• 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!

Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof should not Return.

Like the Neelix episode when he gets revived by nanoprobes. Totally silly, but it actually delves deeper into how Neelix perceives the afterlife . . .
Which is what makes it truly unforgivable. Forty minutes of Neelix "character development"... *shudder* Those forty minutes were dark times indeed.

As far as "Serious Neelix" episodes go, I thought it was at least admirable that they went that route, and I usually hate Neelix.
 
When the older episodes/films do something off-the-wall? . . . When the Abrams films do it?

Yeah, like Makeshift says, a bad Abramstrek idea doesn't become automatically valid if you can find some almost-as-bad distant half-cousin to it in old Trek. I'm surprised at how often it's necessary to point that out on this forum.

The point is, and why this stuff gets pointed out, is cause people act like Abrams and Co. are going out of their way to piss on the franchise. What's getting missed is that the writing is actually pretty true to tone and style of TOS. I've said in the past: the new movies are "average" Trek films once you strip away the visuals. In terms of story and / or writing, there is nothing standout about the movies. These are strictly formula / paint by numbers, Trek stories. Yet, they're still fun and entertaining films.

Every "sin" the new movies have committed are no worse or no better than the same "sin" when it was done in past incarnations of the franchise.

The minute a complaint starts wit "Star Trek never did [insert complaint]". It's a safe bet that it did at some point in the last four decades. Which is my biggest beef with the new movie: It should have been a wholesale slaughter and reboot fo the franchise. They're actually to loyal to the franchise's past.

Those kind of complaints have existed as far back as the first films. "THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN", why is it so special now? I just ignore those.
 
Almost forgot about that nonsense. Right up there with replacing the Vedek's brain with a positronic matrix.

What about transporters? With a single-hair they were able to completely restore Pulaski to her normal self. Or when they were able to restore Picard from the transporter log.

Star Trek and technological non-sense have gone hand in hand for nearly fifty years now.

Of course then there's the biggest technological cheat... "sleep". :lol:
 
We literally had one poster arguing that Into Darkness wasn't Star Trek because it had Spock running.

Oh, I don't doubt there are some oddball notions out there, going way back. Sometimes one just has to shake one's head and move on.

Nerys Myk said:
But is it really a bad idea? Is the idea that with the application of some 23rd Century medical knowledge Khan's blood can be used to bring Kirk back from what should be a fatal exposure to radiation really a bad one?

It depends ultimately on what you're looking for from a Trek story. In narrative terms the "magic blood" trope strikes me as a fantasy or comic book superhero idea. Probably the latter: I don't think the way Lindelof keeps talking about elements of the movies by analogy with superhero mythology is coincidence. It rubs me the wrong way because I don't really come to Trek for straight-up superhero or fantasy stories per se (same reason I never much cared for that TOS episode where they literally encounter a Greek God).
 
Almost forgot about that nonsense. Right up there with replacing the Vedek's brain with a positronic matrix.

What about transporters? With a single-hair they were able to completely restore Pulaski to her normal self. Or when they were able to restore Picard from the transporter log.

Star Trek and technological non-sense have gone hand in hand for nearly fifty years now.

Of course then there's the biggest technological cheat... "sleep". :lol:

Oh God, even I was calling "Bullshit" on that when I first saw the episode--and I love BoBW. That's a good example of "we painted ourselves in the corner by showing how badass the villain of the week is, we need a gimmick to defeat them"

Almost forgot about that nonsense. Right up there with replacing the Vedek's brain with a positronic matrix.

What about transporters? With a single-hair they were able to completely restore Pulaski to her normal self. Or when they were able to restore Picard from the transporter log.

Better blame TAS for that one: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Lorelei_Signal_(episode)

Probably even further with "Enemy Within" if you want to get into the transporter fucking around with biology. There's a reason that the transporter is my least favorite Trek tech.
 
Almost forgot about that nonsense. Right up there with replacing the Vedek's brain with a positronic matrix.

What about transporters? With a single-hair they were able to completely restore Pulaski to her normal self. Or when they were able to restore Picard from the transporter log.

Better blame TAS for that one: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Lorelei_Signal_(episode)

Magic transporters go all the way back to The Enemy Within.

Does 'magic blood' seem fantastic? Of course it does, but no more fantastic than dozens of other things (good and bad) that we've seen the franchise hand us over the last fifty-years.

But here's the thing: I watch Star Trek for the fantastical elements. If it wasn't for those fantastical elements, I may as well watch modern day cop shows and political dramas.
 
Probably even further with "Enemy Within" if you want to get into the transporter fucking around with biology.

Magic transporters go all the way back to The Enemy Within.

:techman:

Something that always bugged me about the episode: Where did the extra matter come from?

Think about it: Kirk beams up. Only the matter of one Kirk in the stream. Yet, the transporter created a complete, living, human being: minutes apart from the original transport. "Evil" Kirk is basically a replicated human being created from nothing, with the "dark side" of the original cut and pasted onto it's mind.
 
Something that always bugged me about the episode: Where did the extra matter come from?

Think about it: Kirk beams up. Only the matter of one Kirk inthe stream. Yet, the transporter created to complete, living, human beings: minutes apart from the original transport. "Evil" Kirk is basically a replicated human being created from nothing.

Tuvix has the same issue.
 
I've said in the past: the new movies are "average" Trek films once you strip away the visuals. In terms of story and / or writing, there is nothing standout about the movies. These are strictly formula / paint by numbers, Trek stories. Yet, they're still fun and entertaining films.

I'd say they're Star Trek done as comic book movies (with a fair amount of Star Wars under the chassis -- themes of destiny, culminating medal scenes, STID even gives us a Millennium Falcon-style shuttle chase on the surface of Kronos). Trek always had its share of pulp, but the gestalt of nuTrek is more purely pulp than it's ever been.

Pure pulp can of course be plenty entertaining... which is why even the worst Star Wars has always made money. It only irritates me to the extent it does in the context of Trek because whatever heights Trek climbed or depths it sank to in days of yore, it was a vessel for a more diverse kind of storytelling than that. I think that's the core difference some people feel between nuTrek and its predecessors. Certainly it's the core difference for me.
 
Nerys Myk said:
But is it really a bad idea? Is the idea that with the application of some 23rd Century medical knowledge Khan's blood can be used to bring Kirk back from what should be a fatal exposure to radiation really a bad one?

It depends ultimately on what you're looking for from a Trek story. In narrative terms the "magic blood" trope strikes me as a fantasy or comic book superhero idea. Probably the latter: I don't think the way Lindelof keeps talking about elements of the movies by analogy with superhero mythology is coincidence. It rubs me the wrong way because I don't really come to Trek for straight-up superhero or fantasy stories per se (same reason I never much cared for that TOS episode where they literally encounter a Greek God).
But Star Trek is full of such "Comic book" ideas. If it was an occasional anomaly, there could be a case, but its not. Science that works like magic is the norm, not the exception.
 
I'd say they're Star Trek done as comic book movies (with a fair amount of Star Wars under the chassis -- themes of destiny, culminating medal scenes, STID even gives us a Millennium Falcon-style shuttle chase on the surface of Kronos). Trek always had its share of pulp, but the gestalt of nuTrek is more purely pulp than it's ever been.

Pure pulp can of course be plenty entertaining... which is why even the worst Star Wars has always made money. It only irritates me to the extent it does in the context of Trek because whatever heights Trek climbed or depths it sank to in days of yore, it was a vessel for a more diverse kind of storytelling than that. I think that's the core difference some people feel between nuTrek and its predecessors. Certainly it's the core difference for me.

Thing is... Roddenberry admittedly lifted plenty from pulp science fiction magazines of the 50' and early-60's.

I wonder if some of the divide over the Abrams films could simply come down to folks who like serious drama played straight vs. folks who like to have a fun time with bigger than life heroes?
 
But Star Trek is full of such "Comic book" ideas. If it was an occasional anomaly, there could be a case, but its not. Science that works like magic is the norm, not the exception.

TOS was pulp science fiction. Seriously. Kirk was fighting lizard men, Greek gods, multi-color brains and Nazis.
 
I'd say they're Star Trek done as comic book movies (with a fair amount of Star Wars under the chassis -- themes of destiny, culminating medal scenes, STID even gives us a Millennium Falcon-style shuttle chase on the surface of Kronos). Trek always had its share of pulp, but the gestalt of nuTrek is more purely pulp than it's ever been.

Pure pulp can of course be plenty entertaining... which is why even the worst Star Wars has always made money. It only irritates me to the extent it does in the context of Trek because whatever heights Trek climbed or depths it sank to in days of yore, it was a vessel for a more diverse kind of storytelling than that. I think that's the core difference some people feel between nuTrek and its predecessors. Certainly it's the core difference for me.

Thing is... Roddenberry admittedly lifted plenty from pulp science fiction magazines of the 50' and early-60's.

I wonder if some of the divide over the Abrams films could simply come down to folks who like serious drama played straight vs. folks who like to have a fun time with bigger than life heroes?

Good point. TOS is pretty much an anthology series that uses that same cast and characters from episode to episode. It has a very pulp-magazine feel to it. Versus latter day, TNG and beyond, series where Trek began to take itself much more seriously as a dramatic series.

But Star Trek is full of such "Comic book" ideas. If it was an occasional anomaly, there could be a case, but its not. Science that works like magic is the norm, not the exception.

TOS was pulp science fiction. Seriously. Kirk was fighting lizard men, Greek gods, multi-color brains and Nazis.

Kirk as Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon. The White Hat cowboy riding in to save the town.
 
But Star Trek is full of such "Comic book" ideas.

"Full of" is putting it a bit strongly, but like I said, I didn't care for Who Mourns for Adonais either. For my tastes, Trek's quality goes down the closer it comes to pure fantasy. It's more compelling to me as SF or as the use of an SF framework for telling dramatic stories from other fictional genres.

SeerGSB said:
Kirk as Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon.

Like I said earlier: let's not make the nuTrek the enemy of the good. People often seem to get so carried away in defending Abramstrek tropes that they actually forget that Star Trek did set itself apart, did deliver more than mere pulp, which is the reason it has a large fandom today and Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon don't. There's nothing wrong with liking Abramstrek; throwing the achievements of old Trek under the bus to justify doing so isn't necessary.
 
What about transporters? With a single-hair they were able to completely restore Pulaski to her normal self. Or when they were able to restore Picard from the transporter log.

Better blame TAS for that one: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Lorelei_Signal_(episode)

Magic transporters go all the way back to The Enemy Within.

Does 'magic blood' seem fantastic? Of course it does, but no more fantastic than dozens of other things (good and bad) that we've seen the franchise hand us over the last fifty-years.

But here's the thing: I watch Star Trek for the fantastical elements. If it wasn't for those fantastical elements, I may as well watch modern day cop shows and political dramas.

The difference is that "The Enemy Within" explores the consequences of what happened after that transporter effect splitting a man in two, so I give it more leeway because at least it does something with it. When Kirk is revived with magic blood, what comes out of that other than him living? There has to be more to these kind of plot devices than a reset button. It's like the end of "The Naked Time", great episode, but the thing with the time travel is so out of place and nothing ever comes out of it "Oh, I guess someday we'll look into it".
 
When Kirk is revived with magic blood, what comes out of that other than him living? There has to be more to these kind of plot devices than a reset button. It's like the end of "The Naked Time", great episode, but the thing with the time travel is so out of place and nothing ever comes out of it "Oh, I guess someday we'll look into it".

It may be a reset button of sorts, but it serves its purpose in the story. Plus, I do think there was more to the device than just a reset button, it provided the driving force for the actions of the Starfleet officer who destroyed the Kelvin Memorial.

I really didn't need for them to dissect the philosophical ramifications of Khan's blood.
 

Magic transporters go all the way back to The Enemy Within.

Does 'magic blood' seem fantastic? Of course it does, but no more fantastic than dozens of other things (good and bad) that we've seen the franchise hand us over the last fifty-years.

But here's the thing: I watch Star Trek for the fantastical elements. If it wasn't for those fantastical elements, I may as well watch modern day cop shows and political dramas.

The difference is that "The Enemy Within" explores the consequences of what happened after that transporter effect splitting a man in two, so I give it more leeway because at least it does something with it. When Kirk is revived with magic blood, what comes out of that other than him living? There has to be more to these kind of plot devices than a reset button. It's like the end of "The Naked Time", great episode, but the thing with the time travel is so out of place and nothing ever comes out of it "Oh, I guess someday we'll look into it".

Which is why I keep thinking that STID is two movies compressed. Everything post Khan reveal feels like ideas from a follow up movie that got jammed into STID's final 1/4.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top