the things TREK shouldn't do

[RobertScorpio]

someone posted this list of things TREK should do to get better...the thread was banned for some reason, but I couldn't disagree with this list more..

1960's.
Trek needs......
1. better visuals. Lets see some graphic violence. Some blood from time to time. (GO SEE STARSHIP TROOPERS AGAIN)

2. Starfleet needs to be more of a military organization. Starfleet works to maintain peace through strength. It needs to be a group that is not afraid to ruffle a few feathers from time to time. (GO SEE STARSHIP TROOPERS or BSG)
3. Some nudity, profanity, and a "popular" soundtrack. (THIS I WOULD AGREE WITH, IF DONE WITH SOME THOUGHT)

I believe that incorporating these elements will turn Trek into something that all will agree is fitting for the society that we are all lining in today.


I think the moment TREK tries to be 'modern' by being more violent/blood/overt military, it will lose it's soul, and I won't watch it. Star Trek should be above the elements that make hits out of COPS or BAIT CAR. Nothing wrong those shows, I love them both, but a Star Trek show JUST about violence JUST about blood JUSt about sex will crash and burn....IMO

Rob

 

[Dr_Daystrom]

someone posted this list of things TREK should do to get better...the thread was banned for some reason, but I couldn't disagree with this list more..

1960's.
Trek needs......
1. better visuals. Lets see some graphic violence. Some blood from time to time. (GO SEE STARSHIP TROOPERS AGAIN)

2. Starfleet needs to be more of a military organization. Starfleet works to maintain peace through strength. It needs to be a group that is not afraid to ruffle a few feathers from time to time. (GO SEE STARSHIP TROOPERS or BSG)
3. Some nudity, profanity, and a "popular" soundtrack. (THIS I WOULD AGREE WITH, IF DONE WITH SOME THOUGHT)

I believe that incorporating these elements will turn Trek into something that all will agree is fitting for the society that we are all lining in today.


I think the moment TREK tries to be 'modern' by being more violent/blood/overt military, it will lose it's soul, and I won't watch it. Star Trek should be above the elements that make hits out of COPS or BAIT CAR. Nothing wrong those shows, I love them both, but a Star Trek show JUST about violence JUST about blood JUSt about sex will crash and burn....IMO

Rob

What, do they want Star Trek to be like "Mirror, Mirror" or "In a Mirror Darkly" all the time? That wouldn't work.

 

[captcalhoun]

goddamn shaky-cam like nu-BSG

blatantly obvious Earth-tech on alien planets like nu-BSG

heavy-handed political messages like nu-BSG (oh, wait. too late)

bullet time

laser swords

 

[Balthier the Great]

I'd vote for "play it safe"

Also NO JAR JAR BINKS. Misa no leik Jar Jar Binks. Hesa idiot.

Shaky Cam -- no I hate it.

No Baptist Peacher Mode (where a charecter who is Just Absolutely Perfect tells everybody why they should be just like them)

No easy answers. They should have to work hard to save the day.

Honeslty, I'd love to see them do something more along the lines of Farscape. Wild weird places where the unexpected is expected.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

2. Starfleet needs to be more of a military organization.

Star Fleet is a military organization. I've never understood the claims by fans (and insistence by Roddenberry) that it isn't. As portrayed in TOS is was very clearly a military organization.

 

[PhoenixIreland]

2. Starfleet needs to be more of a military organization.

Star Fleet is a military organization. I've never understood the claims by fans (and insistence by Roddenberry) that it isn't. As portrayed in TOS is was very clearly a military organization.

"Starfleet is not a military organization its purpose it's exploration"-Picard

Its been made clear more times than I can count in interviews and on screen that it's not a military organization, it was only after the major Borg threat that they began to even consider a dedicated tactical wing for starfleet with the defiant.
It's also why they had such plain uniforms in all but ENT, because they wanted to avoid militaristic uniforms.
Even IN ENT Archer said he was reluctant to be too heavily armed because "I didn't wanna be making first contact in a war ship"

A balance has to be struck in this area.
Gene clearly didn't want starfleet and the federation to be militaristic, but to be able to use force as a last resort to defend themselves.

Starfleet is an exploratory service with defensive capabilities, and it seems now, a tactical element made of defiants, soverins, promethous etc
This is where the balance comes in, they need the likes of those ship classes because while the ST vision of humanity in the future, and the rest of the UFP, is peaceful, not every other race will be peaceful, so they have to be able to defend themselves.
I think we should avoid making starfleet an agressive organisation, it ruins the whole point of the federation.

 

[USS Kongo]

Star Trek should never have a lame pop song for its opening credits....

...oh, uh, wait..never mind...it's too late.

"It's been along time, gettin' from there to here...."

Sean

 

[Michael]

2. Starfleet needs to be more of a military organization.

Star Fleet is a military organization. I've never understood the claims by fans (and insistence by Roddenberry) that it isn't. As portrayed in TOS is was very clearly a military organization.

"Starfleet is not a military organization its purpose it's exploration"-Picard

Its been made clear more times than I can count in interviews and on screen that it's not a military organization, [...]

I think that's what he meant with the "insistence by Roddenberry". As shown in TOS, most of TNG and all of DS9, Starfleet is a military organization.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

I think that's what he meant with the "insistence by Roddenberry". As shown in TOS, most of TNG and all of DS9, Starfleet is a military organization.

Thank you. That is exactly what I meant.

 

[PhoenixIreland]

Eh, no very clearly it was not,
They done alot of fighting in DS9 out of nessicesity.

The rest of the time they were explorers, they took on military roles when nessicary but were primarily an exporatory service (the whole point of star trek...ye know).

They don't look or act like a military orgnanisation, and on screen dialoge shows they're not.

 

[Mistral]

the things Star Trek shouldn't do

Pick its nose

Laundry(let the maid do it)

get involved in an Asian land war

argue religion in an Irish pub(Oops! Judging by how bruised and battered it is that one was a little late.)

try to teach a pig to sing

Cross the street without looking both ways

Ah, well, that's all I've got.

 

[anais]

Star Trek: Survivor - Trekkie Island

 

[PhoenixIreland]

They shouldn't have common tolits.
I remember hearing that the ENT-D had only one, and in a VOY episode Nexlix revealed they're shared...as in you don't have one in your quarters.

 

[Michael]

tolits

What?

 

[anais]

tolits

What?

Toilets?

 

[PhoenixIreland]

Typo...clearly

 

[Michael]

Then what do you mean by "the Enterprise-D had only one"?

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

Eh, no very clearly it was not,
They done alot of fighting in DS9 out of nessicesity.

The rest of the time they were explorers, they took on military roles when nessicary but were primarily an exporatory service (the whole point of star trek...ye know)

They don't look or act like a military orgnanisation, and on screen dialoge shows they're not.

Taking part in exploration doesn't necessarily make them non-military.

A few points:

• Whenever there has been a threat of invasion or war it is Star Fleet who is called in. If the United States were threatened by invasion or war who would they call in? Right, the military.
• When asked if the Enterprise had been built by the Navy or Air Force by Cpt Christopher, Kirk says they're a combined service.
• Kirk says on at least one ocassion--Errand of Mercy--that he's a soldier not a diplomat
• In TWOK David Marcus flat out refers to Star Fleet as "the military"
• In TFF Star Fleet send Kirk in to rescue political hostages, which would be a military operation
• In TUC when asked if they were mothballing the fleet the CinC says that exploratory and scientific operations wouldn't be effected. Then what would be effected? Military operations.
• The entire rank structure and organization of Star Fleet points to it being a military organization

Star Fleet certainly has a variety of functions, but I never had a question in my mind that it wasn't a military group. That is until in the 80s when Roddenberry started complaining that the movies were too militaristic and that Star Fleet was really a bunch of Jacques Cousteaus in space, which--to me--seemed to fly in the face of everything we'd seen in TOS to the contrary. Then in TNG he went out of his way to try and back up these after the fact claims, but I never found it at all credible.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Starfleets mission statement is to seek out life, not to protect and serve. Hence it isn't a military.

It only does the later when absolutely necessary, and seeks out all possibles that would lead to avoiding it.

It's also been suggested (or at least alluded to), on all the shows, that most officers only have basic combat training and only have to learn combat tactics once they reach the higher echelons of command.

This to me does not say "military".

Also, lots of places outside militaries have hierarchical command structures.

I think the biggest mistake was it took five series to get the MACOS. There should have been something similar in place long ago--to avoid confusion.

 

[PhoenixIreland]

Some enterprise D diagram back in the day apparently "revealed" that the ENT-D only had one in the middle of the ship.

Taking part in exploration doesn't necessarily make them non-military.

None of that counters the idea that they are a pimarily exploratory service with a military role, at most they have a dual role, but are not primarily a military organisation.

Marcus was reffering to the historical trend, eg atomic scientists,