Spoilers Prodigy ship revealed
- Thread starter NCC-73515
- Start date
The USS Enterprise is a character. The reboots don’t get that.
https://www.joshuaajohnston.com/2017/03/27/uss-enterprise-character-reboots-dont-get/
https://entertainment.time.com/2013/05/17/star-trekkin-a-geeks-guide-to-the-uss-enterprise/
Any true fan of Star Trek will tell you the USS Enterprise is no mere starship — it’s a character in its own right.
https://www.joshuaajohnston.com/2017/03/27/uss-enterprise-character-reboots-dont-get/
https://entertainment.time.com/2013/05/17/star-trekkin-a-geeks-guide-to-the-uss-enterprise/
Any true fan of Star Trek will tell you the USS Enterprise is no mere starship — it’s a character in its own right.
You're entitled to your own opinion.
There are others like us who see's things differently.
I stopped reading there.
I know you're quoting something, anyone who says 'any true fan' doesn't deserve to be heard.
There's no such thing as 'true' or 'real' fans. There's just fans and not fans.
I guess that's where you and I differ.
I'm willing to read through everybody's argument, good or bad and analyze it for it's own individual merit.
I don't let such things as one phrase like 'any true fan', inhibit me from giving the person a fair shot at their argument.
Gatekeeping doesn't deserve to be heard.
Unless it's against bigots and fascists
That's your personal philosophy, you're entitled to it.
I'm willing to read through all people's arguments on their own individual merit / basis and give people a fair shot.
Even if I may disagree with them on several issues.
Not much of an argument. Just a clickbait article with a slideshow of ships. Nothing about what makes the ship a character..
Johnson's article also fails to make it's point. Another I hate the reboot retread. The whole the ship is more important the the actors line of reasoning is laughable.
Last edited:
If you don't understand it, that's fine. There are others like us that see the StarShip as it's own character.
Not to the contingent of us that see's the StarShip or a titled vessel as it's own character.
That applies to many shows as well, not just Star Trek.
Airwolf itself was a character, same with Serenity in FireFly.
Repeating an assertation with out evidence isn't much of an argument. Sell me on the idea.
I don't even require an argument. The TOS and Movie Enterprise was its own character to me. All the other hero ships and space stations not so much.
If those articles can't appeal to you, then I'm not going to bother.
It's fine if you don't "get it" and see things our way.
There's no Good/Bad with that, we're just different people.
You must have your reasons. Lay it out. I'm an open minded guy.
It's not something that can be easily put to words and understood, it's more gutteral and feelings based.
You know how there are people who collect Action Figures or other toys?
Then there are those of us who collect Mecha, Machines in general.
And those are the things we collect, be it Motor Cycles, Cars, Aircraft, StarShips, etc.
And you understand how some people give their Swords a name, even a human name.
It's a different type of association with inanimate objects that we like.
Yeah, we do that. I do that. Kirk and Scotty do that. Mal Reynolds does that. It's anthropomorphising. But that different than calling it a character. A character in a fictional context has motivations, actions and traits that define them. A place like DS9 has this because it's old and a hodgepodge of technologies.
It goes beyond Anthropomorphisation.
It's not something that can be easily explained.
Similar threads
