• 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!

What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

I don't think it shouldn't.

I have very few "shoulds" around Star Trek.

I have several.....mostly involving Majel Barrett.

There never was a HILL STREET musical* (yet), but I remember a brief 1990 push to produce a TREK opera which was apparently, ultimately discouraged. Perhaps if James Sikking is willing to sing, we may yet still get both.

(*I just couldn't resist.)
 
Last edited:
That one does indeed make me ill.

Especially when they get to Supercalinarcolepticextrahalitosis. I always lose my lunch at that point. :barf:

I'm one Angela Cartwright fan who was similarly allergic to THE SOUND OF MUSIC....as was my mentor Pauline Kael. I believe McCALLS magazine fired her for her scathing review. And yet....

.....during the month of September 2001 I began to appreciate it in context. One 2001 review compared the two, describing them as ''two worlds gone mad.'' And my mother, who passed away that fall, always enjoyed it. So I eventually bought the movie. While not entirely successful, parts of it are more moving to me now.

At one point I dubbed ''Spoonful of Sugar'' during Ice Cube's BOYZ N THE HOOD scenes.*

(*Tweetybird's ''Singin' in Da Bathtub'' is even better with Ice-T's cadences. Trust me on this.)
 
How's THIS for a musical:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

"Has the jury reached a verdict? ... HIT IT!" :guffaw:
 
People who insist that Trek is supposed to be some pseudo-documentary of fictional events really irk me, TBH. It's pretty clear that Trek cannot be read at that. At best, it can be seen as a dramatization of events that take place within the Star Trek universe. For example:
  • The universal translator is (generally speaking - outside of Kelvin movies) shown as not only translating speech, but showing mouth movements which match with the translated speech. While I suppose it's theoretically possible that it would like generate a small hologram over someone's mouth, there's no logical reason why this would occur.
  • Similarly, there are, on occasion, shots aboard alien ships without the presence of any Starfleet officers. These are also presented translated (including with mouths in proper sync) into English. There is no UT here, so what is going on.
  • Trek has repeatedly taken liberties with dramatic lighting which is completely impractical for a work location, particularly during combat.
  • Recasts have happened across the series, and we are not meant to believe that the characters have had cosmetic surgery.
  • Issues related to budgetary constraints (particularly around TOS).
Due to all of this, I think the only expectation we should have regarding episodes of Trek is they're largely in continuity with what has been established before, if you were reading about it on a page-long summary of the episode. The actual execution though, that's all just creative interpretation, even if you take a Watsonian slant towards things.
 
People who insist that Trek is supposed to be some pseudo-documentary of fictional events really irk me, TBH. It's pretty clear that Trek cannot be read at that. At best, it can be seen as a dramatization of events that take place within the Star Trek universe.
Indeed, yes. I have used the terminology "strict literalism" in the past to describe this, because I largely see it happen in studying history and different documents for ancient history. Taking it as a dramatization covers over all the issues noted but still allows freedom of creative expression.
 
If you include TOS in this, could you give a specific or two?

I don't think we really saw the extremely dim lighting on the bridge thing until TWOK.

However, TOS did use unnatural lighting on the bridge, which looked dramatic, but didn't make sense from a realistic standpoint.

Shadows, for example, get cast backwards, toward the walls of the bridge, which makes sense from a perspective of stage lighting. It makes no sense from a perspective of the bridge, however, as lighting should be coming from the ceiling.

Here's some impractically dim lighting from Balance of Terror though.

st-balance22.jpg
 
You just missed your chance; it was on network TV last night. :D
I'll rent The Sound of Music on Amazon. There's someone I want to invite over to watch it with, we actually had this discussion IRL a few weeks ago, and then we'll watch it. Maybe on or around Christmas.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top