Star Trek Into Darkness (Pre-release)

[Lost21stJedi]

I think by that time things had calmed down a little bit. It was after WW3.

My "future history" isn't the best though so don't quote me on that.

I'm not sure either, in First Contact, wasn't there a line where she asked Picard "what faction he was with" or something similar. I assumed that meant there was still fighting going on

 

[Jeyl]

Star Trek's message is that we are growing and can be better. Why do you take such issue with that?

I don't take issue with that message. I actually like the idea of humanity not being so prejudiced against others and moving on from "I'm better than you" conflicts. I just think other Star Treks were better at conveying this message than others. The episode "The Neutral Zone" has a bunch of late 1900 era humans being revived on the Enterprise, and for doing nothing but being who they are, we get these comments from the crew.

Riker: Well, from what I've seen of our guests, there's not much to redeem them. It makes one wonder how our species survived the twenty-first century.

Picard: A lot has changed in the past three hundred years. People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of things. We've eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions. We have grown out of our infancy.

So yeah, buying the new season sets of TNG is so infantile and irredeemable that it would leave future 'enlightened' humans pondering how we could have survived as a species. Don't bother bringing up the Nazi regime, numerous acts of genocide, mislead wars or terrorists attacks on innocent populations. I'm trying to support and enjoy Star Trek, but it keeps telling me that doing such a thing is infantile! It's like buying a condom and the instructions call you a pervert for even thinking about wanting to have sex.

 

[nickytea]

"You can't take it with you."

Dependence and possession are virtues to be transcended in countless disciplines.

It follows that our future would promise as much spiritual advancement as it does technological advancement. (Though the latter is what most fans prefer to focus on.) A purely consumerist society is not sustainable. Doesn't take a Star Trek writer to realize that.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

I don't take issue with that message. I actually like the idea of humanity not being so prejudiced against others and moving on from "I'm better than you" conflicts...........

lollollollollollol

Unless you think TOS is better than TNG!

 

[Jeyl]

It follows that our future would promise as much spiritual advancement as it does technological advancement.

The way Star Trek treats it's 'spiritual advancement' comes off more like self-glorifying arrogance than a deeper understanding of one's self and the rest of the universe. After all, this is a franchise where our enlightened heroes have condemned numerous species to die out rather than letting them have a future by simply existing.

 

[Jeyl]

Unless you think TOS is better than TNG!

You've got to admit it is hard for someone to create a universe about a more perfect humanity when he himself was a crook.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

The way Star Trek treats it's 'spiritual advancement' comes off more like self-glorifying arrogance than a deeper understanding of one's self and the rest of the universe. After all, this is a franchise where our enlightened heroes have condemned numerous species to die out rather than letting them have a future by simply existing.

Can't argue with this one! :thumbsup

 

[Michael Bergeron]

You've got to admit it is hard for someone to create a universe about a more perfect humanity when he himself was a crook.

You could say the same about 95% of the American founding fathers... At least they put forth the effort instead of tearing down the ideals of someone else because of personal flaws.

 

[Jeyl]

You could say the same about 95% of the American founding fathers... At least they put forth the effort instead of tearing down the ideals of someone else because of personal flaws.

And I won't argue that. I'm just in the camp that while I thank Gene Roddenberry for giving us one of my all time favorite science fiction franchises, I'm not going to say that his visions were all that good. I even argue that he wasn't even a good Star Trek writer a majority of the time.

This is why "Assignment: Earth" is such a bad pill. It is so obviously a backdoor pilot to a whole different series that one has to wonder if the Star Trek bits weren't written by hand on the sides of the script. The whole point of the episode was used as a safety net for Gene because Star Trek was facing possible cancellation and he wanted to have a new series to fall back on. Now, it's perfectly fine to start work on another series if even if the current one you're working on is still going strong, but do you really want to end your current series, one that you know has a pretty dedicated fan following with an episode that has nothing to do with Star Trek? At least "These Are The Voyages" was undoubtably a Star Trek product, "Assignment: Earth" was not.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

And I won't argue that. I'm just in the camp that while I thank Gene Roddenberry for giving us one of my all time favorite science fiction franchises, I'm not going to say that his visions were all that good

But, at the very least from a TOS perspective, Star Trek IS his vision... I don't know what you're trying to get at. So you like Trek but you don't like what makes it Trek?

 

[NakedMoleRat]

I like cheese.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

I like cheese.

Mmmmmmm... Cheese...

 

[Jeyl]

But, at the very least from a TOS perspective, Star Trek IS his vision... I don't know what you're trying to get at. So you like Trek but you don't like what makes it Trek?

Star Trek has had such a long variety of depictions since it's creation that I wouldn't say it's fair to categorize it as "one man's vision". If you're going to classify Star Trek as a "Human Adventure", why doesn't anyone criticize episodes that involve the alien characters? Gene Roddenberry himself once said "If we're not making a show about humans, what's the point?" which I think is a pretty closed minded statement given that Star Trek, even the original series has long established alien cultures who were not human to be characters in their own right. TNG and most prominently DS9 gave characters their own dedicated stories that didn't even involve the human characters. Nobody came into the writers room and told everyone to stop because the characters aren't human. That would have been stupid, yet that was Gene's vision.

Plus, Gene Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek is marred with sexism, something I would hardly call 'enlightened'.

 

[Bryancd]

Trying to reconcile the creators vision for Trek in the 1960's against it's modern iterations and sensibilities is a fools errand.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Plus, Gene Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek is marred with sexism, something I would hardly call 'enlightened'.

:facepalm:facepalm:facepalm

Look at it for it's ERA. Female first officer, black woman on the bridge... It was revolutionary.

To his market in the 1960s nobody would have watched an episode all about a non-human character (even though he did do so with Spock, pushing even that boundry).

If it weren't for the universe he created you wouldn't have had that opportunity later. His vision of the future allowed for it.

 

[Michael Bergeron]

Trying to reconcile the creators vision for Trek in the 1960's against it's modern iterations and sensibities us a fools errand.

:thumbsup

I don't know why I let myself get dragged into these... :lol

 

[nickytea]

If you're going to classify Star Trek as a "Human Adventure", why doesn't anyone criticize episodes that involve the alien characters?

Jeyl, you're taking Trek as literally as a biblical extremist.

Aliens in Trek are a metaphor. A narrative device used to further explore the depths of our humanity. You're one localizing, specifying "humanity" to reference the race of man.

 

[Jeyl]

Aliens in Trek are a metaphor. A narrative device used to further explore the depths of our humanity.

What kind of a metaphor do the small purring fur balls known as Tribbles fit into humanity's image?

 

[Michael Bergeron]

What kind of a metaphor do the small purring fur balls known as Tribbles fit into humanity's image?

Jock itch.

 

[Lost21stJedi]

What kind of a metaphor do the small purring fur balls known as Tribbles fit into humanity's image?

If you’re a fan of science fiction, you might remember the old Star Trek episode, The Trouble with Tribbles. It was a simple story with a predictable ending. But, it’s also a great metaphor for the current state of affairs in much of the developed world. First, the summary:
The crew of the Enterprise is sent to protect a special wheat-rye grain in temporary storage being held at deep space station on its way to some designated planet.
At the same time, a trader named Cyrano Jones lands at the station, bringing along this fur-ball of a thing called a tribble. It’s an animal that basically has two jobs in life – eat and reproduce.
The tribbles get loose on the space station and start reproducing like rabbits pumped up on extra strength Viagra. They summarily eat everything in sight – including all the grain.
Inevitably, there is the pivotal scene where Captain Kirk realizes what’s happening and goes to one of the station’s grain holds to investigate. As he opens the door (conveniently located above his head), a seemingly endless number of tribbles flood out – plunk, plunk, plunk – burying Kirk up to the chest

The Trouble with Tribbles - EscapeArtist Asset Protection