Planet Descent
Community => Mess Hall => Topic started by: Sapphirus on September 04, 2011, 06:34:49 PM
-
http://nerdapproved.com/movies/george-lucas-makes-more-changes-to-the-star-wars-films-for-blu-ray/
This is a bad sense of a step backwards, the original theatrical editions of episodes IV-VI will not be included! Why, George Lucas, WHY!!!!
-
inb4 "Han shot first"...
...
Han shot first, darn you Lucas!
-
[url]http://nerdapproved.com/movies/george-lucas-makes-more-changes-to-the-star-wars-films-for-blu-ray/[/url]
This is bad sense of a step backwards, the original theatrical editions of episodes IV-VI will not be included! Why, George Lucas, WHY!!!!
I disagree. Yes, the original theatrical editions of IV-VI were groundbreaking and a tremendous success and many fans dislike the changes/alterations in the re-release editions. But keep in mind that the re-release editions included effects and components that were not possible when IV-VI were first made but were items Lucas had wanted in them. It makes sense that the re-release versions are more to what Lucas had wanted, plus there were a LOT of fixes applied to the re-release versions. In that article they note that a LOT of additional corrections and rebalancing of the audio are in the blu-ray release, especially to "A New Hope" (episode IV).
I, too, like (and preferred) the original theatrical, but with all the audio fixes and audio rebalancing, plus numerous corrective edits (no boom mic in the picture, etc) the blu-ray edition should be good.
-
I agree and disagree. I guess some things like Jabba and Han Solo in IV has always been intended. However; I think some things like Han shooting Greedo last is something he decided to put in later for whatever reason. or Vader now saying "No" at the end of VI.
The only thing I liked about the updates, were the window views in Cloud City; like the laser fighting scenes. everything else, no opinion or didn't care for it; oh, the other one I liked when when Vader told them to prepare for his shuttle; this again, in Empire Strikes Back.
-
I'll go along with that.
-
*is watching Star Trek*
Huh? Oh sorry, I wasn't listening, what was that about...Star Wars, was it? ;D
-
is Trek like another language for Wars? Trek? sound like creek, or wreck?
I'm not a huge fan of Star Wars, like I use to; but it's still interesting to see at times.
-
What, you never heard of Star Trek? I guess that was before your time.
-
I saw two episodes, on a DVD or something; a gift from my father. It had "nomad", some computer that entered their ship. I'd like to say it was "perfect', the robot that is. and that Spock ended up saying something that caused nomad to go crazy. they got Nomad out of the ship and it later blew away.
the other; Something about the beginning of time, Adam and Eve; I think. I saw only bits of that.
-
I think you gotta remember that people loved the originals, not these retcons.
Updating the effects is one thing but changing things that affect the story itself is a different matter.
That's not a question of what Lucas wanted and couldn't have back then because of those things weren't effects dependent.
In the same way that my Avatar bluray has 3 different versions on the disc where it includes or omits certain portions of the film depending on whether you want the directors cut, the extended or the cinema version, Lucas should be doing the same with Star Wars to allow people to opt for the updated version with some changed scenes or the 'original' with updated effects. I got the impression he isn't going to do that and he's trying to efface the originals from peoples' memories, which I think is a shame.
I've got 1080p HDTV rips of the StarWars movies and they are very sharp albeit not quite as polished as a fully remastered bluray.
At least I've got those to fall back to if he makes a complete pig's ear of it.
-
While you all raise good points about this, I still think you guys are getting too worked up over something that, at the end of the day, isn't really that big a deal. So George Lucas looked back on his works and saw things he wanted to change. Every writer/creator does that, so can you blame him for wanting to do the same? And I personally think those first three Star Wars movies certainly could use it, as it seems clear to me that when they were made, Lucas did NOT have the universe they were set in figured out very well.
And I think Lucas knows that too, hence the continued attempts to modify it.
Maybe his methodology for doing it isn't the best by releasing only the modified versions and not the originals every now and then like Crash says, but oh well. The originals are still out there if you really can't stand the edited versions.
But of course, as I'm sure I already made clear, I'm not the biggest Star Wars fan around. I mean sure, I've seen all the movies, but there are other sci-fi fanchises (not just Star Trek) out there that top Star Wars for me fairly easily.
So I might be bias in the matter.
...
Maybe. :P
-
If Star Trek got modified all of the time, you may not like it.
I know, when it all comes down to it, does it matter? No. Personally, I don't care much for a lot of the movies, tv shows, music, games, etc that I own. I could do a massive clean out and still not feel like I am missing something.
A lot of the modifications don't BUG me bug me, some a little more than other things. I guess I can see why he'd change things. Ever read my story? Yikes. So many changes ALL OF THE TIME. Nothing seems final.
but still, it's nice to see something we grew up watching. To see more storm troopers, or sand people; more or less robots; different ones, may not be so bad.
but to change Greedo trying to shoot Han first changes character.
Han is the type to just go and kill; this made it look like self defense. It changes it some.
Vader doesn't have to say "no" twice at the end of VI. We get it. I got it just fine. He looks down at Luke; and looks sad. He decides to put an end to it and save Luke. We get it. Hearing "no" twice is just not needed, and dumbed down the film.
-
Variety is the spice of life, after all.
A bit of chopping and changing just makes things more interesting for the die-hard fans.
-
If Star Trek got modified all of the time, you may not like it.
Ah, but Trek has gotten modified before.
For example, the original series got remastered (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series#Remastered), and while it wasn't that extensive, still made changes.
And unlike Star Wars, Trek has also gotten rebooted (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29) which, alternate timelines and other technicalities aside, still changes significantly the canon fans know and love.
And Trek has also gone through the care of several different people other than it's creator and was taken in directions fairly different than originally intended (Deep Space Nine (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine) is a good example) and one can argue that the same argument can stand there.
And there are probably more to come.
And you don't hear me complaining about any of it.
In fact, I fully support it. Every franchise needs a little freshening up, to be taken in a different direction, to make altercations to it's structure. Sure, one may not like all the changes they make, but that wasn't my choice to make. And if you don't like it, then a better thing to do is just not watch it, buy it, or participate with it. It moved on, and if you aren't willing to be open-minded and move with it, then logically you're going to get left behind.
While we're on the subject, I think Star Wars could stand a reboot itself (and probably will get one someday in the future, no doubt). Furthermore, I think it was a mistake for Lucas to have started the franchise with the fourth movie, worked to the end, and then bounced back and did the first three. If he felt the need to do that for the sake of storytelling, especially far enough in advance to label "A New Hope" the fourth episode, then I really don't think his idea was ready to be done just yet. If he had waited and worked out all the details and solidified his universe and started from the true beginning, and then worked to the end, I genuinely think Star Wars could be twice the franchise it is now, and seeing it's success it's got now, that's saying something.
But nope, what's done is done. And no doubt little ol' George Lucas is looking back at it all, sees he did things that now seem to be mistakes to him, and now he's trying to make amends.
And on the subject of who shot first, Greedo or Han, yeah it does change the character, but that depends on how you see the character. And to George Lucas, he obviously sees the character in a way you guys don't, and seeing he created the character, he'd know Han better than all of you. So he saw that Han needed to shoot second instead of first in order to fit how he saw the character. Who are you guys to dictate how he should write his movies? IMHO, I think Han shooting second better fits what Han's character later came to be, but that's clearly just me.
And Vader saying "no" twice. Mere finickiness on your part, seriously guys. Of all the things you could gripe about, why should how many times Vader says one word be so high up on your list? I mean, sorry if I sound bitter, but that just doesn't make sense to me. Sounds to me one just doesn't like the fact it got changed at all, which is fine, but the rest of the world doesn't need to know you can't accept the movie now that Vader says "no" twice.
*takes a deep breath*
Well, I think that covers everything. Turned into a bit more of a triad than I had intended, but I might as well get it all off my chest anyway.
-
not that I have seen them, but I do remember Star Trek making films/tv shows, or whatever, and new ones would come out, different characters, maybe new names.
But an actual remake? like take the classics and add lines in, and add in more, whatever there is in that show?
I agree to a point about going in order. When IV-VI were done, then many years later, I-III, it doesn't seem to blend as well.
but I-III IMO is not as good, and probably would have made IV-VI worse then.
There are some people out there; be it geeks, or whatever they're called, that likes a classic untouched. It may have flaws, who cares.
that may be partially as to why some are upset with all of the changes.
I was thinking, between Han and Greedo. Was it self defense, or did Han have every intention of shooting Greedo but Greedo shot just a hair quicker than Han?
oh well.
I don't know if much bothers me about the updates. I think the new "NO!!!" kind of does.
and VI, those songs in Jabbas Palace, and the ending music; not too great.
-
I thought the way Lucas had it before made Han look like a badass. Now he made him a goodygoody.
>>> And Trek has also gone through the care of several different people other than it's creator and was taken in directions fairly different than originally intended
- More like: Rick Berman and Brannon Braga and whoever was in charge of Enterprise inherited a totally magic creation and reduced it to utter mediocrity.
See? Fixed your sentence for you, haha! ;D
-
yeah. it changed some things around, and although I agree with Scyphi that the one who knows Han better than anyone is Lucas. But still; these were not changed once it "became possible" to film like other special effects in the movies.
I don't know how much I care. Maybe I am writing for the sake of writing, or to let you know my opinion.
this marks my 777th post. who would have ever thought I'd get that far?
-
I thought the way Lucas had it before made Han look like a badass. Now he made him a goodygoody.
>>> And Trek has also gone through the care of several different people other than it's creator and was taken in directions fairly different than originally intended
- More like: Rick Berman and Brannon Braga and whoever was in charge of Enterprise inherited a totally magic creation and reduced it to utter mediocrity.
See? Fixed your sentence for you, haha! ;D
After that, the only thing that could revive Star Trek was J.J. Abrams (who will die (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzC8DiIRuuk)) and too many lens flares.
-
Too true.
-
- More like: Rick Berman and Brannon Braga and whoever was in charge of Enterprise inherited a totally magic creation and reduced it to utter mediocrity.
Well, I personally think they were onto something with the first two seasons, but people weren't really getting into it, so then they made seasons three and four and effectively ruined it, yeah.
Well, season four had some good story ideas, actually, they were just WAAAAY too drawn out.
After that, the only thing that could revive Star Trek was J.J. Abrams (who will die) and too many lens flares.
IMHO, though, I think J.J. Abrams was the best thing to happen to Trek in years, because Abrams had the gumption to go back to the beginning and modernize everything when no other person would've dared. To alter Roddenberry's original portrayal of Trek was literally taboo, and while you DO have to respect the fact that Roddenberry left such an impact on the world to generate such feelings, I think that attitude was slowly starting to hold Trek back, and it was losing it's edge. Granted, to go back and reboot it all was no doubt a risky move, but Abrams not only pulled it off, he pulled it off so well that he gave Trek one of it's most successful movies ever.
But I will admit he seems to have a fetish for lens flares...but I personally can get used to that. :)
-
Enterprise series ship NX-01 was a disgrace.
A lot of other problems existed to make the show a shambles - firstly, the character of the Captain, who was appalling.
Should never have even been called Enterprise, I mean who thought of that idea? Why was it necessary when the Defiant, Voyager, Prometheus and Thunderchild are such fan favourites as well. The name shoulda been different.
-
I think the point of Han shooting first is that Han was quite self-serving with little care for others, (or rather to emphasize the point) which only serves to make his later transformations that much more incredible.
-
@Crash: To each their own. :)
@IHateHackers: Interesting argument, I have to confess I hadn't thought about it that way.
-
that may tie in with Leia saying "I love you." and Han saying "I know."
-
I think the point of Han shooting first is that Han was quite self-serving with little care for others, (or rather to emphasize the point) which only serves to make his later transformations that much more incredible.
I've heard that the reason the change to Han shooting second caused so much backlash, was because the change was made in response to critics who didn't like Han's character. In that way, I guess it robs a little bit of the character that Lucas tried to give Han originally.
-
I hate critics.
-
How critical of you. ;)
-
oh no, we're in critical waters now. (okay, I'm overdoing it. joke has been done)
-
Enterprise was so nearly an awesome series but it was ruined by obvious flaws.
The ship was ruinous. The Captain was ruinous. The Captain's beagle was ruinous. The technology was completely wrong.
The rest of the cast, apart from the black guy was great. They shouldn't have ruined and undermined Reed's character or killed Tucker.
-
Why were the ship, the captain, and his dog ruinous? I liked the difference in technology. It's supposed to be the story of the very first enterprise, Earth's very first long-range ship. I think it's an interesting turn that they don't want to use the transporters. It's like "Hey, the world wasn't always full of Enterprises and warp-capable warships. It had to start somewhere."
-
The captain was a horrible captain. He didn't inspire his people. He was an ass. It was a wonder how they ever survived anything. (I like that actor though)
-
Archer was okay (kind of an interesting blend of Picard and Kirk with his own twist to it) until the events at the end of season two turned him bitter, and then, yeah, he was totally unlikeable, because he just seemed to be mad at everything, so much so I truly wondered if that was going to get him in serious trouble and kicked out of Starfleet (but of course that never happened either).
Other than that, IHateHackers nailed it. The idea was to go back and try and show how Trek as we know it all got started, and I think that despite the show's various flaws, they nailed that much.
I fail to see how Porthos (the dog) was ruinous, as the dog was really just kind of there (like Picard's fish) and save very select episodes, never played a major role in the series.
Concurred on them killing off Tucker. Bad move, that was. In fact, that whole last episode was bad, and very half-baked. Baked BAD, in fact.
Though the tie-in with Next Gen in that episode was an okay idea (even though it didn't tie-in too well), and the last minute (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXotJu1CapU) at the very end of the episode was, despite everything else, beautiful, and as it marked the last Trek production of any sort for a number of years until J.J. Abrams came along, remarkably fitting.
-
Thank you so much for spoiling the ending -_-
-
Trust me, beyond what I described above, you weren't missing much. It was a lousy ending episode for the series. They didn't even try. :P
-
I think I would have to agree, to a point. The cast of the Enterprise crew didn't seem to be trying, but both Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis tried (sort of). Marina was just there to provide filler, but Frakes was trying (you could tell) but the script was weak and he was trying to breath a spark back into his acting (too much time behind camera instead of in front of it) while constrained to the TNG role he was re-visiting. ... He just doesn't look young enough anymore (too pasty and ... bulgy) and it just didn't work. Just wasn't believable.
-
Problem was though that the technology was just the same even though ENT and TNG were hundreds of years apart.
Archer's enterprise had everything the TNG ships had by the end. It seemed problematic.
The dog had no place on the first ship, I didn't think. You didn't have Kirk with his dog or whatever. It would just never happen on a military-style vessel/organisation.
-
Except that Starfleet is not, at this point, a military organization. Not really anyway. Besides, how can we really know what a "Starfleet" would be like in the future? Military codes of conduct evolve over time, just like anything else. 100 years ago, women serving actively in the military as anything but a nurse far from the battlefield was insanity. Maybe in 100 years the captain of the first warp-capable starship would be allowed to have a dog. I mean... Who's going to say no 1000 lightyears from home?
The technology is not identical. I don't think we ever saw grapplers or anything like that in TNG. They just had flashy lights that made things do stuff. And they never hesitated to use the transporters except in a few episodes where it was part of a specific storyline or character. is it similar? Sure, but it's not the same. And I think the point is more their attitude towards certain technologies than it is the actual technologies themselves.
-
Well, Gene Roddenberry's whole idea of Star Fleet was that it was a navy in space. Everything apart from Enterprise put that point across fairly well.
The original series and films make that a very major theme and even the start of Voyager holds very true to that before it diverges into stupid, repetitive and melodramatic plots about individual characters after 7of9 shows up.
When you watch Star Trek II, Saavik is always called "Mr Saavik", when she's clearly a Vulcan woman and that always causes confusion. It's not because she's a Vulcan or anything like that, it's just that it's old British Navy tradition.
Riker was introduced as First Officer in TNG (a new position that we hadn't seen on a starship previously) because that was an element of old Navy ships that Roddenberry wanted to bring in, where the Captain made the high-level decisions and the First Officer took pride in managing the basics; the ship and the crew.
The grappling hook was about the only exception I could think of when I was writing my previous post.
Everything else - particularly regarding weapons was the same. It was all just what we'd seen before; phase cannons and photonic torpedoes when it should have real missiles with vapour trails, railguns firing streams of tracer for point defence, plasma/laser cannons etc. They also wasted the opportunity to have a ship that didn't need to conform to what starships normally are supposed to look like (with a saucer and two warp engines). They could have escaped from all that but no, they stole the Akira Class from First Contact/DS9/Voyager and flipped it upside down.
And then! after all of that they turned around and criticised the Akira for being an "ugly bow-legged ship" after they'd completely ripped off the design. I have to say that as a Star Trek fan, that makes me genuinely furious that such disingenuous, backbiting people were allowed to take over Gene's TV legacy.
They had all that inspiration from 'real robot' animes where they have semi-realistic space battleships that they could have used to make the show's weapons more credible given the setting and completely different to what we'd seen before.
But of course we had to have the ships flying around firing different-coloured beams at eachother just like every other series of Star Trek. Infact they even managed to spare the expense of animating the shield bubbles because those conveniently didn't exist. The beams just struck the hulls, recording no visible damage to the ships.
Towards the end of the series they seemed to use the transporter for almost everything short of site-to-site transport. Didn't they even beam from one ship to another at warp speed in one episode? ; something that was nigh impossible even for Scotty. Don't quote me on that but I'm pretty sure Enterprise beamed someone to/from its sister ship at warp speed in one episode.
You're right, it wasn't the same but, I was expecting *much* more originality from the creators rather than just rehashing what we'd already seen.
They had such a massive leeway to do new things without breaking any continuity (because we know so little about that far back from the other series anyway) and yet they changed nothing where they would have been entitled to and changed everything where they weren't (by ruining continuity here and there).
-
Well, this is going to give me a lot to talk about...
Gene Roddenberry's whole idea of Star Fleet was that it was a navy in space. Everything apart from Enterprise put that point across fairly well.
I'll give you this one. After the original series, Trek slowly and gradually started to loose more and more of that original militaristic edge, and by the time Enterprise rolled around, it was pretty much gone, although it was already well on it's way to that point well before the series actually started. This is also partly why Abrams's reboot has appealed to me so much, because it brought back the militarism with a vengeance. :D
even the start of Voyager holds very true to that before it diverges into stupid, repetitive and melodramatic plots about individual characters after 7of9 shows up.
Don't go dissing Voyager on me here. Next to the original series, Voyager was probably the most trekkiest show out of all the others, and was an excellent sci-fi show to boot, that not only explored the alien, but also explored humanity's reactions to the alien (which is, and always has been, a major part of proper, powerful, science fiction). Furthermore, all the other Trek shows had their moments of character development, TNG especially. In fact, TNG in many ways was more melodramatic that Voyager.
Riker was introduced as First Officer in TNG (a new position that we hadn't seen on a starship previously)
Not true. Spock was established as the First Officer in TOS, he just also doubled as the chief science officer. This is partly because when Roddenberry first pitched Trek to studios, his initial version had female first officer, but the studios disliked the idea and asked him to leave that out, so Roddenberry no doubt gave the post to Spock, but also keeping the original science officer role he had been conceived with. The only things Riker really brought to Trek that was new was to be a first officer that served as ONLY the first officer, and got his own chair for it too. Beyond that, Riker didn't really bring anything new to that idea.
They also wasted the opportunity to have a ship that didn't need to conform to what starships normally are supposed to look like...
Except fans would've revolted if they didn't adhere to that trademark appearance, because that's one of the biggest things Trek is known for. Without it, it's not Star Trek. It's something else trying to pass itself off as Star Trek, and with that, then you'd REALLY have fans feeling betrayed. Furthermore, I think you're missing the whole point of the show with this line of thought. It wasn't that the show was meant to be a chance to break away from everything that is Trek, it was to show how everything we know as Trek today came into being, explaining how they came up with the ideas for this tech, why they needed them, and what they had to go through to develop it and/or use it, and their thoughts/issues about said technology.
And for the record, a lot of the technology wasn't that alike, especially in the first two to three seasons. And even when it was, it was severely underpowered to what would appear in later shows. Transporters had half the range, as well as far fewer failsafes, photonic torpedoes were under powered (and for the first two seasons, torpedoes were more literal missiles. In season three onward they were replaced with more iconic photon(ic) torpedoes) the phase cannons as well as their handheld phase pistol counterparts are much more limited in comparison to their 24th century brethren (phase pistols only have two settings (stun and kill) whereas in later centuries they have a whole slew including "disintegrate.") They didn't even have any kind of red alert for a season and a half. And all of the above was given a notable robust feel. The tech may still be the same iconic stuff Trek has always had, but there are still notable differences.
They had all that inspiration from 'real robot' animes where they have semi-realistic space battleships that they could have used to make the show's weapons more credible given the setting and completely different to what we'd seen before.
The day Star Trek takes ideas from animes is the day the franchise dies, put bluntly. That's a bad idea on so many levels, I don't even know where to start with it. And again, to do that would remove everything that makes it "Trek," and then what's the point?
In fact they even managed to spare the expense of animating the shield bubbles because those conveniently didn't exist. The beams just struck the hulls, recording no visible damage to the ships.
Another one I gotta give to you. That didn't really make much sense to me either. Well, the idea to try and and emphasize the time difference by excluding shields does, but not their eventual solution of "polarizing armor."
Towards the end of the series they seemed to use the transporter for almost everything short of site-to-site transport.
Towards the end of the series, fans were accusing the show of not being 'Trekkie' enough, so the producers worked to try and please them by scaling up the similarities to TOS-style trek several notches, so not total blame can be placed on the producers for that. I personally had mixed feelings about it, liking some of the stronger ties to established Trek, but also losing some of the show's original themes.
Didn't they even beam from one ship to another at warp speed in one episode? ; something that was nigh impossible even for Scotty. Don't quote me on that but I'm pretty sure Enterprise beamed someone to/from its sister ship at warp speed in one episode.
I looked this up. Found no reference whatsoever to such an event taking place in Enterprise. I think the episode you're referring to is an instance where the NX-01 and NX-02 physically dock with each other at what I believe were warp speeds in season four. Exactly why they did this though, I can't remember. Along the way, though, I learned that in Trek cannon, it is apparently possible to beam one off another ship at warp speeds so long as the speeds of both ships match. it is generally not an encouraged practice, though, because doing so at warp speeds runs the risk of distorting the matter stream and causing trouble for the subject being transported.
They had such a massive leeway to do new things without breaking any continuity
Not really. One of the biggest standing criticisms for Enterprise fans have is that it doesn't stay true to continuity enough. Most of this is rather little, technical, and sometimes even petty "errors," though (like the fact that they probably shouldn't have viewscreen technology in that time period), but this just proves how annoyingly picky the Trek fanbase can be about continuity.
Something which I could use as a springboard to tie in back with this thread's original topic about George Lucas and Star Wars, but I won't.
Point is that fans wouldn't have allowed the producers to have the leeway with continuity you speak of, or they wouldn't watch it.
You're right, it wasn't the same but, I was expecting *much* more originality from the creators rather than just rehashing what we'd already seen.
And to a certain degree I agree with this as well. The show always was lacking in some kind of hook that it needed to set it apart from the other Trek productions. The Temporal Cold War at times worked kind of well, but they didn't do enough with that until season three with the Xindi storyarc, and then it was going in entirely the wrong direction. Until then, it really did kind of feel like it was just more of the same-old, same-old, and nothing really, truly, new.
But on that point I mean the storytelling, not exactly the setting. The setting was good, but settings alone don't tell stories.
-
Riker was brought in because Roddenberry wanted a first officer. I'm not claiming that Riker's character brought anything to the show or that he was the first choice as the character to fill that slot. Roddenberry said himself on TV before he died that this was the case.
Spock wasn't a pure first officer with nothing else to do. He was the second in command but he was the science guy. He wasn't responsible for the ship's maintenance or for choosing landing parties etc. This was what Rodd wanted to inject.
I think you've got me a bit wrong there.
Voyager became disastrous shortly after 7 showed up because all the episodes about her became unbearable. They didn't develop seven's character. They were just melodrama and filler about her 'implants' always malfunctioning, lol.
After about a season or two it self-repaired though. I thought the finale was brilliant - better than a lot of 'trekkies' claim.
Voyager started out great and then went extremely variable in terms of quality and sense.
MASSES of things were cribbed from anime as early as Next Generation. Look at Rick Sternbach and the Mammal Engineering section of the Enterprise-D. Geordi says to Ferengi visitors in one episode "have you seen the whales yet". This is a direct theft (admitted by Sternbach) from GunBuster et al. Mammal Engineering is even described in the TNG Technical Manual in one chapter.
Weapons from manga were all recreated in exact detail as props for live action in Star Trek, seriously, because the designers lifted them wholesale.
I'm not saying that we take anime themes either. Just that the Japanese show us what a near-future space battleship would likely resemble. They could have learned so much from such wonderful, realistic, hard-sci-fi ship design but it was a wasted trick that they didn't.
So actually, it's not disastrous on many levels and it won't be the day it dies because it happened far, far more than people realise in TNG. It's subtle but it's *everywhere*.
There's not a lot I haven't read about phasers. I love phasers. They are the best sci-fi weapon of all time.
A TNG type-2 phaser has sixteen settings. The top nine are disrupt settings. Setting 7 is lethal. Setting one stuns for a few seconds only and can inflict neurological damage if used on someone repeatedly. I can read my TNG technical manual too, lol.
The visual effects for 'phasers' and torps were identical to post-TNG series, which was insanely lazy and non-creative. The jump from those conventional torpedoes to photonic torpedoes *within the series* was far too quick to be believable. It was the visual cues that were problematic. The fact that the phase pistol only stunned or killed without disrupt was a logical concession that didn't mitigate the above from an effects perspective.
Getting rid of the shields was fine and polarised hulls are underway in R/L in the form of plasma-reactive-armour for tanks but it just looked like a game without a particle or decal system. The ships pounded away at eachother without having any visible effect on eachother from an effects perspective.
I'm not talking about ripping away from Star Trek. I'm talking about making the show fitting to its supposed era. Star Trek was always supposed to be hard sci-fi to an extent. How is making the weapons fitting to the time taking away from the show? That's the only extent I wanted them to go to. I shoulda made that plainer.
I still think that the ship should have been a logical progression between the Phoenix ship from First Contact and Kirk's original Enterprise, which gives you an enormous leeway for creativity but they lifted a contemporary of the Enterprise-E and made it hideous.
I feel sympathy for the show for being criticised for not using the transporter and bending to stupid pressure.
The temporal cold-war made me feel as though the series was trying to cling in any way it could to the successes of the TNG-era shows by putting in a weak and spurious connection to that time period. That may be quite a bold claim I suppose.
None of the other series say that much about that era of Star Trek lore so it was sheer carelessness that brought them to conflicting with so many of the tidbits of info that were infact given.
I don't see why you couldn't have a viewscreen TBH. It's just a set of cameras on the outside and a big screen TV. It doesn't have to be as clever as TOS viewscreens to do 99.9% of what you want it to.
Another thing that annoyed me was that the only military streak on the ship was the weapons guy and they basically seemed to ridicule him every chance they got. It seemed as though they sort of implied that he was camp and effiminite, they made him devious (probably cos he was a British actor) against and overshadowed by the adolescent-natured captain, who went and sulked in his room and took his problems out on his crew at every opportunity.
-
Gotta say that's the first time I've ever seen ANYTHING from japanese entertainment called realistic.
-
Haha, well, somehow they have a way, don't they...
If you watch Evangelion, the whole Tokyo3 city; train stations, railways, skyscrapers-and-all descends underground and are suspended from the ceiling of a gigantic, underground cavern and the buildings are replaced on the surface by huge barriers, walls, towers of missile launchers, machineguns, artillery and the like.
It's a completely ridiculous notion but when you watch it in Evangelion Rebuild - all you think is "oh my God, that's awesome". The silliness of it is completely ... out of your mind when you watch it because it's just so well done. The scale and detail and 'look' of the CGI is so incredible that you're just in awe. You don't even think about the concept.
With Macross, the Valkyrie is a Fighter plane. It flies in space and works underwater. It transforms into two types of robot in one and it can be expanded with extra equipment which it can keep attached while it transforms all the 3 ways. It's the most overcomplicated thing in the world, right? But watch the show and see if you truly feel that way about it afterwards.
Gundam is pretty tame in comparison. The ships and vehicles are mostly pretty hard-sci-fi stuff.
-
Riker was brought in because Roddenberry wanted a first officer etc...
If you watch the original pilot for Star Trek (TOS), "The Cage," (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Cage_%28episode%29) the one that was rejected, you'll see that it already had a first officer that matched Riker's duties. So the idea was clearly there from the beginning, so I think it's more of a case of Roddenberry finally getting to enact upon an idea fully he hadn't gotten to enact upon in it's entirety until then. Beyond that, though, yeah, I think I misunderstood the first time, so apologies. :)
Voyager became disastrous shortly after 7 showed up blah blah blah...
Obviously we've got no hope of coming to an agreement here, because from my point of view, that's exactly when the show took off for me. So it might just be better to agree to disagree on this subject. :)
I thought the finale was brilliant - better than a lot of 'trekkies' claim.
Will agree with you on that, though. I though that was an immensely satisfactory finale for the series. ;D
MASSES of things were cribbed from anime as early as Next Generation. Look at Rick Sternbach and the Mammal Engineering section of the Enterprise-D. Geordi says to Ferengi visitors in one episode "have you seen the whales yet". This is a direct theft (admitted by Sternbach) from GunBuster et al. Mammal Engineering is even described in the TNG Technical Manual in one chapter.
Ooh, the TNG Technical Manual...that's going to make things difficult here...
See, it's because one can argue relatively easily that it's not strictly canonical. There are a wide array of in-jokes and gags in there that aren't meant to be taken 100% seriously, not to mention the fact that some of things it describes are described in that book alone, and are never repeated anywhere else in other Trek productions, and are in fact times flat out ignored and changed, at times even in TNG itself no doubt. Like Mammal Engineering. Even I have to concede that, ripped from anime or not, it's a pretty cool idea, but despite that one very vague reference to it, nothing in Trek supports it's actual existence very well, particularly in later shows when they quite clearly have no such thing.
Please don't take that the wrong way, though. I'm just pointing out this is one of those areas that can be seen as...nebulous...to some, and those 'some' aren't going to see it as a valid argument.
As for Trek ripping ideas from anime, no matter how subtle, I stand by what I said before; it's a bad idea, particularly these days when people expect more realism and less convenient and meaningless technobabble, and I have yet to hear of any anime production that meets those standards.
Gotta say that's the first time I've ever seen ANYTHING from japanese entertainment called realistic.
Exactly why I think that statement is so full of win. :D
Of course, I must admit that I am more than a little bias in this area, as I have never looked upon animes very fondly. But point is that while TNG might have gotten away with it slightly, I'm willing to bet that is the most Trek will ever be able to get away with, and I doubt any future Trek production could match TNG's supposed "success" in that area. Furthermore, and this is probably just me, but those hints of anime in Trek feel alien to me, and not proper "Trek," and now that I think about it, explains a thing or two about TNG to me that has always bugged me (it definitely had it's moments, but admittedly it is not one of my favorite Trek shows). Not to say there's anything wrong with that, it's just not my cup of tea, and doesn't sit well with me.
The visual effects for 'phasers' and torps were identical to post-TNG series, which was insanely lazy and non-creative.
I suppose I can see where you're coming from with that. They probably could've done something to make them seem more...I don't know...backwards, or at least different to the TNG portrayals. Although admittedly, nothing immediately comes to mind that can do that other than obvious stuff like sticking with the original missile-like torpedoes, or changing the color of the phaser beams (which isn't that original an idea either).
The jump from those conventional torpedoes to photonic torpedoes *within the series* was far too quick to be believable.
Agreed wholeheartedly, and it was right about then that the show really started to go downhill for me.
Getting rid of the shields was fine and polarised hulls are underway in R/L in the form of plasma-reactive-armour for tanks but it just looked like a game without a particle or decal system.
As I said before, good idea, but their portrayal of it needed a lot of work.
I still think that the ship should have been a logical progression between the Phoenix ship from First Contact and Kirk's original Enterprise, which gives you an enormous leeway for creativity but they lifted a contemporary of the Enterprise-E and made it hideous.
Technically they show something like that in the intro, so I guess what you're supposed to get from that is that they already hit that point and passed it. At any rate, I have to give the NX-01's design some credit because unlike other Trek ships, it was relatively easy to figure out where everything was and why. Beyond that, I still stand by the fact that straying away too much from the saucer-shape and two-warp-nacelles would've only been asking for more crap from fans than they've already gotten.
The temporal cold-war made me feel as though the series was trying to cling in any way it could to the successes of the TNG-era shows by putting in a weak and spurious connection to that time period.
You're actually partly right. The producers original concept of the show didn't have anything like the Temporal Cold War, but the studio was convinced that the show wasn't going to work unless it had an added twist to it, so despite not really being very comfortable with the idea, the producers threw in the Temporal Cold War idea to please the studio. In the bonus material for the Enterprise DVDs, one even states that the whole idea of the Temporal Cold War probably should've been a whole different show of it's own, and not mixed up with Enterprise, a sentiment I completely agree with. The Temporal Cold War was undoubtedly a cool idea, but when you really get down to it, just didn't mesh well with Enterprise, and I'm frankly kind of amazed the producers were able to get the two to mesh as well as they did.
I don't see why you couldn't have a viewscreen TBH. It's just a set of cameras on the outside and a big screen TV. It doesn't have to be as clever as TOS viewscreens to do 99.9% of what you want it to.
Because in the TOS episode "Balance of Terror" (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Balance_of_Terror_%28episode%29) (the same episode the Romulans are first introduced in), it is explicitly stated that at the time of the Earth-Romulan War (which the events of Enterprise precede) that there was no two-way visual communication on starships, meaning no viewscreens.
Personally, I'm with you, having the viewscreen anyway just makes perfect sense and the detail is trivial at best, but the point I was making with that is that there are a fair number of Trek fans (apparently enough to make a difference) that can't forgive the producers of Enterprise for little things like that.
Another thing that annoyed me was that the only military streak on the ship was the weapons guy and they basically seemed to ridicule him every chance they got.
Like I said, the militarism was all but gone by the time Enterprise rolled around, and it just continued that trend when what Trek desperately needed was to bring it back.
This is fun, I've gotten to sit and analyze Star Wars to death and now I'm doing the same for Star Trek :D What sci-fi franchise are we going to do next? :P
-
??? beats me, don't really do sci-fi.
-
Heheh, you liked Voyager because the borg woman with the huge front suddenly showed up, lol.
I can't think of anything in the Tech Manual for TNG that was contradicted. The whole mammal engineering was certainly supported in the show. I think the book may not be completely official but it was written by the people that made the show. So it might not be official but I don't see how it could be more authoritative.
Trust me though that there are tonnes of bits stolen from anime in TNG. Ships, weapons allsorts of things pilfered wholesale. And this was all I was after for Enterprise, where it would have made perfect sense to have seen combat more similar to ship battles from Gundam.
I'd forgotten about the first officer in TOS's Pilot episode. That was yet another role that Majel had.
The viewscreen thing is open to interpretation. Just because there wasn't duplex communication doesn't mean that it didn't exist. I always took it that the Romulans didn't want to chat.
It's interesting and I totally agree with you about the Temp. Cold War
I still think the criticism of their theft of the Akira class holes Enterprise below the waterline. Don't you think a ship like the Sulaco from Aliens with warp engines would have been better? It should have been huge with loads of support craft to compensate for the lack of transporters, rather than a smaller ship with only enough room for two tiny shuttles. It shoulda bristled with real-world weapons, firing swarms of missiles and clouds of bullets at the enemy.
-
Heheh, you liked Voyager because the borg woman with the huge front suddenly showed up, lol.
Heavens, no. Actually the fact Seven turned up at the same time is more coincidence. It's just (having recently been rewatching Voyager lately) I noticed that some of my favorite episodes (can you say "Equinox" (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Equinox)?) took place at or just after Seven's appearance on the show, and so logically, that's when the show really grabs my interest. :D
I think the book may not be completely official but it was written by the people that made the show.
No, it's not considered official per say, despite indeed being put together by members of the TNG crew, and as such, some Trek sources such as Memory Alpha (the site I keep linking to (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Portal:Main)) does not consider it an official source for Trek data and typically doesn't refer to it in it's articles.
This does not mean I think the same, BTW, because I don't. Well, not really anyway. A better way to put it is that I'm willing to concede that the technical manual indeed has have some reliable data and can be a good reference for all-things Trek (for example, the information you quoted about phasers sounded spot on). My point is that not every Trekkie is going to think the same, so I've found it's generally a good practice to not be entirely dependent on it, and being open to consider other sources of information at the same time.
Trust me though that there are tonnes of bits stolen from anime in TNG. Ships, weapons allsorts...etc
All I've got to say to that is kudos for TNG for pulling that off. I seriously doubt later did as much, and all future Trek productions doing next to any at all, barring any unusually outstanding animes that might be produced in the future (admitted, though, I'm not holding my breath).
The viewscreen thing is open to interpretation. Just because there wasn't duplex communication doesn't mean that it didn't exist.
Exactly what I think.
I always took it that the Romulans didn't want to chat.
That too. They are notoriously non-chatty. :P
While we're on the subject, I realized another potential error one could pin Enterprise on, and that's the fact that in the same TOS episode in question, it is established that cloaking technology of any sort hadn't been encountered before nor was it even known of any working examples (at least it's strongly implied as such). Starfleet had even declared the technology completely infeasible due to power constraints, until the Romulans proved them wrong in that same episode with a small cloaked ship they use to stage a nearly one-man attack on the Federation. The issue with this is the fact that the crew of the NX-01 encounter cloaking technology actually quite repeatedly throughout the course of the show. In their defense, some of it can be easily explained away due to the involvement of the Temporal Cold War causing such technology to fall into the hands of certain races prematurely. But for others, they don't have this convenient little loophole, including their odd encounters with (surprise, surprise) the Romulans.
None of these are details I'm going to hold a grudge over, though, but it just goes to show that Enterprise was not as adherent to continuity as it might first appear.
Don't you think a ship like the Sulaco from Aliens with warp engines would have been better? It should have been huge with loads of support craft to compensate for the lack of transporters, rather than a smaller ship with only enough room for two tiny shuttles. It shoulda bristled with real-world weapons, firing swarms of missiles and clouds of bullets at the enemy.
Don't know, because I have no idea what said ship would be like. Sounds like it's more like a warship to me, and while Trek ships undoubtedly have teeth (some more than others), they generally weren't intended solely for battle, but rather more for exploration and trying to preserve the peace, kind of the opposite of war. So going around doing that in warships says to me that people shouldn't be taking them seriously when they claim they're trying to do these goals.
-
Equinox was a great double-parter.
Seven was really good in that one. "I am familiar with humour. Yours is crude and predictable." lol.
Their evil doctor was good in that eppy too. The Doc was the best character by a mile.
I did say that the quality was variable. I was thinking about the stupid episodes (there seemed to be a lot) where Seven went rogue cos her borgness took over again or she was gonna die unless ... someone changed her oil filter or whatever.
Your view of the Tech Manual and mine are the same. The DS9 manual is nearly as good but is littered with blatant inaccuracies in some places - especially where it starts talking about Starfleet ship classes like the Nebula Class etc.
Where it talks about the station and the Defiant, things seem to go a bit smoother.
The prototype cloaked ship is a bit of a problem in Enterprise. But the idea of cloaking devices is such a pull that no writer could be blamed for using it. The other thing is that when you think of Romulan ships the immediate thing you think of is cloaking devices.
It was an unfortunate but quite good cop-out in the Dominion War that the Dominion ships had little trouble triangulating cloaked ships' locations.
I still thought the Defiant was too small a ship to be taken seriously. I remember one episode where it was fighting alongside a (presumably) ancient Klingon Bird of Prey and the BOP took out a Dominion attacker with a couple of blasts from its twin disruptors and the Defiant had to fire a great, long cascade of shots from all four phasers to take out another. I suppose one Dominion ship could have been badly damaged already and the other in perfect condition but it looked a bit odd and unbalanced to me.
-
I am now officially lost.
I haven't seen much of the old star trek but what I did see I liked.
And yeah. Canada... stuff -- I'm sure everyone else here knows and I don't need to say it.
I saw the reboot and I loved it. It's now on one of the bookshelves in my room (yeah I have a lot of bookshelves in my room).
-
Shhhhhhh. The Trekkies are having at it.
-
I was thinking about the stupid episodes (there seemed to be a lot) where Seven went rogue cos her borgness took over again or she was gonna die unless ... someone changed her oil filter or whatever.
I'm guessing you're referring to episodes such as "Retrospect" (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Retrospect_%28episode%29) and "The Raven" (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Raven_%28episode%29), if so, then I guess I see your point. While I liked some of the episodes, some of the others (like the two I list above) didn't work as great as they could've.
As for DS9, that's probably my least favorite of the Trek series. I just didn't like the overall feel of it, and it left no real lasting impact on me that much save the Dominion War (which, like it or not, is too pivotal to Trek canon to ignore) and the episode "Trials and Tribble-ations" (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Trials_and_Tribble-ations_%28episode%29).
I give the Defiant credit for the fact that it is such a resilient little ship. :P
-
Well, where everything in TNG was five-finger discounted from Japan, DS9 was all thieved from Babylon 5.
That's especially apparent at the start of the show before writers began to expand their horizons a bit. The problem was that the Star Trek people had barely any idea at that stage how to do a mainly action show at the expense of exploration and only in the last seasons did that all become credible for me after they introduced CGI.
The other strange thing was how the Dominion were a completely intractible enemy at first. Even their small ships were a nightmare and after a while they were little more than cannon fodder.
I think if I'd been in charge of designing the Defiant I would have gone back as they did to making it a more manageable size but I would have made it no smaller than a Miranda Class or Constitution Class. Then I would have had the warp core running horizontally through the ship to give it more power (as the runabouts and shuttles do) and I would have been very tempted to make it a dual-warp-core starship.
I think I would have kept the look about the same though.
I was interested that a lot of designs for Voyager were closely based on the Defiant and the Oberth Class. Sternbach's original one was like a giant runabout with a saucer section. It was appalling but it nearly went through. Infact you can see how the final version was influenced by it in places.
-
Yet, funnily enough, they ended up with the really beautiful and thoroughly planned out design we know today. The only real issue I can think of that anybody has with Voyager's design is it's moving warp nacelles, which even the in-show explanation for didn't even make any sense, and after awhile, it seemed like everybody just wanted to avoid the subject, because you saw them even portraying those nacelles moving less and less in later seasons. :P
I think the reason they went for the Defiant's small size was because the show was supposed to be about the station, DS9, and not the ship, so they purposely tried to keep it, and it's role, small as a kind of failsafe to keep it from becoming too dominant in the show. But that's just speculation, and even if I'm right, whether or not they succeeded is quite debatable.
-
I think you might be right. Originally the Defiant was only going to be a pumped-up little runabout with extra weapons until somebody must have realised how futile an idea that was.
I think the moving nacelles on Voyager was a slight ... holdover from the original runabout-like design because, like you might expect, the engines were going to sit either side of the ship's engineering section and so they were, still on the finished version (except that they flipped up for Warp speed).
I didn't really mind the idea to be honest.
The shape of the saucer was retained from the original design but the bridge module is basically a bit from the top of the upscaled-runabout engineering hull shifted forwards onto the saucer (which looks ugly to me now that I see that it was shoehorned in).
The sad thing is that, if you look at the bottom of Voyager's saucer, there is a support craft called the Aeroshuttle set into the hull. It was never used at all in the series, even though it appears in the show's writers' bible, which even ventures to tell you quite a bit about it.
You can see what the thing was supposed to look like if you Google-Image "Aeroshuttle".
So, instead they made the Delta Flyer, which while cool was too small to contain the escape pod (which they showed in one episode) and was too big to comfortably enter the shuttlebay.
The other thing is that the Master Systems Display on Voyager's bridge clearly shows a backup warp core at the back of the saucer section. This is another sweet idea that was never exploited.
-
Oh, I know all about the Aeroshuttle. According to the article on Memory Alpha (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Aeroshuttle), the reason it was nixed was because the idea was similar enough to the idea of the captain's yacht (presented in Star Trek: Insurrection) that Rick Berman didn't want Voyager's Aeroshuttle potentially trumping the movie's captain's yacht, so the idea never officially took off, despite being fairly far in their plans for it.
So instead, they did indeed later make the Delta Flyer to pretty much exploit the original idea (it's stated that had the Aeroshuttle gone through, they probably would have never come up with the Delta Flyer) and I think that worked out pretty good for them in the end. Though, I would like a floorplan of the flyer, as it's interior doesn't seem to match it's exterior very well. That beyond it's weird windshield, and the fact that it apparently and completely replaced Voyager's original shuttles though, I always liked the flyer. :)
As for the various unused ideas, lots of shows have such unused ideas in the end, Trek and other sci-fi related shows especially, or ideas they initially started out thinking it was a good idea, but later discovering it didn't actually work as well as they expected. Sometimes it's fun to consider the 'what-ifs' about how those unrealized ideas might have worked out, but one also just has to accept sometimes that it just wasn't meant to be, for whatever reason.
-
The Aeroshuttle explains the fairly modest shuttle capability of the Voayger ship. I think Rosenzweig's idea that the Aeroshuttle wasn't fitted for Voyager's Badlands mission is highly credible and the best possible explanation.
Mentioning its absence in the episode where they were designing the Delta Flyer would have made sense but it would also have complicated matters unnecessarily for non-die-hard fans of the show for its absence to have been mentioned for the first time out of the air. Hardly anyone would have understood what the Aeroshuttle was or known any of its intended backstory or purpose.
I like the Delta Flyer well enough but Bonchune's model of the Aeroshuttle is more elegant and ... 'realistic' in a way to me.
Berman was an idiot in many regards. Many fans hate him for having tried to efface the original series and remodeling the franchise so that TNG-onwards and Enterprise were the only elements of the franchise. That's why they felt they had to kill Kirk in Generations. It was viewed by a lot of people as a symbolic thing, not just a plot element.
Personally, I don't place all the blame at Berman's door. He made some sucky decisions of his own but Paramount also made it clear that either he put their terrible ideas into effect or they would find someone who would. They also made the TNG movies on an absolute shoestring. You can tell that from the quality or absence thereof of the CGI in those movies; especially Insurrection.
I mean, they were almost TV movie quality in terms of the budget. The amount of money as a percentage of total budget of those films that went on Patrick Stewart's salary was staggering.
Interesting how Voyager was going to be an enlarged Runabout and the Aeroshuttle was going to be a Runabout with wings ... Sternbach must have had some kind of God-damn wet dream fixation on the Danube class Runabout. I mean it was a nice enough design but ... really.
His blog isn't too bad actually. Doug Drexler's blog, on the other hand, is a bit nauseating. He really is about as far up his own ass as Voyager was away from Earth when it started its journey home. That's certainly how he comes across to me.
-
I totally agree about the TNG movies being less-than-spectacular. Generations was really the only movie of the TNG movies that I really liked. After that they just got worse and worse until you got Nemesis, which for me, is probably the one Trek movie I'd rather pretend never happened.
Though maybe I'm not being fair with it, because I never did watch Nemesis all the way through.
...
Nah. :P
-
For Nemesis they should have put in a director with some experience of Star Trek. Bits of it were fine and it had plenty of action.
Insurrection was okay because it was effectively a feature-length TNG episode. It seemed to have gone back to its roots in a way but there were some lacklustre bits.
I think we've seen the end of Star Trek on TV because the finances and the people don't exist currently to make a better series than what we've already had.
After the TNG-era and also the new Battlestar Galactica people expect amazing sets and visuals and the trekkies demand a very tight and faithful tie-in with what's gone before and the finances and the devotion needed to make that happen aren't going to come together.
Producers just want guaranteed viewer numbers for the least amount of effort. Same with the games industry. That's why every game released at the minute (like Gears of War 3) is just a suped-up Doom clone that they know people will buy and they know that they don't have to take any risks by making something substantially different or novel.
-
Nemesis had a poor plot from what I saw of it, and even the good parts all felt...done before. I saw the final battle portion of the movie, and all throughout that, I couldn't help but draw parallels to the fight to past Trek productions. From the top of my head, I can draw parallels to The Wrath of Khan, The Undiscovered Country, The Search For Spock, and Voyager's "Year of Hell Part II" episode, and there were probably more. It didn't help any that both the acting and the music were lackluster, or just plain lacking all together. Special effects weren't bad, but all felt more just for show than anything else.
As for Trek not appearing on TV again, don't be so sure of that. Rumor is that there's a new Trek series pitch in the works (http://whatculture.com/tv/david-foster-readying-to-pitch-new-star-trek-t-v-series-to-cbs.php) and it already sounds very promising. No word on whether or not Paramount's game for it, though, but I'd imagine that after Abram's success with Star Trek XI, they'd at least be open to it. Guess we'll have to see.
You're right about producers just wanting guaranteed viewers with minimum effort, though. That shows quite plainly with today's TV market. There are so many bad shows out there that really have no place to have the success they do that it's really kind of pathetic... :-\
-
Yeah, the acting btw Picard and mini-Picard was awkward and duff and the whole wedding at the start was awkward.
The film was meant to replicate Wrath of Khan which is why Data had to buy the farm place of Spock.
I love the phaser effects in that film.
Most series today are madcap, half-cocked ideas that only last a season or two when the ill-conceived ideas fail to grasp peoples' imagination.
-
...or in the case of some, the audience in question fail to see it's potential and shun it, like the ill-fated Stargate Universe (yeah, I'm still bitter over that).
If they really meant to replicate Wrath of Khan with Nemesis then they failed epically. Nemesis doesn't deserve to be compared to the greatness that is The Wrath of Khan, that much I can say without any hesitation.
-
I think you can tell I don't know Star Trek. yeah.........
I just remember so many different advertising's of different star like shows. Star Trek, the Next Generation, Babylon 5 I think, some G name I think, I'd like to say there's another, but I don't remember.
-
I think for anyone that doesn't have a keen interest in TV sci-fi they must all blend into eachother and I can really understand how people see the whole thing as incredibly sad and strange.
For me, it's escapism from a world full of bastards.
I have to say, I could never really get into StarGate the series because of the acute lack of ships.
Vehicles seem to be a fundamental part of space travel and science fiction to my mind and my mind doesn't want to be pursuaded otherwise, lol.
I think they seemed to feel the same way later in the show but then you seemed to get one fleet of identical pyramid ships shooting at an identical fleet of identical pyramid ships.
-
Keyword: Stargate, not Starship :P
I am addicted to Stargate. They have a lot more than just focusing on the technology aspect. The goa'uld used ships a lot. The humans would use their own ships near the end of the series and when they did, it was always epic.
-
Sci-fi doesn't necessarily have to involve spaceships to be sci-fi, you know, but I think I see your point on that Crash. Stargate was a lot more "grounded" than some of it's cousin shows, at least until later in the franchise, when more focus started to be put on ships. Stargate Universe even dealt more with the ship than the Stargate itself.
Heh, we really have gotten off-topic, haven't we? :P
-
I have to say, I could never really get into StarGate the series because of the acute lack of ships.
Same here.
I'm not a Stargate fan (never got into it)... however, I did really enjoy Stargate:Universe.
They're on a very interesting ship, but more importantly, it wasn't nearly as tied to the previous series (i.e. it was perfectly enjoyable in and of itself, despite my not having seen the others).
-
Yeah, I think I'm gonna have to have a look at that myself.
-
Too bad it got killed off after just two seasons.
-
Too bad it got killed off after just two seasons.
Wasn't that the same case with the Terminator series? I never got into those series; just heard it died quickly.
-
I wouldn't know for certain, I haven't really followed the Terminator franchise that much, but yeah, I think I had heard via the chatter of the internet that it died quickly. I don't think many people really enjoyed it that much. But that's just judging from what I've heard.
-
When I saw the second or third episode of Terminator the series, I decided I couldn't watch any more.
It was incredibly dull compared to the pilot. I think it improved after that but I never went back, lol.
Terminator 4 was pretty good but not as good as I figured it might be.
Somehow it wasn't as striking as the battle scenes of the future from T1 and 2.
I think it was supposed to be the opening years of the war when there was still vestiges of humanity left; like warplanes and military bases.
We need another film further in the future where the robots have really piled the pressure on the humans and all the humans have is guerilla warfare and whatever weapons they can steal from the Terminators, like what you see in the originals.
That's what I was hoping for from T4 but I guess 2h 30mins of that woulda been quite depressing, lol.
-
Too bad it got killed off after just two seasons.
More like "too bad SyFy dragged it violently into a dark alley and left it to rot". The failure of both SGU and Caprica was due in no small part to their greedy high standards of profit and their horrendous time slot choice. Both shows were on the upswing when they were axed for "low ratings" because syfy put them at a time when most people are sleeping for work the next day.
-
I could never really get into Caprica to be honest.
They need to get back to fighting the Cylons.
-
Never followed Battlestar Galatica, honestly.
-
I saw maybe one or two episodes of the Terminator series. girl terminator with that sexy look, bad terminator NOTHING like Arnold. just bleh....
-
Never followed Battlestar Galatica, honestly.
Get out. Now.
No seriously. That's like the best show ever.
-
I might as well pack up too.
-
The new (2004-9) or whatever BSG was fantastic.
I was watching a documentary about Stalin in WW2 last night on BBC FOUR. I was absolutely gobsmacked when they had music from the new BSG playing in the background to set the mood.
Apparently BBC America bought the rights to the new BSG series. That presumably accounts, to some extent, for its use.
-
@ IHateHackers: Before you panic, part of the reason I haven't watched it (the new series) is because I don't get the channels it airs on, and since I haven't seen an episode and know what the show's like, I'm hesitant to hunt it down on the web.
The old, classic, BSG series is another story though. Reruns of that air every now and then, but I have a hard time watching it and keeping a straight face at the same time, so I don't watch it much. Usually what I see of it is from channel-surfing.
It gets worse, though, because BSG isn't the only major sci-fi series I haven't watched. I've also never seen an episode of Doctor Who in my life, for the same reasons I haven't seen the new BSG.
-
BSG had too much sex in it.
Stop sleeping with the damn robots when you know they are a robot. You can't fully trust them. Most of them are out to kill you. Kill them. Dogfight against them.
Stop sleeping with that crew member, she's probably sleeping with someone else and has got AIDS. Move on with your life. Get your ass to Earth.
The original BSG was kinda ok, but it does cause a lot of facepalms.
Caprica actually put me to sleep.
Scyphi, there is no way that Doctor Who can possibly be compared to the new BSG. It's all about fun, but it runs deep with trust between the people that are on the show. Plot devices occur all the time, and surprisingly, consistancy is rock solid. There are never any boring politics because the Doctor is always there to say something completely rediculous and silly, but entirely true.
Actually, Doctor who is one of the few sci-fi shows that my dad will actually watch that has out of this world things in it :P
The new Doctor officially made bow ties and fezzes cool again :D
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ze5Xm5fW-4o/TCeGe9JscDI/AAAAAAAAA-s/kdWYrFrqAI8/s1600/doctor+who+fez+t-shirt+small.jpg)
-
(http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c59aa53ef0148c78b5eb3970c-500wi)
http://wilwheaton.typepad.com/wwdnbackup/2011/01/i-wear-a-fez-now-fezzes-are-cool.html
-
I only watched a few episodes on network television, I got the rest from my trusty local library. Sadly, I think it was you that told me your library sucks.
-
BSG had too much sex in it.
That right there doesn't make me too inclined to watch it. Sorry IHateHackers. :(
Scyphi, there is no way that Doctor Who can possibly be compared to the new BSG.
Heaven forbid if I accidentally made you think I was comparing the two! That was not intentional at all, even I can see the two are in two completely separate ballparks. The only reason I even brought it up at all was...actually for two reasons. ::) First reason was because the biggest reason I hadn't watched it is because none of the channels I get carry it, an issue I also faced with BSG (the only comparison I was making). Second reason was because I figured the reaction might be interesting to see if everybody learned I hadn't seen any of Doctor Who, something like the reaction IHateHackers gave when he learned I hadn't been following BSG.
Actually, since we're on the subject, my interest has been sparked in Doctor Who, and I've been thinking about looking more into it, and see what I think of it. The problem is knowing where to start watching (surely not at the very beginning?).
Sadly, I think it was you that told me your library sucks.
I didn't say it sucked, I said it was small, and that's not entirely the library's fault. They've recently expanded though (yay!) but because the expansion is still pretty recent, I'm sure they're still working on making use of the extra space...and I'm sure they're hesitant to go filling it up too quickly (at least I certainly hope so).
-
I started watching Dr Who a few weeks ago (starting with borrowing several entire seasons from my uncle :P). I expected to like it but I was still surprised by how much I did.
-
BSG had too much sex in it.
That right there doesn't make me too inclined to watch it. Sorry IHateHackers. :(
Pffft. I think that's a gross exaggeration. It's certainly no worse than any other modern sci-fi (SGU, anyone?). Come to think of it, sci-fi and sex have always been in a relationship, right back to Captain Kirk (though perhaps not quite so shamelessly as BSG... BSG is about as shameless as they come, and not just with that)
-
SGU just had it every once in a while with one or two people and it actually tied into the story a little better. Chloie slept with Scott, but it was Eli who was seriously the best for her. He was stuck in the "just friends" area, a chip on his shoulder. But even so, he did a lot for her which proved that he had a strong character.
-
Agreed with everything you just said, Omega. :D
Furthermore, the sex content of SGU, I noticed, was going down towards it's end.
Besides, sex a good movie/novel/story does not make IMO.
-
Agreed with everything you just said, Omega. :D
Furthermore, the sex content of SGU, I noticed, was going down towards it's end.
Besides, sex a good movie/novel/story does not make IMO.
True, but I don't think a bad story it makes either. I don't particularly care for it, but it doesn't ruin it for me either.
-
Really depends on how good the writer writes it. Or in the case of a movie, the writer director and actors.
-
To be perfectly honest, I don't really see why any work needs any sex at all. Most to nearly all of these works would work just as well without it. As I see it, the only reason it's there at all is for the sensuality and nothing more.
But that's my viewpoint about it. Obviously, not everyone agrees with that.
-
I agree with both actually; the need or no need for sex. Obviously, in some adult film/entertainment, you need it, but in most films, you probably don't need it at all. It some cases, it's simply a distraction, or just plain stupid. Think Titanic and the girls name, Rose. That painting scene, or in the car.
But there are such films like Clockwork Orange that in a sense, needed some of that.
Another, not fond of language, f you this, and f you that, and b words, and other words. bleh. here and there, okay, too much, and it's just too much.
"Harry Brown" with Michael Caine, needed that. It was very fitting.
those are the few films, more so with Harry Brown, that if you didn't have it, it'd be very silly.
-
True, I will concede that there are some works out there that I can be understand it having such content, but c'mon, that's a select few at best. These it's getting to a point that every work has it whether it needs it or not.
-
I agree, as stated earlier. sometimes, you think it's turning into a great movie and then they insert something that isn't necessary. I was pleased to see such films like Red or Expendables without any form of nudity. language wasn't too bad either from what I remember.
-
I second that.
One a side note, I didn't expect to enjoy Red, but it turned out to be a lot of fun (though a bit violent, hence the PG-13 rating).
-
I kind of get the sense that some people are getting a hugely exaggerated impression of the sex content of BSG...
-
My parents used to love BSG, but got tired of the sex so they stopped watching.
-
BSG is far too much of a masterpiece imo to let that ruin it, especially considering it drops off dramatically towards the end of season 3.
-
Yeah, there's nothing really unsuitable in the show, well, unless you watch the movie recap version, lol.
The main series is fine.
I always lol when the President says how the only way to survive is to make babies.
-
I always lol when the President says how the only way to survive is to make babies.
Hearing that while around people of the opposite gender; yeah, can we say, awkward?
-
I always lol when the President says how the only way to survive is to make babies.
Hearing that while around people of the opposite gender; yeah, can we say, awkward?
Can we say, laugh it off?
-
I always lol when the President says how the only way to survive is to make babies.
Hearing that while around people of the opposite gender; yeah, can we say, awkward?
It would be more awkward with only the same sex.
-
And I'm realizing again just how very off topic we've gotten. :P
-
this got off topic fast, actually by you. first page, just a few posts down, someone starts talking about Star Trek ::)
-
this got off topic fast, actually by you. first page, just a few posts down, someone starts talking about Star Trek ::)
I think scyphi just got told ;)
-
On the old forum, Top Gun would have locked this topic long ago.
-
Hey, that was just my way of saying you guys were getting too worked up over ol' Mr. Lucas changing a few things in Star Wars...and that I didn't care enough for Star Wars to have sympathy. :P But the comment seemed to go over everyone's heads, so I dove into a more detailed explanation of my point, staying on topic fairly well too, if I'm honest. :P
Though I suppose I was the one that brought Trek into the matter at all, though, didn't I? ::)
Of course, Vanguard, the subject was just about ignored until you brought up again by saying, and I quote...
If Star Trek got modified all of the time, you may not like it.
...and I used that as a springboard to dive deeper into my argument. Again staying fairly on topic with Star Wars in the process, I note. ;D
It was really more Crash and Techpro making jokes about Trek in general that really started the shift into Trek, as that got one wanting to discuss one's opinions about Trek. A chance I couldn't pass up, TBH. ::)
Oh well. It was fun while it lasted, and that's what's important, right? :)
And anyway, my comment was more about how we had gone from talking sci-fi to sex.
...which again, I have to admit, was started by me.
...darn it. :P
-
lol, who is talking about sex? I think it was just mentioned in passing..
-
we rarely stay on topic. That's just life though. This movie or person, or place or item reminds me of this or that, and then 'this or that' is read by someone else who says "hey, that is like that or this". and before you know it, we go from Star Wars to sex
-
We're not talking about sex, we're talking about sex in sci-fi.
-
we go from star wars to sex in sci fi films.
-
I mean, sex is just part of life. It makes everything better. As long it's done tastefully, I don't see any problem.
You folks should watch Lexx. There's an interesting show if ever you saw one.
-
Life in general is hardwired to reproduce and to enjoy reproducing.
If we were highly advanced algal cells instead of humans... it wouldn't change a thing (well maybe how the characters looked).
-
Yep, no point swimming against the current, lol - especially when there's no compelling reason to do so.
-
Yep, no point swimming against the current, lol - especially when there's no compelling reason to do so.
But sex is bad!
-
Not really. It depends more on how you use it.
-
I think IHateHackers is right and we should extinguish the species on principle. :)
-
sex is bad if you're a retard. ;D
what? over the edge?
I believe in marriage first. I am not going to push anyone to anything though. It's purely your choice.
-
Is Crash the only one who detected the obvious sarcasm there? :/
-
I caught the sarcasm, but you also unwittingly provided a springboard to yet again shift the topic that people decided not to pass up. ;)
-
sex is bad if you're a retard. ;D
Maybe so, but if your a retard and having sex do you care if it's bad?
-
Depends on ... well ... yeah, that's probably so.
-
lol, who is talking about sex? I think it was just mentioned in passing..
Rule #1 about all forms of life...
Yeah...