Post by whitestar on Dec 7, 2005 0:36:23 GMT -5
Star Trek has run its course. After 28 years of Trek, it was wise on Paramounts' part to give the franchise a much needed rest. The Original Series (TOS) was to a large extent, a repackaging of science fiction cliches, which was taken from Forbidden Planet. Nonetheless, it worked because of good writers and an engaging cast, but it was hardly groundbreaking even then. Still, in the confines of the time, it worked well enough most of the time. Subsequent Treks have all been fundamentally derivative, and none of them have really raised the bar any, or added a level of complexity to the trekverse to justify their existence. And as with any formula that's repeated too many times, it gets boring really quick. In the absence of any particularly interesting characters (most of the time) and amazingly bland writing which - in this case - isn't even done by people who have a working knowledge of science fiction like on TOS, it just got boring real quick. Rather than "reinvent" it or take chances with it or smash the hell out of it and rebuild it from the shards, which is what drama is all about, they simply arbitrarily redecorated the shows every so often. Cowards!
Beyond that, the Next Gen era disregarded science fiction completely by throwing out the laws of physics and invented their own. Plus, they focused on story space wars, or gender role questions, or strawman enemies and so forth. Science fiction is all about skewing the view of the world, asking impertinent questions, and dealing with the disturbing answers, science fiction is all about transition, about redefining one's place in the scheme of things, about viewing society from a different perspective to see what foibles you can find out about it. That's why Gulliver's Travels still qualifies as science fiction 300 years later, and Trek really doesn't. That's why War of the Worlds is good sf 110 years later, but none of the movie versions count as science fiction.
That being said, here are the reasons why Star Trek is so boring:
A. Deus Ex Machinas - Trek has countless of this infraction and they appeared in all five series. Example: the transporter beaming crew members into another parallel universe, people traveling beyond warp 10 and evolve (or devolve) into another lifeform (oh please! ), traveling back in time to correct mistakes such as the death of a valued crew member or erasing embarrassing moments, rather than learning to live with the consequences, for better or worse. And wormhole aliens who wipe out Starfleets enemies in a blink of an eye! Talk about a total copout!
B. Lack of Character Development - Example: there is a Voyager episode where Tuvok loses his ability to comprehend science and technology due to some freak accident. But in the process, he develops his artistic ability and once he learns that the process could be reversed, he refuses to undergo it at first, but then finally resigns to it and Tuvok is restored to his old self again: highly intelligent, but far too boring (although the actor who plays him is a hoot and way more interesting). The writers could have attempted a daring approach by letting Tuvok explore the possibility of resigning his status as a Starfleet officer and pursue an artistic career, entertaining the crew as they search for earth, unfortunately, the writers chickened out. The characters in the Original, Next Gen and Voyager represents the typical cardboard types. Real characters change, caricatures do not. Trek has always been about the caricature. The only exception is DS9. That show has strived to create characters that had flaws, quirks, and perks, which is not surprising considering that one of the main writers for DS9 was Ron Moore, who went off to write and exective produce the excellent new version of Battlestar Galatica, go figure!
C. Technology in Star Trek is unusually perfect and efficient - Example: instant targeting scanners, 100 percent shielding, instant healing, etc. No technology is ever 100 percent efficient, only approximations, yet the show has always been extremely paranoid about new technology. Any new computer will always go crazy and kill people, any new transportation technology is always "too dangerous to use"or, if it shows promise it blows up at the end and "it'll take decades to sort out." Plus, solving all their problems with technology, and usually all in one hour!
D. Superhero-style mentality - Example: We all know that Superman can fly, but does anyone ever worry about what his maximum speed in atmosphere is? How about his maximum speed in space? Does he have any altitude limits? No one ever asks these questions because flight is one of his "special powers." Similarly, look at his laser vision. Does anyone ever worry about what his maximum power output is? Does he have a maximum firing duration? Does he have a recharge time? Does he have a minimum power output? Are there limits to how tightly he can control the frequency and/or power of the beam? No one ever asks these questions because laser vision is one of his "special powers." So what about the Borg? Is their assimilation an actual technology, complete with capabilities, restrictions, and limits, or it is a "special power?" "Silly" is about as apt a description as I can come up with.
E. Pure Energy Beings - Example: there is a Next Gen episode entitled, "Loney Among Us" where Captain Picard beams out into space as pure energy, in an attempt to communicate with pure energy alien beings. Poetically speaking, it's a wonderful idea, unfortunately, it would never work in real life because he would cease to exist. Plus, it wouldn't be fun to be an energy being because since an energy being is traveling faster than the speed of light, the entire history of universe would pass you by in a blink of an eye, and communication with corporeal beings such ourselves would be long dead.
F. Technobabble (a.k.a. Treknobabble) - Example: writers painstakingly explaining Trek
technology/terminology such as: warp drive, transporter, replicators, and holodecks to name a few. The technobabble really was in place of the story. A fundamental rule of TV and Movies is "show, don't tell". Shows like Babylon 5, Blake's 7, Farscape, Firefly, Original Twlight Zone, neo-Outer Limits (another favorite of mine), and neo-Battlestar Galatica proved that you don't need to rely on heavy tech-talk to tell a great story. We don't need to have the way nonexistent technology works explained to us, that time could be better used for other things, like expanding the story, throwing in another subplot, or what have you. It was clumsy, boring, and ultimately irrelevant.
G. Humanoid Aliens - Example: all aliens possessing bumpy foreheads, crinky nosebridges, and what-have-you and yet, they still have a head, two arms and legs. While I'm skeptical about the possibility of alien life in the universe, I'm quite sure they wouldn't look like anything seen on Star Trek, not by a long shot. Just look at the lifeforms on our own planet, especially in the ocean. I'm willing to bet that they would look somewhat similar to the sea creatures in our oceans, than in Star Trek. Not only do aliens in Star Trek LOOK human, they generally act exactly like humans as well, so what's the point of having them even call themselves aliens in the first place?
H. One viewpoint/opinion - Example: the viewpoint of the Original Series, Next Gen, and Voyager was this: "we're the very best that we can be and have a high standard of evolve sensibility", plus, "we're right and everybody else is wrong mentality". Not on DS9. All viewpoints were represented and at times, you didn't feel like agreeing with the Starfleet officers.
Here's another example: There is a DS9 episode which focused on a Cardassian father searching for his lost son, who was kidnapped as an infant and currently in the care of Bajoran parents. At the end of the episode, Sisko, along with the Cardassian father finally tracks down the Bajoran parents and Sisko informs them that the Cardassian father is here to reclaim his son. The Bajoran parents bellowed a protest and strongly refuse. They explain to Sisko and the Cardassian father that they lost their son during the Cardassian occupation and since they were unable to have children again, they decided to adopt a Cardassian child, knowing full well about the dire consequences. After some time, Sisko manages to convince the Bajoran parents to give up their adopted son, and now both Cardassian father and son are reunited, although the son is not exactly thrilled about it because he has no memory of his biological dad. He considers his Bajoran parents as his real parents, who raised and took care of him and his needs.
However, Sisko's reason for turning the son over to his Cardassian father was because he thought the Cardassian father was the biggest victim of all when his son was kidnapped, thus, deserved a second chance. After seeing that episode, I was outraged. Being an adoptive child myself, I understood all too well what the Cardassian son was going through. While I liked the character Sisko, I strongly disagreed with his decision and I think that's what made DS9 superior to all the Treks put together: all viewpoints are represented and you don't always have to agree with the heroes all the time. Plus, it showed a darker side to Starfleet when the writers introduced Section 31, much akin to the CIA or FBI, conducting illegal and questionable mission objectives.
I think the main reason why Star Trek has lost its appeal is that they do not like to address the important and sometimes disturbing questions like, "why are we as a race worth saving?" or "what are we guilty of as human beings?" Which would explain why most of the Trek fans do not like DS9, because they prefer to have a show or series where everything is sugarcoated, along with the black and white mentality of the world. Unfortunately, that's not how its like in the real world. The reality is, our world is a grey one, like a huge canvas filled with various types of color, texture, and dimension, creating a very enrich world.
In short, Trek as well as Star Wars, Stargate, and the original 1978 Battlestar Galatica series are essentially the Barney the Purple Dinosaur of sci-fi/fantasy. Or to put it another way, they're the popcorn of sci-fi/fantasy. While they're fine as an introduction to the sci-fi genre, and they're sufficiently entertaining in a rudimentary way, they're still a kid's show. If you graduated college and you're still really really into it, then there's something wrong, just the same as if you've graduated college and you still really like Barney. That's not to say there's anything inherently wrong with the aforementioned shows, it's just that eventually you need to move on from the popcorn to more sophisticated food.
Unlike the Trek shows, Paramount has made the Trek flicks accessable to the general audience by DUMBING DOWN an already moronic show. But didn't it occur to the Powers That Be to raise the QUALITY of the scripts, instead of simply removing all the bogus Treknobabble and convoluted settings? The current Trek shows (except the original series) are plagued with technobabble explanations and nonsense quantum particles of the week. And this is from a show that claims to be scientifically accurate! To add further insult to injury, would you believe that Trek has a exhibit currently touring scientific museums promoting education?!? What a laugh! ;D
Whitestar
Beyond that, the Next Gen era disregarded science fiction completely by throwing out the laws of physics and invented their own. Plus, they focused on story space wars, or gender role questions, or strawman enemies and so forth. Science fiction is all about skewing the view of the world, asking impertinent questions, and dealing with the disturbing answers, science fiction is all about transition, about redefining one's place in the scheme of things, about viewing society from a different perspective to see what foibles you can find out about it. That's why Gulliver's Travels still qualifies as science fiction 300 years later, and Trek really doesn't. That's why War of the Worlds is good sf 110 years later, but none of the movie versions count as science fiction.
That being said, here are the reasons why Star Trek is so boring:
A. Deus Ex Machinas - Trek has countless of this infraction and they appeared in all five series. Example: the transporter beaming crew members into another parallel universe, people traveling beyond warp 10 and evolve (or devolve) into another lifeform (oh please! ), traveling back in time to correct mistakes such as the death of a valued crew member or erasing embarrassing moments, rather than learning to live with the consequences, for better or worse. And wormhole aliens who wipe out Starfleets enemies in a blink of an eye! Talk about a total copout!
B. Lack of Character Development - Example: there is a Voyager episode where Tuvok loses his ability to comprehend science and technology due to some freak accident. But in the process, he develops his artistic ability and once he learns that the process could be reversed, he refuses to undergo it at first, but then finally resigns to it and Tuvok is restored to his old self again: highly intelligent, but far too boring (although the actor who plays him is a hoot and way more interesting). The writers could have attempted a daring approach by letting Tuvok explore the possibility of resigning his status as a Starfleet officer and pursue an artistic career, entertaining the crew as they search for earth, unfortunately, the writers chickened out. The characters in the Original, Next Gen and Voyager represents the typical cardboard types. Real characters change, caricatures do not. Trek has always been about the caricature. The only exception is DS9. That show has strived to create characters that had flaws, quirks, and perks, which is not surprising considering that one of the main writers for DS9 was Ron Moore, who went off to write and exective produce the excellent new version of Battlestar Galatica, go figure!
C. Technology in Star Trek is unusually perfect and efficient - Example: instant targeting scanners, 100 percent shielding, instant healing, etc. No technology is ever 100 percent efficient, only approximations, yet the show has always been extremely paranoid about new technology. Any new computer will always go crazy and kill people, any new transportation technology is always "too dangerous to use"or, if it shows promise it blows up at the end and "it'll take decades to sort out." Plus, solving all their problems with technology, and usually all in one hour!
D. Superhero-style mentality - Example: We all know that Superman can fly, but does anyone ever worry about what his maximum speed in atmosphere is? How about his maximum speed in space? Does he have any altitude limits? No one ever asks these questions because flight is one of his "special powers." Similarly, look at his laser vision. Does anyone ever worry about what his maximum power output is? Does he have a maximum firing duration? Does he have a recharge time? Does he have a minimum power output? Are there limits to how tightly he can control the frequency and/or power of the beam? No one ever asks these questions because laser vision is one of his "special powers." So what about the Borg? Is their assimilation an actual technology, complete with capabilities, restrictions, and limits, or it is a "special power?" "Silly" is about as apt a description as I can come up with.
E. Pure Energy Beings - Example: there is a Next Gen episode entitled, "Loney Among Us" where Captain Picard beams out into space as pure energy, in an attempt to communicate with pure energy alien beings. Poetically speaking, it's a wonderful idea, unfortunately, it would never work in real life because he would cease to exist. Plus, it wouldn't be fun to be an energy being because since an energy being is traveling faster than the speed of light, the entire history of universe would pass you by in a blink of an eye, and communication with corporeal beings such ourselves would be long dead.
F. Technobabble (a.k.a. Treknobabble) - Example: writers painstakingly explaining Trek
technology/terminology such as: warp drive, transporter, replicators, and holodecks to name a few. The technobabble really was in place of the story. A fundamental rule of TV and Movies is "show, don't tell". Shows like Babylon 5, Blake's 7, Farscape, Firefly, Original Twlight Zone, neo-Outer Limits (another favorite of mine), and neo-Battlestar Galatica proved that you don't need to rely on heavy tech-talk to tell a great story. We don't need to have the way nonexistent technology works explained to us, that time could be better used for other things, like expanding the story, throwing in another subplot, or what have you. It was clumsy, boring, and ultimately irrelevant.
G. Humanoid Aliens - Example: all aliens possessing bumpy foreheads, crinky nosebridges, and what-have-you and yet, they still have a head, two arms and legs. While I'm skeptical about the possibility of alien life in the universe, I'm quite sure they wouldn't look like anything seen on Star Trek, not by a long shot. Just look at the lifeforms on our own planet, especially in the ocean. I'm willing to bet that they would look somewhat similar to the sea creatures in our oceans, than in Star Trek. Not only do aliens in Star Trek LOOK human, they generally act exactly like humans as well, so what's the point of having them even call themselves aliens in the first place?
H. One viewpoint/opinion - Example: the viewpoint of the Original Series, Next Gen, and Voyager was this: "we're the very best that we can be and have a high standard of evolve sensibility", plus, "we're right and everybody else is wrong mentality". Not on DS9. All viewpoints were represented and at times, you didn't feel like agreeing with the Starfleet officers.
Here's another example: There is a DS9 episode which focused on a Cardassian father searching for his lost son, who was kidnapped as an infant and currently in the care of Bajoran parents. At the end of the episode, Sisko, along with the Cardassian father finally tracks down the Bajoran parents and Sisko informs them that the Cardassian father is here to reclaim his son. The Bajoran parents bellowed a protest and strongly refuse. They explain to Sisko and the Cardassian father that they lost their son during the Cardassian occupation and since they were unable to have children again, they decided to adopt a Cardassian child, knowing full well about the dire consequences. After some time, Sisko manages to convince the Bajoran parents to give up their adopted son, and now both Cardassian father and son are reunited, although the son is not exactly thrilled about it because he has no memory of his biological dad. He considers his Bajoran parents as his real parents, who raised and took care of him and his needs.
However, Sisko's reason for turning the son over to his Cardassian father was because he thought the Cardassian father was the biggest victim of all when his son was kidnapped, thus, deserved a second chance. After seeing that episode, I was outraged. Being an adoptive child myself, I understood all too well what the Cardassian son was going through. While I liked the character Sisko, I strongly disagreed with his decision and I think that's what made DS9 superior to all the Treks put together: all viewpoints are represented and you don't always have to agree with the heroes all the time. Plus, it showed a darker side to Starfleet when the writers introduced Section 31, much akin to the CIA or FBI, conducting illegal and questionable mission objectives.
I think the main reason why Star Trek has lost its appeal is that they do not like to address the important and sometimes disturbing questions like, "why are we as a race worth saving?" or "what are we guilty of as human beings?" Which would explain why most of the Trek fans do not like DS9, because they prefer to have a show or series where everything is sugarcoated, along with the black and white mentality of the world. Unfortunately, that's not how its like in the real world. The reality is, our world is a grey one, like a huge canvas filled with various types of color, texture, and dimension, creating a very enrich world.
In short, Trek as well as Star Wars, Stargate, and the original 1978 Battlestar Galatica series are essentially the Barney the Purple Dinosaur of sci-fi/fantasy. Or to put it another way, they're the popcorn of sci-fi/fantasy. While they're fine as an introduction to the sci-fi genre, and they're sufficiently entertaining in a rudimentary way, they're still a kid's show. If you graduated college and you're still really really into it, then there's something wrong, just the same as if you've graduated college and you still really like Barney. That's not to say there's anything inherently wrong with the aforementioned shows, it's just that eventually you need to move on from the popcorn to more sophisticated food.
Unlike the Trek shows, Paramount has made the Trek flicks accessable to the general audience by DUMBING DOWN an already moronic show. But didn't it occur to the Powers That Be to raise the QUALITY of the scripts, instead of simply removing all the bogus Treknobabble and convoluted settings? The current Trek shows (except the original series) are plagued with technobabble explanations and nonsense quantum particles of the week. And this is from a show that claims to be scientifically accurate! To add further insult to injury, would you believe that Trek has a exhibit currently touring scientific museums promoting education?!? What a laugh! ;D
Whitestar