What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Berman-Braga era Trek was bland, beige and (sorry, can't think a word starting with b) overtly cautious. Even a composer whose music was "too exciting" got fired. Status quo was king.
The Abrams movies have their shortcomings but they, Discovery and the subsequent series have brought color, adventure, risk taking, and sheer fun back to the franchise. It's wonderful.
The Abrams movies have their shortcomings but they, Discovery and the subsequent series have brought color, adventure, risk taking, and sheer fun back to the franchise. It's wonderful.
It had its moments, but you're right. Less so with DS9, which escaped the worst of Berman's management style.
Indeed.
But why stare at your feet when you're on a rollercoaster? Just enjoy the ride.
G
Gul Sengosts
Guest
Not that it really matters, but it does annoy me a little when they do that stuff for no other reason than "bigger is better". It's so pointless and an annoying mindset in general.
But, bigger is better.
He'll die half way through his last term, and then they will have to think really hard about how to bury him in his Presidential Library, which is a website.
He believes spuriously that a privilege of running for President is immunity to prosecution.
Although if he can't be prosecuted for anything (which he can) then logically he shouldn't be able to file civil cases against anyone else either (which he probably is).
Making Trump legally neutral might be interesting.
Imagine if Donald Trump was one man in America who can't sue for sport.
I'm not sure where this came from, but let's leave this stuff to Miscellaneous or TNZ.
That'll teach me to respond to a previous post without quoting it. 
"Shades of Gray" might be a clip show... but it's actually about as good as it could have been, given the circumstances of its existence. And, it has one of the better closing exchanges, as Trek episodes go. Riker makes a joke, Picard plays along, and Data totally doesn't get it.
"Shades of Gray" might be a clip show... but it's actually about as good as it could have been, given the circumstances of its existence. And, it has one of the better closing exchanges, as Trek episodes go. Riker makes a joke, Picard plays along, and Data totally doesn't get it.
I feel stupid asking, but what are the differences between the TOS and TMP Enterprises? I probably just haven't looked closely enough, I know.
Absolutely. Someone once said something to the effect of "the golden age of rock n roll is 16." Our age and our life at the time means that some things will always have a special place in our heart, even if our "favorite" changes later. So for me, TOS will always have a special place because I grew up with it, and TNG because I was in college in involved in fandom for the first time.
But as far as "never to be repeated", good arguements can be made for the 90s and now, but also for TOS in 1966 and TNG in 1987. All were unique in their own ways.
And to the more technically minded out there yes the graphic is incorrect. Please go complain to the appropriate department.
In the novel they made a big deal about pulling out a few decks to make a mezzanine auditorium, which is where Kirk made his power point to the rank and file.
I agree for Enterprise, Voyager and the last season or so of TNG. That was just this weird 90s/early 2000s blandness and awkwardness a lot of genre shows had back then.
But I disagree with that statement when it comes to TNG during its zenith and for DS9. They were better.
What I fault TNG these days is, in addition to all the main cast women being gentle caregivers, not enough of their stories were character driven. Now not every story needs to be character driven. But in some of the episodes it feels like you could slot just about every character in the roles the main cast has, and it's often more about the guest character than about them, with the main cast just sorta existing to stumble into situations concerning the guest characters and helping to move the plot along.
Now there were some stories that were character driven, but they mainly went to Picard and Data.
I do think modern Trek is a lot generally better about making the main characters important to the plot.
This is just how episodic television usually works. It's only a more recent phenomenon that the main characters drive the entire plot of a season.
But with episodic television it wasn't universal. Look at Buffy the vampire slayer for example. Granted it had a myth ark, but also many stand-alone episodes. And from what I remember, while the was the ocassional guest character who drove the plot, a lot of episodes where driven by the main characters.
And for a more strictly episodic show...Charmed. Now that show has huge problems but the three main characters, their hopes, fears and goals (as wishy-washy and poorly conceived as those were) were usually front and centre.
And even in Star Trek I think that DS9 was a lot better about making the main characters essential to plots. The Quickening, for example, feels like it's a lot more about Bashir and who he is as a person and how that drives him to do what he does than about that planet or any of the guest characters there.
Granted the examples I named are from a later period than TNG. And yeah, if I look at 80s style television there's a lot more of the whole "the main character(s) are just tools to move the plot along" thing.
Similar threads
- Locked
