Joystick and the nerd haters

[Cyke101]

But why design an emergency device in such a complicated way, a thing that has to rise out of the floor? What if the emergency damages the deployment system? An emergency control device should be as foolproof in design as possible, not reliant on special motors to move it into usable position. If you want to design an emergency joystick for the captain's use, you'd put it in the arm of the command chair. And given the tendency of Trek ships to shake around in combat and send people flying, what could possibly be more illogical than a stand-up control station for emergency use only?

Frankly, in the Trek verse, every emergency control ever devised has been damaged and rendered offline so much that such concerns, while valid, are now just numb.

For example, given the tendency of Trek ships to shake around in combat, send people flying, shoot sparks and have flying chunks of mysterious rock aimed conveniently at people's jugulars, we're no longer really surprised when the ship's self-destruct mechanism somehow fails, or that for two decades we've yet to see straps for those heavy containers in the cargo bay. We almost expect something crucial to fail, hence requiring another more-creative solution.

Basically, with everything on every Trek ship always going offline during a major battle, the joystick would be in good company

 

[JarodRussell]

"Auto destruct" failing in Nemesis was one of the biggest facepalm moments in movie history. Just blow up the fucking antimatter storage and your done with it. Or transporters failing just at the right moment so Data just has to sacrifice himself. Same goes for the autopilot going offline so that George Kirk just has to kill himself. How convenient.


There should be a rule: never have a totally random system failure that leads to the death of an important character. It's one of the lamest plot devices.

 

[RoJoHen]

It really does make the Starfleet engineers seem pretty retarded.

 

[BolianAuthor]

"Auto destruct" failing in Nemesis was one of the biggest facepalm moments in movie history. Just blow up the fucking antimatter storage and your done with it. Or transporters failing just at the right moment so Data just has to sacrifice himself. Same goes for the autopilot going offline so that George Kirk just has to kill himself. How convenient.


There should be a rule: never have a totally random system failure that leads to the death of an important character. It's one of the lamest plot devices.

It's always funny how they forget that they have warp-capable shuttles on the ship... that DO have active warp cores... all they need to do is launch a bunch of shuttles into the Scimitar, release the antimatter containment seals, and blammo. Problem solved.

 

[CaptainStoner]

There may be something to Trekverse technology, something to do with the main deflector, that prevents one from warping at a solid object. Isn't the whole point of the main deflector to keep the ship from doing stuff like that? It puts out a beam that has something to do with warp field formation... ?

 

[RyuRoots]

There may be something to Trekverse technology, something to do with the main deflector, that prevents one from warping at a solid object. Isn't the whole point of the main deflector to keep the ship from doing stuff like that? It puts out a beam that has something to do with warp field formation... ?

If memory serves, wasn't Riker going to warp the Ent-D into the Borg cube at the end of The Best of Both Worlds if all else failed?

 

[Nardpuncher]

So the hardcore nerds hate Insurrection because of the Joystick,but they love Wrath of Khan? but it has an evul joystick!!!

You got it backwards, the hardcore nerds love the joystick.
Also, is your misspelling of evil supposed to be like "kewl" in order to show that you think anyone who didn't like the joystick is some pimply-faced teenager who thinks Rick Berman or someone raped his childhood?

 

[Scout101]

There may be something to Trekverse technology, something to do with the main deflector, that prevents one from warping at a solid object. Isn't the whole point of the main deflector to keep the ship from doing stuff like that? It puts out a beam that has something to do with warp field formation... ?

Nope, that's the navigator's job, to aim away from planets and such. the deflector is keeping the tiny shit shunted to the sides, so you don't start putting tiny rocks/chuncks of ice/space trash through the hull at Warp 6...

 

[Captain Robert April]

The joystick is kind of symptomatic of INS's problems. It was trying to be a quiet, thoughtful, contemplative drama, the kind of idea-based story that was often done in the show. But Hollywood doesn't allow big-budget SF films to be small, contemplative dramas; they're pressured to be big action blockbusters. So INS had a lot of action and spectacle and gimmickry and lowbrow humor tacked onto it that just felt awkward and intrusive. And that's just what the joystick column in the center of the bridge was -- a lowbrow action-movie sight gag intrusively and illogically imposed upon a more thoughtfully designed context.

You've just summed up the problem with doing Star Trek movies, period. Not just INS, but all of 'em to one extent or another, culminating with JJ's movie, which chucked the thoughtful, contemplative part of the equation and went with just the 'splosions, lowbrow humor, and sight gags. All frosting, no cake.

 

[Harvey]

I suspect the TWOK stick might be a re-use of one the handles from the spacesuits from the scrapped TMP spacewalk.

I believe Nicholas Meyer claims in one of his audio commentaries that it is a piece of wood, painted black, with a doorbell button glued onto it. Which is what it looks like, so I don't doubt him. But it works, which speaks wonders to the way Harve Bennet and Nicholas Meyer were able to prioritize where they spent their money.

 

[Garm Bel Iblis]

The joystick is kind of symptomatic of INS's problems. It was trying to be a quiet, thoughtful, contemplative drama, the kind of idea-based story that was often done in the show. But Hollywood doesn't allow big-budget SF films to be small, contemplative dramas; they're pressured to be big action blockbusters. So INS had a lot of action and spectacle and gimmickry and lowbrow humor tacked onto it that just felt awkward and intrusive. And that's just what the joystick column in the center of the bridge was -- a lowbrow action-movie sight gag intrusively and illogically imposed upon a more thoughtfully designed context.

You've just summed up the problem with doing Star Trek movies, period. Not just INS, but all of 'em to one extent or another, culminating with JJ's movie, which chucked the thoughtful, contemplative part of the equation and went with just the 'splosions, lowbrow humor, and sight gags. All frosting, no cake.

On the flip side of that we've got TMP where we plod along in search of the meaning of existence and when we find it we vaporize it.

 

[ClayHefner]

Wasn't the TWOk "Joystick" more of a lever with a trigger (some secondary/emergency torpedo trigger), but not suited to actually move around?
Anyway,
Before the Joystick scene, we could always speculate that those flat control consoles have some nifty 24th century methods of controls that are simply unknown to us. Like some forcefield "emulating" a joystick-like 3D control.
Now we know they were always just pushing buttons. Lame.

Does that mean when superpilots Riker or Tom Paris were doing difficult maneuvers in shuttles and starships before, they were either
- flying with digital controls
or
- they were awesome at using the auto-guidance options?

 

[Vonstadt]

I can honestly say my issues with INS stem from a place no where near just the joystick

INS had plenty that irked me, the joystick was just in the pack not the leader of the crowd.

Vons

 

[Maurice]

I suspect the TWOK stick might be a re-use of one the handles from the spacesuits from the scrapped TMP spacewalk.

I believe Nicholas Meyer claims in one of his audio commentaries that it is a piece of wood, painted black, with a doorbell button glued onto it. Which is what it looks like, so I don't doubt him. But it works, which speaks wonders to the way Harve Bennet and Nicholas Meyer were able to prioritize where they spent their money.

That would be a lot of trouble to go to, because you can see it's not just a block of wood: it's shaped. Easier to grab a rubber bike grip and stick a button on it, or pull a handle off a scrapped spacesuit.

 

[Captain Robert April]

^...which could very well be a piece of wood, painted black, with a doorbell button glued onto it.

 

[Doug Otte]

To me, the different reaction to the WOK and the Ins joysticks is based upon the year they were released. In 1982, a joystick seemed like a cool futuristic thing. By 1998, it looked hopelessly retro and contrived.

Interestingly, my brain doesn't change the way it sees something decades later. So, when I watch TWOK now, I don't think the joystick looks odd, but I always cringe at the joystick in Ins, no matter when I watch it. That's why I'm always puzzled when someone thinks an older show/movie looked "dated."

I also agree w/ others here that the different intended functions have a lot to do w/ the different reactions, too. The WOK joystick seemed more functionally plausible.

Doug

 

[number6]

There's also the fact that when the joystick is employed, someone just opens up an emergency compartment and there it is, whereas in INS, it's more like "Deploy the hidden hydraulic joystick...and blow out the ramscoop!!! Booyahh!!"

It's all about the presentation. And the presentation of the mega-joystick in INS was cheesy as hell!!