• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Will we (finally) see...

Re: We'll we (finally) see...

Babylon 5, Farscape, Buffy/Angel/Firefly, BSG, and Roswell are all leaps and bounds ahead of Trek in this area.

Yeah, BSG is leaps and bounds ahead of Star Trek in characterization::rolleyes:
*A drunken XO who in any modern Navy would be told to get his drinking under control or be thrown out:

*A whiny CAG (later Commander, now a civilian) who can't seem to pull it together:

*A self-destructive Viper pilot who wouldn't be able to exist in any air force we know of.

People like these would be great in any Trek show-yeah, right! Most likely they'd be told to get their shit together or get the frack out of the Service(es) pronto. And in Starfleet, that would be pronto. Also, characters like this would piss off most of the fan who expect their Star Trek characters to be better than that, ensuring a rapid ratings drop if these characters were in a series, as well as a ton of negative mail. And then we'd be back here complaining about it like always.

When is it going to get through to some people that Star Trek ain't like that, and deal with it?:rolleyes:


Geez....you couldn't have missed the point by more if you'd tried.

I was not talking about BSG characters moving to Trek, or BSG-like characters being on Trek (although frankly, I think VOY could and should have been more like BSG...and would have been alot better for it - but that is another topic for another time - and forum).

I was talking about writers, and how well they write relationship-related stuff. Because the topic of this thread is gay relationships in Trek.

Generally speaking, I am of the opinion that Trek writers have a long and colorful history of sucking at writing 'ships. The 'ships on TOS where little more than womanizing conquests, the 'ships on TNG were shallow and underdeveloped, the 'ships on DS9 (with the exception of Sisko/Kassidy) were creepy, the 'ships on VOY were out-of-the blue and undeveloped (and ended up pissing off tons of fans), and the 'ships on ENT were about the same as on VOY.

What I was saying in my post was that there are several shows that were much better at this sort of thing than was Trek. In particular, I think that the Joss Whedon shows (Buffy/Angel/Firefly) are much better at this. And certainly Farscape, Roswell, and B5 fall into that category also - in fact, they do it better than does Joss.

However, it does seem that Ron Moore had some talent in this area, as his work on Roswell...and to a lesser extent, BSG illustrate.

And yes, I think the 'ships on BSG are well written, for the sort of show it is. BSG is a dark and gritty show, with dark, gritty and hard characters who have to be hard to survive. They work hard under incredibly dangerous circumstances, and they play hard to blow off the steam. That is sorta the point of that show - to explore what different sorts of people do under incredible, unrelenting pressure and constant fear. What that show IS is an exploration of the dark underbelly of human nature - including the dark underbelly of how people conduct their relationships (both romantic and otherwise) with each other.

So...are the 'ships on BSG all happy-shiny? No...but they fit the show. A show in which the situation is FUBAR, and the characters fight not to become FUBAR themselves...some with greater success than others.

This has nothing whatever to do with whether a Tigh-like character should be in Trek. Or whether or not Starbuck would fit in in Starfleet.

It has do so with the relative quality of writing (particularly of 'ships) in various shows. And in that regard, as dysfunctional as the relationships are in BSG, they are still better written for the sort of show it is than, say, Chakotay and Seven of Nine, which was perhaps the most horribly written 'ship in the history of the 'verse. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Re: We'll we (finally) see...

As usual, PKTrekGirl, you are way off base. :rolleyes:

Captain Picard is bald, but Yoda is green. So what you are talking about makes no sense.
 
Re: We'll we (finally) see...

Babylon 5, Farscape, Buffy/Angel/Firefly, BSG, and Roswell are all leaps and bounds ahead of Trek in this area.

Yeah, BSG is leaps and bounds ahead of Star Trek in characterization::rolleyes:
*A drunken XO who in any modern Navy would be told to get his drinking under control or be thrown out:

*A whiny CAG (later Commander, now a civilian) who can't seem to pull it together:

*A self-destructive Viper pilot who wouldn't be able to exist in any air force we know of.

People like these would be great in any Trek show-yeah, right! Most likely they'd be told to get their shit together or get the frack out of the Service(es) pronto. And in Starfleet, that would be pronto. Also, characters like this would piss off most of the fan who expect their Star Trek characters to be better than that, ensuring a rapid ratings drop if these characters were in a series, as well as a ton of negative mail. And then we'd be back here complaining about it like always.

When is it going to get through to some people that Star Trek ain't like that, and deal with it?:rolleyes:


Geez....you couldn't have missed the point by more if you'd tried.

I was not talking about BSG characters moving to Trek, or BSG-like characters being on Trek (although frankly, I think VOY could and should have been more like BSG...and would have been alot better for it - but that is another topic for another time - and forum).

I was talking about writers, and how well they write relationship-related stuff. Because the topic of this thread is gay relationships in Trek.

Generally speaking, I am of the opinion that Trek writers have a long and colorful history of sucking at writing 'ships. The 'ships on TOS where little more than womanizing conquests, the 'ships on TNG were shallow and underdeveloped, the 'ships on DS9 (with the exception of Sisko/Kassidy) were creepy, the 'ships on VOY were out-of-the blue and undeveloped (and ended up pissing off tons of fans), and the 'ships on ENT were about the same as on VOY.

What I was saying in my post was that there are several shows that were much better at this sort of thing than was Trek. In particular, I think that the Joss Whedon shows (Buffy/Angel/Firefly) are much better at this. And certainly Farscape, Roswell, and B5 fall into that category also - in fact, they do it better than does Joss.

However, it does seem that Ron Moore had some talent in this area, as his work on Roswell...and to a lesser extent, BSG illustrate.

And yes, I think the 'ships on BSG are well written, for the sort of show it is. BSG is a dark and gritty show, with dark, gritty and hard characters who have to be hard to survive. They work hard under incredibly dangerous circumstances, and they play hard to blow off the steam. That is sorta the point of that show - to explore what different sorts of people do under incredible, unrelenting pressure and constant fear. What that show IS is an exploration of the dark underbelly of human nature - including the dark underbelly of how people conduct their relationships (both romantic and otherwise) with each other.

So...are the 'ships on BSG all happy-shiny? No...but they fit the show. A show in which the situation is FUBAR, and the characters fight not to become FUBAR themselves...some with greater success than others.

This has nothing whatever to do with whether a Tigh-like character should be in Trek. Or whether or not Starbuck would fit in in Starfleet.

It has do so with the relative quality of writing (particularly of 'ships) in various shows. And in that regard, as dysfunctional as the relationships are in BSG, they are still better written for the sort of show it is than, say, Chakotay and Seven of Nine, which was perhaps the most horribly written 'ship in the history of the 'verse. :rolleyes:

Better for you, not for me.

I'm not interested in seeing fucked up people in love, gay or straight, on board a Federation starship-especially with a bevy of counselors aboard it. The philosophies of Gene Roddenberry worked well enough for us then, and they work well now-just ask James Cawley (Star Trek New Voyages) about that. If they can't handle their shit properly aboard a ship that like it as not faces danger, and sometimes destruction, on a daily basis, then they should leave the service. And most of the real life armed forces have the same attitude towards this as I've expressed above.

What the characters in BSG do works for them because their civilization is gone anyway, the Cylons are breathing down their necks, and they all don't know if they will survive. In a Star Trek show, that kind of situation would work once-then, the crew in question has to get their shit together and hang together, 'or they'll hang separately' as the old saying goes. That doesn't mean the characters can't be written well, but it does mean that they can't be like the fuck-ups on any of the other shows that you want Star Trek to be. Nor can they be like those fuck-ups all the time, because the other millions of Trekkers who like Star Trek the way it is don't want to see that. They want characters that they and their kids can believe in, and I hate to break it to you, PKTrekGirl, but you live in a nation with fellow Trekkers like that (hate to break it to you again, but most people love the characters on Enterprise as well). That's one of the reasons why Star Trek: New Voyages is so popular, and sadly DS9 is not, because of that quality that you find so unrealistic. The sooner that you and the other lovers of dysfunction get that, the better that you can deal with Star Trek. Or if you can't, then maybe it's time for you to do what I and a very likely silent majority wish that you would do: find some other program to watch.
 
Well, as soon as you guys are ready to get serious, you'll quit insisting on the towel. ;)

Oh...I would not be at all opposed to him 'dropping' the whole 'towel' subplot. :p However, this is a PG board and I am green so I have to pretend that the towel is actually a good thing.
 
Re: We'll we (finally) see...

Yeah, BSG is leaps and bounds ahead of Star Trek in characterization::rolleyes:
*A drunken XO who in any modern Navy would be told to get his drinking under control or be thrown out:

*A whiny CAG (later Commander, now a civilian) who can't seem to pull it together:

*A self-destructive Viper pilot who wouldn't be able to exist in any air force we know of.

People like these would be great in any Trek show-yeah, right! Most likely they'd be told to get their shit together or get the frack out of the Service(es) pronto. And in Starfleet, that would be pronto. Also, characters like this would piss off most of the fan who expect their Star Trek characters to be better than that, ensuring a rapid ratings drop if these characters were in a series, as well as a ton of negative mail. And then we'd be back here complaining about it like always.

When is it going to get through to some people that Star Trek ain't like that, and deal with it?:rolleyes:


Geez....you couldn't have missed the point by more if you'd tried.

I was not talking about BSG characters moving to Trek, or BSG-like characters being on Trek (although frankly, I think VOY could and should have been more like BSG...and would have been alot better for it - but that is another topic for another time - and forum).

I was talking about writers, and how well they write relationship-related stuff. Because the topic of this thread is gay relationships in Trek.

Generally speaking, I am of the opinion that Trek writers have a long and colorful history of sucking at writing 'ships. The 'ships on TOS where little more than womanizing conquests, the 'ships on TNG were shallow and underdeveloped, the 'ships on DS9 (with the exception of Sisko/Kassidy) were creepy, the 'ships on VOY were out-of-the blue and undeveloped (and ended up pissing off tons of fans), and the 'ships on ENT were about the same as on VOY.

What I was saying in my post was that there are several shows that were much better at this sort of thing than was Trek. In particular, I think that the Joss Whedon shows (Buffy/Angel/Firefly) are much better at this. And certainly Farscape, Roswell, and B5 fall into that category also - in fact, they do it better than does Joss.

However, it does seem that Ron Moore had some talent in this area, as his work on Roswell...and to a lesser extent, BSG illustrate.

And yes, I think the 'ships on BSG are well written, for the sort of show it is. BSG is a dark and gritty show, with dark, gritty and hard characters who have to be hard to survive. They work hard under incredibly dangerous circumstances, and they play hard to blow off the steam. That is sorta the point of that show - to explore what different sorts of people do under incredible, unrelenting pressure and constant fear. What that show IS is an exploration of the dark underbelly of human nature - including the dark underbelly of how people conduct their relationships (both romantic and otherwise) with each other.

So...are the 'ships on BSG all happy-shiny? No...but they fit the show. A show in which the situation is FUBAR, and the characters fight not to become FUBAR themselves...some with greater success than others.

This has nothing whatever to do with whether a Tigh-like character should be in Trek. Or whether or not Starbuck would fit in in Starfleet.

It has do so with the relative quality of writing (particularly of 'ships) in various shows. And in that regard, as dysfunctional as the relationships are in BSG, they are still better written for the sort of show it is than, say, Chakotay and Seven of Nine, which was perhaps the most horribly written 'ship in the history of the 'verse. :rolleyes:

Better for you, not for me.

I'm not interested in seeing fucked up people in love, gay or straight, on board a Federation starship-especially with a bevy of counselors aboard it. The philosophies of Gene Roddenberry worked well enough for us then, and they work well now-just ask James Cawley (Star Trek New Voyages) about that. If they can't handle their shit properly aboard a ship that like it as not faces danger, and sometimes destruction, on a daily basis, then they should leave the service. And most of the real life armed forces have the same attitude towards this as I've expressed above.

What the characters in BSG do works for them because their civilization is gone anyway, the Cylons are breathing down their necks, and they all don't know if they will survive. In a Star Trek show, that kind of situation would work once-then, the crew in question has to get their shit together and hang together, 'or they'll hang separately' as the old saying goes. That doesn't mean the characters can't be written well, but it does mean that they can't be like the fuck-ups on any of the other shows that you want Star Trek to be. Nor can they be like those fuck-ups all the time, because the other millions of Trekkers who like Star Trek the way it is don't want to see that. They want characters that they and their kids can believe in, and I hate to break it to you, PKTrekGirl, but you live in a nation with fellow Trekkers like that (hate to break it to you again, but most people love the characters on Enterprise as well). That's one of the reasons why Star Trek: New Voyages is so popular, and sadly DS9 is not, because of that quality that you find so unrealistic. The sooner that you and the other lovers of dysfunction get that, the better that you can deal with Star Trek. Or if you can't, then maybe it's time for you to do what I and a very likely silent majority wish that you would do: find some other program to watch.

Still missed the point. But thanks for playing, just the same.

It is pretty clear to me than you are more interested in trashing BSG (and DS9 - presumably in a blatant attempt to piss me off?) than in discussing what I was actually saying, so I'll skip it and go back to thinking about Jamie Bamber in a towel.
 
Who says a gay dude (or lesbian gal) has to be in a relationship?

I have plenty of gay friends who are not currently in a relationship.

Do they turn straight in between partners? I think not.

A crew member can be identified as gay without us ever seeing even the slightest hint of he or she being in a relationship.
 
I'll skip it and go back to thinking about Jamie Bamber in a towel.

To help your imagination:

2m44ocx.jpg
 
and go back to thinking about Jamie Bamber in a towel.
Beat you to it :D

You know what this forum needs? It needs someone to volunteer to keep moderator (that would be me) stress to a minimum by posting pictures of Jamie Bamber in a towel at random intervals.

Perhaps when they see me getting stressed....or frustrated...or maybe when they know I've had a bad day....

Yes....that's what this forum needs. :cool: Kinda like Dennis's groundhogs...only.....not. :p
 
I'll skip it and go back to thinking about Jamie Bamber in a towel.

To help your imagination:

2m44ocx.jpg

Woohoo!!!! Read my mind! :techman:

See!??? I feel better already! :evil:

You know...I normally reserve this for the DS9 forum, but since this forum does not have an award yet, I'll just use our award from over there:

19633731017059NamelessDelavianChocolateAward.gif



Enjoy, Belar!

And in the meantime, I'll be in my bunk. :drool:
 
Is it wrong if I say I don't really give a damn about including a gay/straight/bi/hermaphrodite/white/black/Jewish/Christian/whatever character...Because I'd like them to prove they can do good movies/TV, period, before they go trying to deal with social or other issues, or even Trekstuff like canon fidelity?

Really, horse goes before cart, folks. Let's see if they pull off the basics, first.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top