|
Tons of people want Star Trek to be optimistic, they write fanfiction about the characters going to movies and complaining about their high school teachers. Its charming and owns y'all haters get wrecked Give them the property for two years and you're going to see entire episodes where Kirk really does just get to talk about how much he likes horsies
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:03 |
|
|
Pick posted:Spot? Happy lizard
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Calling the Star Trek content we’ve already gotten “perfect boring stagnant utopia” is what makes me think that you’re not taking this seriously because Star Trek has managed to mine lots of great drama under that premise, specifically in episodes where the utopia or the idea of the utopia was threatened by credible powers and ideas. That pretty much proves that your ideas have already been written and given airtime, and still done in a way that doesn’t betray the tone of the franchise. So yes, grimdark poo poo is still anti thetical what Star Trek is about. Horseshit. Saying "Star Trek has done every kind of optimism worth doing" is dumb. You say I'm wrong for calling out your stagnant utopia, then spend two more paragraphs saying that's basically all you want. If you're done with Star Trek, fine, be done with Star Trek, but don't act like that means everyone has to follow suit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
Star Trek should not be about the Federation what the gently caress is so difficult about this to understand I mean even DS9, the show most about the Federation, spent the majority of its time interacting with other cultures: the Bajorans, the Cardassians, the Ferengi, the Klingons, the Dominion, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
For a good episode about dark Star Trek that also doesn't betray the show's ideals, just take a look at Duet. Fundamentally, the show is about putting on the trial of opinion, a concentration camp worker. Not a guard, not someone directly involved in what went on there, but a filing clerk who worked at space Auschwitz. Star Trek did what I don't think any other sci-fi show would be willing to do (chud writers aside), and showed sympathy for the man. That this man was in so many ways one of the camp's victims, that he was powerless to do anything and too afraid to try even as he began to go mad with guilt over his part, however small, in what happened there. Yes, his story ultimately ended in tragedy, but Kira Nerys, a former terrorist who liberated that very concentration camp, ultimately refused to kill this man. While the episode is never directly brought up again, there's a noticeable change in how Kira approaches the Cardassians for the rest of the show because of that man. It's a dark episode with a tragic ending, but it also finds goodness in this man and Kira changes for the better as a result of what happened. You can't say that about anything that happened on STD.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
The Quickening another dark but positive episode.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Star Trek should not be about the Federation what the gently caress is so difficult about this to understand I mean, you never will get a show "about" the Federation or Starfleet, it inherently has to be about the protagonists on the ship/station/whatever. The Federation is just the setting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Pick posted:The Quickening another dark but positive episode. Or The Measure of a Man if you want an episode about a hard man making a hard choice (Riker) that's fundamentally positive and portrayed well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
Riker is indeed a hard man 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Horseshit. Lmao. I can see how you came to that conclusion, so I’ll reword it: there is plenty of directions that Star Trek could go in but 1) 90s comicbook dumbness does not fit the franchise IMO 2) it needs an optimistic tone, however I do not believe there are any industry players that are capable of writing with this in mind as I believe their brains are broke by being Dark and Edgy 3) in light of the fact that there is no one in the industry that can carry the torch, it’s better to let the franchise lay to rest because if it isn’t done well than I don’t want it done at all 4) Early Trek is proof that you can have drama and tension and violent threats in a show that’s supposed to be bright; if there was a new Trek show than I would encourage the writers to keep those two factors in mind while they created a new direction for the show. athat doesn’t mean you have to copy Old Trek lmao, it just means you have a working proof of concept for what does and doesn’t work. There, now you know what I mean.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Let JMS have Trek this time 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
I would kickstart a JMS Trek show, sign me upppp
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
I don't give a gently caress if it's prestige drama or just TNG again but not lovely like Voyager so long as it takes the gently caress place after Voyager. I'm so happy Patrick Steward is back so we can finally have the first non-prequel or reboot since Voyager ended its run. Why is Star Trek so afraid to answer the question "cool, then what happened?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Why is Star Trek so afraid to answer the question "cool, then what happened?" Because that doesn't get nostalgia boners going. And doing a show about the 29th century time cops in their time ships would demand being creative for all the 29th century poo poo. Even Star Trek Online, at the orders of CBS, abandoned its DS9 themed expansion shortly after launch to throw out a half-baked Discovery expansion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:Why is Star Trek so afraid to answer the question "cool, then what happened?" But we have so much more to find out about SPOCK, literally the only character in the franchise (that makes money)
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Lmao. I can see how you came to that conclusion, so I’ll reword it: there is plenty of directions that Star Trek could go in but 1) 90s comicbook dumbness does not fit the franchise IMO 2) it needs an optimistic tone, however I do not believe there are any industry players that are capable of writing with this in mind as I believe their brains are broke by being Dark and Edgy 3) in light of the fact that there is no one in the industry that can carry the torch, it’s better to let the franchise lay to rest because if it isn’t done well than I don’t want it done at all 4) Early Trek is proof that you can have drama and tension and violent threats in a show that’s supposed to be bright; if there was a new Trek show than I would encourage the writers to keep those two factors in mind while they created a new direction for the show. athat doesn’t mean you have to copy Old Trek lmao, it just means you have a working proof of concept for what does and doesn’t work. What you meant is dumb. You have this very narrow idea of what Star Trek is, and you want that or nothing at all. Well, there's a simple answer to that; stop watching. No one is forcing you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
HD DAD posted:But we have so much more to find out about SPOCK, literally the only character in the franchise (that makes money) 6 Degrees of Spock
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:What you meant is dumb. You have this very narrow idea of what Star Trek is, and you want that or nothing at all. Well, there's a simple answer to that; stop watching. No one is forcing you. Dude, I already stopped watching Disco, I’m spinning yarns about what I want to see in a new Trek show that doesn’t actually exist. I’m sorry you don’t appreciate all the neat stuff we already have, and that you think that grimdark poo poo is the only direction to go in, but that’s not my problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
HIJK posted:Dude, I already stopped watching Disco, I’m spinning yarns about what I want to see in a new Trek show that doesn’t actually exist. I’m sorry you don’t appreciate all the neat stuff we already have, and that you think that grimdark poo poo is the only direction to go in, but that’s not my problem. I'm literally the guy who said Star Trek can go in any direction, as long as it's well written. You're the one who seems to think it can only go on as it always has.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:We're not talking about Discovery. That's a different show entirely. There is no show about what we're talking about, just some short films that are generally well received that hint at what we're talking about. So take that argument and shove it. Do you really not see what kind of message it sends if the Federation actually succumbs to _internal_ strife and has to rediscover its ideals? It's one thing for the Federation to get pushed to its limits by external threats (like the Borg, Dominion or other powers) but a totally different one if its failure is rooted in its own ideology/people. If the Federation we know CAN at this stage fail due to internal strife then you can easily make the argument that it inevitably WILL fail at some point, that there is just no way for humanity to evolve past a point where we as people and not just our political structures have evolved past such a point. It kinda says that everything is cyclical, that there HAVE to be "dark ages" and we are "doomed" to repeat those cycles (Star Wars for example already has this issue). You can tell interesting stories with such a concept and there are plenty of them I enjoy (Asimov's Foundation is the granddaddy of this very concept in SciFi) but it does go against the very core of the kind of SciFi Star Trek always wanted to be. Star Trek is supposed to be a future of humanity where things DO get better, we DO improve and get PAST a lot of issues. This doesn't mean it has to be absolutely linear, there can be (minor) setbacks but if you'd ever turn the current Federation into something "evil" in the future then it undermines everything it stood for. The Federation getting destroyed by its own doing and having to be rebuild is just not "succeeding". That's like saying the Weimar Republic was a success because of what followed AFTER WW2. There is just no reasonable scenario in which the Federation can fail without making the same basic mistakes humanity supposedly has overcome. So yes the Federation on its own is "boring" and that's okay because Star Trek stories shouldn't rely on internal conflict within the Federation or on a failure of its social order. The core conflict should be about how an "Utopia" interacts with the outside world, how OTHER "groups" can follow this path and how this utopia can be maintained even in the face of adversit, not to mention having an Utopia is the only way to actually SHOW it. The premise of rebuilding an Utopia pretty much always just consists of talking about it but we never get to see it. There is a reason why SciFi offers so few examples of "Utopias" as a real setting where it's not just some vague goal of the future. We have plenty of SciFi stories that deal with the struggles of getting to this point but how many of them show what we are even trying to accomplish and where to go from there? And you know what is so great about Star Trek? You can still have the kind of story you might imagine but please do it from another perspective. Don't bring the Federation down just to rebuild it, you can simply show how other species who aren't at that point could travel this path to a better future with all of the challenges involved. This gives you also plenty of opportunities to show how an utopian society like the Federation deals with the challenge of spreading its ideals. THAT was in my opinion the strength of DS9, it used the Bajorans, Cardassians and so on to show humanity's struggles of the past and present without undermining the Federation as a concept and still left room for some questions/critique regarding the Federation (is an utopian society destined to assimilate everything around it in order to survive?). Phylodox posted:I'm literally the guy who said Star Trek can go in any direction, as long as it's well written. You're the one who seems to think it can only go on as it always has. You could in theory also write a great crime show in the Star Trek universe but the question whether or not you should is not unimportant. I think there is still merit to the concept of actually having something to say, a message you want to communicate and that message DOES depend on the direction you are following. LinkesAuge fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Nov 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:21
|
|
|
I would have loved to see 7 of 9 learning to ride a horse , I bet like Chakotay knows how and Tuvok would have a cowboy hat!!
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:What you meant is dumb. You have this very narrow idea of what Star Trek is, and you want that or nothing at all. Well, there's a simple answer to that; stop watching. No one is forcing you. *meanwhile, a decade of increasingly tone deaf stories goes by* There are people who do have a very narrow vision of what Star Trek should be, and it's the owners of the property. They could go anywhere, anytime, do any kind of format etc; but so far they mainly seem interested in one approach (now, since they're doing a light-hearted cartoon show and with the changes in management at CBS that might be changing) which is to try to poorly whittle down the attributes of the franchise that kept most people coming back for decades Pick posted:I would have loved to see 7 of 9 learning to ride a horse , I bet like Chakotay knows how and Tuvok would have a cowboy hat!! I feel like it would have been actively impossible for Seven to comfortably ride a horse in that corset
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I'm literally the guy who said Star Trek can go in any direction, as long as it's well written. You're the one who seems to think it can only go on as it always has. Well, what you kept saying was that Star Trek should have a show where the Federation collapses into nihilism and then has to rebuild. I rebutted because I don’t think that’s good Trek, and you kept doubling down on that angle, even after I provided an example of a competently written show with the tone you said you wanted and said I didn’t think that was a good fit for the franchise. Then I talked a bit about what I’d like to see in new Trek, even said that there were plenty if different avenues they could take. The Orwell is a good example of a show that manages to do Trek but differently from what we’ve seen: it’s a comedy show from the Family Guy creator, which means that instead of a happy clappy vision of the future, it runs heavily on skits and jokes. It has been said in this very thread that it’s a decent follow up to Trek. It’s a little too nostalgia heavy for my taste but I’m glad it exists and it’s more proof of concept of the possibilities that still lie before Star Trek. None of that matches up with that you were saying IMO.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
LinkesAuge posted:If the Federation we know CAN at this stage fail due to internal strife then you can easily make the argument that it inevitably WILL fail at some point, that there is just no way for humanity to evolve past a point where we as people and not just our political structures have evolved past such a point. It kinda says that everything is cyclical, that there HAVE to be "dark ages" and we are "doomed" to repeat those cycles (Star Wars for example already has this issue). I mean...by this standard, the existence of the Dark Ages invalidates our existence. If everything were cyclical, we never would have progressed beyond being hunter/gatherers. Institutions fail. Ideas persevere. Federation is just a word. A meaningless series of syllables. That's part of the problem; people are holding the institution up as some inviolate thing. That's a mistake. That's how institutions fall apart from within. When people forget the ideas and start serving the institution. Maybe the Federation should fail, if this is how people react to it. gently caress the Federation. gently caress Starfleet. Get back to the roots. Focus on the ideas. What is Star Trek about if we remove the superficial trappings of the navy/military/fake UN? I think that's more interesting than more Romulan fuckery. Tighclops posted:There are people who do have a very narrow vision of what Star Trek should be, and it's the owners of the property. They could go anywhere, anytime, do any kind of format etc; but so far they mainly seem interested in one approach (now, since they're doing a light-hearted cartoon show and with the changes in management at CBS that might be changing) which is to try to poorly whittle down the attributes of the franchise that kept most people coming back for decades I mean...you say this in response to the idea of a fundamental shake-up of the setting. Moving forward a thousand years, potentially re-examining the very fundaments of what the Federation means. How is that not going anywhere? How is that not changing the format? EDIT: HIJK posted:The Orwell is a good example of a show that manages to do Trek but differently from what we’ve seen: it’s a comedy show from the Family Guy creator, which means that instead of a happy clappy vision of the future, it runs heavily on skits and jokes. Oh, come on. Your idea of "Trek done differently" is literally a re-hash, but with smarm. That's your bold new vision for Trek. Keep it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
Ha ha and Seska would have like an evil cowboy hat
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
Pick posted:Ha ha and Seska would have like an evil cowboy hat make this an entire season of voyager and it would have been its best one
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Star Trek chili cook off who brings what how badly does Neelix lose
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Riker brings his famous Red Alert chili. It's very spicy and good. Reed brings his famous Reed Alert chili. It's just flavorless warm, wet, ground meat. Sisko brings a Chilibalaya. Combining Chili with, you guessed it, Jambalaya. Lwaxana brings a jello mold but all the jello is infused with Romulan ale. Odo brings a vegetarian chili but no one can have it, the crockpot he is carrying is part of his being.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I mean...by this standard, the existence of the Dark Ages invalidates our existence. If everything were cyclical, we never would have progressed beyond being hunter/gatherers. K. But none of this or anything like this has been what's happening. You're talking about a hypothetical take on Star Trek that nobody in charge or the potential to be in charge has been pushing. Could what you're talking about be interesting? Sure, and I bet if somebody gave the right people millions and millions of dollars it would be possible to make a riveting movie out of one of The Culture novels too but that's about as likely as what you're talking about. I mean, there's also the part where there reaches a point where you're so far removed good or bad from the original idea that you may as well just start something new but they'll never do that because *~marketing~* Instead we've had a series of -as I've said- increasingly tone deaf prequels and reboots that often more closely resemble thematically inappropriate shows like 24 than anything Star Trek with no end in sight. In this environment, when somebody says they want to break down and examine the fundamentals of the premise it's not unreasonable to assume that probably means it's going to result in more mid-90s pouchshirt wearing hardmen who make pretty speeches to wrap their war crimes up in a bow at the end quote:I mean...you say this in response to the idea of a fundamental shake-up of the setting. Moving forward a thousand years, potentially re-examining the very fundaments of what the Federation means. How is that not going anywhere? How is that not changing the format? You dismiss levity as "swarm" and meanwhile they're in talks to give a whole Star Trek series to a literal space hitler like dude they're not re examining poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
AlBorlantern Corps posted:Riker brings his famous Red Alert chili. It's very spicy and good. oh god yes, gently caress you Reed Crews get hammered on the jello shots and enjoy the heck out of that Red Alert chili and Chilibalaya. That’s the makings of a great barbecue
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
Odo pretends to eat his own chili. Garak nods half approvingly/half confused
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
AlBorlantern Corps posted:Odo pretends to eat his own chili. Garak nods half approvingly/half confused Post the gif
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Adequate_Scott/status/1062090524558086144?s=19
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Post the gif I don't have it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Michael Burnham's chili gives everyone food poisoning, because hope is a lie
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I mean...by this standard, the existence of the Dark Ages invalidates our existence. If everything were cyclical, we never would have progressed beyond being hunter/gatherers. Maybe you shouldn't use bad history as example. The concept of a "dark age" has long been dispelled and is very eurocentristic to begin with. We actually made a lot of progress in the so called "dark ages". And yes, things aren't (so far) cyclical for humanity, that was my point (we DO make actual progress and don't have to reset society constantly) but even more important, it's not just about looking at "reality", more important is your outlook at the future and what ideology you'd like to support/portray in this regard. There is certainly no lack of more pessimistic/cynical view points in SciFi and I can and do enjoy these but please let's not turn everything into that. quote:Institutions fail. Ideas persevere. Federation is just a word. A meaningless series of syllables. That's part of the problem; people are holding the institution up as some inviolate thing. That's a mistake. That's how institutions fall apart from within. When people forget the ideas and start serving the institution. Maybe the Federation should fail, if this is how people react to it. gently caress the Federation. gently caress Starfleet. Get back to the roots. Focus on the ideas. What is Star Trek about if we remove the superficial trappings of the navy/military/fake UN? I think that's more interesting than more Romulan fuckery. Institutions are build on ideas which come from people. I hate it when people use phrases like "Institutions fail. Ideas persevere" (no offense) because that's imo just not true or has at least other really bad implications because that'd mean BAD ideas also persevere and there is nothing to get past them. You also can't disconnect the institutions from the people, the instituations are functions of ideas and not the other way around. The problem you describe is that those (good) ideas can be corrupted over time and thus the institutions with them. Seperating between "the Federation" and "the people" is just semantics. There is a reason why I wrote if the current Federation (and thus its good society) turns evil it undermines the utopian portrayal of its society (and I do admit that the Federation is obviously by no means an actual utopia but it's at least as close as you can get for a TV show). Sure you can go back to the "roots" of the "good" Federation but you now have established that SOMETHING was wrong, that the utopia wasn't really a utopia, that people didn't get past human "nature", that we once again look for answers to the very basic questions of society. The problem with removing the "fake UN" is that the fake UN is the connection between the utopian and the outside world. Like I said an utopia society is indeed "boring" or let's say at least very limited in regards to its storytelling potential (it offers by definition no conflict on its own) and thus we need to look for it at its borders or beyond them (metaphorically and literally). I'm not sure what the Romulans got to do with it, it's not like I think we should retread old ground. That's why I would want future Treks shows to actually move FORWARD in the timelime. I don't mind the Klingons, Romulans and so on as part of the ST universe but it also shouldn't revolve around them. LinkesAuge fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Nov 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:Post the gif AlBorlantern Corps posted:I don't have it! Got you fam.  (Fun fact, this is saved as OdoYouWeirdo.gif on my computer)
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
Sir Lemming posted:Michael Burnham's chili gives everyone food poisoning, because hope is a lie this killed me, I am dead as of this moment, we are all dead we post into threads to reclaim our lives this we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
AlBorlantern Corps posted:Odo brings a vegetarian chili but no one can have it, the crockpot he is carrying is part of his being. Odo's got a perfectly usable bucket in his office to hold chili.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 23:03 |
|
|
Worf and Jadzia argue and wind up bringing two different chilis. Worf's is fine, if not a little bland and a little sweet, with some prunes floating in the pot. Jadzia brings a pile of gagh squirming through some whole chocolate habaneros. Nobody eats anything from either pot, but Quark records a video of the crowd's reaction to the reveals of their chilis and sells holodeck access to the whole schadenfreude experience.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 22:47
|
|
