The Doctor Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I gotta hand it to the Doc... BOBW is the best storyline in Star Trek - maybe with Unifcation a close second... (Spock?) Eh, I felt the Unification storyline was polluted by the existence of Tasha Yar's half-Romulan offspring. Alternate timeline stuff in TNG just rubs me the wrong way. The story could have gone on just fine without her - and should have, to be perfectly honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chevron 7 locke Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I thought best of both worlds was okay....not great but okay...it would have been better if we could have seen the full battle of Wolf 359, that would have made it much more interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Kirk. He had an awesome martial arts move set. Nothing too fancy, just kick ass and get the job done. They are all likeable however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I thought best of both worlds was okay....not great but okay...it would have been better if we could have seen the full battle of Wolf 359, that would have made it much more interesting See, you seem to be more partial to the shiny lights and explosions you get in space battles than anything else. Wolf 359 was left unshown to build suspense, just like the battle in the Sol System in the beginning of First Contact (which was also an incredible movie, btw. One of the best). We didn't really see much of the Borg until they made a bee-line for Picard, and even then we only saw a handful of drones and very little phaser fire. After that, all we saw was Locutus. That's the Borg at their prime - not the creepy looking guys from Voyager's era, but the rarely seen foe with the ominously shaped vessels. Space battles are best left to a franchise based on such material. Star Trek isn't about war, and explosions, and bright lights making cool noises. That's what makes Star Wars so great. Star Trek is, in my mind, more cerebral than that - at least, the better storyarchs are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chevron 7 locke Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I agree. Forst Contact was a great movie, but i feel that if we saw more of the battle it would have raised more suspense, like showing the borg and starfleet ships fighting would have raised the question: who is going to win this battle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endorenna Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 See, you seem to be more partial to the shiny lights and explosions you get in space battles than anything else. Wolf 359 was left unshown to build suspense, just like the battle in the Sol System in the beginning of First Contact (which was also an incredible movie, btw. One of the best). We didn't really see much of the Borg until they made a bee-line for Picard, and even then we only saw a handful of drones and very little phaser fire. After that, all we saw was Locutus. That's the Borg at their prime - not the creepy looking guys from Voyager's era, but the rarely seen foe with the ominously shaped vessels. Space battles are best left to a franchise based on such material. Star Trek isn't about war, and explosions, and bright lights making cool noises. That's what makes Star Wars so great. Star Trek is, in my mind, more cerebral than that - at least, the better storyarchs are. Y'see, my first exposure to Picard and the Borg was First Contact, so when I saw The Best of Both Worlds, I pretty much knew what was going to happen. Not that I wasn't on the edge of my seat--anything having to so with the Borg puts me on the edge of my seat! I haven't gotten to the Borg in Voyager yet, so no comment there (except that Seven sounds like a really cool character, from what I've heard ) Star Trek is very cerebral. My favorites are the episodes with good space battles ('cuz I love space battles) and a lot of thought behind them. As far as Sisko being 'The Emmissary', I could do without all that garbadge. Waaaaay too 'Oh, let's stare at the big green light bulb in a wierd box and see that later we're going to have a very intimate relationship with a stupid wimp named Barial' and that sort of thing. And the ear-grabbing thing hurts me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I agree. Forst Contact was a great movie, but i feel that if we saw more of the battle it would have raised more suspense, like showing the borg and starfleet ships fighting would have raised the question: who is going to win this battle? Well, we quite obviously knew that the Federation would lose the battle, as it was only ten minutes into a two hour movie. Therefore, showing the entirety of the battle itself would only serve to raise production costs needlessly, and cheapen the suspense inherent in the idea of such a battle taking place so close to Earth. Besides, we got to see the new Enterprise fire its new and improved blue weapons, as well as a nice big explosion when the Federation fleet destroyed the Cube. And in the end, hearing the fear among the ranks the Federation fleet and the classic Borg ultimatum, followed by the screams and such as the battle begun, was far more intense than anything they could have done by showing the space battle itself. Hearing the people behind the battle made for such a greater emotional impact than hearing the "PSSSSSHHHH" of starship weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chevron 7 locke Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I thought star ship weapons went Foom-Foom! Edit: I like picard. it's archer that i have a problem with, you can admire kirk...he got green alien space babes every few episodes and regular babes in every other episode. Archer...he aint got nothing Spamming a thread repeatedly with unnecessary posts will get you into trouble. -RH Deleting posts cause a mod warned you will get you into trouble as well. -RH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True_Avery Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Parents watched Star Trek a lot when I was growing up, thus so did I. So I'm going to have to go with... Jean-Luc Picard. Sorry Kirk, but Patrick is just too awesome for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 The "best thing in Star Trek" has to be handed, without question, to the two-parter The Best of Both Worlds. cmon, Picard in a Fremen suit, his bald head with a laser pointer stuck to it was intensely funny as oppose to just ''intense''. I fell off my purple beanbag laughing. Surely he could have ordered those nanobots to stimulate some follicular growth. My fave TNG ep was that one that kept repeating itself until the enterprise got destroyed, until they figured out they were stuck in some type of temporal loop. mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW01 Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 My fave TNG ep was that one that kept repeating itself until the enterprise got destroyed, until they figured out they were stuck in some type of temporal loop. The one with Capt. Frasier at the end - yeah, that was good! I think my favourites from TNG were 'Gambit', 'Lower Decks' (both Season 7), and everything featuring Q! (especially 'Tapestry' - Q (posing as God) "Blasphemy! You're lucky I don't cast you out or smite you or something.") And I think that DS9 (and therefore Sisko) may have benefited from the longer-running storylines - the Maquis, the exchanges between Sisko and Kai Winn, the Prophets, the Cardassians and Dukat, and - of course - the Dominion War. The other series, for the most part, were chopping and changing between storylines each episode, except for double episodes and Voyager's overarching 'return home' premise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattig89ch Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Give me Jean Luc Picard (pronounced as Q did the first time he appeared) anyday. At least he was more diplomatic. Everyone else was more like, shoot first, shoot some more, then when everyone's dead ask a question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavardes Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I thought star ship weapons went Foom-Foom! Edit: I like picard. it's archer that i have a problem with, you can admire kirk...he got green alien space babes every few episodes and regular babes in every other episode. Archer...he aint got nothing Spamming a thread repeatedly with unnecessary posts will get you into trouble. -RH *sigh* *rubs temples* Star Trek is meant to be dynamic and story-driven, with story-archs that detail inter-species relations and a development of understanding that transcends racial barriers. It's supposed to be about tolerance and diplomacy, and tactical problem-solving in the face of impossible odds. It isn't supposed to be about sex, explosions and shiny gunfire. You want shallow storylines with two-dimensional characters and too much action, I suggest you go play Halo. Me, I like my brain having something to wrap itself around and analyse while I watch a movie. I like to be challenged mentally by my entertainment, because to me, it's a waste of my time otherwise. TNG brings that to the table nearly every time, and Voyager does as well, by majority. TOS doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 TNG brings that to the table nearly every time, and Voyager does as well, by majority. TOS doesn't. That might be because Roddenberry's original idea for Star Trek was 'Bonanza in Space', I seem to remember. It developed and changed into what it was during the movies, and then grew more into TNG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Dravis Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Yes, that was what TNG was meant to be about. As for the original series...nah. Some influences Roddenberry noted were A. E. van Vogt's tales of the Space Beagle, Eric Frank Russell's Marathon stories, and the 1956 science fiction film Forbidden Planet. Parallels have also been drawn with the 1954 TV sci-fi series Rocky Jones, Space Ranger, a much less sophisticated space opera that nevertheless included many of the elements -- organization, crew relationships, missions, elements of bridge layout, and even some technology -- that made up Star Trek.[4] Roddenberry also drew heavily from the Horatio Hornblower novels depicting a daring sea captain exercising broad discretionary authority on distant missions of noble purpose; his Kirk character was more or less Hornblower in space.[5] Roddenberry had extensive experience in writing westerns that were particularly popular television fare at the time, and pitched the show to the network as a "Wagon Train to the stars." Basing your show on westerns, early sci-fi - which most often was VERY exaggerated - the new "hard" scifi was nonexistent then, for the most part - and B-grade TV space operas does not indicate what you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 "Bonanza in space" was merely Roddenberry's way of selling the show to networks that were looking for westerns. I don't think that was his vision for the show, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Star Trek is meant to be dynamic and story-driven, with story-archs that detail inter-species relations and a development of understanding that transcends racial barriers. It's supposed to be about tolerance and diplomacy, and tactical problem-solving in the face of impossible odds. Star Trek is supposed to be about whatever its creators says it should be about. It isn't supposed to be about sex, explosions and shiny gunfire. TOS isn't all about these things, it also has episodes which exemplify the qualities you listed above in the previous quote. You're obviously too biased by your dislike of the show to see them. TOS doesn't. Not to you, but I'm sure fans of TOS would disagree with you. As Sam and Astor have said, TOS was created in a different time and for a different demographic. Criticizing it for not being like TNG is incredibly unfair because it simply was not meant to be that way. If it wasn't for TOS, TNG wouldn't even exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavardes Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Few instances in a series that still has a majority basis in the characteristics I listed do not constitute overall quality. It constitutes that the series was not a total waste of time. Also, the claim of it being for a different demographic is no excuse. Yes, it was for a demographic very much unlike our own, but in terms of modern quality, which I judge all works of entertainment on, it was of poor production, actor performance, and story depth. And, again, just because it's popularity lead to TNG does not make it a success in today's standards of fiction. Perhaps you are too biased for the show to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Also, the claim of it being for a different demographic is no excuse. It isn't an excuse, it's fact. It was tailored for a different audience in a different time. Yes, it was for a demographic very much unlike our own, but in terms of modern quality, which I judge all works of entertainment on, The standards on which you judge it didn't even exist back then, so I'm sorry that TOS doesn't meet them. That's like saying George Washington was a crappy President because he only had thirteen states to command. And, again, just because it's popularity lead to TNG does not make it a success in today's standards of fiction. No, the fact that it's the basis for the entire multi-million dollar franchise makes it a success. Perhaps you are too biased for the show to see that. TNG is actually my favorite Trek series. I also enjoy TOS because I'm able to place it in the proper context and view it for what it is meant to be rather than making unfair comparisons to a much later TV series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endorenna Posted December 1, 2008 Author Share Posted December 1, 2008 I enjoy TOS and TNG. Of the two, I far, far prefer TNG because 1. I got sick of Spock crying. 2. I don't like womanizers. 3. Barely clad women get on my nerves. 4. I don't like womanizers. 5. The Klingons made me laugh too hard. 6. I DON'T LIKE WOMANIZERS!!!!!!!!!!! Yet I still watch it. In the later series, I really like the episodes that hark back to the TOS (aka Crossover, Trials and Tribble-ations, etc.) But man, TNG has some annoying parts too... :S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavardes Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 It isn't an excuse, it's fact. It was tailored for a different audience in a different time. No excuse for poorly made television. The standards on which you judge it didn't even exist back then, so I'm sorry that TOS doesn't meet them. That's like saying George Washington was a crappy President because he only had thirteen states to command. So just because people didn't have a widened understanding of quality entertainment, we are to accept their productions as equal to other franchises even when they really aren't? I'm so sorry that I am attempting to raise the standards of entertainment that the modern viewer enjoys, because, guess what, it's not the '60s and '70s anymore. The funny thing is, I haven't heard you put up a decent argument for the quality of the show, or its actors, yet. You just keep saying that relative to the shallow and sex-oriented demographic it was targeted after, the show was top-quality. No, the fact that it's the basis for the entire multi-million dollar franchise makes it a success. The general public matter very little in terms of quality. High school musical is one of the top grossing movie franchises in the United States. Does that mean you think they've been successful in bringing quality to the entertainment world? TNG is actually my favorite Trek series. I also enjoy TOS because I'm able to place it in the proper context and view it for what it is meant to be rather than making unfair comparisons to a much later TV series. That's nice. I'm gonna stick to keeping my standards high, because that way, I only watch high-quality work. See what I did there, with the high standards, filtering out everything but high quality stuff? Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 No excuse for poorly made television. By your criteria, all the shows produced in that time were poorly made. So just because people didn't have a widened understanding of quality entertainment, They didn't have your 'widened understanding of quality' because it didn't exist back then. we are to accept their productions as equal to other franchises even when they really aren't? I never said TOS was equal to TNG. I said you can't compare them on the same ground and in the same context. I'm so sorry that I am attempting to raise the standards of entertainment that the modern viewer enjoys, because, guess what, it's not the '60s and '70s anymore. You're attempting to raise the standards of the modern viewer? Are you a television executive? A respected media commentator? I seriously doubt it, so the only thing you're doing is making unfair comparisons between two shows that are very, very different. The funny thing is, I haven't heard you put up a decent argument for the quality of the show, or its actors, yet. You just keep saying that relative to the shallow and sex-oriented demographic it was targeted after, the show was top-quality. Where did I say the show was top quality? The only thing I ever said about its quality was that it was obviously good enough to have a franchise based off of it. Please stop with the strawmen, it's getting annoying. The general public matter very little in terms of quality. High school musical is one of the top grossing movie franchises in the United States. Does that mean you think they've been successful in bringing quality to the entertainment world? High School Musical is immaterial to the discussion at hand. Again, comparing something from the past by today's standards is ridiculous. You don't dislike your grandparents just because they think differently from you. They grew up in a different time and you have to at least acknowledge and accept that. That's nice. I'm gonna stick to keeping my standards high, because that way, I only watch high-quality work. See what I did there, with the high standards, filtering out everything but high quality stuff? Yeah. Whatever floats your boat. Still doesn't validate your using modern standards to judge the quality of older shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 And stuff from the 60s and 70s are low standard? Eh? I think James Bond would like to have a word with you, Adavardes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Agreed, holding ToS to the modern day sci-fi standards is a little silly... the world was a very, very, very different place back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediAthos Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I voted for Picard. I think that as a starship captain Picard seems the most well rounded. He can talk when there is time for talk and there is no doubt he can fight especially when it's against the Borg. (that is when he isn't one of them) I have to give an honorable mention to Sisko as well because there were so many times when it was just him and his little station against what seemed like the rest of the galaxy and because I thought he was one of the better developed characters of the DS9 series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.