What do you HATE about Star Trek?

[T'Girl]

Shows like Star Trek encourage

But then you run headlong into the TNG version of the prime directive. Very harsh, and the opposite of "enlightened."

We have the president of the federation (in TUC) abandoning two starfleet officers to a foreign power, just so he could proudly proclaim my administration is not above the law. How nice that his public image is more important than two people's lives.

 

[BigJake]

But then you run headlong into the TNG version of the prime directive. Very harsh, and the opposite of "enlightened."

The Prime Directive business originally derived from (or at least was preceded by) a pretty standard SF trope that dictated that more primitive races survived and evolved because more advanced aliens made a habit of staying out of the way and letting them do so; it just cast the Federation as the "aliens." That trope has since become dated, as has the whole idea that the "observer" and the "observed" can and should be strictly separated.

Nevertheless I quite like the fact that TNG used it to create serious conflicts and dilemmas that couldn't be wished away "Because Heroism!" or "Because The Children!" TOS' comparatively cavalier attitude toward it is at odds with its claims about what it is supposed to represent. And as a tool for adding drama and handicaps for the heroes I've always liked it overall, precisely because specific instances of its application can provoke passionate ethical debate.

 

[USS Triumphant]

We have the president of the federation (in TUC) abandoning two starfleet officers to a foreign power, just so he could proudly proclaim my administration is not above the law. How nice that his public image is more important than two people's lives.

1. He was entirely correct: Expediency is not a basis for violating an oath of office. Although I understand how the last few American presidents might have confused you.

2. Even from the perspective of expediency, he was entirely correct: Colonel West was the officer presenting the rescue briefing, and he was part of the conspiracy. There is little doubt they would have turned the rescue operation described in that briefing into a provocation to escalate matters.

 

[urbandefault]

What I really hate about Star Trek is that fans have come to expect so much from it. It was a tv show that came back from the dead to do movies and subsequent tv spinoffs. It had/has time and budget constraints, and there is not the time or the money or even the mass appeal to cover every little thing the fans want to see.

It's entertainment, pure and simple.

Some folks over the years have been inspired to enter career fields based upon what they saw onscreen, and others have been inspired to invent the imaginary technologies portrayed. That's great, and we all benefit from it.

But still and all, Star Trek is entertainment.

 

[BigJake]

What I really hate about Star Trek is that fans have come to expect so much from it.

I'd say lowered expectations are actually the bigger problem, but different strokes...

 

[BillJ]

What I really hate about Star Trek is that fans have come to expect so much from it.

I'd say lowered expectations are actually the bigger problem, but different strokes...

I agree with urbandefault. Star Trek is entertainment and if it isn't entertaining then I don't have much use for it.

 

[BigJake]

Star Trek is entertainment and if it isn't entertaining then I don't have much use for it.

Most disputes occur over what actually meets the standard of "entertaining" and what kind of "entertainment" is relevant.

 

[BillJ]

Star Trek is entertainment and if it isn't entertaining then I don't have much use for it.

Most disputes occur over what actually meets the standard of "entertaining" and what kind of "entertainment" is relevant.

Standing around reciting stilted dialogue and mumbling random words whenever a solution to a problem is needed is not entertaining. In my opinion.

Star Trek lost site of the fact that it is suppose to be entertaining.

 

[urbandefault]

Star Trek is entertainment and if it isn't entertaining then I don't have much use for it.

Most disputes occur over what actually meets the standard of "entertaining" and what kind of "entertainment" is relevant.

This is the perfect example of what I'm on about. If you're not entertained by what is offered, why bother with it?

I take Star Trek for what it is. If there is an episode or a series that doesn't interest me, I'm on to something else. Who am I to demand that the entire franchise cater to my tastes over those of others?

It's all good, but fandom tends to take itself a little too seriously.

 

[BillJ]

This is the perfect example of what I'm on about. If you're not entertained by what is offered, why bother with it?

I take Star Trek for what it is. If there is an episode or a series that doesn't interest me, I'm on to something else. Who am I to demand that the entire franchise cater to my tastes over those of others?

It's all good, but fandom tends to take itself a little too seriously.

Quoted for truth.

 

[BigJake]

Who am I to demand that the entire franchise cater to my tastes over those of others? . . . fandom tends to take itself a little too seriously.

Quoted for risible overstatement followed by unintentional irony.

If you're not entertained by what is offered, why bother with it?

Yeah, and "shut up and eat your porridge" never ever works as a means of defusing this kind of disagreement and never will, because the thing is sometimes communities contain people who are actually interested in how stories work and how to make them better. The same reason people discuss which episodes they like and which they don't and why.

Standing around reciting stilted dialogue and mumbling random words . . .

And I've never cared for this kind of distortion and outright shitting on other iterations of Trek upon detecting incomplete loyalty to Trek-as-Star Wars, but we've been through all that.

 

[BillJ]

Standing around reciting stilted dialogue and mumbling random words . . .

And I've never cared for this kind of distortion and outright shitting on other iterations of Trek...

I'm sorry you can't (or won't) see it, but after watching some of the 24th century episodes over the last few days, what I describe above is even worse than I remembered it to be.

Some great actors have come through the various series during Berman's tenure. I just wonder how much more fondly it would be remembered if they had loosened up the writing and got rid of the technobabble?

 

[BigJake]

I'm sorry you can't (or won't) see it, but after watching some of the 24th century episodes over the last few days, what I describe above is even worse than I remembered it to be.

Well, I find this a tad eccentric, but you're the best judge of what entertains you -- I will not demand that Your Sort Should Stop Having Opinions. (Provided of course that your sort extends me the same courtesy.)

 

[BillJ]

I'm sorry you can't (or won't) see it, but after watching some of the 24th century episodes over the last few days, what I describe above is even worse than I remembered it to be.

Well, I find this a tad eccentric, but you're the best judge of what entertains you -- I will not demand that Your Sort Should Stop Having Opinions. (Provided of course that your sort extends me the same courtesy.)

This place would be insanely boring if we all thought the same exact way.

 

[urbandefault]

Who am I to demand that the entire franchise cater to my tastes over those of others? . . . fandom tends to take itself a little too seriously.

Quoted for risible overstatement followed by unintentional irony.

If you're not entertained by what is offered, why bother with it?

Yeah, and "shut up and eat your porridge" never ever works as a means of defusing this kind of disagreement and never will, because the thing is sometimes communities contain people who are actually interested in how stories work and how to make them better. The same reason people discuss which episodes they like and which they don't and why.

Standing around reciting stilted dialogue and mumbling random words . . .

And I've never cared for this kind of distortion and outright shitting on other iterations of Trek upon detecting incomplete loyalty to Trek-as-Star Wars, but we've been through all that.

Dude, what is your deal?

From what I've read in your last several posts it seems to me that you can't find much to like about Star Trek.

That's cool. I don't care, because I find a lot to like about Star Trek. All incarnations, from TOS to the JJ movies.

But if I don't demand that the franchise change the little things that I tend to overlook, that's my thing. If you think my opinion on that and fandom is "risible overstatement" and "unintentional irony," well ...

Ok, fine.

 

[BigJake]

From what I've read in your last several posts it seems to me that you can't find much to like about Star Trek.

That's such an utterly bizarre thing to read into my last several posts that it makes me doubt whether further responses to you are worthwhile... but I'll give it one more try.

That I have no patience with this "shut up and eat your porridge" business says nothing about whether I can "find much to like about Star Trek." It says that I don't find grousing about People Having Opinions to be productive. That's a pretty simple distinction.

 

[BillJ]

That I have no patience with this "shut up and eat your porridge" business says nothing about whether I can "find much to like about Star Trek." It says that I don't find grousing about People Having Opinions to be productive. That's a pretty simple distinction.

I think it's one thing to have an opinion about something (we all do), it's quite another to spend all day bitching about something you don't like. Or to make drive-by slams of material (or creators) you don't like just to try and instigate a fight.

I love dissecting and discussing Star Trek and if everyone had the same opinions as I do this would be a very dull place that I wouldn't visit very often.

 

[BigJake]

Or to make drive-by slams of material (or creators) you don't like just to try and instigate a fight.

Well, you see, if we're all adhering to the Not Demanding that People of Your Sort Stop Having Opinions regimen, then linking to a simple opinion should not be instantly interpreted as "just trying to instigate a fight," right? Because that's tendentious and needlessly hostile and we're not doing that, correct? Especially when the opinion might have been linked to because it's actually relevant to something that was just said?

 

[lurok]

As others (not hate, but "c'mon, you can do better"...though in context, understandable)

* sentimentality

* lack of more diverse gender/racial/alien/national identities

* moralizing/bad allegories, metaphors

* bad bottle episodes and clip shows

* uninteresting villains-of-the-week

* plot recycling

* lazy writing, acting, directing

 

[BillJ]

Well, you see, if we're all adhering to the Not Demanding that People of Your Sort Stop Having Opinions regimen, then linking to a simple opinion should not be instantly interpreted as "just trying to instigate a fight," right? Because that's tendentious and needlessly hostile and we're not doing that, correct? Especially when the opinion might have been linked to because it's actually relevant to something that was just said?

You can dance around all you want, but you know exactly the type of posts I'm talking about. We see it all the time in the Star Trek Into Darkness forum (posters who berated the movie before it had even hit theaters), it also happened quite frequently in the Voyager and Enterprise forums (calling Berman and Braga: "Knobshine and Fuck-knuckle") way back when.

There are trolls and there are people who take this stuff way too seriously. Star Trek is a TV/movie franchise, not a religion nor a lifestyle.