-
The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.
Revisiting original Trek
- Thread starter GKarsEye
- Start date
PillowRock
Regular
How much of a problem that is depends on which of the series you are looking at, in my opinion.
When they were making TOS back in 1966 and 1967, it wsn't just that it was an American-made show. I suspect that never even occurred to them that it might be possible that it would ever be shown anywhere else. Therefore, it doesn't bother me in the least that all of their references were so US-centric.
By the time of the later series, they had to know that the shows would be syndicated internationally. Therefore, being so ethnocentric is a more culpable shortcoming of the writing in those series.
Joseph DeMartino
Moderator
But it really isn't even that (or Brit chauvanism in the case of Dr. Who.) It is a purely practical matter of money, locations and the available pool of actors. One of the ways SF shows (try to) stay on budget is by shooting everything inside the studio, where things are easier to control. Location shooting, even just outside the soundstage, costs more, because people and equipment have to be moved (which takes time, and time is money.) So anywhere they can save money they're going to do so. If they can go outside the studio walls and shoot in Los Angeles, or an adjacent stage normally used for a contemporary cop show, or the back lot where streets and builidngs from a handful of eras (moslty 19th western and early 20th century urban New York/Chicago style) are available Naturally most of the actors in town are Americans, with the normal racial proportions. so ginning up a story set in 16th century Japan or 11th century India is going to be tricky to pull off. It is less a matter of "this is what we as producers are comforatble with because we're a U.S. (or U.K.) show" or "this is what our audience will accept" as "this is what we can afford, this is who we have handy and this is where we can afford to shoot". (Which is why you see the same damned caves outside of Los Angeles in movies and TV shows from the era of the silent western straight up through contemporary low-budget features.
) Regards,
Joe
Chilli
High Treason Prevention Officer
Oh, I'm aware of all that. Just that with so many of the time travel episodes, I really wish they hadn't done them, just since the concepts seemed so endlessly lame and repetative in a way it seemed like the main aim of many of these episodes was to give the show a contemporary touch - which really bugged me more than anything else when there wasn't an explenation. In some cases there were - then it was fine with me (for example, Tomorrow is Yesterday - at that time, it made sense that only the Americans would notice the Enterprise in low orbit. Or Star Trek IV - San Francisco would be the ideal place to go for a bunch of weirdos trying not to be TOO obvious - who would notice them there? )
Though as for sets, one can always take one thing and pretend it to be something else - I've lost count of the Planet Californias over the course of Trek .. one occurance of US-centricity that really bugged me was Broken Bow. A Klingon ship crashes in a completely random spot and the only present local is one farmer - of course it has to be in Oklahoma .. that time, they SO easily could have pretended that their set was .. Siberia or god knows what. Just SOMETHING to break the illusion of there being some little guy sitting under the US with a great magnet
it seemed like the main aim of many of these episodes was to give the show a contemporary touch - which really bugged me more than anything else when there wasn't an explenation. In some cases there were - then it was fine with me (for example, Tomorrow is Yesterday - at that time, it made sense that only the Americans would notice the Enterprise in low orbit. Or Star Trek IV - San Francisco would be the ideal place to go for a bunch of weirdos trying not to be TOO obvious - who would notice them there? )Though as for sets, one can always take one thing and pretend it to be something else - I've lost count of the Planet Californias over the course of Trek
.. one occurance of US-centricity that really bugged me was Broken Bow. A Klingon ship crashes in a completely random spot and the only present local is one farmer - of course it has to be in Oklahoma .. that time, they SO easily could have pretended that their set was .. Siberia or god knows what. Just SOMETHING to break the illusion of there being some little guy sitting under the US with a great magnet Capt. Neville
Regular
*blatantly jumps back to the middle of the thread*
Frankly, any Voyager episode with the Doc as the main character was quite good (except for maybe the last season or so, they just ended up missing the point finally).
*Some* of the writers got the point of his character, in that, for a yet-another-rehash-of-the-emotionless-Spock-ripoff, he was anything but unemotional.
There was one in particular where a copy of the Doc ends up in some museum, where they have a (very badly skewed and butchered) record of Voyager's contact w/ the planet. Way cool ep there.
Also, The Year of Hell was one of my favorites, partially b/c the bad guy wasn't a cut-and-dry bad guy (for a change), was an EXCELLENT actor (and shame on me for not noticing he was the dad in That 70's Show), plus a cool, unusual SF concept. But what was BEST of all was that, for quite possibly the ONLY time on the show, Voyager wasn't the most powerful ship around (even against the Borg. ugh). The part where the baddie ship loses his temporal core or whatever, and basically the captain sighs, annoyed with being bothered, and orders the conventional guns online, which promptly kick EVERYBODY's f*cking ass....dunno, apart from Janeway's cringe-inducing line, it was a great ep
My other two favs, I think, were Relativity, which despite having Seven and Janeway as the focus, and having a time travel plot, had two good points going for it:
1. They used time travel to have some fun, rather than the standard we-don't-know-what-a-paradox-is thread
2. The concept of the future time ship, not to mention just the *design* of the bridge, kicked ass. (Votes for future time ship to be the focus of the next series, or at least have that set. Please???
....um, and Message in a Bottle, just b/c of all the hijinks that ensue.
As for TNG, I'd have to add my vote for Yesterday's Enterprise and put one in for Cause and Effect. Call me a sucker, but in the rare case where Star Trek did a time travel episode right, they did it perfect.
Oh, and All Good Things, simply for the three seconds we get to see our beloved G'Kar being ultra-cool
OK, sorry, that came out WAY longer than anticipated
--mcn
Frankly, any Voyager episode with the Doc as the main character was quite good (except for maybe the last season or so, they just ended up missing the point finally).
*Some* of the writers got the point of his character, in that, for a yet-another-rehash-of-the-emotionless-Spock-ripoff, he was anything but unemotional.
There was one in particular where a copy of the Doc ends up in some museum, where they have a (very badly skewed and butchered) record of Voyager's contact w/ the planet. Way cool ep there.
Also, The Year of Hell was one of my favorites, partially b/c the bad guy wasn't a cut-and-dry bad guy (for a change), was an EXCELLENT actor (and shame on me for not noticing he was the dad in That 70's Show), plus a cool, unusual SF concept. But what was BEST of all was that, for quite possibly the ONLY time on the show, Voyager wasn't the most powerful ship around (even against the Borg. ugh). The part where the baddie ship loses his temporal core or whatever, and basically the captain sighs, annoyed with being bothered, and orders the conventional guns online, which promptly kick EVERYBODY's f*cking ass....dunno, apart from Janeway's cringe-inducing line, it was a great ep
My other two favs, I think, were Relativity, which despite having Seven and Janeway as the focus, and having a time travel plot, had two good points going for it:
1. They used time travel to have some fun, rather than the standard we-don't-know-what-a-paradox-is thread
2. The concept of the future time ship, not to mention just the *design* of the bridge, kicked ass. (Votes for future time ship to be the focus of the next series, or at least have that set. Please???
....um, and Message in a Bottle, just b/c of all the hijinks that ensue.
As for TNG, I'd have to add my vote for Yesterday's Enterprise and put one in for Cause and Effect. Call me a sucker, but in the rare case where Star Trek did a time travel episode right, they did it perfect.
Oh, and All Good Things, simply for the three seconds we get to see our beloved G'Kar being ultra-cool
OK, sorry, that came out WAY longer than anticipated
--mcn
M
Mike G
Guest
I agree with you capt. Neville that there were some very good Voyager episodes; and the ones you mentioned were quite good. But thats the thing that annoys me. There was nothing wrong with the premise, or the characters that kept the show from being good. It was just bad writing most of the time!
The reasons you listed above about "The Year of Hell" being a good episode are all true. And to tell you the truth, it was a good episode. The problem is the monumental reset button pushed at the end. It destroyed what made it a good episode.
I agree with what most others have said about TOS being either very good or very bad. I hate to say it, but having a low budget, especially in the later years did not help. (most of the time that is, I belive the episode "Let That be Your Last Battlefield" was proposed erlier and turned down, only to be made later because it was very low budget.) Still, TOS has to be respected because of its vision, and its revolutionary message and such.
The reasons you listed above about "The Year of Hell" being a good episode are all true. And to tell you the truth, it was a good episode. The problem is the monumental reset button pushed at the end. It destroyed what made it a good episode.
I agree with what most others have said about TOS being either very good or very bad. I hate to say it, but having a low budget, especially in the later years did not help. (most of the time that is, I belive the episode "Let That be Your Last Battlefield" was proposed erlier and turned down, only to be made later because it was very low budget.) Still, TOS has to be respected because of its vision, and its revolutionary message and such.
I watched the original trek as a kid and the effect it had on TV can't be overstated. It was groungbreaking on many levels, not the least the way it broke many "racial" barriers (Spock was a Vulcan) and sexual taboos ( first interracial kiss and with Spock first interspecies kiss) on national TV which then was the ONLY TV!!! It allowed many non sci-fi shows to deal with many more issues. It is dated, the FX are pretty pathetic compared to todays standards, but damn near everybody in the world understands the phrase "Beam me up, Scotty".
IMHO TOS doesn't have to be tolerated as much as celebrated.
IMHO TOS doesn't have to be tolerated as much as celebrated.
hypatia
Regular
Anyone who would seriously judge the effects in TOS by today's CGI standards is... well, not being very realistic.
And yes, in many ways it was a groundbreaking show on many levels. I recall reading an interview of Nichelle Nichols. I believe it was after season 1 she was ready to quit. "All I ever do is say 'hailing frequencies are open, sir' ".
Until Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke with her. He asked her not to quit, and told her how important it was to show a future humanity where a black woman was sitting, as an equal, on the bridge of the Enterprise.
My only real "regrets" about TOS are that the portrayal of women as true equals was seriously messed with by the television executives, and that they didn't stick with their original Captain Kirk actor. (Sorry, no offense Shatner fans )
And yes, in many ways it was a groundbreaking show on many levels. I recall reading an interview of Nichelle Nichols. I believe it was after season 1 she was ready to quit. "All I ever do is say 'hailing frequencies are open, sir' ".
Until Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke with her. He asked her not to quit, and told her how important it was to show a future humanity where a black woman was sitting, as an equal, on the bridge of the Enterprise.
My only real "regrets" about TOS are that the portrayal of women as true equals was seriously messed with by the television executives, and that they didn't stick with their original Captain Kirk actor.
(Sorry, no offense Shatner fans )
Chilli
High Treason Prevention Officer
Kirk didn't have an actor before Shatner - the first pilot, The Cage, had Jeffrey Hunter as Captain Pike, a completely different character. Also if Kirk wasn't my favorite character on TOS, I had few regrets about Pike leaving - he just .. wasn't very good. And IIRC, he didn't return on his own initiative, not because he wasn't wanted anymore - the things NBC wanted out of the show were the woman and the alien. Number One was the real loss from the pilot .. but one can't really just blame the TV stations for demaning her to be removed. It was after all not the TV stations that had that idea - but the test audiences they played the Cage to. Ironically, if I recall correctly from Shatner's autobiography which I read YEARS ago, it was oddly enough more the women in the test audience that objected to a female first officer, not the men. I really never got that .. I guess it must be envy
And Kirk's womanizing side isn't something that was on the series from the beginning btw .. that only started entering the show after the departure of Grace Lee Whitney/Janice Rand, who was there partially for his permanent love interest.
Also if Kirk wasn't my favorite character on TOS, I had few regrets about Pike leaving - he just .. wasn't very good. And IIRC, he didn't return on his own initiative, not because he wasn't wanted anymore - the things NBC wanted out of the show were the woman and the alien. Number One was the real loss from the pilot .. but one can't really just blame the TV stations for demaning her to be removed. It was after all not the TV stations that had that idea - but the test audiences they played the Cage to. Ironically, if I recall correctly from Shatner's autobiography which I read YEARS ago, it was oddly enough more the women in the test audience that objected to a female first officer, not the men. I really never got that .. I guess it must be envy And Kirk's womanizing side isn't something that was on the series from the beginning btw .. that only started entering the show after the departure of Grace Lee Whitney/Janice Rand, who was there partially for his permanent love interest.
B5_Obsessed
Regular
I thought the term "temporal incursion commencing" was pretty cool as the crewmen scanned the timelines for changes. Instead of being a cop out, the "reset button" was actually integral to the story. Anorax had supposedly been altering the timeline for a thousand years to restore his family, and in the end it was his own death and destruction of the timeship that was the solution to putting everything back. By taking out his temporal shielding (and Voyager dropping theirs), everybody got their happy ending, which I found very satisfying. So even with the inevitable timeline changes and reset button, I'd put that episode as one of the most neatly structured Trek episodes ever done. And it was "Voyager". Who'da thunk?
I believe that was also the first year Foundation Imaging was doing the FX for Voyager, so I didn't find it surprising that Anorax's Time Ship looked a lot like Babylon 5.
Also, aside from That 70s Show, Kurtwood Smith played the President of the Federation in Star Trek Vi. He was one of those awesomely cool Roshamon-looking aliens
first seen is Star Trek IV.
M
Mike G
Guest
Ok, but the way I look at it was that Year of Hell was a good episode where they actually show the characters going through difficult times and growing. It had consequences, there were problmes. Thats the way the show should have been the whole time. And when they finally get it right, the whole thing never happened.
admiraldave
Regular
I hated Year of Hell. I found Janeway's actions inexplicable, from deciding her crew should try and make their way in warp-driveless lifepods, to how she thought her suicide charge would reset the story (I can only assume she read the script). Annorax was vaguely interesting, but the interactions between him and Commander Wooden were pretty painful to watch.
It's a pity too, because the episode that first referenced the year of hell, when Kes was moving backwards in time, is one of my favourite episodes of Voyager.
It's a pity too, because the episode that first referenced the year of hell, when Kes was moving backwards in time, is one of my favourite episodes of Voyager.
Oatley1
Beyond the rim
That accounts for my major disappointment with Year Of Hell - when it was first mentioned in that Kes story, I was hoping that we would get a season-long story thread, showing the major events for that year, and the continual breakdown of Voyager, with perhaps one ot two deaths. In other words, the whole of Season 3 would have been dedicated to the Year of Hell.
Instead, what we got was two OK episodes and another example of the giant reset button!
PillowRock
Regular
Actually, IMHO probably not envy, as such, so much as outright antagonism.Ironically, if I recall correctly from Shatner's autobiography which I read YEARS ago, it was oddly enough more the women in the test audience that objected to a female first officer, not the men. I really never got that .. I guess it must be envy
It was a period when virtually all of the women in their test audiances would have been homemakers (stay-at-home-Moms, in more recent vernacular). They would not have seen that as choice, so much as the single possibility for them. Seeing a successful career woman acting not only as a full equal with the men, but as the superior of most of them, could easily provoke the gut reaction of being a repudiation of basically their entire life. They were being defensive, wanting to get rid of the thing that they found personally threatening (even if they couldn't have really verbalized that).
Capt. Neville
Regular
Frankly, I can forgive the reset button in The Year of Hell for one simple reason: they used the reset button properly! The reason we hate the reset button is because it was so over-used and resulted in zero growth of characters, plot or anything else worth growing on Star Trek.
In other words, ask yourself this: if they took out every reset button except that one, would you object to it? I certanly wouldn't.
And yes, that's the terrible shame with Voyager--such amazing potential, such a good premise, and even (for the most part) such good characters...and, save for maybe a handful of episodes, they were all completely wasted.
Sigh.
--mcn
In other words, ask yourself this: if they took out every reset button except that one, would you object to it? I certanly wouldn't.
And yes, that's the terrible shame with Voyager--such amazing potential, such a good premise, and even (for the most part) such good characters...and, save for maybe a handful of episodes, they were all completely wasted.
Sigh.
--mcn
M
Mike G
Guest
Maybe, but only a little.
LondosHair
Regular
GKE - you're doing yourself a disservice if you aren't watching TNG in its entirety... although you may have seen most or all of it over the years in syndication. There are lots of episodes that don't necessarily fall under your plans for that series that are classic Trek/TNG moments. I know it's a lot to watch, but what's the rush?
DS9 has to be watched pretty much in its entirety, I agree. Especially the last few years. The storylines floundered a little bit until they started the Dominion arc.
I don't and won't ever own a season of Voyager. Voyager soured my taste for Star Trek, to say the least. It's sad when you consider that a buxom blonde Borg who wasn't on the show til season 4 and a holographic doctor were the only truly complex and interesting characters on the show... plus it got tedious waiting to see "how they're gonna blow the hell out of & then totally fix Voyager THIS week..."
I've never been a proponent of the even/odd numbered Trek movie phenomenon. The Motion Picture is still a favorite of mine, despite the 70's cheesiness at points. The story is unique and draws loose parallels to future Star Trek lore. Two and Four are obviously great, but I also like Three very much. It's probably the darkest of all the Trek movies, almost devoid of humor. Five outright sucked, but I can't fault the story for it. If you've ever listened to William Shatner's Movie Memories on audio tape, the way he describes his original vision for Star Trek V is fascinating. Six is still my favorite Trek film. I loved Generations, and I think it's the weakest example used in the whole odd/even thing. I also loved First Contact. I liked Insurrection, although I think it was the cheesiest of the TNG films. As visually beautiful as Nemesis was, I think it was too short, incomplete, and hastily written. (Can't say I'm surprised, given its writers.)
DS9 has to be watched pretty much in its entirety, I agree. Especially the last few years. The storylines floundered a little bit until they started the Dominion arc.
I don't and won't ever own a season of Voyager. Voyager soured my taste for Star Trek, to say the least. It's sad when you consider that a buxom blonde Borg who wasn't on the show til season 4 and a holographic doctor were the only truly complex and interesting characters on the show... plus it got tedious waiting to see "how they're gonna blow the hell out of & then totally fix Voyager THIS week..."
I've never been a proponent of the even/odd numbered Trek movie phenomenon. The Motion Picture is still a favorite of mine, despite the 70's cheesiness at points. The story is unique and draws loose parallels to future Star Trek lore. Two and Four are obviously great, but I also like Three very much. It's probably the darkest of all the Trek movies, almost devoid of humor. Five outright sucked, but I can't fault the story for it. If you've ever listened to William Shatner's Movie Memories on audio tape, the way he describes his original vision for Star Trek V is fascinating. Six is still my favorite Trek film. I loved Generations, and I think it's the weakest example used in the whole odd/even thing. I also loved First Contact. I liked Insurrection, although I think it was the cheesiest of the TNG films. As visually beautiful as Nemesis was, I think it was too short, incomplete, and hastily written. (Can't say I'm surprised, given its writers.)
