Would a Andorian Trump be orange?
Spoilers Let’s talk about the destruction of Trek utopia…
- Thread starter Anters
- Start date
Would a Andorian Trump be orange?
Well, the hoo-man one is...
Well, if you pour something orange into Blue Curaçao, it turns into a violently deep, dark green, so maybe Th'rump of Andor is green.
An Orion. A bunch of no good terrorists, slavers, and general sleezeballs. It all makes sense.
Well, of course. Now that he is gone he obviously is totally beloved and was never considered annoying in the slightest...Icheb? beloved?
Well, Icheb wasn't the most beloved character, personally I didn't care much about him.
But he was still a character which many people liked and bringing him back just to kill him off in the most sadistic way is insulting.
Not to mention that it's not all about Icheb. I'm tired of those 21th century producers with their doom-and-gloom fascination who only are capable of destroying.
As for Voyager, despite its flaws it was ten times better than everything produced after 2000.
I watched a little of Buechler's recent videos in order to make sure that I was not being hyperbolic. The two videos I watched exhibited all of these characteristics, and one that I did not previously account for:
- Fifth, he actively looks for things to be offended by. Buechler went down a list of things by which he judged the episode, one of which was "Did have identity politics? Did it have "womansplaining?". This conclusively shows that he views new Star Trek as an activist. He actively looks for reasons to hate each episode.
Mileage will vary.
I prefer Trek 09 over most Berman Trek, as well as TNG films.
I prefer Trek 09 over most Berman Trek, as well as TNG films.
Conversely, I prefer 90s Trek more than most of what came after, but I consider season 2 of Discovery to be among Star Trek's best (in spite of a languid wrap-around story).
I just finished reading this entire thread before posting. I’d like to comment on two issues: gore and profanity and the utopian vision.
The easier, simpler issue is the level of gore on display and the profanity. I watched TOS as a high schooler, so I’m old enough to endure mature themes. Still I’m disappointed that the writers and producers are taking this crude approach to entertainment. My family has many good memories of sitting together to watch episodes of Star Trek, most NG. My kids were in middle school at the time, and I felt comfortable that they would see the types of morality plays that ST is famous for. I never had to be concerned about gore or profanity. I don’t consider ST: Picard family friendly, which is disappointing. The gore and profanity add nothing to story lines except shock value. The scene with Icheb being dissected alive was truly revolving and completely unnecessary. A couple of authors make this point with more pith than I do.
“Cursing is the crutch of an unimaginative mind.” - Rick Yancey
“Profanity is the effort of a feeble brain to express itself forcibly.” - Spencer W. Kimball
If I could talk to the writers, I would exhort them to exert more creativity. They are better than this.
The second issue is more complex. First of all, I never felt Star Trek vision was utopian. It was optimistic. In fact, it was one of the very few futuristic visions that was. Almost all futuristic, science fiction in today’s market is dystopian with protagonists typically engaged in some conflict just to survive. Star Trek presented a world one would actually want to live in. Neither Starfleet nor the Federation were perfect, but both had noble ideals that the characters tried to live up to. When some actors violated those principles, the protagonists opposed them, which proposed the plot conflicts in many episodes. The broad themes of TOS, NG, Voyager, and Enterprise was of an emerging consensus of advance planets that worked together for the common good. Even DS9 with billions of people killed during interstellar war had an optimistic tone with the characters longing for the end of the war and a return to normal. Starfleet and the Federation had enemies that they worked together to overcome.
That optimistic future was Gene Roddenberry’s legacy, and I always found it very appealing. I just don’t see it in ST:Picard, and that is disappointing. It doesn’t seem like Star Trek to me. It’s just another dystopian, futuristic sci-fi series with some characters from old TV shows I used to like.
Instead of plots about how so much that was positive and uplifting old ST showing cracks and breaking down, I would much prefer the wild leaps of imagination that TNG especially was so good at. When are we going to see an episode like “Cause and Effect” that showed the Enterprise exploding in the opening scene and left you wondering, “How are they going to solve this?” Or how about “Parallels” with Worf literally jumping from one quantum reality to another?
Does anyone else miss this part of Star Trek in Picard?
The easier, simpler issue is the level of gore on display and the profanity. I watched TOS as a high schooler, so I’m old enough to endure mature themes. Still I’m disappointed that the writers and producers are taking this crude approach to entertainment. My family has many good memories of sitting together to watch episodes of Star Trek, most NG. My kids were in middle school at the time, and I felt comfortable that they would see the types of morality plays that ST is famous for. I never had to be concerned about gore or profanity. I don’t consider ST: Picard family friendly, which is disappointing. The gore and profanity add nothing to story lines except shock value. The scene with Icheb being dissected alive was truly revolving and completely unnecessary. A couple of authors make this point with more pith than I do.
“Cursing is the crutch of an unimaginative mind.” - Rick Yancey
“Profanity is the effort of a feeble brain to express itself forcibly.” - Spencer W. Kimball
If I could talk to the writers, I would exhort them to exert more creativity. They are better than this.
The second issue is more complex. First of all, I never felt Star Trek vision was utopian. It was optimistic. In fact, it was one of the very few futuristic visions that was. Almost all futuristic, science fiction in today’s market is dystopian with protagonists typically engaged in some conflict just to survive. Star Trek presented a world one would actually want to live in. Neither Starfleet nor the Federation were perfect, but both had noble ideals that the characters tried to live up to. When some actors violated those principles, the protagonists opposed them, which proposed the plot conflicts in many episodes. The broad themes of TOS, NG, Voyager, and Enterprise was of an emerging consensus of advance planets that worked together for the common good. Even DS9 with billions of people killed during interstellar war had an optimistic tone with the characters longing for the end of the war and a return to normal. Starfleet and the Federation had enemies that they worked together to overcome.
That optimistic future was Gene Roddenberry’s legacy, and I always found it very appealing. I just don’t see it in ST:Picard, and that is disappointing. It doesn’t seem like Star Trek to me. It’s just another dystopian, futuristic sci-fi series with some characters from old TV shows I used to like.
Instead of plots about how so much that was positive and uplifting old ST showing cracks and breaking down, I would much prefer the wild leaps of imagination that TNG especially was so good at. When are we going to see an episode like “Cause and Effect” that showed the Enterprise exploding in the opening scene and left you wondering, “How are they going to solve this?” Or how about “Parallels” with Worf literally jumping from one quantum reality to another?
Does anyone else miss this part of Star Trek in Picard?
No, if I wanted more TNG I'd watch more TNG.
I want something that forces to face uncomfortable realities.
Also, cursing has been part of Star Trek, as much as censors will allow, since the start. The only new word is "fuck", otherwise the hand ringing is shallow and betrays ignorance and double standards.
At what point did you think a show rated TV-MA would be family friendly?
"TV-MA: L, V"
L and V doesn't stand for Love and Virture
Star Trek was never necessarily meant to be family-friendly programming. Gene Roddenberry wanted to make an intelligent and adult science fiction series that pushed the limits. Roddenberry tested the limits of the censors in both the original series and the Next Generation.
I agree at the scene with Icheb was a little on the extreme side, but it was PG-13 level violence at its worst. And again, this is not something that is new to Star Trek. In 1987, this was extreme...
Science disagrees...
https://achnews.org/2019/07/22/psyc...happier-healthier-and-more-honest-damn-right/
Swearing on Star Trek...
"Dystopian"? In what way? Just because the Federation made a bad decision? It's still the same world we saw in the Next Generation era for the most part. If you live on Earth there is no want or hunger. We saw in Picard that even someone living in what's considered a slum had more than sufficient shelter and power and even a replicator.
There are no downtrodden masses or evil overlords. Largely no persecution for being different, the unfortunate decision about the Romulans notwithstanding. And you know what, even if I don't agree with the decision Starfleet made about the Romulans, I certainly can understand it. It's a complex issue with no clear-cut right or wrong. That's what I like about it.
Because Patrick Stewart said he had no interest in doing the same kind of stories he had done before?
Last edited:
Except, it's not dystopian. For the average Earth inhabitant, there is no fear, no scarcity no danger. Picard is happening out in the wilds, in the wake of a great tragedy that occurred to the Romulan Empire. It is a very human exploration of that fall out.
That is not dystopian unless we are mangling that definition.
Yup...SPS said, unequivocally, that he would NOT return to playing Picard if all that was going to happen was a sequel and the same character and such from TNG/Movies.
I can't blame him, he played Picard, in basically the same capacity, for a time span of 15 years across two TV series (technically DS9 because of being on Emissary) and four major motion pictures.
I can't blame him, he played Picard, in basically the same capacity, for a time span of 15 years across two TV series (technically DS9 because of being on Emissary) and four major motion pictures.
Nope...you see...what you didn't see is that the Federation is now not the Federation of Star Trek...
But the Federation from Starship Troopers
Would you like to know more?
Only if there is power armor.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
