Good Old Fashioned Debate

[Brie]

I like to consider myself the biggest Star Trek fan of my generation, as I'm sure many of you do as well. That being said, I have always found myself at a debate with "Fan me" and "Logical me." By that I mean, "Fan me" would like to say that Star Trek can do no wrong, but "Logical me" knows not all of Star Trek is or can be accurate. Well here is where I would like to open up debates on some major topics.

1.) "No matter how dark or un-winnable the situation is (whether on the enterprise, DS9 or Voyager) the crew always comes out miraculously unharmed and alive by some crazy feat of engineering or medical miracle done on the fly by one of the many engineers or doctors throughout Star Trek."

I often find myself saying "That was convenient" during many episodes of Star Trek, maybe it's my military side coming out but in almost any episode something or someone is saved by a crazy on the fly fix or cure, when in real life (Like on a carrier, like me) fixing a part of the ship or saving a life could take days or weeks. Do you ever catch yourself saying "impossible" when watching the show and if so could/should a more realistic approach be used in the show?

2.) "In any Battle fought by Enterprise, Defiant or Voyager, all other ships were defeated or destroyed, but _____ always comes out to defeat the enemy with little to no damage."

Do you think another ship should have been allowed the winning blow in one of the episodes, or do you think a more realistic battle scenario could/should have been scripted at any point?

3.) "There are so many instances in which an alien race looks identical to us if not for one or two minor changes."

Do you think more creativity could have been put towards the aliens with the budget that they had or do you like the idea that light years away alien races could still look identical to us?

4.) "There are a few episodes in which you can not understand what an alien race is saying and it is usually attributed to the language being so different from our own that the universal translator cant decipher it. yet in voyager when they are thrown into an entirely new part of space, with no earthly contact, they can understand almost every race, with a few exceptions."

do you think they should/could have expanded more on the idea that out in that part of space everything is entirely different, language included?

I know Star Trek is Sci-Fi and and a large amount realistic change would take away from that aspect or even prevent progression of the plot altogether, but even in a smaller dosage do you think more realism could have done well in the show.

If you have any debate questions you would like to add in, please let me know and I will add it to the list.

 

[IrishNero]

I believe a lot of details/minutiae are left out because it doesn't advance the story line and would mire the show in constantly inconvenient situations that would take too long to handle within the context of a one-hour episode. Though I loved most of the Brannon Braga-era shows of the 90s, they became a bit too formulaic and if it weren't for the different cast and starships you'd be hard-pressed to differentiate between the three shows (TNG, VRG, DS9) in terms of how the stories developed and concluded. But hey, they stuck with what worked, or at least, for about a decade it worked. As you mentioned, budget (and probably time) constraints also hamper or preclude deviating from the show's development formula. If you have but a few of weeks to develop a working script, you're more likely to avoid deviating from what you did previously in order to fit a tight schedule and/or budget.

But I'm a hack-writer, and from what I know, there are at least a few great writers on this forum who would be able to verify, disprove or enhance any of what I just said, so perhaps they will chime in. Engage!

 

[Maurice]

Who are you quoting?

 

[wildsulu]

hi,

Re. 1.) You're right that they almost always come out physically unharmed. I know of only one instance (ds9 season 7) where someone gets permanently physically harmed. But there are several instances where crewmembers are either mentally harmed or suffer because of losing close family or friends.

 

[hux]

1.) "No matter how dark or un-winnable the situation is (whether on the enterprise, DS9 or Voyager) the crew always comes out miraculously unharmed and alive by some crazy feat of engineering or medical miracle done on the fly by one of the many engineers or doctors throughout Star Trek."

I often find myself saying "That was convenient" during many episodes of Star Trek, maybe it's my military side coming out but in almost any episode something or someone is saved by a crazy on the fly fix or cure, when in real life (Like on a carrier, like me) fixing a part of the ship or saving a life could take days or weeks. Do you ever catch yourself saying "impossible" when watching the show and if so could/should a more realistic approach be used in the show?

The fixes don't annoy me. It's the failures that do. When someone is escaping from the ship and they can't get a lock.....sorry captain he got away......how? I mean you've beamed people from planets and from alternative dimensions but getting a lock on that dude who stole a replicator is beyond your abilities.

2.) "In any Battle fought by Enterprise, Defiant or Voyager, all other ships were defeated or destroyed, but _____ always comes out to defeat the enemy with little to no damage."

Do you think another ship should have been allowed the winning blow in one of the episodes, or do you think a more realistic battle scenario could/should have been scripted at any point?

If they get the winning blow, then the show finishes. Voyager should definitely have experienced more battle damage though

3.)

You don't like the number three?

4.) "There are so many instances in which an alien race looks identical to us if not for one or two minor changes."

Do you think more creativity could have been put towards the aliens with the budget that they had or do you like the idea that light years away alien races could still look identical to us?

It would require too much effort for every species too look wildly alien so I can live with that but for certain episodes, I think they should push the boat out a little more. The first contact episode in TNG for example. I would have liked to have seen more effort with them especially to highlight the point of the episode which was, you are not alone out here (because there are people who look very similar to you...yawn) Then you have episodes like Voyagers Nemesis and those fantastic looking Predator aliens. Why....for such a nothing episode

5.) "There are a few episodes in which you can not understand what an alien race is saying and it is usually attributed to the language being so different from our own that the universal translator cant decipher it. yet in voyager when they are thrown into an entirely new part of space, with no earthly contact, they can understand almost every race, with a few exceptions."

do you think they should/could have expanded more on the idea that out in that part of space everything is entirely different, language included?

I once thought a great episode might be where the universal translators malfunction and crew who normally speak to each other every day have no idea what is being said. Klingon, Vulcan, Human etc. In general though, it is necessary to skip too much of this as it would be dull. TNG did the Darmok ep and DS9 had one where they malfunctioned for 10 minutes so it's been covered occasionally

1I know Star Trek is Sci-Fi and and a large amount realistic change would take away from that aspect or even prevent progression of the plot altogether, but even in a smaller dosage do you think more realism could have done well in the show.

Star Trek on HBO would be fine by me

 

[Brie]

Who are you quoting?

No one these are questions I'm asking.

 

[Makarov]

Good topic. Problem with letting the enemy win is that it would take more than one episode I think. You'd have to show who lives, who dies, introduce a new ship, and be a major change to any series. I'd definitely like to see it though. Not even the new BSG properly did anything like that in my opinion.

You might like to see Lower Decks from TNG which is one of the few episodes I think avoids "plot armor" for some of the characters. For the most part I ignore the logical part of my brain and just buy into the episodic nature where you know everything will reset by the end.

I don't particularly like that all aliens look humanoid, I prefer Mass Effect style aliens that look drastically different. But it's just one of those budget things. You know what bothers me though? Any race that is supposed to be alien but looks exactly like humans. Guinan for instance. Not a fan of that style.

 

[IrishNero]

I would imagine that it's cheaper and quicker to film with minimal makeup/wardrobe. That may partially explain the preference for human-like characters overall.

 

[Brie]

Good topic. Problem with letting the enemy win is that it would take more than one episode I think. You'd have to show who lives, who dies, introduce a new ship, and be a major change to any series. I'd definitely like to see it though. Not even the new BSG properly did anything like that in my opinion.

You might like to see Lower Decks from TNG which is one of the few episodes I think avoids "plot armor" for some of the characters. For the most part I ignore the logical part of my brain and just buy into the episodic nature where you know everything will reset by the end.

I don't particularly like that all aliens look humanoid, I prefer Mass Effect style aliens that look drastically different. But it's just one of those budget things. You know what bothers me though? Any race that is supposed to be alien but looks exactly like humans. Guinan for instance. Not a fan of that style.

You have instantly become one of my favorite people on this forum by referencing Mass Effect!

on another note haha It's good to see someone with similar opinions. Also if I'm not mistaken there is a show or web series called lower decks which is kind of a spoof/spin off of what the non essential characters deal with on a daily basis

 

[SPCTRE]

Mass Effect is heavily, heavily influenced by Star Trek in a lot of ways. The relative phenotypical diversity the franchise is able to portray comes with the medium (and a hefty triple-A development budget).

 

[Maurice]

Who are you quoting?

No one these are questions I'm asking.

Then you're abusing the quotation marks, Dr. Evil.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I often find myself saying "That was convenient" during many episodes of Star Trek, maybe it's my military side coming out but in almost any episode something or someone is saved by a crazy on the fly fix or cure, when in real life (Like on a carrier, like me) fixing a part of the ship or saving a life could take days or weeks. Do you ever catch yourself saying "impossible" when watching the show and if so could/should a more realistic approach be used in the show?

All the time. Deus ex machina are Trek's biggest crutch--especially the Berman variety.

3.) "There are so many instances in which an alien race looks identical to us if not for one or two minor changes."

They did (sort of) explain this away in a TNG episode. Basically a humanoidish race "seeded" the Milky Way with their DNA.

Yeah. I thought it was kinda silly too.

Then you're abusing the quotation marks, Dr. Evil.

It's not "abuse." It's a "stylistic decision." We should all "respect" her "posting style."

 

[IrishNero]

Quotation marks are OK as long as you cite your source using the APA format.

 

[Richard Baker]

Lots of good things brought up in this topic!
I understand having most aliens being human actors but the rare times they make the effort to alter past the funny foreheads really stand out. One moment which I do not think they ever repeated was in the first episode of Enterprise when Phlox gave a smile and they used digital graphics to alter the shape past what a human could do, another was in JJTrek#1 when they altered the eye position of the Nurse. I can accept the humanoid form and being a natural answer to an evolution question, but I wish they could alter proportions, limb articulation or even number/type of fingers to reflect alien origins.

Having the star of the show, be it a ship or crew always being the only ones to strike the final blow to an enemy is annoying. TOS gave you a feeling that the Enterprise was part of a larger fleet which also did important things. Since then it has been only the hero ship and crew that is the pivotal essential element in the crisis. DS-9 took it to an extreme- Sisko was just a Commander assigned to a station, in the end he was the mastermind of the entire Dominion War. Even Quark's idiot brother became the Grand Nagas for the entire Ferengi race. It is not a deal killer to have the heros be part of something larger, to contribute meaningfully, but to have them be the only ones which save the day every single time is getting old.

 

[marlboro]

I have never understood why people get hung up on the "All the aliens look like humans!" thing.

It's like complaining about a movie having subtitles because "words don't pop up in front of your eyes in real like when you are talking to a foreigner!"


It is for dramatic and budgetary reasons. That's it. No big mystery. It shouldn't have top be explained by away by some mediocre TNG episode.

 

[Vger23]

I have never understood why people get hung up on the "All the aliens look like humans!" thing.

It's like complaining about a movie having subtitles because "words don't pop up in front of your eyes in real like when you are talking to a foreigner!"


It is for dramatic and budgetary reasons. That's it. No big mystery. It shouldn't have top be explained by away by some mediocre TNG episode.

Actually, long before the "mediocre TNG episode" addressed it, it was mentioned in both "Return to Tomorrow" and "The Paradise Syndrome" decades earlier.

 

[marlboro]

So they used three episodes to come up with three separate explanations for something that really didn't need to be explained.

It's sort of like super hero comic books. There are some things that you just have to accept as basic conceits of the genre. if you try to "fix" them by explaining everything away you end up taking all of the fun out of it.

 

[Ithekro]

The older two were to explain why there were basically Humans or Vulcans on other planets.

 

[marlboro]

I thought the "parallel worlds" thing was used to explain that?

 

[martok2112]

Hi, Brie,

My answer to a lot of the things that would otherwise bug me about most storytelling can be answered by the "Martok2112 Law of Storytelling" (yeah....my law...lol)

The Martok2112 Law of Storytelling is a flexible law, in that, no matter the contrivance or the constriction, it always yields to the needs of dramatic storytelling.

In other words, my law might read something like this:
"Logic and physics will always yield to the needs of dramatic storytelling."
Or
"Time will always yield to the needs of dramatic storytelling."

(Pirate's voice: It's really more like a guideline. ).

Just a couple of examples. (And before anyone asks who I'm quoting, I am quoting me. )


So, in other words, dramatic storytelling serves one purpose, to move the story along in a way that keeps the audeince engaged at the primal level. Basically, it's sitting around a campfire and listening to the storyteller weave his/her fantastical tale.

If the audience is there to analyze every little nit and pick of logic, physics, time, etc....then they are only there to be know-it-alls and malcontents. They've forgotten the joy of simply sitting back and enjoying the story. They are the annoying asshat at the campfire who questons every little detail no matter where the storyteller is in the story.

Example: Everyone's gathered around the campfire. We have the Storyteller, a few kids and a few adults. Many of the kids are awaiting with eyes wide open and ears attentive, for they know the Storyteller to be a great weaver of tales. The adults sit with them, some genuinely pleased with the Storyteller's prowess, and others feigning awe for the benefit of the children, but keep their counsel because they know that others wish simply to be entertained.

And then there's that one "person" who is A Singular Storyteller's Hassler Obssessing Little Elucidations (for short, we'll call this guy the ASSHOLE)

Storyteller: All right, now this took place a long time ago...
ASSHOLE: How long ago?
Storyteller: What?
ASSHOLE: How long ago did this happen?
Storyteller: (tolerant grin). I don't know... A few years.
ASSHOLE: That hardly constitutes "a long time ago."
Storyteller: Whatever. Anyway,....an unspecified amount of time ago...
Small child: What does unspecified mean?

The Storyteller is a little flustered at this point, but grins to try and give a brief explanation to the small child who has now been taken out of the story before it's even had a chance to begin.

Storyteller: It means "no one's said how long, and no one really knows or remembers."

The child nods in understanding.

ASSHOLE: Can you get on with the story, please?

The Storyteller does his/her best to ignore the ASSHOLE.

Storyteller: There were three little kids...
ASSHOLE: Boys? Girls? Were they preteens? Toddlers?

The Storyteller now starts to glare at the ASSHOLE.

ASSHOLE: (indifferent, or just stupidly oblivious). Infants? Come on, give us some substance here.

Storyteller: Two boys and a girl! They are between the ages of 9 and 11 years old!

ASSHOLE: Two boys and a girl?!

The Storyteller is once again unable to mask neither ignorance, nor disdain at the ASSHOLE's constant need for minutiae. The other adults are now starting to feel similarly, especially as they see some of the kids yawning or looking sleepy before the story has had a chance to unfold from its beginning. But the ASSHOLE, still oblivious to the growing tension in the vicinity, continues his inquisition.

ASSHOLE: I mean, that's a bit of a sexist trope, isn't it? I mean, what, are you gonna have the singular little girl be the damsel in distress in your story? Cripes...hello, Mr.Predictable!

As time goes on, and interruptions from the ASSHOLE continue, the story has made a little progress, but all the children are either asleep, or somehow otherwise catatonically preoccupied. The Storyteller tries almost every trick (s)he can think of to regain the kids' interest, but to no avail. The ASSHOLE, seeking only to hear a story catering to his pretentious "intellectualism", has created a toxic environment for everyone else simply wishing to hear a rousing tale. (Eventually....hopefully....somebody discretefully beat the living dog turds out of the ASSHOLE).

A good storyteller tries to appeal to the widest possible audience, unless their story is indeed meant to cater to a specific audience.

Thing is: Star Trek is one of those entities that caters (or tries to cater) to the widest possible audience. It has done so since "Where No Man Has Gone Before". (The Cage tried to pander to intellectuals at a time when people just wanted to forget about reality for a while.....especially with the VietNam conflict...and it didn't fly.)

Just sit back, and enjoy the ride....even if it does have a few uncomfortable bumps.


And this is simply a personal opinion and POV.