The TV shows. To me a TV show is the perfect canvas for Star Trek. The movies tended towards brainless action.
Which Was Better the Movies or the TV Shows? :Poll:
- Thread starter VulcanMindBlown
- Start date
Exactly. There's no "right" way to be a Trekkie.
TV, no question. The movies were mostly excuses for cast reunions. Over-sentimentality and bad jokes with the characters you love.
Pretty much my sentiments. When I think of Star Trek, television is first thing that comes to my mind.
Just to add an extra thought to my other posts [in agreement with these two posts above] I think a perfect example of Trek being dumbed-down on the big screen is...
Picard. He goes from being the wise, rational, intellectual captain on the TV shows...to a tommy-gun wielding, dune buggy driving...mid-life crisis-style captain on the big screen.
[I know some of you will say: "AH! But that was Patrick Stewart wanting action" or something but to me, that doesn't count...what we see on screen from a perspective of characterisation is all we can count not that an actor influenced it. Picard goes from stoic and rational to an action hero and it does not work]
I would also like to point out I like the films [except JJ stuff] but they are, to me, clearly inferior. A bit of fun. But they have no depth.
[These reasons are probably why I defend TMP and enjoy it so much]
The problem with re-sampling Star Trek in 2009-14, after taking a ten-year hiatus from all things Trek (in anything other than a sentimental, feel-better viewing), was that I came back with a different set of experiences. I had been to college--Community College--but I made sure to take my Humanities courses while there--Intro to Theater, Intro to Cinema, Composition courses, Intro to Philosophy and Ethics--and I also read about, and tried my hand, at putting together fiction works. This was something I wanted to do for a long time--to write the great, American novel. I realized I didn't have that talent for it, but it remains a hobby. Star Trek was a mystery to me, after all these years of watching, it was just fun entertainment, until I put my brain on more than epic storylines and big moments in the timeline. I started to see concepts--a new paradigm--in Trek I had never seen before. Like, for instance, the ethics behind "Playing God" in DS9's second season, an episode that did not connect with me, as a child. These writers were using concepts that were not in other shows.
So, when comparing an episode--one of 30 a season--to a movie that is made once every 2-3 years, one episode can be a dud. It doesn't have to make a lot of money. It can kill a show if too many of them are above people's heads (or insulting for those pursuing a PhD in Philosophy), but it doesn't have to be successful every week. One bad movie, can kill a movie franchise. So, what has been proven to be bankable in Star Trek movies:
1. Revenge as a motivation for our antagonist.
2. The Enterprise is destroyed.
3. A crew member dies and/or is brought back to life.
4. The Klingons as an antagonist.
5. The Romulans as an antagonist.
6. Everyone being happy and healthy at the end of the movie, feel good.
7. Lots of epic storylines (The Borg Invasion, Spock's death, Making peace with the Klingons, etc.)
So, this is why I prefer the series now. It's not boring, it's fun to see different character moments, and once you know the characters, engaging in behavior that can go against type for either dramatic or humorous results. One of my favorite moments in DS9, is not Sisko telling the Defiant to launch weapons at the Klingons to save Dukat in The Way of the Warrior, it's him explaining to Kassidy Yates why he said "It's a big step" when she wanted to move onto the station. He feels guilty for Jennifer dying! It's not just his anger at the Borg or Picard, his hurt that he lost her, he feels that he got her killed! BIG MOMENT! HUGE! And can you even name the episode it happens in? More to the point, can most fans name that moment, if I started the dialogue and didn't include Jennifer's name? It's not exactly "Mr. Worf, Fire!" But it's one of my favorite Sisko moments.
This long diatribe is just to say, I prefer the series. It's not even close.
So, when comparing an episode--one of 30 a season--to a movie that is made once every 2-3 years, one episode can be a dud. It doesn't have to make a lot of money. It can kill a show if too many of them are above people's heads (or insulting for those pursuing a PhD in Philosophy), but it doesn't have to be successful every week. One bad movie, can kill a movie franchise. So, what has been proven to be bankable in Star Trek movies:
1. Revenge as a motivation for our antagonist.
2. The Enterprise is destroyed.
3. A crew member dies and/or is brought back to life.
4. The Klingons as an antagonist.
5. The Romulans as an antagonist.
6. Everyone being happy and healthy at the end of the movie, feel good.
7. Lots of epic storylines (The Borg Invasion, Spock's death, Making peace with the Klingons, etc.)
So, this is why I prefer the series now. It's not boring, it's fun to see different character moments, and once you know the characters, engaging in behavior that can go against type for either dramatic or humorous results. One of my favorite moments in DS9, is not Sisko telling the Defiant to launch weapons at the Klingons to save Dukat in The Way of the Warrior, it's him explaining to Kassidy Yates why he said "It's a big step" when she wanted to move onto the station. He feels guilty for Jennifer dying! It's not just his anger at the Borg or Picard, his hurt that he lost her, he feels that he got her killed! BIG MOMENT! HUGE! And can you even name the episode it happens in? More to the point, can most fans name that moment, if I started the dialogue and didn't include Jennifer's name? It's not exactly "Mr. Worf, Fire!" But it's one of my favorite Sisko moments.
This long diatribe is just to say, I prefer the series. It's not even close.
I prefer the series because we can follow the characters for years and see more of a variety of storylines than we get to see in a movie. That said, I think the TOS movies managed to accomplish quite a lot in the way of character development and memorable storylines over the course of 6 movies. I don't follow the school of thought that a Star Trek movie can't be intelligent and entertaining at the same time. That seems like an easy excuse for the movies to devolve into mindless action blockbusters.
The TV shows. Well, TOS and TNG.
I won't count the movies, because in mu opinion, there are only three good Trek films. The rest is midiocre to shit.
I won't count the movies, because in mu opinion, there are only three good Trek films. The rest is midiocre to shit.
I could live happily ever after without the movies.
I preferred the TV shows
I voted for both. The TV shows were great and made me into the Trek fan I am today, but when the movies got it right...by golly! They got it right! I'm talking about the likes of The Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country, mind you.
Imagine a world where only the series or the movies exist, which one would you choose? Series for me, easily! No question.
Similar threads
