So, how I felt watching and listening to some parts of TNG means I have a negative view of myself?
Interesting hypothesis.
Why the hate for Disco?
- Thread starter David Hanley
- Start date
- Status
Interesting hypothesis.
Agreed. I thought of mentioning First Contact, but at least in this one Picard seemed to have some respect for Lily herself by the end of the movie.
She didn't hesitate to call him on his bullshit, and to some extent he had to admit she was right.
I haven't seen that episode in years myself, and I don't have a hard drive full of TNG episodes. I actually don't have any of the episodes anymore, since my VHS tapes got fried.
But go ahead... you'll only find out that I'm right. I've seen that episode multiple times, and it always left me hating Picard all over again, and wanting to kick Riker's anatomy as well. Both of them are reprehensible in that episode.
I agree. One of the best examples was a Romulan Warbird decloaking and taking several shots at the Enterprise on it's way to the Gom-tu creature in "Tin Man," and Picard barely changes facial expressions and allows this attack on his ship (and by extension, an act of war on the UFP) to go on without any response whatsoever.
Agree. I I meant more that I prefer Star Trek to do things that take advantage of the unique and exciting sci-fi setting and universe, rather than a "morality play" that could have easily been executed in a small-town theater presentation. For example, "Duet" is a good episode, but it's nothing that couldn't have been played out in a post WWII setting between 2-4 characters on one or two sets of a stage production. There's nothing inherently wrong with that...it's just not what I personally look forward to out of Star Trek...so I don't put "Duet" or "Measure of a Man" on the same high pedestal as others do.
I agree. And, if "Classic Trek era" means TOS...I concur wholeheartedly. I think the TOS era was far more dynamic and colorful than the TNG era, while not being overly-frenetic. Again, not to say I don't like and appreciate the other eras...but my preference in tone, pace and style is TOS.
I'm sure @fireproof78 really appreciates the psycho-analysis.
TNG is filled with little references to how "humans of the past" were laughable. One needs look no further than "Encounter at Farpoint," the tone-setting pilot for the entire series. The entire discussion with Q on the bridge when they are first stopped at the energy field and lines during the trial are all right there.
I don't think anyone here is interested in getting into a fact-finding genital-measuring contest about it. Most of us have immediate access to every episode of TNG as well. I'm not going through the catalogue just to prove a point, and I doubt anyone else cares to either.
Bottom line, though, is that I think it's pretty clear that TNG at times was rather explicit about looking down at the history of humanity. Now, there's plenty of room to argue whether or not that snobbery is warranted, but that's not the point. The point is that it can be off-putting to a lot of people, and I think that's perfectly valid. I feel much the same way @fireproof78 feels. It was hard to decide whether or not to roll my eyes or to be offended with a lot of TNG's self-righteous, self-congratulatory crapola it spooned out on occasion.
YMMV, but that's how I feel about that.
Discovery would be more interesting if it had archeological excavations based on real world discoveries.
Disco seems to have become a more 'this is who I am' then what is out there to find on uncharted planets.
A shovel doesn't care who handles it, as long as someone is using the shovel to dig.
That's why you hear about so many down and depressed cases of Shovel in the post Burn era.
Take care of your shovel and she will love you for life.
Disco seems to have become a more 'this is who I am' then what is out there to find on uncharted planets.
A shovel doesn't care who handles it, as long as someone is using the shovel to dig.
That's why you hear about so many down and depressed cases of Shovel in the post Burn era.
Take care of your shovel and she will love you for life.
Last edited:
It's interesting how Star Trek in general (taking all series into account) is all over the map when it comes to depicting archaeology. One of the interesting scenes I liked was in an episode of Voyager when Chakotay takes an away team to a cave to investigate something, and they find a bunch of dead bodies. Chakotay directs the team to observe and tell him what they see. When B'Elanna says "a bunch of dead bodies, what more do we need to know?" (paraphrased), Chakotay gives them a lecture in how to observe and interpret, based on what they see with their own eyes.
It's a scene that appeals to my anthropologist self, because A&A isn't only about the Stuff (artifacts).
And characters like Vash are no better than looters, of the sort who went out to Find Stuff in the 19th and early 20th centuries. They had no real respect for studying the artifacts in situ. If you remove an artifact without properly documenting it, it's just looting and while a collector might pay $$$$$$$ for it, it becomes worthless in terms of actual study.
Doc, let's leave the psycho-analysis to your office hours to maintain doctor-patient confidentiality, mmkay?
"That is the exploration that awaits you! Not mapping stars and studying nebula, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence."
I appreciate the concern.
You're fine. You don't have to drop out of the thread.
This is similar to my feelings. I find the things I expect to see in Trek that make it different are lacking. Discovery is glitzy Science Fiction more that it is Trek. Some may appreciate the story it has to tell, but I don't appreciate that both the Roddenberry element and the Roddenberry/Justman/Berman visual and story continuity was dumped. The first season handled it so badly that it turned me off in the first two episodes and I have never gotten it back. I forced myself to watch the first season and a half. Including Pike, Number One, and Spock was cool and showed promise (and they are getting their own series), but I have never really cared about the Discovery crew. For me it is just a series of bad decisions in the production that ruined it. Star Trek had been on screens for 40 years and had recalled TOS in a fitting way many times. Every change that occurred had a reason in universe (the look of the Klingons took more than 20 years to come out, but it did). Then along comes Discovery and none of that matters. It is all new and different and there was no good story reason to do so. But really for me it comes down mostly to the writing. The other things can be chalked up to a reboot, but the writing failed so miserably that I just don't care about it. Only Pike made me watch any of season 2. I have no reason to watch season 3. I just don't care.
The writing for Picard, on the other hand, has been incredible. It has what Discovery lacks. I can't wait for season 2. So my issue is not all new Trek, it is Discovery specifically. I'm also looking forward to seeing more of Pike's Enterprise. Just not Discovery.
Which is the point of new Trek. Everyone gets something!
'Humanity of the 24th (and later, I imagine) is still flawed'; positively shocking.
'Perferct' people are boring even in real life, and definitely make for boring characters, too.
Part of the plot and character development is about those flaws, yes? And, with any hope, how they grow past them, overcome them.
I'd also like to point out that I'm not intending to johnson-joust with anyone here. If I wanted to know what episodes someone cares to cite on any subject, it's merely so that I can get the facts from that before commenting.
We all good here, now?
I was actually pretty good to begin with.
And I totally agree. It's actually a criticism that has been levied heavily against TNG through the years- that many of the characters are static, unrelatable and boring due to their minimal amount of human flaws. I tend to agree with that assessment, particularly as it relates to Cpt. Picard. I still like the show, but it's a valid criticism and a major weakness in the format.
And there are a lot of people right here in this very conversation who liked DSC and thought PIC was a mess. Then there are still others like myself who like them both quite a bit MORE than what we had in the 90's era.
It's one of the reasons I always disagree with people pointing to "the writing is 'good' or 'bad' " to justify their personal opinions and tastes. It's clearly subjective, given the massive number of unique opinions and positions fans have on the various series. It also kind of proves the entire point, that this era of Trek is taking a different approach. While 1987-2005 was largely homogenized and cookie-cutter...this era is taking some risks by putting out very different productions with very different tones.
It's nice if you get lucky like me and like most of it (although I'm fairly indifferent about LD at this point)...but that isn't going to be the typical case. One series will resonate, another might not. And, frankly, I think that is a fantastic approach to avoid having the franchise become stale and repetitive like it did in the past. I think some fans take it way too personally when a Trek gets produced and they are not the target audience (see also: 2009). People have to remember...that's intentional and it's also better than the alternative.
I like Star Trek the best when it's balanced.
Not too pretentious and preachy, but also not too campy or overwhelming action.
TWOK to me is very well balanced Trek. It has great character stuff and drama. It has the sci-fi candy of ships and a technological concept. It has moral dilemma, some action, comedy and even touches of romance and horror. It does it all without feeling like it's going through a check list.
Journey to Babel to me is also another example of balanced Trek. It doesn't take itself so seriously that it doesn't have humor, but it also still feels grounded.
Not too pretentious and preachy, but also not too campy or overwhelming action.
TWOK to me is very well balanced Trek. It has great character stuff and drama. It has the sci-fi candy of ships and a technological concept. It has moral dilemma, some action, comedy and even touches of romance and horror. It does it all without feeling like it's going through a check list.
Journey to Babel to me is also another example of balanced Trek. It doesn't take itself so seriously that it doesn't have humor, but it also still feels grounded.
I agree there are absolutely action scenes in TOS and ALL other Star Trek, but IMO it was rarely ever the high point of Trek.
During action sequences I often feel like I just want the action to be over with so we can get back to the story. And I'm not talking about Trek specifically here, I'm talking about action movies and shows in general.
There is action I like, I just think a lot of it is filler and lame attempts and trying to impress the audience with spectacle.
I really enjoyed the first 30 minutes or so of Star Trek Beyond. When we were just hanging out on the ship with these characters. When it later turned into an obligatory action-fest it was less interesting to me. The dissection of the Enterprise was pretty cool though.
I both want the action to be over but also am fascinated by what we see in the characters in their responses to the action. So, it's not the only thing I enjoy about action. I think I learn a lot about characters in the action. Perhaps not as much in the quiet moments but I don't think it is spectacle, at least not for me.
As much as I like DSC and PIC, I have a hard time believing I'll like all the new Trek series equally. I liked LD but it didn't stick with me. I'm firmly wait-and-see with SNW. I'm 30 years too old for Prodigy. So it's already happening.
I’m most looking forward to my sons watching PRO. I think that will be a lot of fun and I can view it vicariously through their eyes.
I agree. I love watching shows about discoveries in ancient Egypt and then going back further in time to try and determine what exactly was the point in human progress that caused the sudden leap in moderation. Episodes of Trek created to get people interested in simply not walking past dead bodies would create more exploratory minded humans that would want to explore Mars and other planets instead of simply saying "Oh that's just a planet."
Trek has never been about "Oh, that's just a planet."
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
