Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

[BillJ]

Even the MPAA disagrees with you. While movie ratings have become more lax, each of Abrams movies is a PG-13 rating. With the exception of Nemesis, no movie was over a PG rating.

(1) MPAA ratings from different decades aren't comparable.

(2) MPAA ratings from the same era are, often, not comparable.

(3) Star Trek: First Contact was also rated PG-13.

(4) The PG-13 rating didn't exist until July of 1984, so the first three TOS films couldn't have been given it (and obviously weren't going to be rated R).

Thanks for the info, Harvey. I had thought the PG-13 rating came out sometime in the mid-80's, I just couldn't remember when.

I'm not surprised Star Trek: First Contact was PG-13. It was pretty violent and graphic, much like TWOK.

I just wonder why some people keep remembering Trek as nothing but sunshine and rainbows?

 

[Harvey]

I just wonder why some people keep remembering Trek as nothing but sunshine and rainbows?

Selective memory?

(Which, to be fair, I suffer from often enough, too.)

 

[HaventGotALife]

We've seen countless destroyed ships, we've seen horrific scenes like a man's head being crushed and a Captain hit by a phaser, watching him die. These movies have been incredibly violent, and I wouldn't introduce anyone to the universe seeing all this death and destruction.

We've seen Epsilon IX, three Klingon cruisers and Lt. Ilia "digitized" in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. We watched Captain Terrell disintegrate himself, the Ceti Eel makes a bloody exit from Chekov's head, we see the charred body of Peter Preston and the destruction of the Reliant in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. A freighter crew bites the dust in the opening minutes of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. The Grissom is destroyed, we watch David Marcus get stabbed, a Klingon boarding party gets killed during the destruction of the Enterprise and Kirk kicks Kruge in the face several times before he falls to an obviously gruesome death.

Selective memory?

I find Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan far more "graphically violent" than Star Trek Into Darkness.

The final frontier has never been a safe place, even in TNG. What did Q say again?

"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid."

Probably my favorite line in all of TNG--and Q is absolutely right. Exploring the final frontier was never supposed to be warm and cozy--and that means death and disaster sometimes.

"Risk is our business" and all that.

This.

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTlIwB3fnVw[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ArVBL8EgKU[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNoErHIfrGU[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl8BCW1i81M[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-gkvrkvH_Q[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhRzfg3zLbA[/yt]

I find all these scenes more disturbing than a slug coming out of the ear of Chekov.

 

[Harvey]

Aren't there single episodes of Star Trek (I'm thinking of 'The Doomsday Machine' and 'Operation: Annihilate!' specifically) that feature more death and destruction than both the Abrams movies combined?

 

[BillJ]

I find all these scenes more disturbing than a slug coming out of the ear of Chekov.

Way to miss everything else I posted on the matter.

Aren't there single episodes of Star Trek (I'm thinking of 'The Doomsday Machine' and 'Operation: Annihilate!' specifically) that feature more death and destruction than both the Abrams movies combined?

Yeah. Also, don't forget the Space Amoeba from "The Immunity Syndrome" which eats system Gamma 7A and the Cloud from "Obsession" which likely caused all kinds of death and destruction and ate a few red shirts.

The TOS death toll had to have been in the tens of billions.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Khan was amazingly clean after he "took care" of Marcus. An ounce of realism there and he'd be covered in gore.

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

 

[BillJ]

Khan was amazingly clean after he "took care" of Marcus. An ounce of realism there and he'd be covered in gore.

Yep. And it doesn't match Terrell's tortured shriek as he disintegrates in TWOK.

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

Which I'm actually fine with because it fit the story. Just like when we got a close-up of the Borg replacing organic limbs and eyes with cybernetic parts in Star Trek: First Contact.

 

[Blip]

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

Gratuitous? Disgusting?? Those are hardly the terms I'd use. Hell, these days I'd hesitate to even use the word "graphic" to describe that scene.

 

[Greg Cox]

It also occurs to me that the Prime Universe version of Jim Kirk was one of the sole survivors of a genocidal massacre on Tarsus IV.

Kinda makes nuKirk's upbringing seem positively Norman Rockwell by comparison!

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

Gratuitous? Disgusting?? Those are hardly the terms I'd use. Hell, these days I'd hesitate to even use the word "graphic" to describe that scene.

You mean this scene

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_Vr9LnogLM[/yt]

 

[Ilaliya]

I think they should have a series called "Star Trek: Relativity" set in the 29th century, and the mission is to travel around and collapse/remove all those stupid alternate time-lines running around.

In the series finale, they destroy the ability to time travel within the Star Trek universe (in such a way that resolves the paradox -- leave that up to writers), and fade out of existence.

The whole concept of timelines have weakened the Star Trek property. In my very humble opinion.

 

[BillJ]

The whole concept of timelines have weakened the Star Trek property. In my very humble opinion.

Time travel has given us many of the best stories across all the Trek series. I'd say keep it.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

I was 4 years old when I started watching the original series.

Five here.

Six here.

Five here as well,and I started watching it in the early 70's (I was born in 1969. )

 

[Greg Cox]

Okay, I have to ask: What's wrong with "disturbing." Since when was Star Trek not supposed to ever be disturbing.

The Salt Vampire was disturbing. Charlie X wiping the yeoman's face off was disturbing. Joan Collins getting hit by a truck is disturbing. Rukh the murderous android was scary and disturbing. Charon destroying itself in a genocidal race war was disturbing. Christopher Pike, scarred and paralyzed and trapped in that chair, was damn disturbing . . . .

I swear, sometimes I think that if "City on the Edge of Forever" aired today, some fans would object that it wasn't "optimistic" or "utopian" enough:

"Damnit. The real Jim Kirk would have found a way to save the timeline without sacrificing an innocent woman. Star Trek is about science and solving problems, not despair and no-win solutions. And did we really need to see some poor bum get gratuitously disintegrated? Or McCoy strung out on drugs and living in soup kitchen? Talk about a downer! Who the hell is this Harlan Ellison hack anyway?"

 

[F. King Daniel]

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

Gratuitous? Disgusting?? Those are hardly the terms I'd use. Hell, these days I'd hesitate to even use the word "graphic" to describe that scene.

By Trek's standards, it is. I'm fine with it, but I'm not sure I would have been age 6.

 

[Greg Cox]

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

Gratuitous? Disgusting?? Those are hardly the terms I'd use. Hell, these days I'd hesitate to even use the word "graphic" to describe that scene.

By Trek's standards, it is. I'm fine with it, but I'm not sure I would have been age 6.

I grew up on horror movies. That scene didn't bother me!

 

[Ilaliya]

The whole concept of timelines have weakened the Star Trek property. In my very humble opinion.

Time travel has given us many of the best stories across all the Trek series. I'd say keep it.

You don't think they've tapped that well dry?

When they were doing time travel in TNG, it was novel and very cool. Voyager got a little out of hand, but I think they were clever about it. But by ENT, it seemed like the go-to gimmick when the writers were being lazy.

Again, just my opinion. But I just felt like... I wanted to be immersed in the "era" of that particular Star Trek show. One of the cool things about Star Trek (to me), is that it's "hard" enough sci-fi that you get episodes where it's really about exploring the boundaries of technology, and the interaction between technology and people... and how that creates problems but it's used to solve problems.

Too much time travel, and it's like... it's ALWAYS the 29th century. There is no concept of "watching historical events in the Star Trek universe." And getting to see limitations of the technology of that era. Because it's always *now* in the time war.

If that makes any sense.

 

[BillJ]

You don't think they've tapped that well dry?

They've tapped many wells dry over the past seven hundred episodes and twelve movies. It doesn't mean that there isn't room for more well crafted stories. I'd point most recently to the novel The Rings of Time by fellow TrekBBS member Greg Cox.

When they were doing it on TNG, it was novel. Voyager got a little out of hand, but they were at least clever about it. But by ENT, it felt like the go-to gimmick when the writers were being lazy.

Again, just my opinion. But I just felt like... I wanted to be immersed in the "era" of that particular Star Trek show. One of the cool things about Star Trek (to me), is that it's "hard" enough sci-fi that you get episodes where it's really about exploring the boundaries of technology, and the interaction between technology and people... and how that creates problems but it's used to solve problems.

Too much time travel, and it's like... it's ALWAYS the 29th century. There is no concept of "watching historical events in the Star Trek universe." And getting to see limitations of the technology of that era. Because it's always *now* in the time war.

If that makes any sense.

The beauty of the Trek format is that there's room for all different types of stories. Too go forward and say that we're going to eliminate one type of story just doesn't set well with me.

 

[JariM]

Nothing in any of those clips is as gratuitous, unnecessary and disgusting as the end of "Conspiracy" where Picard and Riker destroy Remmick's head.

Gratuitous? Disgusting?? Those are hardly the terms I'd use. Hell, these days I'd hesitate to even use the word "graphic" to describe that scene.

Yes. Today it doesn't look like much but back in the day we didn't really see that stuff on television shows.

The whole concept of timelines have weakened the Star Trek property. In my very humble opinion.

Time travel has given us many of the best stories across all the Trek series. I'd say keep it.

That's just the thing. It should not become a crutch for the writers.

 

[BillJ]

The whole concept of timelines have weakened the Star Trek property. In my very humble opinion.

Time travel has given us many of the best stories across all the Trek series. I'd say keep it.

That's just the thing. It should not become a crutch for the writers.

But the thing is, is it really a crutch? When you look across the totality of the franchise, we have maybe four dozen actual time travel episodes out of seven-hundred plus episodes of material.

Across the Original Series, there are five time travel episodes (six if we count TAS).