Slashdot Mirror
Star Trek: Pick A Plot
Vinnie_333 writes "This article on the New York Times sounds out on the often repetitive plots of the 10 Star Trek films to date (this include ST: Nemesis, coming soon). It refers to the film franchise as '10 films with 5 plots' and lays them all out in front of you. This does have a ring of truth. As a fan of Sci Fi (but not particularly Star Truck), I have to admit that there are only so many unique plots out there, and most of them have been well used by HG Well's time. Star Trek is, after all, a genre franchise and the story lines are held back by certain restrictions of the genre." I personally would pay Berman/Braga et al $20 if they never have a holodeck or time-travel-based plot ever again.
when you have such great acting?
Ahhh yess, the obligatory sigh oh, did you say sig?
As a fan of Sci Fi (but not particularly Star Truck),
How old are you? Munging up the names of something you don't like is something I did when I was 12. Come on, you guess can be a little mature, can't you?
FYI - I'm not standing up for Star Trek. I don't like it much either.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
I personally would pay Berman/Braga et al $20 if they would just sit down and watch "Wrath of Kahn." Trek as it should be, and seldom is.
Not everyone deserves a 320i
I'll throw in $20 as well. Let's see if we can buy Hollywood like they buy Washington.
I find these stories very similar to comics, where stories seem to be very similar. I suspect the authors are creating so many similar stories with a purpose: the differences are hard to see, and we end up watching the same show all over again, coz we were unsure if we had seen it before.
I'd just settle for a decent TV show.
The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
Well, if you really want to admit it, there are only about three plots. You have Man against Nature, Man against Man and Man against Himself.
I would suppost that Man against computer (or Superman against computer) could be any of the above.
What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
They need to go back to good old ship fights. Star Trek Insurrection is the example I am talking about multiple ships in combat and close quarters combat towards the end of the movie.
I read an article about TNG production a little while back. Rather than coming up with a exotic particle/lifeform/radition of the week to save the day, TNG scriptwriters would often just write in a placeholder to be replaced with a tech-adviser's technobabble at a later date.
Scripts would look as so:
GEORDI: Let's [technobabble] the main thrusters so that we can [technobabble] the Borg.
Etc...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Not trying to flame. I used to be a big fan of the original as well as TNG. :-)
However, the plotlines in B5 were far superior to anything on StarTrek, IMHO of course.
Also, no Wesley Crusher type characters
Jesus used to be my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.
If it wasn't for the predictable plots you couldn't play The Star Trek the Drinking Game.
I think some of the ST:TNG shows with the holodeck and time-travel plots were fun (e.g., when Mark Twain was a character on the show). I like them for the same reason I like the "Q" episodes. YMMV, I suppose.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
+5 karma to the first guy who posts a link to one of those anonymous nytimes generator sites
I'll have something intelligent to add one of these days...
The writers of Star Trek aren't held back by anything other than their own incompetence. There are a million potential plots out there. For that matter, well-written characters and dialog can make a trite plot into a fine film.
Granted, many plots were used by Wells or Bradbury or Burroughs long ago, but if you simplify things down to that level everything starts to look the same. If you wrote a 1-paragraph summary of all of the romantic comedy films ever made, for example, it would look like this:
"Two characters who at first seem to have insurmountable differences meet and, through a series of comic moments, fall in love. A complication threatens to dash their hopes, but at the last moment everything works out."
That doesn't mean all of these films are without value. Just most of them.
It's Slashdot's evil twin... SlashNOT
Don't all the Bond movies essentially have about three or four plots? What about Police Academy? Indeed, is there any series of movies that *doesn't* have the same few plots repeated again and again?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I personally would pay Berman/Braga et al $20 if they never have a holodeck or time-travel-based plot ever again.
Amen!
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
...if Paramount never let Berman/Braga write ANY plot again.
When "Star Trek: Nemesis" opens this December, audiences will learn that the United Federation of Planets is about to make peace with its adversary, the Romulan Empire. The initiative may founder, though, because of an enemy who is surprisingly close to the captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise.
Once again, the history of the future repeats itself. Go back in the series from the 24th century to the 23rd, substitute Klingons for Romulans and James T. Kirk for Jean-Luc Picard, and you will discern the outlines of "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country." This duplication is not simply a matter of one generation following another onto the bridge of the Enterprise. As true fans can tell you, "Nemesis" will seem new and yet vaguely familiar: the 10th film in a series that has five plots.
Five, in fact, may be a generous accounting. Here is an exhaustive summary of what can happen in a "Star Trek" movie:
A megalomaniac tries to seize the power of life itself ("S.T. II: The Wrath of Khan"; "S.T. V: The Final Frontier"; "S.T. VII: Generations"; "S.T. IX: Insurrection").
A senior officer of the Enterprise comes back from the dead ("S.T. III: The Search for Spock"; "S.T. VII: Generations"), or a fate worse than death ("S.T. VIII: First Contact").
The crew of the Enterprise goes back to an earlier century on Earth, to make sure that history happens as it should ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home"; "S.T. VIII: First Contact").
A spacecraft threatens to destroy Earth, and we're to blame, either because our technology is more advanced than our ethics ("S.T.: The Motion Picture") or because we've trashed other species ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home").
True fans can tell you something else as well: Poverty of narrative invention has nothing to do with predicting the success or failure of any "Star Trek" film. "The Wrath of Khan" has more incident than the others put together and is by common consent the best of the lot. But "The Voyage Home" also ranks high, despite a story that can be fully retold in the listing in TV Guide. Like the original television series, which put expansive ideals into rudimentary settings, "The Voyage Home" charmed audiences by blending self-aware goofiness with outer-space liberalism.
Will the new picture strike the same balance? Trekkie superstition holds that the good episodes have even numbers, and "Nemesis" is No. 10. So there may be hope -- assuming, of course, that nothing new ever happens in the "Star Trek" series.
.. not for this drivel, at least.
5 plots? I can sum up 99% of 'em with this:
I stopped being a fan a couple years into TNG.
It just became apparent that anything the 'franchise' does is just drying to squeeze a little more milk out of the cash cow. It's hardly good science fiction anymore.
1) Big problem (alien, wormhole, time-loop, computer malfunction) presents itself.
2) Bunch of yammering and melodrama and crappy dialogue, of the hollywood breed, which they no doubt think is interesting.
3) 5 minutes into the end of the show Geordi (or whoever) goes 'I got it!' and yammers out some nonsense techno-babble which solves the problem.
They could at least throw in a bunch of cool special effects, something.
IMO the franchise has been coasting on nostalgia for years, god only knows how long it will last, though.
Thats not to say that there's much better on TV. I plan on watching Smackdown! tonight, it's as intellectual as anything else on the toob.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Just put Marina Sirtis in tight clothing and you have an instant bankable franchise!
There are numerous plots if humans try to think outside the borg cube (aka, the "mental/conceptual box"). Man against *** is boring. Writers always seem to treat alien cultures in some way that humans always understand (ultimately). What about a plot with alien characters who truly are alien such that you walk away from the TV or movie theater wondering what actually happened, purely because you couldn't be sure you properly interpreted alien actions.
Hmm, and if /. has any more articles on Star Trek, it might be a good idea to have a little 'Star Trek' logo and category instead of 'Movies'....
Just my 2 cents... or 2 strips of Gold Pressed Latinum I suppose.
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
ST:whatever can have origional storylines.. I have seen many many MANY Sci-Fi movies that had great plotlines but were crippled by the fact that they were B-movies.
Space based Genre has a TON of room to move and segway into billions of plotlines...
Hell look at LEXX... I dont think that rehashed anything and can fit in the ST universe...
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
... what POKE 65495,0 does!
The people going to see these high-numbered sequels are loyal to the cast and to the very 'essence' of Star Trek The Next Generation.
I am not really a trekkie, but I love STTNG and I will be seeing the movie on DVD if not in the theater. For people who are even more devoted than me it won't matter what the movie is like when it comes to quality because they are going to see it regardless.
A series of phasers fights and scenes where Piccard says things like "Engage" and "Come" would make them a happy bunch.
dmiessler.com -- grep understanding knowledge
Well, it is a well-known fact among screenwriters (and probably other writers as well) that all stories have already been told. Now it's just about _how_ you tell the story.
Plots, OTOH, can be easily quite original and I find it rather surprising that there are only 5 plots for ST movies (I've seen only one). Reasons for that are impossible to come up with without knowing what's going on behind the scenes.
The article states:
;^)
"The crew of the Enterprise goes back to an earlier century on Earth, to make sure that history happens as it should ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home"; "S.T. VIII: First Contact")."
I must have seen the alternate version of number 4, because I swear they went back in time to capture two whales and bring them to their present time. Nothing about ending whaling, preventing whales from becoming extinct, bringing all the whales to the future. By the end of the movie, there are exactly two whales in the oceans of Earth, and little hope for their re-populating. While it was simply an eco-feel-good movie, it wasn't a fix-history movie.
Funny line about using 'LSD' in college though.
Some of the holodeck subplots were interesting - the notion of 'addiction' by Lieutenant Barclay in ST:TNG. Extending the technology by introducing the Doctor in Voyager seemed okay, but then extending to other "photonic life" in several different ways became strange: apparently there was some photonic life that didn't appear to require actual computers or holo-emitters (the absurd episode in which Janeway must become a B-movie queen), and then later we again see photonic beings who do require computers/holo-emitters.
Of course, the real issue is that so many sci-fi plot points are impossible under the laws of physics as they are generally known (whether we're talking about the 1960's or 2002): faster-than-light travel, time travel, transporters, warp fields, subspace communication. Breaking the rules is what enables the plots to get interesting, and of course we all hope/believe/fantasize that what we imagine might one day be possible, since any sufficiently advanced technology is magic (Clarke).
What I find most troubling are gaping inconsistencies, often made worse by implausible explanations. In one episode, the scanners can identify a single individual among billions on a planet with super-advanced technology, and then in the next they can't scan to find out what's inside a wad of Kleenex (exaggeration).
One of the absurd, and often annoying, plot devices that is also sometimes one of the more amusing, is the notion that this crew of a few hundred (really just a dozen or so people who seem to actually do everything) can invent new technologies in a few hours, with half the ship's systems disabled, while huge teams of dedicated scientists with vast resources could not accomplish such work (apparently the only major technology invented by humans but NOT invented on Enterprise or Voyager, was the non-damaging warp technology that was introduced on Voyager).
No question about it: the last episode of "Enterprise" last year took away just about everything that showed promise in the series: the notion that they were less advanced, less able, less knowledgeable than the later crews.
-- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
...I think it's good entertainment.
My first (and for quite some time, only) Star Trek experience has been the TNG and VOY episodes. And I like them a lot. There's repitition, but I think it's good entertainment; I like watching it. However, I don't like TOS, nor do I like the Kirk-movies. I'm not one for old-day sci-fi (except StarWars, but hey). I did like Insurrection though. Again, good entertainment; some action, pretty special effects, acting wasn't too bad at all, some heroism (but not corny) and a lot of sci-fi. Yeah, that's good entertainment to me. Now if you don't like it, don't go and see Nemesis. I for one will be among the first to get tickets (hoping they won't wait with releasing it here in the Netherlands for a month or 6).
Good entertainment, that's what it is too me. I can go and get some popcorn and a soda and enjoy 90+ minutes of good entertainment. Throw in a little heriosm, some good catchy lines (Data: "Lock and load", it just all depends on _who_ says it) and some nice shots and I've got good entertainment.
"We live in our minds, and existance is the attempt to bring that life into physical reality" Ayn Rand
Why O Why do they not ask fans for help. Perhaps they have, but I do not remember it. Many ST fans know *everything* about the ST universe. They are usually geeks with quite informed and educated ideas about sci fi. Why not have a web page where fans can submit intelligent plots for new shows and films?
I would bet the quality would be better and the originality would increase. Of course, I would think that Rick Berman and his writers would go through and professionalize the plots from the hollywood sense. But at least the ideas and general plot would come from those who live and die by the ST world: the fans!
Perhaps I am placing too much confidence in those I've seen going to ST conventions and clubs. But then again, perhaps not. I'd personally pit them any day against a hollywood writer in coming up with original, science-based ideas.
Khannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Khannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!
(Protomatter: no ethical scientist would use it, but it solves so many problems)
Sometimes, I think these Star Trek stories are just a ploy to get Wil to come and post.
/. users are above shameless celeb watching, right?
Nah,
Ok, maybe so, but the categorization sucks. You can't lump Kahn in with Sybock (a gay vulcan), and Ru'Afo (a piece of drift wood).
But what does it matter? It took voyager 7 seasons to come up with only 3 plots. In my estimation we're ahead of the game here.
I'm surprised there hasn't been an ST movie revolving around the Q. What's not to like - their omniscient and omnipotent, and to some degree omnipresent. Why can't they feature a pitched battle against the Traveler and Wesley Crusher, who apparently can manipulate subspace.
...oh, right, never mind....
Think of the mayhem!! Think of the comedy!!
We always used to laugh about this one
How on earth did a six foot fly come to be living in a twelve foot cube in the down below?
That's a story line I'd like to see.
I also want to know how on earth he gets all the information.
Perhaps he's got some sort of dominion over normal sized flies which he commands to hang out on the walls of the ship and report interesting stuff back.
Star Trek stories are mostly shite. They've got that huge ship with all those people and almost all the action takes place in one of 8 rooms.
Rykers beard & hair combination looks like it's plastic too.
Here's hoping someone wipes out the Ferengi any time soon
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
speaking of movies.... how many rocky movies are there? like 17? 17 movies, 1 script :)
mp3s by me
I felt like the article lacked foundation. Sounds like the guy heard about a 30 second trailer that his cousin uncle saw and decided to flamebait every Star Trek fan.
He uses extremely vague suppositions to catogorize the Star Trek series and doesn't even include every movie in his 5 plot categories.
He might as well lump them all into the good versus evil category.
I would have to say that even with redundant plots, each movie was entertaining in its own rights.
This is the 10th film. 10 is even, so the film is going to be good.
Given that the TNG cast are all about ready for the knackers yard, can we presume that film 11 will be Voyager, and thus suck royally on at least two counts?
Actually there were lots of things I liked about Voyager, but they're not the things that would make a good movie. Apart from 7 of 9. And it won't be that kind of movie, I'm sure.
The Self-Made Critic has a more detailed scoring scheme for Star Trek movies in his review of Insurrection. We'll see how accurate it is after Nemesis.
--
E_NOSIG
Two characters who at first seem to have insurmountable differences meet and, through a series of comic moments, fall in love. A complication threatens to dash their hopes, but at the last moment everything works out."
You've pretty much described Lethal Weapon, Alien Nation, Tango & Cash, etc.
"The crew of the Enterprise goes back to an earlier century on Earth, to make sure that history happens as it should ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home"; "S.T. VIII: First Contact")."
This is an interesting interpretation of the Episode IV story-line. The crew did not go back in time to prevent someone from changing history as they did in VIII. Rather the crew went back in time to change history. The Borg didn't go back and kill the Whales, the humans did it all by themselves!
Anyway, I'm not sure this guy watched either movie, and some of the Star Trek movies do suck, but the plots don't over lap that much...
My other sig is extremely clever...
Star Trek traditionally has predictable plots. That's part of the fun and culture of the series. I suppose the movies could be a little more original with their plot lines, but leave the series alone :)
Besides, I like knowing in advance that any "extra" in a landing party is doomed to a painful, yet entertaining death. Too bad they didn't take care of Wes when he was a borderline extra.
I'm not what most would consider a trekkie, but I do enjoy the shows. I never really got into Voyager, though...
My sig sucks.
anyone that has taken a graduate level course in literature or has taken a hardcore writing course, there are only 6 plots in literature. Everything simply recasts the plots in a new and different environment. The measure of a good story, movie or show is how well it captures/creates an alternate reality. End of story.
... it's about character. A good deal of both DS9 and TNG (arguably both really good shows, whether you like Trek or not) was about character interaction. I'll give you an example:
There's an ep of DS9 where Will Riker's duplicate (transporter accident in an ep of TNG) stole the Defiant and went off to give the Cardassians hell.
One could very easily dismiss that ep as "Oh geez, dude steals a ship, fires the guns a few times, and gives up when he's outnumbered. What an original plot. *sarcasm*"
However, that wasn't the interesting part of the episode. The interesting part was WHY Riker's duplicate did this. He was stranded alone on a planet for 8 years. When he was recovered, he couldn't live up to success that the Riker that made it off the planet enjoyed.
When you watch this ep, you're lead to believe that the Riker duplicate was going for the 'greater good' trying to uncover some Cardassian plot. What was really going on was he was hoping to quickly turn himself into a hero, even if it meant death for him.
There were other interesting details of the episode, but I just wanted to make that little point: Plot isn't everything. Here's a case where scifi gave birth to a situation not likely to happen in reality, and gave the audience an interesting glimpse into a fictional world.
Frankly, I think Enterprise would be a lot more popular if people understood this concept. The 'plot' of the episodes isn't the strong point, the development of the characters is. That's what it's all about.
hehehe. The world is full of chimps and I don't believe in evolution.
Lets face it, if Sci-Fi was full of original plots the Evil Overlord List would not be nearly as funny.
... the first series, and very well acted, by a very capable cast. The writing was of a quality (for the most part) not seen these days outside of a West Wing, or an ER. Most of all it was bright, mentioning then-cutting-edge science as causually as could be. Think of how revolutionary it must have been, to hear talk of warp drives, anti-matter reactors, and plausible beam weapons. Universal Translators. Racial equality. Gender equality. Tribbles.
It was a show that dared you to think, that made you look at things a different way. What exists today, that watered-down product churned out like so many slasher-film franchises... sigh.
Best episode ever? Harlan Ellison...
Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
Aliens + Soft Core porn = Lexx
nuff said.
Rule #1 about Star Trek time travel plots: If the crew goes back in time, it's good. If the crew is visited by someone from the future, it's bad.
:-)
Seriously, think about it. "Voyage Home", good. "Time's Arrow" (TNG, Mark Twain), ok. "Past Tense" (DS9, American ghetos in the 21st centry), good. "Tomorrow is Yesterday" (TOS, airforce thinks Enterprise is UFO), ok.
Compare those to the Voyager finale, crap. The episode where Worf's son comes back from the future to kill himself, dumb. Anything in Voyager involving the Starfleet Time Cops from the future, ugh.
The weird one is the Voyager episode where the crew is attacked by someone from the 29th century and is thrown back to 1996. It has a little of each, but in the end they kill Bill Gates, so that episode officially rocks.
Think about it, it really is true. Of course, that does not bode well for "Enterprise", as their big plot arc is all about being visited by the Voyager Time Cops over and over again. *groan*
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
holodeck, borg, holodeck, borg, aliens doing something to the crew and only seven and the doctor know whats going on, holodeck, something happens and only seven and the doctor know whats going on, holodeck....
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
1. ?????
2. Profit
need a starship?
Conclusion, top execs make more $$$ and get to take their family on a two month vacation to a tropical island so they can cook in the sun and drink booz.
McGyver: Hero in distress must fashion something miraculous out of seemingly disparate common items.
Soap Operas: Someone screws someone else either financially, emotionally, or physically.
Quantuum Leap: Hero must struggle with either emotional, logical, moral, or political belief to complete mission. Oh yeah, if target body is male then must get woman to in love again.
m.mmm..myyy
No, not the travel back to earth in the past kind. Those really suck. But I really like the paradox and causality loop kind of things. Reaction being observed before the action and throwing everyone for a loop (pardon the pun). That last episode of STTNG, I really liked. I also liked some of the Voyager ones (and Janeway saying that she swore she'd never wanted to be in one). That 'Year of Hell' was a good one, too. Time Travel can be fun, as long as it isn't going back and revisiting a known past.
Many of my favorite Star Trek episodes are the ones that take place almost entirely on the bridge - almost Shakesperean in the lack of different sets. The story is character driven, not event driven. The story becomes more about how the characters react to the situation, and how they interact with one another, and less about "Hey the Romulans just shot as us".
An earlier poster is right, plot is defined as a struggle - whether it's man vs. man, man vs. nature, or man vs. himself. While unfortunately the Next Generation did use a lot of technobabble to save the day during the plot's climax, it's mostly forgivable - For the sake of the storyline we're supposed to accept the fact that Geordi LaForge and Data are *extremely smart*... Same goes for Spock on the Original Series. Other stories where the climax was resolved a different way, like through a violent confrontation it was usually Riker and Worf (or Kirk) who kicked ass and took names. When it was a tactical battle, it was Picard (or Kirk) who used his superior strategy to save the day. When it was a medical crisis, you could count on Pulaski or Crusher to handle it. (Or Bones..) There are a finite number of ways to resolve a conflict, and Star Trek seems to use all of them - even running away and asking Q to get them the hell away from the Borg.
Other television shows, in my humble opinion, would be wise to take some cues from Star Trek and become more character driven and less event driven.
Fundamentally, I guess I'm trying to say that they can revive plot lines to a certain extent while coming up with different conclusions that are fresh and interesting.
There are only a few stories to be told. One of the largest - the main story - goes something like this.
1. Hero is confronted with unbeatable challenge / unsurmountable odds.
2. Hero experiences personal growth/enlightenment
3. Hero overcomes challenge / odds.
The matrix? Star Wars? Lord of the Rings? There is nothing wrong with the recycling of ideas in film or books or anything. Its part of human nature.. there are only so many ideas.
The Hero with a Thousand Faces is a book that explores this very idea. Its worth checking out.
Well, maybe I'm being optimistic, but I'm hopeful for that Lord of the Rings trilogy they're working on...
{
picard.say("prime directive is of atmost importance");riker.say("but captain, our action affects innocent lives");
deana.say("I am sensing conflicting feelings captain");
geordi.say("I am trying captain,the engines are at 85% efficiency");
data.say("that is acceptable");
}
while ( 100 >= episode)
I do like startrek but sometimes it stirs a feeling of dejavu
Umberto Eco points this out in his article The Myth of Superman (I'm afraid a quick google only turned up this synopsis, not the whole text). Here are some key quotes from that link, and, I assume, the article (come on, it's been nearly six years since I've read it! :^D Maybe I did earn that B.A. degree after all...). I try to recall a few more important bits below.
...
.construct on a small scale 'analogous' models which mirror the larger one."
:^) (Last season was a dream!)
:^) Anyhow, it's no surprise Star Trek is often similar. It's part of the myth that "resonates with our archetypes". Hey, someone much smarter than me said that. Stop making fun. :^)
Traditional mythic heroes were governed by a law, therefore these heroes were predictable and held no suprises for the audience.
... and
Authors preferences are not considered when writing a novel. They are forced to write along the guidelines of a cultural model. In this case, "authors. .
Basically the deal was that if you started at A and went to B, you might pass through C or D or E but your story must end up at A again or you'll have spoiled the myth.
There's only so much a mythical figure can do (or mythos o' figures). Here are some of the more horrendous deviations from the "A leads to B leads to A again" that I can think of off-hand (a little Spidey-centric, I'm afraid):
* The brilliant folk at Marvel kill off Aunt May. (She's back now)
* The brilliant folk at Marvel decide Spider-Man is really a clone. (The clones have all disappeared now)
* The brilliant folk at DC kill off Superman and then have several return. (I think we're back to one, but I don't read Superman)
* Patrick Duffy leaves Dallas.
* Felix Lieter (sp) has his leg eaten by a shark in Licensed To Kill. (Haven't fixed that yet, but they did ditch Dalton, even if it isn't his fault that movie stunk to high heaven)
This is why, I believe, these fictional stories rarely do things that are irreversable, like have Peter Parker age [much] or main characters get married (last I looked, Marvel was still struggling with that one, even having MJ disappear). It's also why shows tend to die after the leading man & woman get romanticly involved -- see Moonlighting. Or why they die when they switch tone -- see all those Carol Burnett[-esque] episodes later on in Magnum, P.I.
So, in one sense, the reason Star Trek is always the same is the same reason everyone was on pins and needles when Diane left Cheers.
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
Two dudes are listening to a new Metallica album.
Dude 1: Dude, all these songs sound the same!
Dude 2: Yeah, but Dude, it's a good song!
Gilligan's island - Gilligan screws up their rescue attempt and keeps the small group on a remote island. Gilligan tries to score with Ginger.
The point of Star Trek is not to be "MacGyver" set in space. Star Trek exists as a metaphor for what we are today, and for what we are not.
The plots you see over and over are simply platforms for a glance at what an advanced people might do, how they might act, and why they act, when faced with the same basic issues we face today.
So, often when the whizbang thingamajig is broken on the Enterprise, the real plot is the interaction between the crew members and their adversaries, not the solution to the whizbang problem.
"We could use the Cockran emitters to generate a surge overflow in the creature's biomatrix."
"Like putting too much air in a balloon!"
"No, no, let's use the Kerlian emitters to generate a surge overflow in the creature's biomatrix."
"Like putting too much air in a balloon!"
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
The same is true for any branch of literature. Science fiction has a much wider range of possible plots than mainstream fiction. The point is that they don't develop these plots in any interesting way.
Look at Johnny Mnemonic. They took a pretty good short story, and made a pretty boring movie out of it. There is lots of good science fiction to make movies out of. Hollywood does not want to make movies that require people to think, which is the whole point of science fiction, not blowing stuff up.
All the plots were explored by Shakespeare... by the Bible, I've heard it all... PROVE IT!
limited imagination, if you ask me... which you didn't. For example... Stanislaus Lem's plots... try to map them to HG Wells and find yourself making quite a big stretch.
-pyrrho
That's when the good guys at the MPAA come in and take away your borg - TIVO sighting you can't have it because it violates the temporal prime directive
See the Pictures of the Flood of '08
The Enterprise visits a remote outpost of scientists and they are all OK.
Captain Picard has to make a difficult decision about a less advanced people, but the Prime Directive makes it easy.
The crew of the Enterprise are struck by a strange alien plague, for which the cure is found in the well-stocked sick-bay.
The Enterprise is involved in a bizarre time-warp phenomenon, which is in some way unconnected with the 20th century.
A power surge on the Bridge is rapidly and correctly diagnosed as a faulty capacitor by the highly-trained and competent engineering staff.
Just as i thought sci-fi movies were getting hackneyed in the mainstream view (I mean, Battlefield Earth), I heard there was going to be an Ender's Game movie. I talked to OSC at a book signing recently and he said the movie isn't totally under his control or anything, but it seems it should turn out GREAT, but casting hasn't even started -_-.
Au contraire! I was afraid the holodeck would be terribly misused when they introduced it, but some of the most interesting and creative episodes involve the holodeck, albeit in the series, not the movies:
Moriarity makes the crew think they're not in the holodeck, then <spoiler deleted>
Holodeck lounge singer Vic shows Nog a reason for living
Using the holodeck to recreate testimony and look at different viewpoints
Holodeck addiction --- something that would be a real problem
Using the holodeck as a simulator, what would probably be one of its most useful uses
While they aren't always the best episodes otherwise, it's not because of the holodeck, and some are among the best...
The world is full of chimps and I don't believe in evolution.
Evolution past chimps, anyway.
...that there are only five basic plots worth writing about in existence. They boil down to Romance (good person meets true love), Redemption (bad man turns good), Justice (good person is elevated), Tragedy (good person is fallen), and Quest (good person saves everything). Whether the person in question is in conflict with one other, many others, nature, or himself, they all come down to that.
So "Star Trek" tends to be formulaic. So what? So's everything else that's ever been written; it's a matter of how well it's written that draws or repels us, which is why "The Wrath of Khan" is so popular and "Generations" is less so.
However, a Romulan-based plot could be postponed in order to use John Delancy (sp?) before he gets too old. I mean, how much should an immortal, omnipotent being age? I would say not too much.
Additionally, once upon a time, I heard a vague and unreliable rumor that they were going to kill Data because Spiner decided that he was type-cast. (And I suppose being typecast as a single character that is impossible to duplicate elsewhere would be somewhat limiting ;-)
Its very true that most original plots have all been done - same goes for characters and twist endings. honestly how many times does earth egt attacked by aliens, go into world war, is distroyed by a disaster, my father kills me my mother kills me, my child kills me, my step sister kills me, my third cousin removed who is actually my neighbors wife kills me - its all been done - may not have been the best or worst movies in the world but there ins't anything thats really original....
Movie Examples:
- "6th sense" begot "The Others"
- "eXistenZ" begot "13th Floor" begot "The matrix"
- "Blade runner" begot "ghost in the shell" begot "amitage the 3rd"
Ave Molech Setting
There are so many places they could go with their plot motifs (Man vs. Himself can be seen in the motif of a stranded person surving the odds and their personal self-doubt until rescued, for example.) Science fictions offers endless variety of these!
Cambellian science fiction was all about asking "What if?" Where has that gone with this franchise? Technobabble, non-sense and special effects usually. The problem Trek has been accused of often is not thinking about the consequences of certain technologies. Great examples are missed opportunities with cloaking and teleportation or explaining how the toilets on the Enterprise work (if in fact they are connected in some obscure way with the food replicator).
In stead of asking a What If question about technology we are usually instead given a song and dance routine by Data, a sexual episode between data and a real woman, a lame space battle (sit down B5 folks already) or some dumb ass plot where they come across a planet populated ONLY by Gangsters/Sou Chefs/Half Naked Californians.
Oh, and one more plot about dystopia and I will scream.
I'm not asking that they make their movies as stunningly boring as, say anything written by Robert L. Forward (*great* scientist - lousy story teller in my humble opinion). But get some real writters: David Brin, Greg Bear, Vernor Vinge even! These guys could take that Franchise where No Science Fiction Franchise has ever gone before!
Well, that's my piece. Thanks for listening.
--Peter
The first six movies were sort of an epic saga, anyway, weren't they? They were all sort of related, as I recall.
An exciting epic featuring all the repetitive sagas of a daily news site. Including a giant karma sucking troll as the head of the evil M$ Corporation. Featuring repeated posts from the NY Times (registry required) of the latest plot of the M$ troll to takeover the world (Killer asteroid, robbing us of music, this mysterious disease BSD that they all keep talking about.). Popular polls of where the geek masses eat, sleep, drink, and #@!%. The heroes of our film? A dynamic duo of CmdrTaco and his little buddy CowboyNeal.
I think we could develop this into one of great film franchises of history. I hear that a cadre of circus chickens are lined up to direct.
Ideas?
did it bug anyone else that voyager never did an alternate universe episode, not that it wouldn;t have been as nonsensecal as their time travel plots, but its one of those thigns that bridges the different series, like Q, a friend of mine said in the mirror universe vayger wasn;t stranded in the delta quadrant, btu it still would have been an interesting episode ps, i didn't ever watch TNG that much, did they ever do a mirror ep?
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
If the four plots listed are `an exhaustive summary of what can happen in a "Star Trek" movie', why is Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country missing?
The reason why I like ToS more and more is the fact that the writers were only constricted by the Roddenberry "bible" (which at the time was quite loose and open to speculation).
The way I see it, over the years Trek writers have been slowly building a fence around themselves and now they find that they are creativly constricted.
They are trying to break out of the mold with Enterprise, but consider that they have already had a "holodeck" AND a "time travel" episode. I think they (the writers, et al) have forgotten that Trek at it's heart is about discovery, adventure and humanity.
crazy dynamite monkey
The same thing can be said about Shakespeare, so therefore he must be an awful writer. In fact, it's even worse than Star Trek--he only has three plots!
- Tragedy: Someone has a flaw that ultimately leads to their demise.
- Comedy: misunderstandings and odd characters combine. Hilarity ensues.
- Histories: An elaboration and dramatization of historical events and people.
Wow. Shakespeare sucks.
I got flamed/modded down a while ago for voicing severe dissatifaction with the Wesley character. My exact argument was along the line of:
/. reader, so some here are friends with him, and were offended for him. I don't think he ever replied, discretion being the better part of valor and all. As far as the 'gay' reference, watching the few episodes just reminded me of seeing Who's the Boss in the '80s, and you could tell that the actor who played Jonathon was gay. Don't know if Mr. Wheaton is gay, but it sure seemed that way in the show. That wasn't why I hated the series, but refering to it sure pissed off a lot of people. I just thought the show was terrible, and the original was much better.
Every episode I saw had that gay kid inventing some new contraption that used purely experimental or hypothetical physics to save everyone's ass.
Some people took extreme offense at that. I also never cared for the Next Generation series anyhow, so I only saw a few shows. But each one was the same ending.
And now I know Wil Wheaton (ala imdb.com), the actor who played Wesley, is a
So while I didn't like Wesley Crusher because the show used him as a crutch, I loved Jar Jar Binks. He is just so stupidly annoying, how can you not like him? And with C-3PO's scenes being limited, they needed someone that could fill in as the stupidly annoying character.
when you're on Slashdot?
They'll watch it because they want to see Picard, Worf, Data and Troi again.
-- SIGFPE
The only ones to get your cryptic reference are those born to laugh at tornados.
Was(!Was)
Offtopic?!?!
It was referring directly to Berman and Braga and what they should do for $20!!! This is directly related to the teaser on the main slashdot page!! Fucking mods are smocking dick AND crack!
Blame the writers not the actors. Good writing can make a bad actor good, except Jonathan.
mem in MMII
This is not bad. The beauty is in how old stories are told anew. God, as they say, is in the details.
Is Star Wars any less a great movie just because it came after The Magnificent Seven, which itself was preceded by The Seven Samurai and Hidden Fortress? Of course not. They are all great movies, and the fact that they have essentially the same plot is irrelevent, because the details are what matters.
The Protagonist. The Antagonist. The Conflict. The Resolution. For the imagination-challenged, basic plotlines can even be computer generated. For example, at this site.
Doesn't matter. Make the details interesting enough and any plot will make for a good story. Now, if you can't come up with original enough details...well, then, your story really is tedious and boring and you should take up something else for a living, like accounting.
I'll tell you what the 'effect' is! It's pissing me off!
Seriously, the *place* really is Wonkers' Corner. On the other hand, the *bar* that sat right there, on Wonkers' family land, was called "Wanker's Corner". For some strange reason, when the lease came up for renewal the Wonker family decided it was time to let some other business be in that spot. :)
So now the "Wanker's Corner bar is several miles away from Wonkers' Corner, in Wilsonville.
Confused yet?
(And yes, it's seriously off-topic. Local interest only. Move along....)
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
It's not what story you tell, rather how you tell it.
The link to the article is broken...it asks me to log in. Has someone informed the nytimes webmaster? Something like this could seriously affect the ability of the site to reach people.
Martial arts and ST! Now THERE'S something we haven't seen since Sulu wielded that sword!
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
Please... is this slashdot or have I mistyped the URL? Flaming in the story itself, not the comments?
Engage!
And get all the GOOD plots you can imagine.
Mod me down....I don't care...Farscape is at stake here people.
Too much technology makes it too easy for the writers. If there is a serious problem, a warp drive or a time travel will get the heroes out of trouble. If there were technological constraints, then the writers would have more things to write.
For example, if the ships had no shield, combat would have real tactics. Ships would be hidden behind asteroids, try surprise attacks, launch missiles, etc.
As it is right now, anything can happen. Q can jump into the plot any time and mess things up.
The writers should also have in mind that a series is as big as its characters are; and most successful series have a mission in them: people try to achieve a target, there is a focus.
Star Trek does not have big characters, except for the captain of the Enterprise (and maybe Spok!). Geordi La Forge, Lt Data and the rest of the crew make up for an interesting party, but not that interesting in the long run.
Stories like 'The Lord Of The Rings' are great because the main focus is on the characters, their growth, their mission in life. If these goals can be accomplished by impressive actions on behalf of the key individuals, then the story will be a success. If not, it will be fun for a while, but it will be quickly forgotten.
You may not know one of the greatest shows: Star Blazers. Far superior than Star Trek, even in the errors section(it has some major goofs, but they do not distract from the story).
I'm just glad I didn't have to read "free reg., blah blah" again.
I think after 10 years the creative team of Berman and Braga has gotten a little stale. They were wonderful on TNG (then again they had GR there at the start).
STVoyager wasnt something I liked at the beginning. Now I watch and download old episodes and am starting to like some of the Episodes.
DS9 seemed a little too foreign, but its growing on me too.
Some of the plots are just plain lame. Star Trek needs fewer quality episodes, not more crappy ones.
Braga himself complains about this.
I was drawn into TNG by the stellar acting (no pun intended), and got a lot of science inspiration from the show. I guess with a lot of other fans out there willing to contribute to this huge monster, UPN just got lazy and kept it going just for the money.
Look at the comics made by DC. Every couple of years the creative teams rotate out and they keep it fresh. Star Trek should not use the same plot lines forever and ever. It just gets old.
I like what Enterprise is doing by taking it back into the past. Just dont let that get stale. UPN woulnd't want to lose my interest, would it?
With all the other garbage on TV today, the Star Trek shows have good morals, tell a good story and throw in wonder with a little advanced technology to boot.
The movies are predictable. The only good one in my opinion (I havent seen all of the TOS movies) is First Contact.
I've read the leaked script for Nemesis and hope that they can clean the thing up a little.
Please dont write formulaic sci-fi anymore. I want new stuff.
Duh? I doubt he wrote his part.
...for Star Trek XI: The Tribbles Strike Back.
Clearly Star Trek needs an infusion of creativitiy. Might I suggest some Jerry Springer.
Plot:
#1 impregnates an alien. Her Father - the ruler of the Disconian Empire - is upset. The Federation is thrown into chaos as an intergalactic shotgun marriage looms.
Or maybe
StarBoat - fuse Star Trek with Love Boat and make a movie about all of the romance abord the Enterprise. I can just hear the theme music
As Miguel Alcubierre published way back in 1993.
It's time they stopped milking this dead cow and let it rest. With the exception of II, IV and VI, they all sucked. One great movie, two resaonably good mivies and seven pieces of festing dog vomit. That's one screwed up track record.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Christ, I just watch them for the explosions and sassy ladies.
And, of course, the opening credits.
Technobabble is wretched within the Star Trek franchise, but technobabble doesn't have to be wretched.
Think about Blade Runner, especially the scene between Roy Batty and Eldon Tyrell. If you just read a printed copy of that scene, without reading the rest of the script (or without seeing the movie), it would be some prime technobabble.
But, that scene really works for me. Why? Because I am interested in the characters, and what they're doing. Hauer and Turkel convey an incredible amount of tension! I really believed that Tyrell was trying to talk his way into saving his own life!
If the newer Treks could manage scenes like that, I might be able to watch it again. But that would be hard to do, with a franchise based on weekly episodes.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Gene L Coon is why the first series was so good. Look at the first three seasons of Next Generation if you don't beleive me.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
This is not really related, but altho I love the Monday and Thu wrestling shows, I'm NOT watching tonight. They're having a gay-marriage "ceremony" that probably won't even be interrupted by the Superstar of the Week(TM).
Wrestling shows sometimes go where they shouldn't. I made it a point to switch to WCW when the Undertaker was doing the faux-Satanic ritual crap, too.
Drop the politically/religiously sensitive crap and get back to real wrestling and character development please, WWE!!
.
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
He takes a ship out with a training crew, doesn't follow Mr. Savik (Kirstie Allie's) advice about raising deflectors when the Grissom doesn't respond and gets the guts tore out of the Enterprise. We then find that the Federation has some kind of gadget they shouldn't be messing with, and the designer is the progeny of Kirks chronic "fooling-around" having caught up with him, who is as bloody-minded as the old-man Kirk himself. And to straighten out the whole mess, Kirk ends up sacrificing his best friend Spock.
This thing with Kahn is sort of like Bush and Saddam -- we know that Kahn is crazy, but if you think about it, Kahn has some legitimate grievances that Kirk has on his conscience.
There is no other Star Trek that gives that level of character development to either Kirk or Kirk's nemesis.
On the subject of the decline of Trek, the technobable bugs me the worst -- I saw this promo piece with Levar Burton explaining that they write "technobable" as a line in the script to call on a consultant to fill something in.
Classic Trek didn't have techno-babble. Enterprise would get enveloped with some kind of multi-color thing, Kirk would bark "Spock, what is that?" and Spock would stare into his science station Tektronix terminal hood and say "I don't know, it isn't registering on our sensors." Compared to NG, Classic Trek was high concept -- they wouldn't try to explain it like one shouldn't try to explain the Monolith in 2001.
Great. Now I've got to get vomit out of this keyboard.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
You wouldn't happen to know who it was who advised the writers of Voyager that:
- having the ship run smack into the "event horizon" of a black hole, then
- cracking it like an egg, followed by
- 'reflections' off the 'event horizons inner surface' as they attempted to escape
was a good idea? Youch.
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
I'm sorry already and I've not even pressed submit yet.
:)
B5 was/is the best.
They moved it off prime time here though and I've missed at least one series.
I'll get someone to buy me the DVDs for Christmas
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Here's a new story that Star Trek could try.
Some drunken Finn posted this on alt.stupidity many years back. It is hilarious (for its stupidity) and worth a read.
DAMN YOU PIRARD -- the script
The last four seasons of DS9 were of the same quality as B5. They both did have one episode stories, but they both had a very thick red line going through it so which took you back to previous episodes and made it possible to see three, four episodes in a row (it happens, okay :-) without getting bored because there is progress in the story instead of restarting it all over each time.
To me, the last four seasons of DS9 were the best series of the whole ST collection.
bash$
...producers had to 'shush' the actors every time they came on stage...
This is true. I hope I don't ruin anyone's good time, but those doors were opened by a SFX guy, who sat on an upturned bucket behind the set wall, pulling on a cable. (In the second season, the advanced technology of a wooden handle was added!)
Imagine the sound a sliding glass door makes when the track is rusty, and you know what those doors sounded like...a far cry from the pleasant "woosh!" we hear on TV.
Watch TNG, and you'll see that actors RARELY speak while doors are closing behind them. Sometimes you'll see an actor walk into a room (usually the transporter room) and you'll hear the doors close while they're speaking, but you won't see them. This happened because that rusty door noise was replaced with the happy "woosh!" sound in post production.
Interesting side-effect of this for me is that even in real life, I rarely talk while a door is closing behind me. It just became a habit to wait.
2. Why do they make the ugliest characters evil? I'd like to see some character interaction and consistent development with some butt-ugly insects or 30 feet giants to be direct allies with the good guys. I keep thinking that real aliens would probably take all shapes and sizes, from massively huge or small and don't necessarily always take a humanoid size.
3. Why is it that Picard always tried to play the high ground on the fact that humans had gotten past many of their deficiencies? One of the things that I liked best about Kirk was that he willing to embrace humanity with its character flaws - he said something in "A Taste of Armageddon" to the effect that "yes, we're killers, but the important thing is that we're not going to kill today". I think it'll take more than a few centuries to evolve past our basic human deficiencies.
4. Why don't they have major characters die on a rotating basis and constantly develop the more ancillary characters? Whenever a conflict in an episode arises that puts a major character at risk, I don't always like the fact that I already know that that character is going to make it out fine. (Tashia Yar and Jadzia Dax not withstanding, but then you always know it before the fact because they announce it in the previews!)
5. Why is it that whenever a crew member falls in love with someone that's not in the main storyline, they never seem to bother to develop it? The person that they're involved with always leaves, gets transferred to another starbase/facility, or dies at the end of the episode. There have been times that I would have really liked to have seen some of the relationships develop further.
I think I'm one of the rare few that thought that Deep Space Nine was great. I _loved_ it when Sisko actually hit Q!
I think B5 had a lot of these qualities too, and is still my favorite SciFi show to date..
.. either you have to blow up the stupid fucking death star/control ship or not.
Read this for more in depth analysis.
Live web cams
Or Robert Ludlum? Or TV series? Or articles? The important thing is not how the plots match up, but how they differ -- what makes the new variation unique. An unexpected twist, a riveting character, or superb acting/dialogue can make a huge difference. Lack of these can result in a flop.
I was taking one day at a time, but then several days got together and ambushed me. (from a Rhymes with Orange comic)
.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
"Star Trek is, after all, a genre franchise and the story lines are held back by certain restrictions of the genre."
I find this to be pure non-sense. Why should a genre be held back by strict rules? Of course, fantasy and science fiction and the likes are inspired by a certain train of thoughts, but that does not mean the imagination should stop at certain bounds; on the contrary, one should always explore new shores and invade them. Complete originality nowadays is hard to come by, but we can always try-- without betraying the genre.
And the Giant Goatseman that ate Cincinnati is brought to you by the Jim Henson company...
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
The same kind of analysis would lead to the conclusion there are only two kinds of characters: male and female.
It is fallacious reductionism to presume a finite number of plots. "Only so many plots" echo the words of cynical unit-sales-driven editors and "entertainment experts" who bring us television horror-shows like "Elimidate."
Don't believe the hype. There are more plots than human beings can number.
Did you notice, however, that every epic star trek movie produced in the TNG series (including the show finale) is about time? Its almost as though its written for aging baby boomers filled with regrets.
[anomoly of the year] causes [time event of the year] which forces Captian Picard to save everyone by risking his own life, and possibly the lives of his crew.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
isnt the whole point of speculative fiction is that the only restrictions on it is the ones that the writer makes up? thats what makes it great. it isnt the plot that drives a story, its the complications that the character has to overcome to get to the end that makes it interesting. the innovativeness of those "rising actions" is the important part in genre fiction. then there is the character's reaction to what is happening. for instance, orson scott card wrote the same story (ender's game) through another character's perception (ender's shadow). both great books in their own right. in a screenwriting class i took last year, all 20 of us had to write a script with the same plot. in the end, there were 20 completly different stories. it is really all in how you tell it...
There was a great episode (though rather hard to follow) where Picard and the crew meet up with a civilization that speaks only in reference to historical events.
While I don't recal the specific dialog or incident, I do recall the general nature of the dialog - [name] on the river [name] - as a reference to two people overcoming their differences to triumph over a common enemy.
Quite a thought provoking episode which requried one to think beyond normal speech and understanding.
In the end, they're making what people enjoy. The fact that a load of people are watching Star Trek means that those people like what they're seeing. It is a business, yes, but it's a business that has no chance if people don't enjoy what they see. If everything star trek totally sucked, would it really have fans? Or any viewers for that matter.
In my opinion, the original poster could have controlled his/her personal opinions a bit more. I like some time paradox episodes, but then I can name some types of episodes I don't like. Everyone has their favorites. But in the end, all of those episodes are needed. And I do think character is one thing, which was very nicely described above.
Gene's vision still shows nicely as well. They can tell things on Star Trek in metaphores that they can't say directly. I don't think it's about showing a realistic future, but about showing us what we might be able to gain if we lived differently.
It's entertainment. And everything Star Trek is a series, not just a pile of episodes and movies. Whether it's the best scifi or the lousiest isn't important, if you enjoy watching it.
http://www.greatyamato.com/ultimateyamato/nccvsyam .txt
Sandor: They destroyed Bridge Number Three.
Wildstar: 3... 2... 1... FIREEEE!!!!
I think what also helped was that Khan was someone you could really fear. He was highly intelligent and completely ruthless. You hear about how he tortured the people on the science station while looking for Genesis and you actually are forced to watch as he torments Chekov and the Reliant's captain by putting ugly creatures in their ears! But he's not just some lunatic -- he's a very capable villain. He hatches a plan to attack the Enterprise with their sheilds down! Good lord. True, Kirk was stupid for ignoring regulations but Khan really deserves credit for doing the unbelievable. Never before had we seen a starship get hit with their shields down!
A good villain is essential in an action movie. Otherwise, it's just a joke.
GMD
watch this
it's been a while.
I wonder if he has to have his clothes hand made on B5 or if he has them delivered from Mantisworld.
Don't the female mantisii (jk) eat the male's head after sex? Maybe he's hi!1 from his wife.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Plot is like the picture frame. A frame is something that all pictures need to some degree, but a beautiful frame with a black velvet Elvis painting isn't going into the Louvre any time soon. Conversely, the most beautiful, insightful, imaginative painting in the world isn't going to suffer much in a weak frame. The picture makes the frame, the frame accents the picture.
This is forgotten all too much in all forms of storytelling, most notably movies. Repeat after me. Plot is the picture frame. Take a look at the most recent Star Wars movies. What could be a Tolkien-esque epic tale of the rise and fall of empires, people, relationships, ends up being a b-movie with flat characters, starring the computer generated imagery. The plot is so intricate, so twisted, so melodramatic, and overcompensating of a weak painting that is falls as flat as pastel sailboats hung above the couch.
It's the characters stupid.
Toddlers are the stormtroopers of the Lord of Entropy.
why does mozilla do that 8(
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
So how do I get my $20, chrisd?
I like your suggestion and I also feel that the fans could write some incredible stories. But I think that B&B would view accepting fan scripts as "asking for help" or as proof that they can't write a good story. Remember, these guys are Hollywood producers -- a group not generally known for being humble and thoughtful. Can you imagine how pathetic they would look if a script written by "some guy in Oklahoma" ended up being far superior to the ones written by them, "the professionals"?
It's too bad that B&B don't let other people do the writing. They could concentrate on doing what they like and are good at. But Hollywood is full of people who can't write worth shit (Lucas, Devlin/Emmerich, etc.) and yet still tarnish their movies because they refuse to give up any kind of control.
Some day in the near future, the fans will be able to make their own movies with decent effects and their own plots. Then the Hollywood big-wigs will have to adapt their approach.
GMD
P.S.: To the guy who mentioned that Berman claims Star Trek accepts fan scripts: I strongly suspect that's when Roddenberry was still alive. I doubt B&B are continuing that practice.
watch this
Bart: Hey, I know it was great, but what right do you have to complain?
CBG: As a loyal viewer, I feel they owe me.
Bart: What? They're giving you thousands of hours of entertainment for
free. What could they possibly owe you? If anything, you owe
them.
CBG: [pauses] Worst episode ever.
I'd like to see that Stuart Klawans fucker write 10 unique movies. =P ;)
I use Windows... like a two dollar wh.. why don't I just go ahead and not finish that sentence.
I wonder if he has to have his clothes hand made on B5 or if he has them delivered from Mantisworld.
He's nekkid.
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
Your insight that Star Trek is a compilation of short stories is telling.
B5's great advantage was its use of a single story arc that played out over the course of several seasons. Within that arc were, of course, sub-arcs and standalone epsiodes, but the context of the show was established by that one large arc. This single fact gave the writers (more properly, the writer) great scope for plot and character development.
A novel, in other words.
Star Trek has never given itself that much freedom. Even Voyager, which launched as if it had an interesting long-range story to work with, found itself bogged down with the holodeck and villian-of-the-week. The conclusion of the series especially demonstrated the writers lack of vision and imagination.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Theres no episode++; line! It'll be stuck like that forever! *gack*
how positively uncivilised
I knew letting the insects in would lower the tone.
But would they listen to me?
"But they eat dog shit", I said.
"Well, there's no dogs allowed on B5", they told me.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
After reading so many posts after all this time on /., I can reduce them to 4 catagories:
Those who liked the article/story.
Those who didn't.
Those who flame the ones who like it.
Those who flame the ones who didn't.
Never before had we seen a starship get hit with their shields down!
Not only that, but what about the incredible phaser damage that was introduced to star trek during that movie? I though that it looked really fsckin' cool.
sci-fi dried up by the time of H.G. Wells?
um, no. pick up Philip K. Dick, and you will be promptly shut-up.
A megalomaniac tries to seize the power of life itself ("S.T. II: The Wrath of Khan"; "S.T. V: The Final Frontier"; "S.T. VII: Generations"; "S.T. IX: Insurrection").
II - Khan wanted a weapon, not the power of life.
V - Spocks brother wanted to meet God.
VII - Dr. Soran wanted to live in dream cloud.
IX - Correct
A senior officer of the Enterprise comes back from the dead ("S.T. III: The Search for Spock"; "S.T. VII: Generations"), or a fate worse than death ("S.T. VIII: First Contact").
III - Correct
VII - Kirk came back from the dream cloud, not the dead.
VIII - ?!? Living with the Borg? Non-sequitor, your facts are uncoordinated.
The crew of the Enterprise goes back to an earlier century on Earth, to make sure that history happens as it should ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home"; "S.T. VIII: First Contact").
IV - They went back to get a whale, not fix history.
VIII - Correct
A spacecraft threatens to destroy Earth, and we're to blame, either because our technology is more advanced than our ethics ("S.T.: The Motion Picture") or because we've trashed other species ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home").
I - VGER wasn't our technology, it was the technology from a mechanized planet.
IV - Correct
True fans can tell you something else as well: Poverty of narrative invention has nothing to do with predicting the success or failure of any "Star Trek" film. "The Wrath of Khan" has more incident than the others put together and is by common consent the best of the lot. But "The Voyage Home" also ranks high, despite a story that can be fully retold in the listing in TV Guide. Like the original television series, which put expansive ideals into rudimentary settings, "The Voyage Home" charmed audiences by blending self-aware goofiness with outer-space liberalism.
"Khan" was the best because it was the most entertaining. "Voyage" sucked. If you're going to make an observation get the facts straight.
That wasn't Bill Gates, just some random rich guy.
Change hehe to Behe and you have a funny pun...
Why have troi, when you can have a borg
couldn't the next ones be based off of DS9? those were more orignal than most of the others....
I'll admit that plot is vital, but broken down in to the simpliest form any story also relies on a theme, a purpose, the setting and the characters. For example, I love Stargate SG1.
Not because every week the plot is so different: Team travels through gate to a new planet, discovers new beings, beings have/cause problem, team resolves it. It is because of everything else.
I am able to relate with the story, relate with the characters, and probably the most important fact is that I am entertained.
It doubled the speed of ROMs on the old Tandy CoCo (Color Computer).
The author makes his "list" of how the movies are like by over generalizing and braking the plots up into the most basic levels. In both of these movies there's some time travel, so they must use the same plot!
A megalomaniac tries to seize the power of life itself ("S.T. II: The Wrath of Khan"; "S.T. V: The Final Frontier"; "S.T. VII: Generations"; "S.T. IX: Insurrection").
"Life itself" eh? In WOK it was a device that jump starts life on planets; in Generations (the fucker didn't even watch the movie) they basically go on a huge LSD trip, they didn't change the world; and Insurrection had the planet that reverses aging. You'll note I left out V but thats because I feel asleep during the movie.
A senior officer of the Enterprise comes back from the dead ("S.T. III: The Search for Spock"; "S.T. VII: Generations"), or a fate worse than death ("S.T. VIII: First Contact").
Kirk didn't die when he got sucked out of the ship you numbnuts. He just dropped some acid with Whoopi for a century or so. And nobody in Contact who was Borgified was rescued (a couple of patches of skin do not a Borg make).
The crew of the Enterprise goes back to an earlier century on Earth, to make sure that history happens as it should ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home"; "S.T. VIII: First Contact").
In Voyage they went back in time to bring back some whales to save the present, not to keep the past from changing.
A spacecraft threatens to destroy Earth, and we're to blame, either because our technology is more advanced than our ethics ("S.T.: The Motion Picture") or because we've trashed other species ("S.T. IV: The Voyage Home").
He has a small point there, but that's two out of ten movies. Not like that other huge sci-fi franchise, where a small fighter causes a chain reaction that blows up a huge battlestation in 3 out of 6 movies.
I can't believe I put smocking.
*slaps self*
Licensed to Kill was a piece of crap. But I'd take it or The Living Daylights over just about any of the unfinished, product-placement-ridden pieces of crap that's come out since he left.
My pet peeve in watching Star Trek (TNG is the last one I followed much), is the slow speed in which battle and other urgent situations play out.
For example, If a ship uncloaks nearby and it poses a threat, it takes several status reports and several commands from the captain to raise shields, power up weapon systems and return fire. The details and commands are spoken slowly enough for ESL students to follow, and by the time things are prepared, the Enterprise has already taken significant hits.
It reminds me of the Thunderbirds. Those string puppets of the sixties would run at the same speed they walked, to avoid swinging on the string when slowing down.
Battle scenes in Star Trek seemed to be modelled on cannon ball battle of sail ships in the 1800's and previous. Given what we have today in electronic jamming, stealth, unmanned fighters, remote sensing, chemical and biological warfare devices, etc., you would expect there to be a much wider variety of battles, and for certain reaction time would be a critical factor. Heck, even the game Starcraft has more interesting conflicts than Star Trek.
The type of plot I enjoy is the one containing some unpredictable content. I enjoyed the episode where a part of the Enterprise becomes a life form that takes over the ship and dreams through the holodeck program of The Orient Express. Stuff like that mysterious brick that goes in the wall, and interacting with characters on the holodeck train was fun.
I also liked the move where Picard was being followed by Borg and he entered the holodeck, called up a 1930's mafia storyline with a crowded room, and used a machine gun with the holodeck safety off to pop off a few Borg as they were busy trying to assimilate holodeck characters.
Of topic, but...
It's a great surprise to me, that after 200+ years of space travel, the federation (or any other race for that matter) have learned to BUCKLE UP during battle when you know if your ship gets hit someone will go flying in a spectacular manner.
They have less complexity than your average 1800's cannon battle. And seem to occur at about the same relative ranges between ships.
;- )
Well, shooting battle scenes using scale models is hard to do, now that they got computer animation we might get a bit more complexity.
No release of active diffusive substances
Two things: 1)Space is HUGE, so diffuse substance get thin fast, and 2)They did, tachyon grids to catch romulans crossing the neutral zone border.
no "warping of space" to defocus/redirect laser/phaser shots.
Come on! They use that in EVERY SINGLE SHOW, they call them SHIELDS! Geez!
No sensor confusion technology.
What? They didn't do enough cloaking ship shows for you?
And there was a TNG show were they fooled the other ship's computer in showing recorded sensor readings as true. + There's the Picard maneuver.
No use of space time delay
Again: Picard maneuver.
The moon is 1 second away. The sun is 8 minutes away. The sun could blow up now we would not see it for 8 minutes. So any time the say "opps" there goes the star/planet they should have to wait 8 minutes (or other time) to see/feel it.
Well, if they were looking at it with they're bare eyes they would, but they have that nifty subspace FTL sensor technology ya know...
No use of gravity well orbital mechanics.
And I suppose Joe Sixpack would go "W00t! ch3ck 0ut th4t l33t us3 0f gravity well orbital blablabla"? Come on! They have to dumb this down to the american viewing public's level! I'm amazed they get away with mentioning anything except nascar or pro wrestling!
Still some of the worst gravity well/ non-Newtonian physics based "space" environments. You can classify it as "fantasy" as it certainly is not based on physics as we know it.
No, it is based on the Star Trek hypotethical future physics (anything with the word "warp" in it is non-newtonian).
And most of all, its TV physics. TV has an alternate set of rules: Every explosion is a gas explosion (looks better), things in space make sounds, if you look at something with binoculars you can hear the background noises, etc.
This whining is of the same level of "Star Trek is l4m3 because all their aliens are humanoids!". Well, find some non humanoid actors and then they'll hire them. Its a tv show filmed in the real world by real people with a limited (if big) budget. They have technical issues wich they cannot get around.
You can't take the sky from me...
I think they aught to put the Federation and Starfleet on the backburner and focus on other races. In particular, they should make a movie about a Klingon Opera. We've been wondering for about 20 years now what made the Klingons look human in Kirk's day.
How about Paramount makes a movie that answers that question in Picard/Sisko/Janeway's day, and answers it as a Klingon Opera? The whole movie could be subtitled with a whole new genre of music like we've never heard before. It would foreshadow future seasons in "Enterprise", yet it wouldn't give everything away because it would give the answers in the way Klingons understand; if the human audience watching the movie wants to understand the spoilers, you'll have to watch closely. As a twist, they could have Klingons playing non-Klingon parts; imagine Alexander Roshenko playing Commander Tucker, and Belana Tores playing T'Pal! But the real kicker is that it could show one of the first Daxes. They wouldn't hire Ezry to play the part because the character would be very different. They wouldn't even have to SAY it's Dax; they could show the cast mingle with the on-screen audience after the opera ends, and one of the audience would be Ezry Dax meeting the woman/man who played the part of Dax 1, talking about her memories of those events hundreds of years ago. A Klingon Opera about the past could have some very subtle references and implications, yet be great to watch for newcomers because it would be just so exotic.
Being entirely on a stage with no CGI, it would cost very little to film, yet it would be a strikingly unique Star Trek movie. It would be completely different from the other Star Trek movies, yet it would be closer to the canon than most Trek movies because it would be all about pulling disparate plot threads together.
The most convincing portrayal of the ultimate in virtual reality with the "holodeck"
About the same time TNG started taking off, Marvel Comics X-Men's Danger Room was approaching the same levels of fictional self-realism. Due to alien technology obtained by Professor Xavier, the Danger Room became more of an immersive virtual-reality world, like the holodeck. Did the two develop independantly? Did they influence eachother. I bet neither Marvel nor Paramount will say. An interesting difference between the two is that, while the Danger Room was often a crucial setting, it was almost never the antagonist of the story like the holodeck was in so many Trek episodes.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
The plot, after all, is simply the behavior of the characters. If the characters are believable, well-formed, and evoke enough of the reader's or viewer's interest and emotions, then the author doesn't need to rely on plot pyrotechnics to sustain interest. The characters become real, and we want to see what happens to them
A prime Star Trek example is Spock.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
This is news?
I wonder about that. [Diehard Trekkie Rant]In one episode Sisko gives commands to several Galaxy wings. Whether 'Galaxy wing' refers to a small battlegroup built around a Galaxy class starship, or two Galaxy class ships acting together, or something else, this is just one fleet of several mentioned. Leads me to think more than just 6 galaxies... Besides, when Starfleet went to wartime production of starships, it undoubtedly built more Galaxies (we know for a fact that the current Galaxies received a refit to make them more survivable).[/Diehard Trekkie Rant]
Ennnnnyway... I do agree st ship battles aren't that realistic. One could could say that the star trek series is presented as a pictoral history type thing that is not really representative of what actually happened, just something lay-audiences would understand (I mean, what.. you have computer controlled, light speed propagating weapons, but you fight in visual range of the other ship? mmmmm no.)
Who... Needs... A... Plot...
When... You... Have... Such... Great... Acting...
I live in a giant bucket.
The original Tasha Yar was indeed killed on Vagra II by Armus (aka "the Exxon Monster"). ("Skin of Evil") The alternate Tasha Yar went back in time with the crew of the Enterprise-C ("Yesterday's Enterprise"), where they rendered assistance to the Klingons in the Romulan attack at Narendra III. The Enterprise-C was destroyed, but Yar was captured alive and taken to a Romulan prison camp. A Romulan commander took a liking to her, and made her his consort. She bore him a daughter, Sela. Later, Yar tried to escape from the prison camp, carrying Sela. Sela, not understanding, cried out for the guards, and Yar was executed as a result. Sela later became a commander herself, and was behind the aid supplied to the Duras family faction during the Klingon civil war ("Redemption"), as well as the failed Romulan plot to invade Vulcan under the guise of a "peace mission" ("Unification").
Clear? I thought not. This is the most whacked-out time travel plot in the Trek universe. You are not expected to understand this. :-)
Be who you are...and be it in style!
There's more variety than THAT...
In B, the disenfranchised group/company/person occasionally has to FIND the A-Team before they can hire them.
This involves them venturing into "the Los Angeles underground", which just happens to include Hollywood, where Hannibal, one of the Army's most wanted fugatives, has a lucrative carrear as a B-movie swamp monster. It, of course, never occurs to Decker, et. al., that the John "Hannibal" Smith in the credits of "Swamp Thing XXIV" jusy MIGHT be the same John "Hannibal" Smith that, in 1972, escaped from a "maximum security stockade".
Oh, and between B and C, you need to include an additional step: The A-Team breaks Murdock out of the insane aslyum.
cya,
john
Imagine all the people...
This reminds me of a time on the set, when we were filming "Datalore."
Brent was going through his lines, playing both Data and Lore, and he noticed that Data was given a line where he was using a contraction.
Brent called the director, first AD, and script supervisor over, and asked them to clarify Brent's understanding that Data did not use contractions.
The phone calls began, and went all the way to Gene's office, before the answer came back, "Data should not use contractions, ever."
This ended up being a plot point later in the show, as Lore's use of something like "Isn't" or "Wouldn't" or "Bitch Ass Monkey Mouth" revealed his true identity.
Funny..I just thought it was cool that you didn't use any contractions in your Data lines...and that sparked this memory that is 14 years old.
How many Star Wars movies had this plot: A jedi, too young to have earned the faith and respect of the established, goes on an epic adventure where, against all odds, he overcomes himself and accomplishes a great and improbable deed. AT LEAST two; to some degree, five.
How many James Bond movies had this plot: A rich villain comes up with a clever plan to rule one of the world's key industries and build a evil empire with the fortune this brings him. A romancing british secret agent attempts to foil his plan, gets caught, but miraculously escapes, going on to defeat the bad guy and romance one of his chicks.
My point is: do we complain? No, we would be stupid if we didn't see it coming. (Or, we might be a culture-section writer at the NYT who's out of ideas.) We're not there for a super plot. We're there because we enjoy the franchise, and we enjoy it BECAUSE of the archetypical plots.
I think it would be completely hilarious to have John DeLancy show up secretly manipulating events, but only viewers who knew he was Q have even a suspicious of it. Have him play a Star Fleet Admiral or something for a few episodes.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Tuvok
It's spelled Tuvok but it is pronounced TooBlack.
3. One reason was the "political correctness" fad that took hold in the early 90s.
If you want a real laugh at political correctness, make a note of every Starfleet admiral you see in a Star Trek TNG episode. *Every* admiral that has a shred of moral fiber is either female or an ethnic minority in North America. *Every* white male admiral is somehow corrupt, possessed by an alien, or simply on the brink of insanity.
Trekkies (much like myself) may go a bit psyco over this, but just to point out - (each point corresponds to the one in the article)
-In "Wrath of Khan", Khan didn't want to "seize the power of life itself", he just wanted revenge on Kirk. In "Final Frontier", I'm not sure who he's referencing to, but I don't see any power seizure there. Also in "Generations", he didn't want like, he just wanted to return to the nexus.
-In "Search for Spock", he wasn't really 'dead' (or it depends on the definition of dead when it comes to Vulcans). In "Generations" Kirk wasn't dead, he was just in the nexus. In "First Contact" who returned from death? Picard was never dead when it came to the borg and I don't remember any resurection scenes.
-Can't really argue with this one I'm afraid.
-Kinda the same with the last one.
But still, ST was great, and although it's getting a bit thin now (everybody hates Rick Berman and Brannon Bragga now), it was good, I have all the old eps on DVD and will always be remembered as good (except by you Star Wars things) until Gene died and B&B stuck their asses into it.
In fact, I think that there is a limited number
of possible plots for stories. These possible
plots have been counted and cataloged by the
folklorists. I think that the total number of
main stories is something around 30-40.
The only place you can find "cool" alien in on the big screen. Alien in TV Serial are always Actors with a little bit of Makeup or a kind of "unorganic" stuff.
:
...
One could be thinking more deeply about alien:
- Do they have unity of thinking, Do they realise what is thinking, who/what is thinking.
- Do they value identity, Do they understand identity
- Do they have an unity of time, are they able to understand time
- Do they have a physical unity (one body), multiple.
I remember finding more than 10 of those. which make at least 2^10 possiblity. I was then able to place some alien in some obvious category (Borg, being an obvious example) and thinking that a _lot_ have not been explored.
You can imagine the problem the Federation could have to communicate with an alien omnipresent, no corporel and unable to understand we exist but holding the information for our survival (hey, you must force a plot where the C'ptain have to contact them...)
The problem is that you can hardly place nice scenario with such Alien in Star Trek as it would be
- Too costy
- Too hard to understand for Joe Bloke
As well ST have to be politicaly correct. The right of the holograms. Be carefull it could remember problem created by Oncle Sam egemony. You do not want to have episode which can cause/remember social tension.
So ST plot will stay what they are, If you want good SF, by a book. TV is here to brain wash you not to instruct you
OTOH, I believe that Fleming was probably the first British author to use this device to associate the character deliberately with a certain lifestyle.
One of the things that I really liked about the Original was that each show stood independently, but they tied together in a loose thread. The original series even took (what I consider great) the step of out-of-sequence plotting. some shows from the second season were earlier stardates than in the first season. If you are a big fan, its neat to pick out the differences in the consoles, uniforms, etc. used to portray the presage of time. If you aren't a big fan, you still get an enjoyable story, and you aren't going 'huh?' because you had a date the week before. I hate soaps, and I don't watch daytime tv. TNG fell victim to serialization in spurts.. some shows would be pure sci fi capsules (adventure at Far Point), some you had to see 5 in a row (Wolf 359) to even get a basic grasp of the story line. Beyond TNG all of the star treks were more 'one-life-to-live' than anything Gene Roddenberry would have signed his name to. B5 was just as soapy as DS9 yes but I think they were both horribly outside of the definition of SCIENCE fiction. Come on, they were both just 'another world' outtakes. As for today, Enterprise is just too much of a good thing. The stories are capsulated well enough (so far) but the whole timeline has been too well defined by the later shows. Within the first 5 minutes of each episode, i have too much knowledge about the adversaries and have picked out the hole thats being plotted. Add in the commercials, and I end up not making it to the end of each sho. I already knew what was gonna happen anyway... Andromeda is much better about giving you a real story within one hour, and only loosely tying each show together. I would really like to see some radically different futures put onto the screen. One example would be James Blish's "Cities in Space" series. In this future, space "ships" are not the main mode of transport, as light speed and hybernation are never conquered. Instead whole cities put to space and spend generations flying from star to star. Frankly this is a much more believable future. I'd find it wonderful entertainment to see London isolated for 200 years meet up with Boston isolated for 100 years, and have them fight over who gets the "Roads for Orion 6" contract. New York landing on Taurus 5, and discovering that drugs have replaced metal as the galactic currency, and having to back out of their contract and go into hiding seems nothing like the 'we lost our dilithium, gotta land and get more' scenario. You'd have to read the book to really see how it works in a plot, but it would be a refreshing change from TV lands overdone human look alike aliens. Hollywood would never make this, because it would require a whole new set of actors every week (but then they did it with the Batman movies, so who knows.) Another story line worth a series is Isaac Asimov's robot planets vs. human planets series. This is a 'priveledged few' are always outdone by the masses theme, and has many real-close-to-home learnings in it, without having to resort to "Q" preaching the last 5 minutes of the show. One of the one's I'd really like to see (and the one that's most likely to become a show) is Heinlein's 'Friday' series (with maybe less on the sex and more on the action) The whole 'spy in space' thing is WAY under-done on any screen, and its a much easier way to write different screenery every week than dragging a whole space ship around the galaxy. I would really like to see BLADE RUNNER minus 10. That movie is the most chock full of eerie predictions I've seen. There's enough material just in what made the screenplay to fill 3 seasons. I really want to know what happened in the 10 or so years before BLADE runner... the sudden loss of population to colonization, and the 'replacement humans' that are dreamed up to fill the gaps all over as humanity suddenly has 100's of planets to fill instead of one. Thats a wonderful story that deserves more air.
The main characters encounter a new planet/alien/phenomena and are attacked/welcomed/held captive in a vortex/alternate reality/holodeck and must travel through time/risk the crew/alternate shield frequency in order to escape/rescue someone/violate the prime directive.
If it is a Star Trek Movie, then Data must explore his emotions/place in the universe/basic rights/lonliness/inexplicable one-liners in innappropriate situations.
Will you stop being so incredibly cynical? Jokes can easily be broken down into a few categories (body-related, sex-related, puns and unexpected situations, plus a few I can't come up with now). Does that mean that all jokes have been told? No, it doesn't.
A joke is funny when it has some poorly defined qualities like 'edge', 'progression towards unexpected climax', 'relevant reference frame' and such.
IMHO, most Science Fiction (and a lot of Hollywood produce for that matter) is of extremely poor quality. It's all a big wank-fest in effects and big name actors. On occation, the system works, but there's a lot of really bad episodes and movies. For good science fiction, see "The 5th Element" and "Minority Report". For good drama, see "Magnolia" or "Life is Beautiful" - or "Traffic" for that matter.
I used to watch Babylon 5, but I've decided it's more exciting to play Deus Ex, and the plot in Deus Ex is actually superior (altough I think it still has a way to go).
Can someone explain to me in simple terms why they like Star Trek?
Stop the brainwash
Didn't A.J. Rimmer write that 500 times before passing out and failing his engineer's exam yet again?
Notice the key word there. Around. In fact, I think it's so important, I'll say it again. An orbit goes around a planet. Any random spot on the equator goes completely around the planet, which is why geosynchronous (sp?) orbits work. The axis or pole of a planet doesn't go around the planet, it just sits there and spins in place. If you're hovering over the south pole of a planet, you're not going around it the planet, and therefore it, by definition, isn't an orbit.
Our repair android is having a TECH problem in his positronic brain, and our engineer's VISOR is growing out of fashion.
Unfortunately, the problem with our TECH won't be in time for Star Trek 10. Since we have bad luck with odd movies, expect an entirely new script with Star Trek 12: Epsilon Quadrant*.
* (For the ig'nant: How many quadrants are there in a whole? What letter of the greek alphabet is "epsilon"? Good lad!)
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
... it's a better track record than Final Fantasy: ten games, 1 plot: adventurers band together to save the world.
there wasa wpart episode which showed that all the humanoid races decended from one earlier rare which spread its genetic code around the galaxy.
i guess they wanted to explain why the different races could mate/same size etc
Time travel stories, holodeck stories. The show was unique.
I didn't watch much of the other shows so my comments center on Star Trek: TNG.
The character development (for the main characters anyway) was fairly good. You got to know them and they had distinct personalities.
Picard "I can talk my way out of anything",
Riker "I like to flirt with alien women",
Troi "I want Will Riker but I don't date co-workers",
Beverly Crusher "I want Picard but he doesn't date co-workers"
Worf "Humans call it domestic violence, Klingons call it making out",
Data/Pinochio "I want to be a real boy",
Geordi "I can fix the warp coil but I can't get a date",
O'Brien "No one else in Star Fleet is married. I want to be different."
Wesley "I took the ship over twice, once with nanites, once by stealing computer control, and they still let me stay."
Coding Blog
Well, there's obviously no intelligent life at The New York Times. The similarities mentioned were just that, similarities. Those plots didn't even resemble each other.
Besides, a plot is just a framework upon which to build a story. The growth of the characters over the years, the interactions and reactions of people we feel like we know are important too.
I could mention many other nuances of storytelling that are apparently lost on this person of little imagination and even less talent as a writer, but why bother. If you don't get it, stay home, more seats for me and my friends.
Cyberdog6 out
Evil is the money of all root....
If you really know Levar Burton, you know you have seen him on Reading Rainbow on PBS.
Let's face it, the Franchise takes it for granted that hyper-zealous fans are going to keep coming, no matter what they do. So why bother doing any actual creative work?
That said, I think once Sisko realized he was the Emissary (sp?) he probably would have gotten a little past the deade wife thing. If he hadn't already.
But I do think you're right in that character development and human interest took a back seat in certain ways - often leaving gaping plot holes. When did Troi and Worf start dating? When did they stop? Was that a throwaway? And wouldn't the aftereffects of Klingon lovemaking put her in bad shape for couseling?
What's really annoying about _all_ the Star Trek stories-to-date is that they are still revolve around the goody-two-shoes in Starfleet!
The Star Trek universe has a LOT of worlds & people who aren't in Starfleet. It would be interesting to see what kind of stories you could get out of a cast of non-Starfleet characters (maybe a poor merchant ship struggling to make a profit on the boundaries of the Federation, for instance).
Magius_AR
If only Bush would sacrifice Cheney to save the day... (or vice versa) ;)
Does the moon orbit the earth or the sun? If you take an orbit over the pole of a planet, you will not orbit it, but you will orbit the sun it orbits.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
yeah, same 5 plots, but same big tits in every movie too. what are you expecting, art or something?
The ultimate Star-Trek plot!
1) Alien (identifiable as such by spots/third nostril/forehead ridges, but otherwise human) on the lamb turns out to be a HUMAN with a NOSE JOB!
I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.
Green-skinned woman against green-skinned woman. Now THAT sounds like good watchin'!
I don't think I've heard anyone express that before! Wasn't the first movie just an old episode extended to 2 hours of 1970's vintage effects? (Replace "V'Ger" with "Nomad", and run again)
Sleep is for the Weak
I was hopeful too, but I heard Vin Diesel was cast as Sauron.
Sleep is for the Weak
Ok, my plot would be; Me, 7 of 9, Jadzia and Kira in 1.5 hours of hardcore porn.
Cruising the milky way would be cool too but...
It was the actual Riker who showed up in Voyager. Q whisked him away to testify on behalf of another Q. The Riker twin appeared only in the TNG episode where they discovered him, and in the DS9 episode where he stole the Defiant. He was supposedly locked in a Cardassian prision after that.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Momentary brain fart, that should have been 3 out of 5.