Zompist Bboard Again

This thread reminded me of a favourite video of mine: Posy - Some Kind Of

Zach Weinersmith chimes in.

masako wrote: ↑Sun Jul 30, 2023 10:21 am I think of this stuff as a consequence of the people running DIS not being Trek fans, a few of them expressly so. JJ Abrams has said that he never watched it, and Akiva Goldsman cut his teeth writing Batman Forever, and Batman & Robin, which, are some of the worst movies ever put to film IMHO.

It's Abrams' MO at this point. He also partly wrecked Star Wars with unoriginal, generic offerings. He just doesn't seem to care about the franchises, which is why he shouldn't be allowed to do one-off works within them.

His understanding of the brief is little more than surface aesthetics and whatever's the laziest way to generate a few big scenes.

chris_notts wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2023 12:28 pm

masako wrote: ↑Sun Jul 30, 2023 10:21 am I think of this stuff as a consequence of the people running DIS not being Trek fans, a few of them expressly so. JJ Abrams has said that he never watched it, and Akiva Goldsman cut his teeth writing Batman Forever, and Batman & Robin, which, are some of the worst movies ever put to film IMHO.

It's Abrams' MO at this point. He also partly wrecked Star Wars with unoriginal, generic offerings. He just doesn't seem to care about the franchises, which is why he shouldn't be allowed to do one-off works within them.

His understanding of the brief is little more than surface aesthetics and whatever's the laziest way to generate a few big scenes.

Gene Roddenberry would be spinning in his grave were it not for the fact that he was cremated and then blasted into space.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2023 3:57 pm Gene Roddenberry would be spinning in his grave were it not for the fact that he was cremated and then blasted into space.

Although to be fair, DS9 would have had Roddenberry spinning too, and that's probably the best Star Trek series ever made. It did go a bit dark and abandon the Federation as a peaceful harmonious utopia though, and Roddenberry was famously against too much intercrew conflict on TNG because he felt humanity would be more evolved by TNG times.

chris_notts wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2023 5:29 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2023 3:57 pm Gene Roddenberry would be spinning in his grave were it not for the fact that he was cremated and then blasted into space.

Although to be fair, DS9 would have had Roddenberry spinning too, and that's probably the best Star Trek series ever made. It did go a bit dark and abandon the Federation as a peaceful harmonious utopia though, and Roddenberry was famously against too much intercrew conflict on TNG because he felt humanity would be more evolved by TNG times.

“In the Pale Moonlight” is a highlight of the franchise.

In general, the more romantically effective individual emotions are in a story, the more "fantasy" it feels. The more that rational outcomes of systems subjugate the intentions of individuals, the more it feels like "science fiction". Technology is just a useful metaphor for telling the latter kind of story. If the antagonist's malevolence gives him superhuman power, that's a fantasy story whether you call him a mad scientist or a Dark Lord. If a character's best-laid plans backfire because of unintentional effects of the system in which he's embedded, that's a science fiction story whether the character is a scientist or the Sorcerer's Apprentice. I think the Game of Thrones books (never watched the show) feel less like fantasy because of the sheer weight that social systems bring to bear on the plot. A more stereotypical fantasy story would rely more heavily on fairytale symbolism.

Assuming the above argument is cogent, a Star Trek episode could be either fantasy or science fiction depending on whether the outcomes are being manipulated by a superhuman intelligence or whether they were retroactively predictable as an effect of unknown/unreasoned features of some unthinking system.

chris_notts wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2023 5:29 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2023 3:57 pm Gene Roddenberry would be spinning in his grave were it not for the fact that he was cremated and then blasted into space.

Although to be fair, DS9 would have had Roddenberry spinning too, and that's probably the best Star Trek series ever made. It did go a bit dark and abandon the Federation as a peaceful harmonious utopia though, and Roddenberry was famously against too much intercrew conflict on TNG because he felt humanity would be more evolved by TNG times.

Which is painfully ironic.

EDIT

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2023 5:24 am Assuming the above argument is cogent, a Star Trek episode could be either fantasy or science fiction depending on whether the outcomes are being manipulated by a superhuman intelligence or whether they were retroactively predictable as an effect of unknown/unreasoned features of some unthinking system.

I am not enthusiastic about arguing over terminology, but I'm of the thinking that sci-fi is fantasy...all fantasy is fiction, but not all fiction is fantasy, to be sure, however the term "sci-fi" seems nothing more than shorthand for any fictional story that includes settings/technology that are not currently known/possible; whereas "fantasy" is most often used to describe mythical creatures and settings from our collective pasts, but hey, what do I know...it *is* all fiction though. All of it.

Well, they did the thing. S2E9 "Subspace Rhapsody" was indeed a musical.

I don't begrudge folks the experience of a musical...I'm sure some people find them marvelously entertaining and completely reasonable forms of storytelling. I, however, don't. Most especially in the world of Trek. Each series has had silly episodes that push the 4th wall, and challenge the suspension of disbelief, sort of "take you out of it" if you will. Musicals, though...that's a whole other level of a thing. And yes, there was story here, there was even some character development, which is good and should happen more, but I simply cannot understand the idea of a musical fitting in to the style and typical formatting of a Star Trek show.

The 12 year gap between Enterprise and Discovery was - according to some fans - very difficult as they weren't really sure Trek would ever come back to the small screen. Well it has, and en force, but the offerings since 2017 have been haphazard, wildly divergent in terms of theme, direction, and quality. IMHO the largest and most important difference in this newer Trek is a lack of cohesion. Each show seems targeted toward very specific audiences and not always for the most earnest of reasons. Along with the pandering and nostalgia-bait, we get old characters that simply behave in ways that seem antithetical to how they were portrayed for decades previously, and story-lines that conflict with established lore (not that every detail must be exact, but it would be groovy if races and planets were at least similar to their established history).

I'm not mad, really. I'm not gonna make claims that "I'll never watch again!", or any dramatic bullshit like that, but I'm overall very disappointed. SNW was, until today, reason enough to hope that Trek was on an upward trajectory that I would be excited to watch and enjoy. After DIS and PIC, I guess I should have known better.

masako wrote: ↑Fri Aug 04, 2023 6:30 am I'm not mad, really. I'm not gonna make claims that "I'll never watch again!", or any dramatic bullshit like that, but I'm overall very disappointed. SNW was, until today, reason enough to hope that Trek was on an upward trajectory that I would be excited to watch and enjoy. After DIS and PIC, I guess I should have known better.

I agree that the new series have been very hit and miss and uneven. But I'm not too mad at SNW for the musical episode because SNW's whole thing has been diversity / doing a different thing every week. I was probably my least favourite episode so far, but I did get through it and as long as they don't make a habit of it...

chris_notts wrote: ↑Sun Aug 06, 2023 1:57 am SNW's whole thing has been diversity / doing a different thing every week.

I mean, yeah, episodic with multiple long-story arcs running in the background. This was the big difference between my so-so enjoyment of TNG and my fanboy love of DS9. DS9 pulled-off what no other (Trek) series has been able to; a multi-season story that was cohesive, meaningful, and satisfying. There are echoes of that in SNW, but DIS tried and flopped around for years before deciding to retcon the entire premise of their series. LD isn't really worried about long-term arcs, rightly so given the flexibility of an animated series. PIC tried the long-arc, but S2 was Just. So. Bad.

I like episodic, I like serialized, but if you wanna balance the two, you have to be pretty savvy about what you include and exclude...and including a freaking musical episode (with a half-baked treknobabble explanation) that also covers character development and minor season-long (sub)plots might be a bad idea given that it just does not flow with the rest of the show.

And I gotta say, there's a whole subset of the web making fun of the "Klingon Boy Band". I'm not sure that's the kind of reaction I would want if I was running a series that's part of the longest running franchise in television history.

I'm outlining some novelas in a sci-fi setting. The idea is I want something that will scratch the Star Trek itch without being fanfiction (i.e. something I can legally sell). What, in your opinions, defines Star Trek and its vibe? Does it have any features that make you think "Oh, this is like Star Trek" in other media?

Back in the day, I would have said, a general optimism, but that appears less true, now. Interstellar exploration and politics in a setting that basically accepts the "Space as an ocean" metaphor?

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2023 1:46 am I'm outlining some novelas in a sci-fi setting. The idea is I want something that will scratch the Star Trek itch without being fanfiction (i.e. something I can legally sell). What, in your opinions, defines Star Trek and its vibe? Does it have any features that make you think "Oh, this is like Star Trek" in other media?

Judging from TOS only... Plot that tend towards intellectual puzzles as much as action; a space navy setting; war depicted as the worst option; a cast of characters with opposite but complementary values.

Nice, thank you for the input. Keep it coming!

I am of two minds about the "space navy" trope. On the one hand, it makes no sense. Space travel is so different from ocean travel, and a quasi-military would be the last thing we'd want exploring the galaxy. But it just works so well in fiction!

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2023 1:46 am I'm outlining some novelas in a sci-fi setting. The idea is I want something that will scratch the Star Trek itch without being fanfiction (i.e. something I can legally sell). What, in your opinions, defines Star Trek and its vibe? Does it have any features that make you think "Oh, this is like Star Trek" in other media?

Imagine you're producing an episodic TV show. No, really! A lot of TOS's Trekkiness comes from the old-style constraints: a small recurring cast; self-contained stories; no overall plot; the assurance that nothing permanently bad can happen to the characters. For that '60s feel, no grimdark or tortured heroes.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2023 6:28 am Nice, thank you for the input. Keep it coming!

I am of two minds about the "space navy" trope. On the one hand, it makes no sense. Space travel is so different from ocean travel, and a quasi-military would be the last thing we'd want exploring the galaxy. But it just works so well in fiction!

The trope makes a bit of sense. You still have to cram people in a tiny vessel in an hostile medium. I don't think space war makes much sense, but the element of danger and 'everything must be done just right or we all die horribly' is there.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2023 6:28 am

I am of two minds about the "space navy" trope. On the one hand, it makes no sense. Space travel is so different from ocean travel, and a quasi-military would be the last thing we'd want exploring the galaxy. But it just works so well in fiction!

Of course you can drop it if you want, but I'd say it's so central to "Star Trekkiness" that if you drop it, it won't really make sense to describe the result as in any way "something like Star Trek".

While "space navy" may be a trope, I'm curious what you'd replace it with? Given that most of space exploration as occurred as an offshoot of military research and funding IRL, and a majority of astronauts have been recruited from, or had experience in, the military. Also, even if the "space as an ocean" thing seems weird, what would you call it? You have a vessel/vehicle that moves along two axes (each of 360 degrees) in an open void...also, how would you distinguish the hierarchy on this vessel? Is no one in charge? Do you switch out the rank structure for a corporate one? Director vs captain, maintenance manager vs engineering officer, etc?

Sometimes, it's better to lean into tropes than avoid them.

I did read one piece of fiction which used the terminology of nobility to express command hierarchy; I think there was a Lord of Astrogation, to give an example.