• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

Translation: most of Star Trek has been a balancing act between its pie-in-the-sky, altruistic humanism and writing interesting adventure stories.
And it should be.

No nation or society is all good nor even 90% good. It's how the better people in our midst struggle with their darker natures that makes both real life and fiction so interesting.
 
I mean, the Federation is an egalitarian democracy but it also has Section 31 and people like Raffi who drown in their own addictions and mental problems,
Though the example of Raffi indicates that in the Federation, or at least on Earth, being poor and down-and-out means having an entire diner all to yourself to live in. I’d sure like that right now.
 
Translation: most of Star Trek has been a balancing act between its pie-in-the-sky, altruistic humanism and writing interesting adventure stories.

I think the difference between the 60's and the 90's was that in Star Trek the hopeful future meant "We're not all dead! And we're in SPACE!"

Then in TNG it was "We have conquered everything bad ever and it's a post-scarcity UTOPIA!"
 
"It's easy to be a saint in paradise" is a great line, because on the one hand it's about how people living out where the problems are haven't got easy answers and struggle to pick the best choices. And on the other hand it tells us that the reality of Gene's utopia is that it's a paradise where everyone acts like a saint :angel:
 
Just watched “Unity”, probably one of the three or four top Borg episodes across the franchise.
 
One thing I've always found a bit funny about the debate it's been my observation that those staunchly in the "no" crowd or also those who cheer the loudest at the proliferation of Meyerisms throughout the franchise.

It's kinda weird.

Do you think? I usually hear TWOK decried as "not Roddenberrian" like these people have never seen Balance of Terror or Arena. (OBVIOUSLY no one has seen Arena. :devil: )

What is a Meyer-ism? Other than The Kobayashi Maru and Romulan Ale? And calling the women "Mister" as well as the men?

I have never found Wrath of Khan more or less "military" or even "naval" than TMP or certainly TOS. It may be more "archaic" than TMP, borrowing more from the age of sail than TMP does... MAYBE. But definitely not more than TOS.

"Belay that!" "Hard to port!" "Fire as she passes!" "Smartly now!" None of those are from TWOK. Nobody heard the "Nautical but nice" in TWOK and said "Where did THAT come from?" I mean, they shouldn't have anyway.

Uniforms: The pants have the same flare at the bottom into the same size boots as TOS owning to the naval look that both are going for. The collars aren't far off of The Cage. He added the "salad bar" to the flag officer's uniforms in TUC. But that's just a more literally modern day equivalent of the little triangle dodads that Our Heroes had worn since Court Martial.

It has the big freaking coats and more metal bling. (Tos didn't have any non-fabric devices. TMP did.) It has belts. (But not belly warmers.) That's... about it? TWOK is actually is the first Trek to REMOVE the stripes on the sleeves. (Stripes: can't get much more traditional military than that).
 
I think the difference between the 60's and the 90's was that in Star Trek the hopeful future meant "We're not all dead! And we're in SPACE!"

Then in TNG it was "We have conquered everything bad ever and it's a post-scarcity UTOPIA!"

Starfleet changed from explorers who made mistakes in TOS, to missionaries spreading the gospel of how great humanity is in TNG.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top