|
In most militaries you find in periods of peace the command staff is mostly made up of people who are good at politics rather than having any skill at command and tend to get replaced rather quickly when hostilities break out. It is probably a coincidence / result of narrative requirements but it is interesting the only Admiral who seemed competent came to the fore during a major conflict. As for Janeway though I always assumed she was promoted away from command of a ship to behind a desk where she'd be much less dangerous and given ego stroking but largely empty authority.
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
Cingulate posted:Let's not forget that this is the Star Trek thread. I'm sorry for kinda causing the derail, but my main point was that the TOS movies use the practical effects, 2001-style scifi look and feel more real than most space opera science fiction. It is interesting how prequels tend to fall into this pattern. I mean I know CGI in general trumps physical effects these days but it has a strong influence on the aesthetic. The Star Wars prequels go for a much cleaner aesthetic than that of the original trilogy, which had a similar lived in future to that of Alien. Prometheus did the same (though they did use more physical effects than is the norm these days) with the Prometheus ship being much less lived in than the Nostromo. TOS and its' movies always presented a cleaner sleeker view of the future that Alien and Starwars were an aesthetic reaction to but even then the reboot film makes everything cleaner and fancier. A good example in all three reboots is the ships: In Alien the Nostromo is a grimy, aging, utterly utilitarian vessel crewed by working grunts whereas the Prometheus is top of the range brand new vessel crewed by highly skilled experts and the richest man ever. In Star Wars the most prominent vessel is a barely functional smuggling freighter, the star fighters are utilitarian aging or vulnerable vessels and even the Imperial vessels don't scream luxury. Then in the prequels we have royal star yachts, art deco fighters and shiny brand new top of the range capital ships. In Star Trek we go from the NCC-1701 being a powerful and noteworthy but far from unique vessel that by the films is seriously getting old to a brand new top of the line vessel crewed by the best the academy has to offer. Given in a lot of ways our tech has surpassed what people thought the future would be like even 25 years ago it makes sense that things will look fancier and of course the general problem of everything has to be CGI will affect prequels too but that did not necessarily mean these prequels would need to focus on vessels and people much higher up the in-universe hierarchy. I wonder if it is a coincidence that in Lucas and Scott's case they are much higher up the film making hierarchy nowadays too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2013 12:21
|
|
|
Pops Mgee posted:So ummm what about that TNG episode where the future Enterprise D can go to warp 13? Wasn't that a Q episode? In which case it could just be Q messing with Picard.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 10:17
|
|
|
I've liked Cumberpatch in what I've seen (especially Tinker Tailor) but his complaints British people don't treat posh people well enough and Americans are better at being deferential put me off him a fair bit. From what I know of his character in Into Darkness I hope he wins though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
alg posted:Why would you set yourself up to watch Insurrection again You'd have the certain knowledge Tom Hardy would go on to better things I suupose.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Zotix posted:What do you guys think about the theory floating around that the villain is actually Picard? I guess posh English people can be victims of profiling too! More seriously it seems like a very silly idea, Cumberbatch has been chosen probably because of a combination of secret agents being associate with James Bond and British people tending to be cast as villains. As well of being a talented actor of course. Plus all the evidence we have on Picard shows him to be someone who really wouldn't do something like this. Even when he worried the Federation was under severe threat of infiltration in Conspiracy he investigated in a calm and logical fashion and went to the source of the problem. In The Drumhead he stayed completely within the bounds of the law and procedure to head off the burgeoning McCarthyism and so on. Man I'm such a nerd.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
In terms of a general audience keeping up would it be wise for the second alternate timeline TOS film to have the villain be from a mirror universe future?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:STARS Trek didn't stand a chance against Nemesis. I hope you feel proud of yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Blistex posted:It's the Catch 22 of franchises. Yeah, franchises that don't do well financially generally just get canned. Studios, not unreasonably, don't want to take risks on something that is risky anyway. They wont take risks on things that are sure to make bank either though... It is a tricky one.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Perhaps Starfleet Intelligence or Section 31 could recruit someone who is very good at playing holodeck games to help ease first contact with a new race from the Delta Quadrant that are obsessed with game playing. The film could be called Star Trek: The player of the most dangerous game
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
Following multiple reports of Romulan incursions across the Neutral Zone the Enterprise is stationed at a strategically important planet awaiting Romulan attack. The three hour movie covers a 5 month period during which the crews' anticipation and fear of battle slowly subsides into tense boredom. Characters discuss the nature of the federation and the desirability of war as an experience, a challenge and an event. Friendships fray and priorities change in the shadow of mortality.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2013 23:54
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:It, uh, it actually was. That's not a crazy conspiracy at all. If you look carefully at this grainy scanner recording you can see Admiral Hanson's "flagship" didn't have any nacelles!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
DS9 addresses that with the root beer analogy and more generally with Section 31. DS9 shows a clear hindsight that TNG tech and attitudes could at any moment slide into dystopian oppression and how menacing that makes the federation's upbeat decency. Heck, episodes like The Drumhead display an awareness of this during the original run of TNG, maybe even Conspiracy in season 1 suggests that the federation could shift from utopia to dystopia very easily or may even already be dystopic.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
It all rests on what you consider a utopia to be and if utopia can exist. A perfect society runs the risk of being boring, an exciting dangerous galaxy requires Star Fleet Admirals to have at least the potential to become, or already be, dictators. Section 31 could be the heroic thin blue line making the utopia possible or the secret police forcing everyone's smiles. (I really dislike section 31 as a plot device and a concept in the Federation because it is such an unsubtle way to raise doubts about the nature of the Federation. It's akin to having a caste of secret therapists in the Klingon Empire to raise doubts about whether an ardently militarist society could function.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2014 12:43
|
|