Exactly. The formulaic approach to Trek ignores its history of variety storytelling.
It's not everything to everyone. It's s buffet and enjoy what you like and ignore what you don't.
Alex Kurtzman on streaming movies and the future of Trek
- Thread starter Danja
- Start date
It's not everything to everyone. It's s buffet and enjoy what you like and ignore what you don't.
Proving what? That someone's knowledge of Star Trek is limited to "space ship go zoom?" The Star Trek I know is about something. Ideas, commentary and characters. Not, "spaceship go zoom!".
Well Space Hitler isn't in charge of the Space CIA. Me I'm not a fan of either and would hope never to see them again. Sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative.
Matalas put the PICARD crew in the 21st Century, Are you saying season 2 was his vanity project?
Wait using a skill or talent possessed by one of your actors is a bad thing? Sorry Gates, no dancing for you. Patrick and Bill, get those horses off the set!!! Put the trombone down Jonathan. Nichelle, if you sing one more note, you're off the show!!!! Don't even think it Picardo!!!
You'll get those straws someday, buddy,
Rather sad and pathetic.
Well, I disagree wholeheartedly. Star Trek to me is a lot more than just a formula. Its characters and stories and oftentimes (no, not Section 31) pushing boundaries. If you look back at TOS, it was very much an attempt at telling a lot of different stories in different settings with a starship taking its crew and its audience there every week. SNW has done an excellent job of bringing that feeling back but in the 21st century.
I'll be honest. I got bored with the 1987-2005 Star Trek formula for awhile. Oh, I started out loving it, and loved it for quite awhile. But then I got bored. Because the stories were very much repetitive and you just knew everyone would walk away just fine.
I also started realizing that there was a lot of entertainment outside of Star Trek. Not only sci-fi too. It made me realize that variety is a far better things than formula. So, yes, I enjoy the idea of various Star Trek’s so that don’t have the same make up as the shows I grew up on from the ages of 7 to 25.
While the shows have not always been perfect, I’ve enjoyed the idea of a ship from Kirk‘s time being pushed into the fire future, a continuation of a legacy character, adventures of a crew that isn’t quite Starfleet’s best, a misfit crew attempting to find their way in Starfleet And a return to the very fundamentals of what makes Star Trek Star Trek. If that doesn’t interest you, so be it.
So which of these look like Star Trek?
So much of this. I was so the sick of paint-by-numbers BermaTrek formula that by the time Enterprise ended, It was almost relief to see it end.
Last edited:
Uh....So which of these look like Star Trek?
It Happened One Night?
Ben-Hur?
Little Caesar?
Hogan's Heroes?
Thank you may I would like to have more of them please since I deserve it.
It's a result of General Order 8: "No poster under any circumstances, ignorance or otherwise, is to say that Star Trek content is actually Star Trek. Unless it's the content I like."
I think he's got a thing against people who enjoy plomeek soup.
[JAKEBLUES] “This place has got everything!” [/JAKEBLUES]
Define “bad” writing.
"What are we, some kind of Section 31?"
Sorry but I can't defend a like like this in a Trek film.
You know I have to agree with you. Binging things does prove how hard that formula gets after so many episodes. God knows how it must've been watching it all live. It is nice to have some differences constantly made to shake things up.
Like you’re astronauts, on some kind of star trek.
You mean writing like that? It isn’t my cup of tea. Same time, is it really “bad”? Clearly, some folks do enjoy.
I can’t imagine there aren’t things out there that you like that others have slammed as bad writing? “Not for me” isn’t synonymous with “bad writing”.
Gatekeeping just seems at odds with IDIC.
It's more playing off how hard it tried to ape Suicide Squad with that joke i just made up. And I mean I can say it's "bad" more in Section 31's case as the whole film is basically that line stretched out, but that is my opinion like you said. Though with the entire 'on some kind of star trek' it's at least more earnest in that kind of line.
Though that does bring up what is "bad writing" in this case when we get so deep into ourselves and what we enjoy and how that counts over something else.
I have found myself calling things that don’t work for me as bad writing, which is a huge mistake on my part. It is the thing that probably gets changed the most during the production process.
I found Section 31 disjointed and didn’t make the best of the advantages it had. Is that solely based on the writing? Since it has been developing for seven years, it is hard to tell how this compares to what was originally written.
It's based on a lot of factors in regards to how a piece of media like that is made, really. Though I guess it is easier to hammer on the writing considering they've been cooking that specific factor for so long with a bunch of other things bearing down it that could've changed it up even more. I just know the 'badness' of it is probably in it failing to convey every single they wanted in the time they had.
I just know I'll enjoy 'Code of Honor' more for getting its stuff across better anyway.
Similar threads
