 
Changing the meaning of a word is just something that happens with time, new speakers of the language and their various misinterpretations and misuses. Just because a word/phrase means something to us now, doesn't mean it means the same thing later.
 
I dunno, I think Nimoy did visibly age a good deal between TOS and TMP. (Must've been those harsh desert conditions at Gol.)

Then again, what's struck me about the two is the aging of Shatner's voice. In TMP, he didn't sound that different than he had in TOS, or at least in TAS. But in TWOK, his voice sounded older, deeper, rougher. And I think that may have been acting -- because when Shatner did Saturday Night Live in 1986 and performed the classic "Star Trek V: The Restaurant Enterprise" sketch, he did an amazing job recreating his TOS-era characterization of Kirk, as opposed to his movie-era characterization.
early to mid-40's and late 40's are like night and day. Not just aging in terms of wrinkles, but changes to one's basic shape (regardless of fitness), voice changes, etc. Can one still act
But he wasn't letting go in TWOK. And all of his friends knew it. It's probably about how he acted right before the Vejur emergency.

No he didn't let go or give up. That's what makes Jim Kirk a hero :)
 
Changing the meaning of a word is just something that happens with time, new speakers of the language and their various misinterpretations and misuses. Just because a word/phrase means something to us now, doesn't mean it means the same thing later.

As I just said a few posts back, and in other threads before, the fact that something can be handwaved afterward by the fans doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake on the creators' part. The whole point of criticizing a work of fiction is to recognize it as a work of fiction and to assess the shortcomings in the process of its creation. It's of no use otherwise, because creators only become better by recognizing our flaws and striving to improve.


early to mid-40's and late 40's are like night and day. Not just aging in terms of wrinkles, but changes to one's basic shape (regardless of fitness), voice changes, etc.

I'm currently in the latter age range myself, and I don't think I've changed that much between the two. I've got somewhat more gray hair, I need bifocals, and I've put on a bit more weight, but that's about it in terms of outward change. As for my voice, it may have gotten a little reedier, but I'm not sure. So it depends on the individual. Some people age more gradually than others.
 
early to mid-40's and late 40's are like night and day. Not just aging in terms of wrinkles, but changes to one's basic shape (regardless of fitness), voice changes, etc. Can one still act
Look at David Tennant from his last episode of Doctor Who to Day of the Doctor. 40s are rough. :)

I'm kind of pissed that I was planning my big day of watching TWOK when I turned 50. Now I have to do it when I turn 49?!?
 
As I just said a few posts back, and in other threads before, the fact that something can be handwaved afterward by the fans doesn't mean it wasn't a mistake on the creators' part. The whole point of criticizing a work of fiction is to recognize it as a work of fiction and to assess the shortcomings in the process of its creation. It's of no use otherwise, because creators only become better by recognizing our flaws and striving to improve.




I'm currently in the latter age range myself, and I don't think I've changed that much between the two. I've got somewhat more gray hair, I need bifocals, and I've put on a bit more weight, but that's about it in terms of outward change. As for my voice, it may have gotten a little reedier, but I'm not sure. So it depends on the individual. Some people age more gradually than others.
It does depend on the individual. Good genes (even better if resequenced) and taking care of oneself can help stave it off for a while. I represent the Scotty's. :wah:
 
Look at David Tennant from his last episode of Doctor Who to Day of the Doctor. 40s are rough. :)

I'm kind of pissed that I was planning my big day of watching TWOK when I turned 50. Now I have to do it when I turn 49?!?
Indeed. I thought Tennant would stay young longer being a beanpole. He wrinkled like someone who eats cake and candy everyday (me). :shrug:
 
When I first saw the past sequence in All Good Things I thought, how is it that the oldest cast member held up the best? It was only 7 years. Riker had to be limited to re-used Encounter at Farpoint scenes due to more than his beard.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top