Why is it necessary to have a cameo from a previous Star Trek incarnation in the new series?
Wish List for Star Trek: 2017
- Thread starter David.Blue
- Start date
Great post, agree with everything you say here. In fact, I don't there's nothing much more to say. You took the words right out of my mouth!
I wouldn't say the show is doomed without a cameo from a previous Trek series, but it's always nice to see the old characters we know and love come back for an episode or two. Depending on who it is, it can feel like a passing of the torch, like when McCoy appeared as an elderly man in the pilot of TNG, Encounter at Farpoint.
I'd love to see Patrick Stewart back one more time as Admiral Picard, or anyone from the main cast of TNG really (excluding Data of course, unless they de-age Spiner through CGI and explain how he's no longer dead).
I haven't watched DS9, VOY or ENT yet, but from all the cameos I've seen up until season four of TNG, I've been impressed and happy with and slightly nostalgic for.
I go back and forth on the cameo issue. I thought the cameo in Encounter with Farpoint was perfectly fine -- and, while not cameos but major roles rather, the Sarek, Spock, and Scotty focused episodes I thought were good as well and the characters were who they are -- Sarek, Spock, and Mr. Scott. They didn't strike me as shoehorned and they were written well, and I enjoyed them. The callback in The Naked Now I thought was a bit obvious (heck I guess the whole episode was), but the particular callback wasn't too bad, and seemed to be, thanks to its placement, a situation where it was more like "okay we got that out of the way, let's move on."
The callbacks got a little stupid later on -- one of my favorites to harp on is the stupid comment by Archer at the end of Regeneration or the book title he read in Azati Prime ("Look everyone!! In case you forgot, this is STAR TREK").
As far as cameos, who can we get for cameos really? The TNG cast? As far as I'm able to tell, everything that has featured them since All Good Things... hasn't actually had the characters from TNG. Instead, I've only seen ST:TNG actors pretend they're on Star Trek. That wasn't Captain Picard, William Riker, or Counselor Troi in the TNG movies, that was Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, and Marina Sirtis. I'm not interested in those people.
Last edited:
Because it creates a connection between the series, makes it feel like a real continuation, not just a new scfi with a star trek name. It can also act as a passing of the torch like it did in DS9 when Picard was handling Sisko's taking command of the station. It was also nice to see a crossover in beginning of Voyager as Harry/Tom were on DS9.
I'm not saying its 100% needed but it certainly helps, at least for me to come into the new show with a sense of real continuation then if it it was simply set 100's of years in future and have no real feeling of a sequel.
I would personally like to see Picard or Sisko as an Admiral in first episode and even more awesome would be some previous characters as regular on new series or at least show face now and again.
We have wildly different definitions of 'essential' then. To me, what's essential to the new series is a good concept that's well-realized, stories/episodes that are well-written, based on SF concepts and ideas that resonant with modern audiences, good actors that are well cast for their roles, characters that feel real in a world that feels real, interesting and engaging dynamics within the regular cast, well-realized conflict amongst the regular crew, interesting and engaging threats of the week or similar, and production values that don't let down the concepts, characters, actors, or writing. There's nothing about a cameo or a callback that's 'essential' to the success of the new series.
Take DeForest Kelly's cameo in the pilot of TNG as an example. Was that essential to the story? Nope. Was it essential to the successful relaunch of the franchise or that spin-off in particular? Nope. It was neat, sure. But in no way was it essential. So too with callbacks. Dropping hints and lore and inside jokes is in no way essential to the success of the new series.
It all sounds good to me too. I want to see other cultural groups within say Vulcan or Klingons. Vulcan sounds to me like a bunch of religious fanatics. Sarek sounds like a Fundamentlist. I would also love to see more of Romulus.
Don't care much about ship designs, not into that. But NO catsuits on the women. There is no dignity in them.
I completely agree that religious people are portrayed as fanatics. Hey, maybe the Vatican on earth is still around. Maybe women are priests now and one of the characters Alma Mater is Notre Dame (very prestigious school BTW). May be somebody could mention Christmas as something other than that Santa Holiday. Don't have to belabor it. Maybe the Kai of Bajor is visiting the Vatican. It happens. Maybe the Dalai Lama is there. Religion is culture and culture is interesting.
Don't care much about ship designs, not into that. But NO catsuits on the women. There is no dignity in them.
I completely agree that religious people are portrayed as fanatics. Hey, maybe the Vatican on earth is still around. Maybe women are priests now and one of the characters Alma Mater is Notre Dame (very prestigious school BTW). May be somebody could mention Christmas as something other than that Santa Holiday. Don't have to belabor it. Maybe the Kai of Bajor is visiting the Vatican. It happens. Maybe the Dalai Lama is there. Religion is culture and culture is interesting.
My wish list:
1) Don't be a waste of the money I would have otherwise spent on completely useless crap.
1) Don't be a waste of the money I would have otherwise spent on completely useless crap.
No. Absolutely not. Religion is always dealt with a veil of contempt in Trek as it rightly should be.
Of course it bothers some people, but you cannot portray an advanced, socialist, scientifically-focused society with something as silly, ignorant and backwards as religion still existing. To me, portraying religion in any kind of positive light would be a betrayal of what Trek's postive, enlightened future is all about. I really think pandering to theists is entirely the wrong way for Trek to go.
What is a 'sneering attitude' to you is a rational, thoughtful attitude to me. Religion is born of ignorance and it takes infantile logic to realise it is from the same realm as Santa Claus and fairies [one issue of Human religion in Trek would be the vast contradiction a crewmember rambling about 'jesus' would be when Bajorans and other species all believe in other deities etc: it simple further highlights the nonsense].
In fact, if anything, I'd like a new series to take a stronger stance against Religion. This would be particularly pleasing of an American made TV-show [where religion, particularly in the south, continues to have a moderately strong hold] which have always shyed away from openly pro-atheistic messages. In turn, this would reflect more the predominant feelings in an increasingly secular & atheistic Europe which, inevitably, the US will begin to follow.
100% agree.
It's difficult, because I think humans have an instinct to believe in something. If it's not God, then it's country, or communism, or the local sports team, or the power of vitamins ... or Star Trek. In the 19th century it was thought that the transcendent effect of High Art (Wagner, Shakespeare) could serve as a substitute for religion.
From what we've seen in Trek, I think we could say that the veneration of Federation principles serves this purpose (similar to contemporary regard for the US Constitution). Why not explore the Federation as a religious institution? Some people would be Fed Fundamentalists; interpretation of the Prime Directive could threaten to cause a schism akin to Catholic/Protestant or Sunni/Shia. There could even be Fed atheists who think disbanding the Federation would end the problem.
From what we've seen in Trek, I think we could say that the veneration of Federation principles serves this purpose (similar to contemporary regard for the US Constitution). Why not explore the Federation as a religious institution? Some people would be Fed Fundamentalists; interpretation of the Prime Directive could threaten to cause a schism akin to Catholic/Protestant or Sunni/Shia. There could even be Fed atheists who think disbanding the Federation would end the problem.
Far from contempt. Many of the featured species in various series are shown to have religion, faith and spirituality. Hero characters are Christians in TOS, believe in Fate in TNG, and we see Vulcan religion in VOY and ENT.
Should our heroes include people of faith? Of course, this would simply be a further exploration of the diverse peoples and societies of the future.
Depicting a future social order that is lacking religion could hardly be seen as advanced, "intractable" might fit better. Everyone will believe the same thing, there will be one pattern that all of society will follow. While there nothing wrong with advocating a position, requiring it for a entire population (hundreds of species) would be monolithic and wrong.
Surely a truly advanced future society will recognize and embrace a multiplicity of beliefs, ideas and thoughts. This should be reflected on the show and in the main characters.
Again there have been worlds and people with faith, and while we don't alway seen a people's beliefs, when have we ever seen a clearly drawn atheist people?
Even Picard expresses a belief in a afterlife.
.
I find much of your post to be...willful supposition. Which heroes in TOS, for example, ever explicitly state a Christian affiliation? The Klingons are known to have slaughtered their 'gods' due to them being "more trouble than they were worth", the Bajoran 'faith' is shown as being nothing more than ignorant subservience to wormhole aliens.
As I said, a future social order without religion is absolutely necessary. Your statement that "everyone will believe the same thing" is nonsense as their are far more opinions/belief systems etc for people to follow that have nothing to do with religion. Also, nobody is stating anything about 'requirement', that presumption is entirely on your part, it is simply a logical process that in Star Trek's enlightened future religion will be largely dead on Earth. It is an inevitability in that future.
As for your point about embracing other beliefs I agree entirely. An advanced culture like the Federation DOES tolerate other beliefs as we can see by the treatment of the Bajorans, Trill, Klingons, Betazoids etc etc. It does not intrinsically imply that the Federation itself needs to hold any of these beliefs or, more specifically, that the humans in Starfleet need to.
Also I find your Picard point a gross misnomer. He mentions that with all the complexity in the universe, that death may not actually be the final stage. He doesn't specifically mention any kind of 'heaven'. In ST with the ammount of alternate universes, parallel timelimes, different dimensions I can understand why a scientific mind like Picard cannot rule out the possibility of something else but that does not equate to any kind of religion. Listen to what he says in 'Who Watches the Watchers', he equates religion to sending people "back to the dark ages" and inevitably leading to war and violence.
As I said in my original post, I understand theists become upset with Trek's Atheist slant and frequently try to modify it to the their own beliefs but as I stated, the mere notion of Bajorans worshipping wormhole aliens, Humans worshipping a few thousand different deities, the Vorta worshipping the founders and no doubt a million other species with a billion other deities in their beliefs only further highlights the absolutely farsical nature of religion.
Wow... so, Nerys being an accomplished resistance fighter, brilliant commander and respected member of the Bajoran community whilst being moderately religious is ignorant subservience? Or how Mora Pol, a celebrated and talented scientist, was also at least an observing Bajoran?
That's pretty presumptuous, eh? To state that religion has to crumble and disappear from this earth as progress is made. And no arguments to boot! I smell confirmation bias and projection.
I will give a general overview on the issue with religion in Trek, IMO. Gene was an atheist, through and through. He felt that religion, faith and spirituality was largely a throwback to the pre-enlightenment era and this manifested very strongly in Trek as a result (except for some notable exceptions in TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT). He made the same errors that you're seemingly making: 1. that religion and science are somehow diametrically opposed by their very nature, and 2. that there couldn't possibly be valid arguments or examples to the contrary.
Actually, it does. The values and philosophy of the Federation are ostensibly enshrined in their founding and governing documents (The Charter, the Constitution, etc). It wouldn't be far-fetched to state that both externally and internally, the Federation upholds and respects various rights and privileges because they are codified in some way. That would include freedom of religion.
That, and you're wrong. The Constitution of the UFP has been mentioned more than once, and it's heavily implied to be similar to most written Earth constitutions (specifically the U.S. Constitution), in that it specifically names and aims to protect individual rights. Rights like the freedom of religion.
He doesn't need to. Depending on how you define 'religion' or 'spirituality', his comments could easily be construed to be religious or spiritual in nature - that he doesn't specifically say he believes in heaven or souls is irrelevant. I'm not saying Picard does hold any spiritual or religious views, it's just note-worthy in how you define religious or spirituality views on an afterlife as needing heaven by definition. Most Indian (Hindu, Jainism, etc) and Eastern religions (Buddhism and others) do not believe in a heaven, would you say that their views regarding an afterlife are not religious or spiritual?
And yet in the entirety of all the episodes dealing with the Bajorans, has very little to say about their very prevalent religious beliefs? In fact, Picard is respectful enough of their beliefs to allow Ro Laren to continue wearing religious headgear against the dress code? Or doing the same with Worf? Or to participate in all the Klingon rituals as an arbiter of succession without one word of how ridiculous it is? Never insults Worf's beliefs or refuses to participate. Not once. In fact, he defends Worf's beliefs to Riker in a different episode.
Bunk. Total bunk. At worst, you're projecting your own beliefs and opinions into Trek and at the least, flatly ignoring evidence to the contrary. While I'd agree that Roddenberry himself was an atheist, and probably intended that Star Trek's version of humanity to be more atheist and/or irreligious, there's plenty of examples to the contrary. You're the one modifying a piece of fiction to reflect your own beliefs, and using that fiction pejoratively.
I don't even know how to respond to that. I'd be offended, but you really haven't put forward any strong evidence. You've used Star Trek as some sort of rallying cry for atheism, as many atheist Trekkers do, without: 1. Looking at the potential evidence against that position, and 2. Evaluating your own position and what potential bias you're bringing to the table, and 3. Recognizing that once a piece of art is created, it is no longer in the control of the artist - especially in the case of Trek with so many different iterations -i t grows, it changes and it can interpreted subjectively.
I'd like to not derail this therad entirely into a religion vs Atheism debate. What I will say is:
1. I stated in my original post that I would no doubt irk the pro-religion crowd here who will attempt to twist trek into some kind of pro-religion thing while also gnashing teeth at my Trek is anti-religious post. It always happens. Quite simply, cruising around in warp-capable starships with replicators and transporters while believing in thousands of years old nonsense [with all the eefrit's, goat-demons, sprouting lotus blossoms and unicorns included] strikes me as being utterly embarrassing and utterly un-marriable.
2. I'd like to re-emphasise that I loathe religion which is why I have studied it at University. You accused me of not providing any evidence against religion however as I said, I think that would fully de-rail the thread and you are no doubt more than capable of reading and researching on the many Atheistic arguments [Hume, Epicurus, Hitchens..]. At present, we are aware of around 25,000 different deities that have been worshipped by mankind. At present, there are about 5,000 still being worshipped or believed in in some manner. Now if we multiply that by the 150 member worlds of the Federation, and the likely number od deities their imaginations have concocted, things become even more farsical to the point where Hume's succinct argument for religious belief simply being a form of Animism seems largely irrefutable.
I'll agree to disagree at this point, because you're right, there is a better time and place for this discussion. And I'm sorry for derailing the conversation somewhat there, we were broaching topics I'm quite passionate about.
As to the original post, I'd like to see:
As to the original post, I'd like to see:
- more alien crewmembers
- more diversity in the casting
- more multi-episode storyarcs
- characterization closer to that of later VOY, DS9 and ENT
- non-hyper sexualized uniform choices for female crewmembers
- about the same amount of techno-babble, as long as it's still interpreted in layman's terms
I wasn't under the impression that this is what we were doing.
This is a discussion on whether there should be religious characters on the show, and has the show in the past depicted a atheist future.
Picard never mentions a heaven, but neither did I. Picard believes that the self survives the demise of the flesh, this is a spiritual belief. As I said "Picard expresses a belief in a afterlife."
There the whole gang (especially Uhura) at the end of Bread and Circuses, Kirk clearly state he's a monotheist, in Balance of Terror Angela Martine was apparently either Catholic or Episcopalian by her actions.
After creating the Klingon, their gods were destroyed by the power of the first Klingon heart beats. The Klingon do have a central religious belief system, with a creation (by gods), a heaven and a hell. How Klingon lives their lives determines whether they go to one or the other.
The first of the Orbs arrives several thousand of years ago, when the Bajorians were already a advanced civilized peoples. The Prophets (through the Orbs) have repeatedly through the millenniums imparted knowledge to the Bajorians. The Prophets themselves are supernatural beings who have acted to protect the Bajorian people.
While it could be a possibility, why would it be a necessity?
Less upset than you might think, I certainly can accept that a small percentage of the characters are atheist.
How would you reconcile Deanna Troi's beliefs (on display in PenPals) with your position that atheism is the norm?
When the first men landed on the moon, one of the activities there was Buzz Alden receiving Holy Communion, religion is in no way incompatible with space travel and exploring other worlds.
Just because you don't accept religion, why would that lead you to think that religion wasn't present on the show?
Why did Angela Martine kneel at her wedding?
Yes. Whether a event, or a metaphor, or a parable, it is believed that it happened in some form. Why would this stop in the future?
It would be interesting if the new show revealed that different alien species also had a great flood, in some form.
********
more alien crewmembers
We saw with Deanna Troi that having a alien crewmember doesn't require elaborate makeup, a line of dialog now and then will do nicely.
more diversity in the casting
Yes, and not just with the Humans, alien species should also have diversity among themselves.
more multi-episode storyarcs
The A-story can be episodic, while the B- and C-stories can be ongoing, some arcs can be multi-seasonal. I would like every character to have their own individual character development arc.
characterization closer to that of later VOY, DS9 and ENT
Did you have something specific in mind?
.
Last edited:
If we're going to have religion in the Federation, then I'd like to see McCoy attempting to treat serious illnesses with homeopathy, Sulu navigating by swinging a crystal pendulum, and Kirk checking his horoscope before any diplomatic or military undertaking.
"Captain, the gods of the dilithium chamber are demanding another human sacrifice!"
"Wesley, you're up."
"Captain, the gods of the dilithium chamber are demanding another human sacrifice!"
"Wesley, you're up."
Similar threads
- Locked
