Do tell...
What would Roddenberry want in XI??
- Thread starter Cheapjack
- Start date
- Status
Do tell...
Do tell...
Indeed. Why don't you try making a living out of it, if you're so good? ST hasn't been bettered, yet. Why don't you give it a go?
I have many different storylines saved on my hard disk that would suffice.
But unlike some, I accept what Trek is or isn't and enjoy it, and that I am
not in the position to add anything to it at this point, so there's no point in
nitpicking it.
So my stories remain my own. I won't be baited into a debate with you over
their merits.
Jolan Tru.
But unlike some, I accept what Trek is or isn't and enjoy it, and that I am
not in the position to add anything to it at this point, so there's no point in
nitpicking it.
So my stories remain my own. I won't be baited into a debate with you over
their merits.
Jolan Tru.
I've got ideas too, they're only half-baked, and I get acidic replies, but at least I'm trying!
No offense, but I call bullshit. You can't make the statement that you can do it better in "24 hours", then not back it up. I've got tons of a shit on my hard drive too. It doesn't mean I can do it better.
1. Saying, no offense and calling bullshit doesn't work in the same sentence.
2. I can and am. It's the internet, it really doesn't matter.
For the same reason I don't get into posting fan-fics, it's a waste of material.
3. I'm sorry you can't. TOS episodes had very simple formulaic storylines.
Jolan Tru.
Enough personal stuff, thank you.
Since we don't know what Roddenberry would have wanted in the new movie, and since Gene hasn't yet checked in himself to let us in on the secret, and since this thread seems to be heading in the same direction as a couple of previous "morality and altruism in Trek" discussions, I'm very tempted to simply close it.
Since we don't know what Roddenberry would have wanted in the new movie, and since Gene hasn't yet checked in himself to let us in on the secret, and since this thread seems to be heading in the same direction as a couple of previous "morality and altruism in Trek" discussions, I'm very tempted to simply close it.
In all fairness, it doesn't take 24 hours to think of a good story line... it doesn't even take that long to think of one that would be better than some of Trek's more sophomoric gap-fillers. Hell, I could do that in 24 seconds.
...
NX-01 picks up a distress signal from a Boomer near the Gamma Hydra system. Arrives to find the boomer under attack by an alien ship which T'pol identifies as a Romulan patrol ship. Enterprise clashes with the Romulan ship and buys time for the Boomer to escape. In doing so, they discover the crew of the errant cargo vessel actually attacked the Romulan ship with some garage-made nuclear weapons, intending to try and steal parts from the ship to replenish their own stores, but underestimated the armaments on their opponent. Archer now has to choose between handing over the captain of the cargo ship to alien authorities or escorting it out of Federation space and dealing with the problem in-house. In the end, he chooses the later... the Romulans take it personally and use it for propaganda to beat the drums for war against Earth.
Good idea IMnsHO. The hard part is turning the good idea into a good story. If you go by the usual ENT formula, you'll produce in 24 hours a pretty mediocre screenplay. If you want to make it really GOOD, that would take more like 24 days.
If you're doing it professionally, they'd want to see it turned in two weeks or less after the assignment.
Don't know. Don't care.
He'd wanna dip his balls in it!
Jaded??? Are you sure thats the word you want?
Other than the setting, what was innovative about TOS? A lot of the people writing were TV veterans, with backgrounds in Westerns and Cop shows.(Roddenberry among them). Many of the stories they told were variations on stories seen on "Gunsmoke" or "Bonanza". Even multi-racial casting wasn't pioneered by "Star Trek" since contemporary shows like "Mission: Impossible" featured the same. And shows like "EastSide/Westside" the preceded it.
Polaris wrote "Tin Man" and contributed to "First Contact", both from TNG.
We do have a lot of Gene Roddenberry's thoughts on the subject, both wriitten and spoken. We can't be one hundred per cent sure what he would have thought , but we can be 60-70%. Roddenberry was dead by the time of DS9, Voyager and Enterprise, but they all tried to stay true to him. If you want, I'll dig out some Roddenberry quotes again, but I don't want to 'sicken' anyone!
In what way was ST innovative? In what way wasn't it? The format, the stories, the writers, the first really successful fairly hard SF show, the most succesful to date.
Last edited:
No we can't. That such a thing is even quantifiable is a foolish proposition.
In any event, I wouldn't cross a street if I was "60-70%" sure of not getting hit by a car.
But the stories being told were simply the same stories TV was telling for 10 years prior, and in movies and books before that -- only the setting happened to be different.
Even the episodes ideas that came from sci-fi writers (such as COTEOF) could be transferred to other genres besides sci-fi. The core idea of that episode that "a main character would need to allow an innocent/love interest to die for the greater good" is not an idea exclusive to Star Trek. (...and no, I would not call that a "moral message", it's simply a storyline).
Don't confuse the setting with the storytelling. The style of storytelling in Star Trek is in the classic TV-style, which was being done long before Star Trek was conceived.
Here's another -- WNMHGB. That episode is about "an average man who becomes so powerful that he begins to play God, with tragic consequences." That story had been told dozens of times in the past, and mostly not within the sci-fi genre (i.e., no space travel or sci fi in general is required to tell that story). Don't get me wrong -- Star Trek told that particular story extremely well, but they were not the innovators of that story.
And before we get caught up again in the (hopefully avoidable) discussion of "Star Trek is about morals", let me just say this...the classic fiction storylines that have been told for thousands of years may have come from our morals, but they are no longer about our morals -- they are simply about human nature.
Starship:
Yes you can! How is that foolish? How would you go about continiuing anything, even ST, if you ignored the person who created it and what He determined it as??Rick Berman said that Gene Roddenberry stood behind him while he was making DS9. He's done hundreds of hours of Trek, you've at most only done three.
You seem to be determined to wipe out the legacy of this man and shape ST into what YOU think it should be, ignoring all that came before. You won't succeed while I'm here.
You've got quite a high chance of being hit car, as a matter of fact. I don't know what the percentage is.
Why don't you set up your own series? You seem to be very authoratitive.
Yes you can! How is that foolish? How would you go about continiuing anything, even ST, if you ignored the person who created it and what He determined it as??Rick Berman said that Gene Roddenberry stood behind him while he was making DS9. He's done hundreds of hours of Trek, you've at most only done three.
You seem to be determined to wipe out the legacy of this man and shape ST into what YOU think it should be, ignoring all that came before. You won't succeed while I'm here.
You've got quite a high chance of being hit car, as a matter of fact. I don't know what the percentage is.
Why don't you set up your own series? You seem to be very authoratitive.
The gatekeeper has spoken.
And it is foolish to assume we have a clue what he would think, it's been
over 20 years since he died, there is absoloutely no way to know how his
view of the world and Trek would have changed over this time with both
the social and entertainment climates.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
