What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Bad Thoughts]

Fourth, I don't think Piller would have gotten the praise he did by all those people if he truly was that bad. They certainly wouldn't have stayed in the franchise for as long as they did.

I was talking about TNG season 3 when you went and added Taylor, who didn't come aboard until season 4. (Which I said was when she started.)

When you brought up Piller's long life in the franchise, I was in my right to explain why. Other people were in the room leading. Other people were dealing with the writers on a day-to-day basis. That stability came from the modus operandi that put Piller more in quality control and vision, but the details were worked out by others.

Whether he was initially beneficial with impact or not doesn't really matter... the results of Piller heading the show can't be denied. He was definitely very beneficial.

I wouldn't deny Piller's contributions. He identified new talent. He created new shows that broadened the scope of the franchise. He focused Roddenberry's humanist message. He balanced the adventure with character.

However, if you look back, I took issue with the idea he created stability. He didn't. Season 3 was no less chaotic than 2, in part because of Piller.

 

[Farscape One]

When you brought up Piller's long life in the franchise, I was in my right to explain why. Other people were in the room leading. Other people were dealing with the writers on a day-to-day basis. That stability came from the modus operandi that put Piller more in quality control and vision, but the details were worked out by others.



I wouldn't deny Piller's contributions. He identified new talent. He created new shows that broadened the scope of the franchise. He focused Roddenberry's humanist message. He balanced the adventure with character.

However, if you look back, I took issue with the idea he created stability. He didn't. Season 3 was no less chaotic than 2, in part because of Piller.

Our only disagreeing point seems to be Piller being a stabilizing force for that season. I get why you say he wasn't and I can see what you mean, but I just don't agree with that assertion.

I don't want to keep going in circles on this (and I value your posts and thoughts on so many things here), so I'm happy to just agree to disagree on that point.

(Besides, I think there are even bigger controversial opinions that Piller's time during season 3. )

 

[korblborp]

Do you mean VIPER?

Spoiler: Viper TV intro

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

that would be the one, thank you. haven't been able to remember the name correctly for twenty plus years XD

 

[Farscape One]

I remember VIPER.

It was a fun show.

 

[FredH]

I was kind of hoping transphasic torpedoes would be a common starship weapons system by the PIC timeframe (2399-2402), but they were probably buried and classified.

Right alongside Genesis? Which may not have succeeded in creating stable planets, but as David Marcus feared, works just fine as a dreadful weapon.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

@Kamen Rider Blade I agree with a lot of what you have written about realism in principle, but I am not coming to the same conclusions. The clawing back of fantasy tech from BSG, The Expanse, and For All Mankind poses a problem for space opera, Star Wars as well as Star Trek. But to use another nautical metaphor, that ship has sailed. The visual language was born of WWII movies and the mentality of Americans in the 1960s and 70s. What's left to do is point out the lack of logic and realism and laugh. The series can still say interesting things about the dangers of space and combat in spite of there being windows on the outwardly exposed bridge. All media will need to embrace abstraction to present relatable stories, fiction and non-fiction. For Star Trek, it means reproducing naval metaphors that are not entirely applicable to working in space. So when Spock tells Kirk that Khan thinks two dimensionally (a silly point given that two and three points are always coplanar), it serves to tell the audience that this man, single-mindedly driven by revenge and arrogant beyond belief, can be trapped by his expectations. Kirk, becoming more aware of the passing of time and his mortality, can be mentally flexible. (BTW, after changing positions radically, the Enterprise should have pitched upwardly and fired all along its previous path. Trying to come up behind Reliant was too dangerous.)

 

[BK613]

And I LOVED them for it.
It was a vary original solution that I've fallen in love with.

Nah, it was derivative, unoriginal and done-to-death by the time it shows up in Voyager.
And I first rolled my eyes at it in 1989 when Burton's Batmobile did it. But at least Burton had the excuse that it was a comic book movie.

 

[fireproof78]

Nah, it was derivative, unoriginal and done-to-death by the time it shows up in Voyager.
And I first rolled my eyes at it in 1989 when Burton's Batmobile did it. But at least Burton had the excuse that it was a comic book movie.

Also reminded me of the helmet that Matt LeBlanc had in the Lost in Space film.

 

[BillJ]

Explain, what did he do?

Rumors for why McFadden left the show was due to unwanted advances from Hurley.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I agree with a lot of what you have written about realism in principle, but I am not coming to the same conclusions. The clawing back of fantasy tech from BSG, The Expanse, and For All Mankind poses a problem for space opera, Star Wars as well as Star Trek.

As I've stated before, I have no intention of clawing back or taking away any of the "Fantasy Tech" that already exists in Trek.
In-fact, I'm going the opposite route and use all of them, in realistic believable ways, but with Practical Limits.
I'll also add to them.

So you don't have to worry about that aspect.

But to use another nautical metaphor, that ship has sailed. The visual language was born of WWII movies and the mentality of Americans in the 1960s and 70s. What's left to do is point out the lack of logic and realism and laugh. The series can still say interesting things about the dangers of space and combat in spite of there being windows on the outwardly exposed bridge. All media will need to embrace abstraction to present relatable stories, fiction and non-fiction.

How you choose to fight in space and how it's portrayed visually can be changed.
The Kurtzman era already changed it to some degree, it can be changed again.

For Star Trek, it means reproducing naval metaphors that are not entirely applicable to working in space. So when Spock tells Kirk that Khan thinks two dimensionally (a silly point given that two and three points are always coplanar), it serves to tell the audience that this man, single-mindedly driven by revenge and arrogant beyond belief, can be trapped by his expectations. Kirk, becoming more aware of the passing of time and his mortality, can be mentally flexible. (BTW, after changing positions radically, the Enterprise should have pitched upwardly and fired all along its previous path. Trying to come up behind Reliant was too dangerous.)

I'm not worried about that. Making easy to understand analogy's is easy enough.

Rumors for why McFadden left the show was due to unwanted advances from Hurley.

Ah, IC

 

[HotRod]

As I've stated before, I have no intention of clawing back or taking away any of the "Fantasy Tech" that already exists in Trek.
In-fact, I'm going the opposite route and use all of them, in realistic believable ways, but with Practical Limits.
I'll also add to them.

So you don't have to worry about that aspect.

Great. Sounds like something perfect for the fan fiction section. It's fan fiction because you're never going to have any control over the franchise, so stop talking like you've been handed the keys. You're no Rick Berman, or Alex Kurtzman. Hell, you're not even a Terry Matalas.

The Kurtzman era already changed it to some degree, it can be changed again.

How so?

I'm not worried about that. Making easy to understand analogy's is easy enough.

With you, I find that highly unlikely. Watching a Star Trek battle created by you sounds about as exciting as a game of Battleship.

 

[cooleddie74]

[*Pops corn*]

 

[Farscape One]

Great. Sounds like something perfect for the fan fiction section. It's fan fiction because you're never going to have any control over the franchise, so stop talking like you've been handed the keys. You're no Rick Berman, or Alex Kurtzman. Hell, you're not even a Terry Matalas.

How so?

With you, I find that highly unlikely. Watching a Star Trek battle created by you sounds about as exciting as a game of Battleship.

I can tell you that a game of BATTLESHIP can be exciting. (I have made it a lot of fun and exciting with my nephew.)

I think the analogy you are looking is... about as exciting as watching grass grow.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Great. Sounds like something perfect for the fan fiction section. It's fan fiction because you're never going to have any control over the franchise, so stop talking like you've been handed the keys. You're no Rick Berman, or Alex Kurtzman. Hell, you're not even a Terry Matalas.

Why are you so afraid of me talking?
What do you have against me sharing ideas?
I thought this was a thread for controversial ideas?

Or is this a thread only for ideas that you agree about?

How so?

The visual portrayal of how Space Battles are rendered and perceived.
It has some good elements, more dynamic battles in some cases.

But still has some bad elements, the sense of scale is a bit off some-times with too many close range battles.
What should be high in atmosphere is a bit too close to the ground.

In some elements, space battles are even closer than Berman Era trek.

With you, I find that highly unlikely. Watching a Star Trek battle created by you sounds about as exciting as a game of Battleship.

Well, then it might not be for you.

Considering you were over-whelmed by what I would consider normal.

But that's a matter of experience.

 

[HotRod]

I can tell you that a game of BATTLESHIP can be exciting. (I have made it a lot of fun and exciting with my nephew.)

I think the analogy you are looking is... about as exciting as watching grass grow.

That's fair. My mind was drawing a blank at the time and I saw Battleship on the shelf.

 

[HotRod]

Considering you were over-whelmed by what I would consider normal.

Not overwhelmed. Bored. The longer a battle goes, the more boring it becomes.

 

[Firebird]

Not overwhelmed. Bored. The longer a battle goes, the more boring it becomes.

The audience is always the first one to notice diminishing returns.

 

[BillJ]

The audience is always the first one to notice diminishing returns.

Or, padding for a short script...

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Not overwhelmed. Bored. The longer a battle goes, the more boring it becomes.

I guess you're of a different generation.

I'm used to watching long battles via Anime.

That's a classic tradition where Anime battles can last a while and the battle gets dissected and analyzed with ebbs & flows, turns in fortunes within said battle.

But hey you don't watch that stuff, right?

So it might not be to your taste.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

How you choose to fight in space and how it's portrayed visually can be changed.
The Kurtzman era already changed it to some degree, it can be changed again.

But still has some bad elements, the sense of scale is a bit off some-times with too many close range battles.
What should be high in atmosphere is a bit too close to the ground.

I agree the distances are silly, ships are too close to one another, and there is no reason to believe the ships should be so clearly in view. Let's take Operation Return, where the Defiant and two Mirandas do a strafing run along a Jem Hadar ship. Those ships should be 10-50 times farther away, and the destruction of the Mirandas could have caused a cascade of explosions. On the other hand, the run through the Dominion fleet would still have been tight at realistic distances and the destruction of the Mirandas could still have led to more danger. Despite the unrealistic distances, the same danger was in place.

That's a classic tradition where Anime battles can last a while and the battle gets dissected and analyzed with ebbs & flows, turns in fortunes within said battle.

Anime only shows one style of combat. Many battles, especially aerial, are hits and runs, or they take place in fits and starts. They are not necessarily hours of constant fire. The fact that the Enterprise and Reliant only get a few shots on each other could be just as realistic.