I don't care anymore
- Thread starter MadBaggins
- Start date
Everyone knows it was William Shatner who changed the world.
Roddenberry didn't change the world. He helped put together a tv show that happens to have a "Rabid" fan following... but the world as we know it wouldn't be either better or worse without it.
What Gene made in a work of fiction also hasn't offered any new compelling consistent philosophy about living one's life - because that's not what Star Trek's actual purpose is, it being entertainment and all...
Sharr
Art doesn't need any one purpose to be.
Star Trek isn't highart - it was always intended as popular entertainment, or Desilu wouldn't have bothered funding its production.
Sharr
No I mean like whatever the writer/director... ect thinks makes for an interesting compelling story and that said writer and director should be free to tell the story *they want to tell*.
And Star Trek ToS had more then its fill of sex (for the 60s) and explosions so please don't go tossing that out like its new to Star Trek or something. GR himself had an active libido and it showed in his work... even in The Cage Pike was meant to be lured with sex.
And I said popular entertainment - the whole reason tv shows are made at all to be consumed by the masses and hopefully enjoyed and arouse interest.
Sharr
"....I CARE!..." (to quote Luke Skywalker)
I'm still, very much looking forward to Trek XI.
And the extra wait... well, it just reminds me of the time when we first heard about TMP and when it actually came out.
I don't have any bad memories of that time, just memories of great anticipation and glee at seeing rumors and production pics in Starlog and the wonderment of seeing the first show on the first day (with my older brothers girlfriend...heh.. the only one who would go with me.)
I jut wanna add something about the TRANSFORMERS movie.
I've watched it a few times now, and to me the main theme is about FAMILY with just a little bit of themeatic freedom thrown in.
Most of the scenes dealt with the individual chsracters (including the robots) relating back to their lives with and without their Families.
Right from the get go we see the main Army guy (Capt. Lennox) talking and relating to his wife and kid on the internet and to his own tactical team as they get in a bit of long overdue R&R.
Then they all end up trying to save that Arab(?) Village and it's inhabitants (Families) from Scorponok.
Almost all of Sams' interaction's throughout the movie, were at some level, dealing with how it effected his Family life.
Even Bumblebee's actions were mostly based on his wanting to keep his, albeit small, Family Unit (Optimus, Jazz, Ratchet..etc...) safe and together by finding the AllSpark before the Decepticons did.
All of Sam's actions and reactions at the climax, are based upon his new found connection to the Autobot's and Mikaela as they have all become part of his new, extended Family.
Of course, this all just my interpretation of the movie after several viewings.
I'm still, very much looking forward to Trek XI.
And the extra wait... well, it just reminds me of the time when we first heard about TMP and when it actually came out.
I don't have any bad memories of that time, just memories of great anticipation and glee at seeing rumors and production pics in Starlog and the wonderment of seeing the first show on the first day (with my older brothers girlfriend...heh.. the only one who would go with me.)
I jut wanna add something about the TRANSFORMERS movie.
I've watched it a few times now, and to me the main theme is about FAMILY with just a little bit of themeatic freedom thrown in.
Most of the scenes dealt with the individual chsracters (including the robots) relating back to their lives with and without their Families.
Right from the get go we see the main Army guy (Capt. Lennox) talking and relating to his wife and kid on the internet and to his own tactical team as they get in a bit of long overdue R&R.
Then they all end up trying to save that Arab(?) Village and it's inhabitants (Families) from Scorponok.
Almost all of Sams' interaction's throughout the movie, were at some level, dealing with how it effected his Family life.
Even Bumblebee's actions were mostly based on his wanting to keep his, albeit small, Family Unit (Optimus, Jazz, Ratchet..etc...) safe and together by finding the AllSpark before the Decepticons did.
All of Sam's actions and reactions at the climax, are based upon his new found connection to the Autobot's and Mikaela as they have all become part of his new, extended Family.
Of course, this all just my interpretation of the movie after several viewings.
I've always thought that art can both be entertaining and achieve some kind of profound statement about the world. Trek, at it's best, does just that.
I content that it wouldn't be so remembered or so ingrained in the culture if it weren't so.
I content that it wouldn't be so remembered or so ingrained in the culture if it weren't so.
...waiting for some rationale for "Gene Roddenberry changed the world..."
(Maybe it was the cell phones?)
No I think there's alot more the Star Trek than just entertainment otherwise it never would've lasted this long and inspired people to become doctors, astronauts, scientists ect.
http://www.ibiblio.org/jwsnyder/wisdom/trek.html
True enough... but every time someone set out with the SPECIFIC INTENTION of "making a profound statement about the world" it failed. The most profound statements made in entertainment are usually the more subtle ones, and as often as not the ones that were not really the original intention of the author or performers or whoever... but which just sort of grew into the situation naturally.
Put another way... "preachy" isn't the same thing as "profound." And almost universally, when someone starts out from the INTENTION of making a "profound statement about the world" what they're really doing is preaching at the audience.
There's no faster way to turn me off (and get me to walk out, and get my money back) than to start beating me about the head and shoulders with preachiness and phoney attempts at being "profound."
That's just the difference between good and crap writing, Cary.
Nope, that to me still reads like a guy who started to believe his own hype...
That it might make comments upon various parts of the world doesn't set Star Trek apart from any other work of fiction where all you need do is look for a message and you'll find one and more often then not find one never intended by the creator.
Do you think those people who were "inspired by Trek" wouldn't have found other sources of inspiration or been inclined to do those things without Trek? I do, more often then not there were more formative forces involved in shaping lawyers and doctors - quit a few chose to be that just fine without ever watching Star Trek. And given there are only a handful of astronauts...
The guys at Desilu would have laughed GR off the lot if he went in there pitching a vehicle to "change the world" with. That there happen to be subtle meanings within some episodes of Trek does not elevate it above mere fiction or entertainment since fiction isn't simply a random congruences of words like some appear to mean when they say something is just "entertainment".
Sharr
Then you equate Star Trek with Lost In Space, Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea, FTroop, Gilligan's Island, The Wild Wild West and a host of other shows that came out in the same time period?
Sorry but IMO Star Trek had alot more than just entertainment value and it's what set Star Trek apart from those other shows it's one of the reasons why Star Trek is still alive in some form today. It even inspired JJ Abrams since he too got inspiration from TOS and TNG.
But others not just Roddenberry has said the same things about Star Trek affect on them.
http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Social/star_trek/SH7.htm
I don't see similar claims being made of other shows from TOS's era. It is entertainment to be sure but it's also more than just entertainment.
Since when did TMP become the blueprint for a Trek movie? Of all the films, TMP was the least Trekian in my opinion. It was trying to ape the vibe of 2001: A Space Oddessy right after Star Wars swooped in and did the TOS formula of humor, philosophy and action. At the risk of looking like it was riding Star Wars' coattails (Which it was, BTW. Remember, Paramount was kicking itself over shutting the door on Lucas and wanted its own space franchise), TMP layed on the psuedo extentialism so much and the characters were stiff, bland, cardboard cutouts that it jokingly was refered to as The Motionless Picture. Thank goodness Bennett and Meyer came in a brought Trek back to its true roots and had a healthy balance of philosophical debate, action, humor, and referencing to TOS without being too overly-fanboyish. Since when did TMP do that?
I have seen some fairly compelling arguments that TMP was actually close in spirit, that the progeny were more of the wayward children. It was in a collection of essays that had been compiled into a regular series of books, the name of which escapes me right now. Much of it I think centered on the sense of wonder and exploration, asking "is this all I am? - hence, the tag "the human adventure begins". Even so, your criticisms are widely held and I agree with much of it. I also felt that TWOK was a return of sorts to what I remembered. It had that sense of high adventure. TSFS overtly emphasized that powerful connection in perhaps the most successful portrayal of brotherhood in all of Trek: the Kirk-Spock-McCoy trinity.
Maybe the answer is that TMP and post-TMP each emphasized certain aspects of Trek, and bypassed the others.
Maybe the answer is that TMP and post-TMP each emphasized certain aspects of Trek, and bypassed the others.
Every writer wants to tell "sophisticated stories" or at least compelling ones... again Trek's made no innovation there and nothing its commented on was new under the sun.
For you maybe, for me once I grew out of my need to see Trek as some form of enlightenment and understand that its just entertainment and when it fails in that it forgets its one true *valid* reason for being.
Studios don't fund philosophies they fund tv shows.
To be a good STORYTELLER not be a bringer of truths. Though I grant he does do a good job at making complex thought provoking entertainment - and yet unlike GR in his later years remembers that's what his job is - to ENTERTAIN. Anyway he "is a bigger Star Wars" fan so...
Only because you're looking through tunnel vision driven by a fans point of view. The kind of people who would make such claims are like if not the same as those who would post on this board.
Star Trek was sold to be first and foremost entertaining and fill a spot on Desilu's pilot schedule when it stopped doing that it rightly got axed.
Simply because a piece of popular entertainment has had an affect on an individual doesn't change the fact that's all it is - entertainment. And I'd further to say it having an affect is more about the person undergoing this experience then the entertainment itself.
Yeah people are everyday in the movie and tv industry some of them are named RDM and JMS... ect. becuse what GR and Rod Serling did was at one point in time make a piece of popular entertainment nothing more or less.
Sharr
Similar threads
