I hope Discovery places "plot" first, avoids melodrama

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Key to what? The stories are still about people. Similar stories can be told on a ranch in the 1870's or a hospital in 2010's.

I'm a big fan of The West Wing and always contended that it was first and foremost (at least for the first 5 seasons) a work-place drama rather than a political show, although there was a bit of political ideaology that was always there.

It was primarily a TV show about a bunch of people who work together and the events that happen during the course of doing their jobs...with their workplace just happening to be the White House, and their boss just happening to be the President.

It wasn't until season 6 and 7 that the show started floundering in its own "politicalness" and went downhill. I wanted to see a show about the co-workers I had grown to like, not a show all about politics or social ideologies.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I agree that the show made its living as a "workplace drama," I would still argue that it was first and foremost Sorkin's bully pulpit. The characters were always speaking for him.

I actually think it became less political after he left because the later writers/producers were never very good at framing their arguments.

I think this is the big reason why the show fell apart during season five. The characters lost their "voice." So all the drama felt artificial and the characters came across as assholes.

I think a very similar phenomenon happened in later 90s Trek. The 'Gene's vision" stuff began to disrupt the conceptual focus. I'm not really sure how to describe it, but it was like the "ideology" of TOS walked along a parallel line to the drama and plot, whereas with the later shows, those two things often felt anamorphic.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I agree that the show made its living as a "workplace drama," I would still argue that it was first and foremost Sorkin's bully pulpit. The characters were always speaking for him.

I actually think it became less political after he left because the later writers/producers were never very good at framing their arguments.

I think this is the big reason why the show fell apart during season five. The characters lost their "voice." So all the drama felt artificial and the characters came across as assholes.

I think a very similar phenomenon happened in later 90s Trek. The 'Gene's vision" stuff began to disrupt the conceptual focus. I'm not really sure how to describe it, but it was like the "ideology" of TOS walked along a parallel line to the drama and plot, whereas with the later shows, those two things often felt anamorphic.

I'm a socially left-leaning/fiscally right-leaning moderate. I was fine with Sorkin's "message". Honestly, I let his ideologies go in one ear and out the other. It didn't hurt my enjoyment of the show and the likability of the characters. I could still like, say for example, Toby Ziegler even when he was being insufferably over-liberal. I think I could still enjoy having a beer and a cigar with him.

It wasn't really "the plot" of The West Wing that I enjoyed so much -- i.e., it wasn't the ideological moral story that we were told by Sorkin that I enjoyed. Rather, it was the manner in which the characters carried on through that story toward its resolution.

Like I said, it was a workplace drama, and the enjoyment for me was seeing HOW those coworkers solved the "issue du jour", not the actual "issue du jour" itself.

This takes me back to the theme of this thread, and my assertion that "Plot" is not as important as how the characters move through that plot. The characters, their dialogue, and their overall interaction with each other is the story; the plot is just the stage upon which that story happens.

 

[Refuge]

^^^^
I don't think that's accurate - especially for season one of TOS in that most of the plots and stories were firmly placed in some high concept futuristic science fiction aspect; or making use of some aspect of known space science at the time. Yes, the people and character issues and conflicts were there too - but TOS was WAY more grounded in actual science fiction then TNG and a lot of the 24th century era shows were. TNG often just used it as more a 'set dressing' then anything else.

Yes. If the same story, dialogue, was crafted into a western, I wouldn't watch it. Reminds me of the western/alien themed episodes.. never liked them. A lot of fans here pour over details of futuristic space craft, uniforms, bridges, phasers, Klingons etc It's what it's about.

 

[Mudd]

I'm a socially left-leaning/fiscally right-leaning moderate. I was fine with Sorkin's "message". Honestly, I let his ideologies go in one ear and out the other. It didn't hurt my enjoyment of the show and the likability of the characters. I could still like, say for example, Toby Ziegler even when he was being insufferably over-liberal. I think I could still enjoy having a beer and a cigar with him.

It wasn't really "the plot" of The West Wing that I enjoyed so much -- i.e., it wasn't the ideological moral story that we were told by Sorkin that I enjoyed. Rather, it was the manner in which the characters carried on through that story toward its resolution.

Like I said, it was a workplace drama, and the enjoyment for me was seeing HOW those coworkers solved the "issue du jour", not the actual "issue du jour" itself.

This takes me back to the theme of this thread, and my assertion that "Plot" is not as important as how the characters move through that plot. The characters, their dialogue, and their overall interaction with each other is the story; the plot is just the stage upon which that story happens.

Yep.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I'm a socially left-leaning/fiscally right-leaning moderate. I was fine with Sorkin's "message". Honestly, I let his ideologies go in one ear and out the other.

That's because Sorkin is a socially left-leaning, fiscally right-leaning moderate.

It didn't hurt my enjoyment of the show and the likability of the characters. I could still like, say for example, Toby Ziegler even when he was being insufferably over-liberal. I think I could still enjoy having a beer and a cigar with him.

But, again, I think that was because, in the early season, Toby was an advocate. And his personality was built around that. In the later years, the replacement writing teams couldn't hone in on that, and Toby just became a messenger. His personality became a separate function, often incongruous to the message of the day. It got so bad that, instead of having a beer, I just wanted to punch him in the face and didn't care what he had to say.

It wasn't really "the plot" of The West Wing that I enjoyed so much -- i.e., it wasn't the ideological moral story that we were told by Sorkin that I enjoyed. Rather, it was the manner in which the characters carried on through that story toward its resolution.

Like I said, it was a workplace drama, and the enjoyment for me was seeing HOW those coworkers solved the "issue du jour", not the actual "issue du jour" itself.

I think here we are sort of saying the same thing. Take the pilot as a great example. The plot of the episode is Josh goes on national TV says something really stupid and spends the next day assuming he's about to be fired. But the whole thing is a set-up for Sorkin's giant (graphic even) "fuck you" to the religious right. Yet it's so perfectly entwined in the events of the day. Plus, he still manages to sneak-in a critique of the US's handling (at the time) of Cuban refugees.

Now if had been a later season episode, the plot would have been: "Bartlett administration clashes with religious right leaders."

And to me, that's the exact same thing that happened with Star Trek. In TOS you had Plot with tidbits of issue mixed in. In TNG+ it was "Issue is the plot."

 

[Nerys Myk]

es. If the same story, dialogue, was crafted into a western, I wouldn't watch it. Reminds me of the western/alien themed episodes.. never liked them.

Not a fan of Mudd's Women, then?
We're not discussing what you like about the show, we're talking about what the show is about.

A lot of fans here pour over details of futuristic space craft, uniforms, bridges, phasers, Klingons etc It's what it's about.

No, that's just things in the show that they like. The show isn't about those things, those are just elements used by the writers to tell stories.If you're watching the show for spaceship porn and cool gadgets I guess that's fine But I don't think that's what the writers had in mind

 

[fireproof78]

Yes. If the same story, dialogue, was crafted into a western, I wouldn't watch it. Reminds me of the western/alien themed episodes.. never liked them. A lot of fans here pour over details of futuristic space craft, uniforms, bridges, phasers, Klingons etc It's what it's about.

It's actually not what it's "about." Those are props, designed to tell a specific story, that, honestly, could fit well in to a Western in the same era with little to no difficulty. Star Trek was framed similarly to Westerns of that day and age. "Wild, Wild West" was actually shot on the same sound stages at Desilu as TOS.

The point of Star Trek was simply the optimism of humanity working together. It became more, a little later on, but its hard to get past the Western style influences that TOS had and grew up with. TOS when out of its way to not explain what a phaser was, what warp drive was, etc. Why? Because, they were just props to tell the story.

 

[Refuge]

It's a science fiction show based in the future of space exploration. 'Discovery'. That's its point..

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's a science fiction show based in the future of space exploration. 'Discovery'. That's its point..

Nope. Its a about a group of people in a show set on a spaceship in the future. Its about them and the situations they encounter. Just like all of Star Trek.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I was looking for the space wizards and laser swords.

Sorry. Wrong room.

 

[Refuge]

They (the group of people) are props too.

 

[Nerys Myk]

They are props too.

The wizards or the swords?

 

[Nerys Myk]

They (the group of people) are props too.

No, they are the cast.

 

[Refuge]

No, they are the cast.

They are like pawns in the game. The 'game' rules. Characters, props, sets are used to tell the story. The story is specific to science fiction of the future and I'm lead to believe .. discovery. No one is suggesting we won't get to know the characters along the way.

 

[Nerys Myk]

They are like pawns in the game. The 'game' rules. Characters, props, sets are used to tell the story.

No one has suggested otherwise. All of those elements contribute to a TV show/movie/play.

The story is specific to science fiction of the future and I'm lead to believe .. discovery.

No, the setting is a science fiction one. The story is something different.

No one is suggesting we won't get to know the characters along the way.

Huh?

 

[Refuge]

Okay I just don't agree. The story is the discovery of planets and aliens and its science fiction/futuristic by theme and in content. They're not out there present times finding what we already know about. The drama from the characters is a vehicle for this. However if you enjoy the character development first then that's cool.

 

[fireproof78]

It's a science fiction show based in the future of space exploration. 'Discovery'. That's its point..

Yes, the journey of human discovery. I believe it was once framed as the "Human adventure."

Characters are not props, at least, not in the same sense as setting, because the characters are what people are generally going to identify with, agree or disagree with, and watch react on a weekly basis. If they are "scifi props" then they will not be interesting characters, and that will lose an audience.

I was looking for the space wizards and laser swords.

Sorry. Wrong room.

I'd watch it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Okay I just don't agree. The story is the discovery of planets and aliens and its science fiction/futuristic by theme and in content. They're not out there present times finding what we already know about. The drama from the characters is a vehicle for this. However if you enjoy the character development first then that's cool.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Or what story, plot or setting are.
Very little in Star Trek is about "discovering" planets and aliens. it about what was happening on those planets and to those aliens.
TOS had very little in character development. But most of the episodes are built around the characters. Their actions and reactions to what was happening around them and to them.

 

[Refuge]

Human discovery?? I'm sure that will factor but why would you need a a big golden space ship to do that?