Little things in Trek that just bug you...

[tharpdevenport]

Data doesn't use contractions except, of course, you know, when he does:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

youtube.com/watch?v=yY1KdQNodN0 (link for those the Youtube videos aren't displaying for)

 

[Herbert]

It feels nothing like Star Wars.

Star Wars is a fantasy movie series that takes place in space, with laser swords, epic /operatic happenings and mystical jumbo-jumbo. It has no connection to us or our future.

Star Trek is a sci-fi-lite concept that is an outer space action/adventure show about future humans and their place in space as they meet and interact with other cultures.

Zero connection. Zero similar feel, unless the fact that both have ships in space make them feel the same. And that's a trait they've shared since the beginning.

Technically, Star Trek has zero connection with our future.

 

[Vger23]

Occasionally.



Quite rarely.



Not a lot of fighting, quite a lot of ethical dilemma in popular episodes "The City on the Edge of Forever" or "Where No Man Has Gone Before", "The Conscience of the King", "Court Martial", "This Side of Paradise". I think the original and TNG were both mixes of adventure and drama, the former leaning more to adventure and the latter more to drama but not that different. I would also say that while TUC had some action it wasn't an action movie as the Star Wars or Abrams films are (especially as its message was much less bellicose).

I disagree entirely (which is a polite way of saying "quite rarely my ass"). For every "Conscience of the King" there is an "Arena" or a "Balance of Terror" or a "Savage Curtain" where action/adventure prevails. In fact, I think that easily more than half of the TOS episodes had some element of straight up blood-pumping action in them. Hell, even "WNMHGB" features a knock-down, drag-out fight at the end with Mitchell. It also displayed a shit ton of explosions and pyrotechnics.

TUC features a zero-gravity assassination scene, a brawl in a prison, a knock-down drag-out with a shape shifter, and a space battle in end with a bunch of Hollywood explosions. I actually think the "message" of TUC is the weakest, most uninteresting part of the film. It was certainly the weakest executed element of the film that's for sure.

Let's take off the rose colored glasses about how civilized and intellectual Star Trek was. It just isn't so.


The only difference between what came before 2009 and what came after is that the action /adventure elements that were strived for but not entirely executed crisply were now possible.

This whole view on the franchise is not much more than rationalizing to justify the ever-tired fan trope that things today just aren't as good as the good old days. It's so tiresome.

http://thenerderypublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/np_trcg_3.jpg

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net...MY-LAWN.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20170214023753

 

[Vger23]

Star Trek is more space fantasy than science fiction.

Takes place in a universe where beings from different species can have children together. The children have traits from both parent, instead of simply not being conceived, or dying quickly. I don't recall Star Wars doing this (I might have missed it).

Trek has space weapon that apparent make noises in a vacuum, and you can see the beams even though there's no atmosphere to scatter the light photons.

Trek has mystical mumbo-jumbo beings with mind reading abilities and others who can work magic by simply snapping their fingers.

Trek has techno-babble. What is a isoton any way?

Trek has a incredible amount of time travel.

Trek has multiple alternate universes.

Between Star Trek and Star Wars, which is more of a "science fiction" story? It's pretty much 'Wars.

Personally I like Trek more than War (also like), but I not blind to the greater fantasy aspects of Trek.

Yeah...but I actually really don't give a shit about any of this.

The point of my post was to say that the tired, sophomoric comparisons of "Star Wars" to "Star Trek Modern" being drawn, which are supposed to evoke a feeling of Star Trek's quite, somber, intellectualism vs. Star Wars's pew-pew fight fight fight mindset are idiotic. Neither is an accurate reflection of those franchises.

 

[Jedi_Master]

I find the "fight" music in TOS annoying.

 

[GNDN18]

Star Trek's quite, somber, intellectualism vs. Star Wars's pew-pew fight fight fight mindset are idiotic.

That idea that Trek is a show about ideas is driven by the fact that it was often just illustrated radio.

 

[suarezguy]

I disagree entirely (which is a polite way of saying "quite rarely my ass"). For every "Conscience of the King" there is an "Arena" or a "Balance of Terror" or a "Savage Curtain" where action/adventure prevails. In fact, I think that easily more than half of the TOS episodes had some element of straight up blood-pumping action in them.

There was some fighting (I think pretty brief), a lot of talking, I don't think any shirt-ripping or blood in "The Savage Curtain". "Balance of Terror" had a lot of action and a lot of drama (and I think it was particularly good in part because it was exceptionally intense), I think "Arena" (also "The Omega Glory", probably "Shore Leave" and "Operation: Annihilate!") was pretty exceptional in being mostly action.

Hell, even "WNMHGB" features a knock-down, drag-out fight at the end with Mitchell. It also displayed a shit ton of explosions and pyrotechnics.

A three or 5 minute fight (which Kirk was reluctant/conflicted about) at the end and less than 1 or 2 minutes of explosions in a 50-minute episode. And it seems to have had quite a lot/a lot more of what you called "this is about something IMPORTANT" attitude.

TUC features a zero-gravity assassination scene, a brawl in a prison, a knock-down drag-out with a shape shifter, and a space battle in end with a bunch of Hollywood explosions.

The brawl and shapeshifter fight were very brief, the assassination and final ship battle were indeed fullblown action scenes of significant lengths, I think all those scenes together are pretty brief compared to the two hour runtime, much more a movie with some action rather than an action movie especially compared to Star Wars.

 

[eschaton]

Between Star Trek and Star Wars, which is more of a "science fiction" story? It's pretty much 'Wars.

Personally I like Trek more than War (also like), but I not blind to the greater fantasy aspects of Trek.

No. Just because ridiculous shit happens in the Trekverse doesn't make it fantasy.

Star Wars, from a narrative perspective, is just space fantasy. It takes place a "long time ago" in some sort of secondary imagined world with no explained connection to our own - just like most fantasy. The stories mostly follow the path of heroes - royalty and powerful magic users. Much of the series is based upon pseudo-mystical ideas, including fate and destiny.

In contrast, Trek is a story which purportedly takes place in the future. The protagonists are just ordinary human beings who do their jobs and try to make the world a slightly less shitty place. There is no destiny. While woo does jump into things from time to time, Trek makes it clear that while there are beings more advanced than we are, nothing is fundamentally unexplainable.

I suppose you could tell the Star Trek story in a fantasy setting. Follow the crew of some sailing ship as they explore strange new islands, etc. But the actual structure of the story has nothing to do with the damn "monomyth" which has been banging around humanity forever, let alone Tolkien.

 

[Discofan]

It allows us to tell the difference between Data and Lore.

How about Lore's facial tics?

 

[Mojochi]

I find the "fight" music in TOS annoying.

I didn't use to, until I saw that obnoxious Jim Carrey Cable Guy movie, where he bellows it like a lunatic, & that literally ruined it for me forever

What's with TNG palm beacons? I mean, you already have a combadge, a phaser, & a tricorder. You couldn't stick a light bulb on the end of one of those? Hell, PENS got flashlights. I got a flash light on a damn keychain bottle opener. Most of us just use our cell phones for that now. You know for people with no pockets, they sure do love to drag around a lot of superfluous crap

 

[Discofan]

In "Assignment: Earth" Teri Gar/Roberta is annoyed instead of being amazed that the typewriter types everything she says. Anybody with a brain in their head would have been astounded back then by this extraordinary feat of technology and yet they say she's very intelligent, please!!!

 

[Timewalker]

Between Star Trek and Star Wars, which is more of a "science fiction" story? It's pretty much 'Wars.

Star Wars is more of a science fiction story?



The writers didn't even know that "light year" is a unit of distance, not time!

EDIT: Okay, the word used was "parsec". But parsec is still a unit of distance, not time.

 

[Vger23]

There was some fighting (I think pretty brief), a lot of talking, I don't think any shirt-ripping or blood in "The Savage Curtain". "Balance of Terror" had a lot of action and a lot of drama (and I think it was particularly good in part because it was exceptionally intense), I think "Arena" (also "The Omega Glory", probably "Shore Leave" and "Operation: Annihilate!") was pretty exceptional in being mostly action.



A three or 5 minute fight (which Kirk was reluctant/conflicted about) at the end and less than 1 or 2 minutes of explosions in a 50-minute episode. And it seems to have had quite a lot/a lot more of what you called "this is about something IMPORTANT" attitude.



The brawl and shapeshifter fight were very brief, the assassination and final ship battle were indeed fullblown action scenes of significant lengths, I think all those scenes together are pretty brief compared to the two hour runtime, much more a movie with some action rather than an action movie especially compared to Star Wars.

Sure bro, sounds good.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Kirk's shirt got ripped a little more than "quite rarely."

 

[tomalak301]

You know @JD started a thread in the sci fi forum about favorite fantasy shows and I admitted I did not know the differentiation between Sci Fi and Fantasy. Reading this thread, I'm glad I'm not the only one confused by the subject. Maybe all this time I was putting them both in their own unique basket and it was just a big fat genre.

 

[Tenacity]

Technically, Star Trek has zero connection with our future.

There also would seem to be a disconnect with our present. Most obvious example would be the eugenic wars.

 

[Herbert]

What's with TNG palm beacons? I mean, you already have a combadge, a phaser, & a tricorder. You couldn't stick a light bulb on the end of one of those? Hell, PENS got flashlights. I got a flash light on a damn keychain bottle opener. Most of us just use our cell phones for that now. You know for people with no pockets, they sure do love to drag around a lot of superfluous crap

I love how in the future flashlight becomes palm beacon

 

[PureCrimson]

I've watched them many times. Love redlettermedia.

Diplomacy and space politics is furthest from my mind when I watch Star Trek. If I want to fall asleep, there are other means besides watching Picard in the conference room pontificating about evolved humanity and how the Tholians and Breen figure into the grand Alpha Quadrant scheme. Someone fucking shoot me haha!

So that explains our disconnect I think.

Star Trek "Post JJ Abrams" is pretty much the only reason I'm watching again. The TNG and VOY era got so boring, antiseptic and repetitive that it eventually became very unengaging. Even as a life-long fan, I pretty much abandoned ship despite great efforts. When the 2009 film came out, I honestly felt like I was watching real honest Star Trek for the first time since TUC in 1991 instead of some board room drama set in space.

But just because something is action/adventure and set in space doesn't mean it's automatically Star Wars. Besides, on that logic, I'd argue that it was SW that aped Star Trek. The original Star Trek (which is by far still the best) was a fun action/adventure show with fisticuffs and ripped shirts and blood and grit with some good heart and sci-fi thrown in. It wasn't until Next Gen that the pretentious "this is about something IMPORTANT" attitude set in...and it was a far more dull and inert experience as a result. Nothing used to make me want to turn the TV off more than when a Romulan ship is pounding the Enterprise and Picard would calmly say "No no Mr. Worf...let's see where this all goes" because apparently "action = dumb/immature!!!" Ugh fuck me. I want my blood to pump and my eyes to widen. I don't want my heart rate to slow and my eyelids droop.

Not saying I don't like TNG (or even VOY, which I'm happily watching right now on Netflix)...but those shows are pale by comparison because of their sometimes emphasis on "diplomacy and space politics," IMHO. And, if I look at it quite honestly, even when they are doing the stuff that's supposed to be "deep" and "important..." they rarely do it very well or effectively. I'd say there are some rare exceptions (Inner Light, Darmok, Duet, The Visitor), but more often than not it's pretty run-of-the-mill stuff admittedly.

So to each their own I guess...I'm happy with the state of things now. It matches what I want out of the franchise perfectly. Looking forward to DSC S2 and the potential for another JJ movie helmed by QT.

But, before anyone gets insulted...there's 750+ hours of Star Trek. It's great because there's something for everyone in there. It's a massively diverse property. It's one of the reasons it's great...because it CAN do hard science-fiction, politics, comedy, adventure, mystery, and action all rather successfully.

Different strokes, I guess.

But that's cool that you can get a new sort of enjoyment out of later Trek while still liking the old stuff.
I wish I could, but it simply isn't for me. There's a clear distinction in what pertains to my interests of Trek.
I only find the JJ films especially, to be the kind of films I am the most bored by and generally find unappealing.

 

[Tim Thomason]

A version of this is how few members the federation has, give how much of the galaxy it occupies.

It has 150 members in the TNG era, which I think is a fair number, because I don't see the number representing planets, but actual polities. Some of them are interstellar empires (Andoria), some have a large area of controlled space, with several protectorates (Vulcan), some operate hundreds of small colonies throughout known space (Earth). The Rigel Planets might be one polity with several species, if non-canon is to be believed.

 

[Discofan]

Star Wars is more of a science fiction story?



The writers didn't even know that "light year" is a unit of distance, not time!

EDIT: Okay, the word used was "parsec". But parsec is still a unit of distance, not time.

What are subatomic bacteria made of?