Classified.What's Kirk's involvement?
Also, a typo that should have read Kira.
My bad. Damn head wounds.
Classified.What's Kirk's involvement?
You had TNG AND voyager for that.More exploration and less war? Yes, please.
You had TNG AND voyager for that.
The point of a franchise is you can do different things.It's almost as if they're part of a franchise...a franchise with something to do with the theme of exploration in its title.
Next we will have people next crying about "genes vision " and how DS9 violates that.30 years later and people are still debating if DS9 has enough Trekking in it.
I feel like they did explore the Gamma quadrant a bit when they had off time in episodes.
Well, it was more about visiting planets than stars...you don't think the franchise should be renamed Planet Trek?franchise with something to do with the theme of exploration in its title.
Next we will have people next crying about "genes vision " and how DS9 violates that.
30 years later and people are still debating if DS9 has enough Trekking in it.
I feel like they did explore the Gamma quadrant a bit when they had off time in episodes.
Agreed. The war itself was boring. WWII: In Space!!! It wasn’t completely uninteresting, but eh.In quite a few respects...it does. Anyhow, there could have been more; I found the war to be a bit of a bore and, occasionally, something of a chore. The maneuvering that preceded hostilities was engaging by comparison.
Putting aside genes real vision was money, drugs and sex.We'd have what the series was originally sold and promoted as: a crossroads in space, where the "new life and new civilizations" seek us out.
There was variety. Dominion, starfleet and Klingons had plenty of variety.Agreed. The war itself was boring. WWII: In Space!!! It wasn’t completely uninteresting, but eh.
And the dramatization of the battles were puzzling with all the technical problems…no shields, ships being too close to each other, not enough diversity of ships, not enough maneuvering and weapons fire, etc. They would have been better off with fleet shots showing a few ships in the foreground and walls of moving stars around them, jumping from scene to scene.
And could they have come up with 1 more original Romulan ship? That plus the scout from ”The Defector” would have been helpful.
War is sensless.Any kind of infantry makes no sense in star trek.
DS9 jumped the shark when it went to a full on WW2 analogy. It was just so senseless.
The problem there is calling it then “strange new worlds.”Star Trek is just an overarching title which represents the setting itself. The characters don't intrinsically have to be going on a literal, physical journey every episode in order for them to qualify as being on a 'Star Trek'.
It's somehow like people criticising Strange New Worlds for not going to planets made of marshmallows or whatever weirdness every week. The characters and their personal journeys are more important than the physical or literal distance that they actually travel.
I could use a bit more sci-fi in my sci-fi.
You can’t have it both ways. Trek was never hard sci-fi but they made a point of being more, certainly than what was on at the time, also than the the current crop that touts itself on being more character and drama oriented. Those are fine too, but 1. own it without the “yeah but…” and 2. maybe try a bit more sci-fi if that’s what many fans want and is part of thre formula that made Trek the success it became. My favorite episodes of SNW are those that include healthy dashes of all these things.I see that. I do. But the focus on characters over science goes back to Roddenberry's first draft of what Star Trek should be about. He wanted to tell very human stories and in TOS there are an abundance of them. Star Trek has pretty much always been a kind of sci-fi-lite show, which I think is something that led to it having such wide appeal. TOS didn't fly over anyone's heads and the characters were very relatable.
You can’t have it both ways. Trek was never hard sci-fi but they made a point of being more, certainly than what was on at the time, also than the the current crop that touts itself on being more character and drama oriented. Those are fine too, but 1. own it without the “yeah but…” and 2. maybe try a bit more sci-fi if that’s what many fans want and is part of thre formula that made Trek the success it became. My favorite episodes of SNW are those that include healthy dashes of all these things.
Indeed, yes. The goal of Trek and a lot of scifi was not "Here's this whiz bang tech." It was "what implications does these things have on the characters." New technology or other science fiction concepts are secondary to characters and drama because there characters are what drive the story forward.I see that. I do. But the focus on characters over science goes back to Roddenberry's first draft of what Star Trek should be about. He wanted to tell very human stories and in TOS there are an abundance of them. Star Trek has pretty much always been a kind of sci-fi-lite show, which I think is something that led to it having such wide appeal. TOS didn't fly over anyone's heads and the characters were very relatable.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.