|
Tequila Bob posted:Right, it's the "let's take vengeance" way of solving problems, and like Star Trek VI, ID is definitely saying we shouldn't do it. Notably, ID launched at a time when society loved revenge fantasies - both Batman and Superman had killed on screen, recently, and the show 24 was being cited as proof that torture was acceptable. Dude, talking down to me is not going to convince me that your interpretation is the correct one. If Into Darkness was a movie made without Star Trek's trappings, it would be fine. Then you are telling a story about two protagonists, one who is struggling within the confines of an institution holding up the facade of a peacekeeping entity and another who is taken advantage by the heads of that entity to launch a preemptive war. There aren't any inherent connections to the Prime Universe of a previous franchise with loaded connotations behind each character and organization. If Into Darkness had simply taken the Beyond approach and let Khan simply be "John Harrison," it would be a stronger film. However, they decided to make the villain the genetically engineered tyrant whose entire back history involved annihilating his enemies and achieving world domination. If you are new to the franchise and have no idea who Khan is or what he represents, then the only issue you run into is why Cumberbatch delivers his "My name. Is. KHAN." speech. If you are a fan, then Khan reveal brings up a ton of prior baggage as well as opens up JJTrek to new questions. Is this "reboot" meant to be a tangent universe caused by Prime Spock getting sucked into the black hole? If it is, then Kirk is absolutely 100% right to suspect Khan of treachery because conquest is what Khan lives for (it's why he accepted exile on Ceti Alpha V in the first place). Is this universe a "Mirror Universe" where things are inherently different from the Prime Universe? If so, then that raises a whole bunch of questions about what the Federation is, what it stands for, and its place in the universe. It also means Khan could be a completely different person (a refugee or a relic from the Eugenics War who didn't conquer a quarter of the world). Star Trek 2009 implies that it is the former (the past is more or less the same before Jim Kirk's birth), but Into Darkness strongly suggests the latter. Could Starfleet have reorganized after the attack on Vulcan (the Federation's 9/11 moment)? Possibly. But that still doesn't explain Khan's characterization (he was on ice long before Nero got sucked into the past). Either of those takes on Star Trek are perfectly fine, but I would argue that refusing to make a clear stand on what your universe represents weakens the final product. Marvel Ultimates worked precisely because it emphasized that it was a new take on the properties, not a complete reboot in the same universe. Ghost Leviathan posted:Kinda funny if Into Darkness ends up aging the best of the NuTrek movies. And yet Paramount is going full speed ahead with its Section 31 show!  Blood Boils posted:Abrams did such a solid job with the trek reboot movies- 
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 09:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:05 |
|
|
Into Darkness is a bad film but I don't think there's anything wrong with how it uses the Start Trek setting in itself. TOS and TNG were both made in periods where liberal democracy seemed like it was working and people were broadly optimistic about the future. In the post 9/11 era where the was much more (warranted) scepticism towards government institutions it makes sense that there'd be a more critical eye cast towards the Federation (which is and always has been America in space) and particularly Starfleet, which is an explcitly military organisation. Like, it's not the end of history anymore, people are going to write stories that reflect the world we live in and that is not the same world golden era Trek came from
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 11:49
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:They really shoulda left in the whole thing in the background that it was made using Borg technology and was originally a way more normal Romulan vessel. The inside of the ship looks a lot like v'ger, fwiw.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 14:29
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:However, they decided to make the villain the genetically engineered tyrant whose entire back history involved annihilating his enemies Go watch Space Seed again, or read the plot summary on Memory Alpha at least. Khan's backstory is that he did all of his conquering without any mass murder. I'll save you time and quote Memory Alpha here: "Scott admits he's always held a "sneaking admiration for this one", with Kirk and McCoy adding that his rule lacked the usual massacres and internal wars endemic to tyrants;" I don't think ID'S portrayal of Khan contradicts his Space Seed character in any way. It is true that Spock (mis-)characterizes Khan as a genocidal killer in ID. Spock Prime gave them that impression, and he's why the Enterprise crew shot Khan in the back and turned him against them. It's worth thinking about why Spock Prime did this, and how it ties into ID's theme of vengeance. Bogus Adventure posted:Dude, talking down to me is not going to convince me that your interpretation is the correct one. Your line "Do "a terrorism" or "bomb civilians" is not the Star Trek way of solving problems" only makes sense if you were suggesting that ID advocated for these things. Which is a bizarre interpretation, and deserved to be called out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 15:00
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:We could say that of a lot of media made at the time. To me, this is more interesting than just dismissing "Pen Pals" as "of its time." Because it isn't of its time, it's fuckin' weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
No Dignity posted:TOS and TNG were both made in periods where liberal democracy seemed like it was working and people were broadly optimistic about the future. TOS was made in 1969.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 16:00
|
|
|
Tequila Bob posted:Go watch Space Seed again, or read the plot summary on Memory Alpha at least. Khan's backstory is that he did all of his conquering without any mass murder. I'll save you time and quote Memory Alpha here: I'd recommend you rewatch Space Seed, unless you have forgotten the order and context of events. They reveal their admiration before Khan tries to seize the Enterprise, showing the folly of romanticizing history's tyrants. Spock serves as the important foil (possibly the standing in for the audience), calling out Kirk, McCoy, and Scotty for admiring a dictator. It's contrasted by Kirk's conversation with Khan, when Kirk realizes exactly how dangerous Khan is. For all of Khan's supposed virtues (avoiding massacres and internal wars, not external ones), he is still prejudiced (viewing non-augments as inferior) and unafraid of violence (willing to kill the entire Enterprise crew). I'll help put things in context for you courtesy of YouTube. It's a clip, but it contrasts the crew's abstract historical research of Khan with Kirk's contextualized conversation with him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29bQrNPbGYI This is how the episode ends: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGLmwljq9dg Spock is clearly skeptical of Kirk's decision to let Khan and his people settle Ceti Alpha V. If you view the episode alone, the result can be seen as ambiguous. If you look at it in context of Wrath of Khan, it is clearly the wrong answer (Khan clearly regrets choosing to "rule in hell" and Kirk failed to check up on him, although you could argue he had no obligation to). The "do a terrorism" line was more meant as a tongue-in-cheek segue back to Star Wars talk. If you want to take it seriously, that is exactly what "hero" Khan does throughout the movie, first by assassinating Starfleet's captains and then deciding to crash his ship into Starfleet Headquarters (which is located in San Francisco): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQkLWa6J3dM I agree with you that it is the wrong choice, and a rather obvious metaphor in having a ship called "Vengeance" crash into San Francisco and likely kill hundreds of thousands of bystanders in the process. My issue is with the current wave of Star Trek writers making variations on, "Yeah, the Federation is a paradise where humanity overcame its worst impulses...but what if it really didn't?" Halloween Jack posted:To me, this is more interesting than just dismissing "Pen Pals" as "of its time." Because it isn't of its time, it's fuckin' weird. Pen Pals is wild.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 16:03
|
|
|
YggdrasilTM posted:TOS was made in 1969. Yes? The Cold War was seen as a surmountable problem, and there was still faith in the institutions carrying it out. Like it's present in the show through the hot and cold wars with Klingons but it's portrayed as an issue that needs solving and not the death spiral of their civilisation
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
No Dignity posted:Yes? The Cold War was seen as a surmountable problem, and there was still faith in the institutions carrying it out. Like it's present in the show through the hot and cold wars with Klingons but it's portrayed as an issue that needs solving and not the death spiral of their civilisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_of_1968
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
Bogus adventure, I do understand your desire to see a future world that works, but part of the conflict in a lot of star trek is that there are people who don't understand or care about that and that it is up to people to make the right, difficult choice in that moment to uphold that. Lots of evil admirals on tng only care about youth or promotion and introduce some problem to the ship that the crew has to resolve through reason. Or else some Klingon politician wants to stop peace talks, or some group of cavemen has forgotten what the Constitution means. It could be argued that the starship Enterprise is the only safe haven in a cold universe, and Into darkness is in line with that. It also shouldn't be ignored though, star trek's depiction of alien races being like, the sneaky planet, or the violence planet or the greedy planet, while humans are flawless, is not exactly an enlightened take. There should be a little reflection into the negative qualities of people and their institutions, or else we Just Can't get to that place where things work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 16:15
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:I'd recommend you rewatch Space Seed, unless you have forgotten the order and context of events. They reveal their admiration before Khan tries to seize the Enterprise, showing the folly of romanticizing history's tyrants. Khan is a heroic character and an antagonist in Into Darkness. These are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
Quite a few Star Trek episodes are specifically about the flaws of the Federation itself and how it treats its own people, even before getting into outsiders, and in TNG, not just DS9. Measure of a Man gets into how it has gaping holes in treatment of artificial sentience, and DS9 gets not only into diplomatic skulduggery but treatment of genetic engineering with Bashir's whole character. How it's handled is another thing, but the point is clearly raised that the society trying very hard and earnestly to be utopian has clear blind spots that the protagonists, characters with both agency and principles, need to deal with. It's because the Federation and Earth wants to rise above the problems of current day society that it's even a conflict in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
FunkyAl posted:Bogus adventure, I do understand your desire to see a future world that works, but part of the conflict in a lot of star trek is that there are people who don't understand or care about that and that it is up to people to make the right, difficult choice in that moment to uphold that. Lots of evil admirals on tng only care about youth or promotion and introduce some problem to the ship that the crew has to resolve through reason. Or else some Klingon politician wants to stop peace talks, or some group of cavemen has forgotten what the Constitution means. It could be argued that the starship Enterprise is the only safe haven in a cold universe, and Into darkness is in line with that. I understand and appreciate that, but my issue is when the desire to rise above shifts from being the general drive of the majority of people in the Star Trek world with occasional evil admirals or corrupt politicians to where our protagonists are the anomaly and corruption is the norm. There is a reason the Federation President in ST VI emphasizes "This President is not above the law" when the Klingons seek to prosecute Kirk and McCoy for the assassination of Gorkon. The system is run by people who care about upholding their ideals rather than the Admirals pushing for war. They are the exception, not the norm. You can still explore flaws and prejudices while maintaining that balance. Hell, VI is all about how Kirk's blind hatred of Klingons is wrong. SNW leans into it with their S1 finale. S2 explores it with Augments. As for TOS aging poorly with one world representing one ideal, one race, one philosophy, that is more a product of pulp soft science fiction during the early and middle 20th century. I don't justify it, but I can't excoriate it for something that people did not (but should have) know(n) better at the time. Most past media is problematic by today's standards (even some of today's media still is).
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:There is a reason the Federation President in ST VI emphasizes "This President is not above the law" when the Klingons seek to prosecute Kirk and McCoy for the assassination of Gorkon. The system is run by people who care about upholding their ideals rather than the Admirals pushing for war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
e: wrong star wars thread, back to your regularly scheduled trek chat 
No Mods No Masters fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Sep 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 19:38
|
|
|
RLM goes on and on about how they like Star Trek because it’s a nice happy view of the future where everyone is good with each other and that sounds so boring lol Blow poo poo up and show me monsters
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 20:21
|
|
|
There's a reason the 4th movie did so well, or the Lower Decks crossover was so good this season. Star Trek is at its best at the same time Twilight Zone is - when it's about philosophical or Sci fi based issues. Even Wrath of Khan was that. It was Space Hubt for Red October. I can't think of any time anyone ever in the history of the universe cared about action in a Star Trek unless it was a singular moment or kill. Darko fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Sep 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2023 23:56
|
|
|
Assimilate this
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:RLM goes on and on about how they like Star Trek because it’s a nice happy view of the future where everyone is good with each other and that sounds so boring lol If you enjoy a galaxy at war, a space war you might say, waged among the stars, boy do I have the franchise for you
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 00:47
|
|
|
Oh you talking about the new hit game starfield
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Nah he's talking about Starship Troopers. Would you like to know more?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:I understand and appreciate that, but my issue is when the desire to rise above shifts from being the general drive of the majority of people in the Star Trek world with occasional evil admirals or corrupt politicians to where our protagonists are the anomaly and corruption is the norm. I'm actually talking more about next generation when it comes to race relations, tos is the more enlightened take in a lot of ways. Something to chew on for into darkness: we have a lot of the things now that the show from the 60s aspired to, we have computers that talk and mobile telephones, race relations have (generally) improved, but that hasn't stopped our systems in real life from trending toward fascism. The answer is more complicated than kicking a thing into a thing, but being able to present the problem with a kind of honesty is important to mulling the solution. Sincerely, how Does a humanitarian peacekeeping armada maintain difference between a regular, warkeeping armada?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 01:23
|
|
|
Ridley Scott was bored by the action in alien covenant and I am with him. Movies should be slow, full of long wide takes of landscapes and architecture. The only time a character should speak is when soliloquizing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 01:27
|
|
|
I get it. Also, I'm having a very annoying week at work where I keep seeing the stuff I have to do increasing at an exponential rate. I'm going to self-exile to Ceti Alpha V and cede the thread back to the proper topic. You can all say I lost the star trek.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 01:38
|
|
|
Bogus Adventure posted:I get it. Also, I'm having a very annoying week at work where I keep seeing the stuff I have to do increasing at an exponential rate. I'm going to self-exile to Ceti Alpha V and cede the thread back to the proper topic. You can all say I lost the star trek. Ah you lost nothing, this thread would be very very boring if we all though the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:07
|
|
|
Ahsoka eps 5+6 are good enough to make me think Dave Filoni is at least capable of making a decent Star Wars movie (read: better than TRoS, but maybe not a whole ton). Will he? Who knows.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:16
|
|
|
Glottis posted:Ahsoka eps 5+6 are good enough to make me think Dave Filoni is at least capable of making a decent Star Wars movie (read: better than TRoS, but maybe not a whole ton). Will he? Who knows. He only directed episodes 1 and 5 of this season.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:19
|
|
|
FunkyAl posted:Ah you lost nothing, this thread would be very very boring if we all though the same thing. I appreciate it 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:24
|
|
|
I think filoni's movie will have a bit more potential if he doesn't write it also, or at least doesn't write it solo like he did for this whole show. There are flashes of potential, it's nice to have someone running the show who is clearly highly passionate and not some hack, but at least with ahsoka as a sample size I don't think he can write for poo poo
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
Timby posted:He only directed episodes 1 and 5 of this season. He's still the showrunner, right? C'mon, let me be semi-optimistic about Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:47
|
|
|
Glottis posted:He's still the showrunner, right? C'mon, let me be semi-optimistic about Star Wars. Yes, he wrote every episode of this season and is the shot-caller, but he only directed two episodes, neither of which filled me with confidence about the movie he'll be directing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 02:51
|
|
|
i'm not a fan of the term witches in star wars as its a loaded term of lady wizards, and its just a hop skip and a jump to having people called force wizards. Then I just dont know why jedi and Sith are a thing and normal non magic people are just bystanders in a world of magic. I think it might be impossible to turn back to more non superpowered people stories once that cat is out of the bag. Marvel has this issue with "street" heros vs their super hero properties. They seem to have solved it by keeping them separate outside of ill fated crossovers. Edit:wasnt Ben called a wizard? also pretty sure they had some in Ewok movies Upsidads fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Sep 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 03:32
|
|
|
Upsidads posted:also pretty sure they had some in Ewok movies Ewoks: The Battle For Endor is the actually-good version of Ahsoka. The issue with the "witches", as presented here, is that there's really no difference between what they're doing and any other basic Sith stuff. Like wow, neat, they can make stuff float and predict the future. Unimpressive! Meanwhile, the witch in Battle For Endor could straight-up shapeshift into a bird and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 04:01
|
|
|
im just more towards keeping into your own brands nomenclature, it gets messy fast. and yeah I'm more for low fantasy force stuff. Once everyone is slinging it then you start to retcon normal characters into force users then han solo was just that one guy who was cool and had no powers
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 04:46
|
|
|
as Phantom Menace established, wizard just means cool
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 06:23
|
|
|
Morgan Elsbeth, business witchboss could have been a breakout character if she'd got to do anything other than glower for the first five episodes. Otherwise they're just Sith doing a Macbeth riff. Anyway, as the latest episode made clear for this part they've gone to a galaxy far far away from a long time ago, the stuff of stories and legends, where Ezra has been living with the Hobbits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 08:25
|
|
|
I don't have time for lovely TV. Can I watch Ashoka ep 5 on its own or do I need to wade through the first four (in which case I'll pass)?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 11:13
|
|
|
Episode 4 was decent too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 11:25
|
|
|
GoldenGun posted:I don't have time for lovely TV. Can I watch Ashoka ep 5 on its own or do I need to wade through the first four (in which case I'll pass)? Give it a minute and I'm sure there'll be a fan edit condensing the first four episodes down to 90 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 11:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:05 |
|
|
GoldenGun posted:I don't have time for lovely TV. Can I watch Ashoka ep 5 on its own or do I need to wade through the first four (in which case I'll pass)? You could watch episodes 1, 2, the last ten minutes of 4 and then 5.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2023 11:39
|
|