Comments on: Fear, loathing, Star Trek and 9-11 http://www.threedonia.com/archives/13019 These are our principles. If you don't like them, we have others... Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:34:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Republibot 3.0 http://www.threedonia.com/archives/13019/comment-page-1#comment-47512 Republibot 3.0 Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:34:42 +0000 http://www.threedonia.com/?p=13019#comment-47512 I myself gave up on Trek around the time of the one-two-three punch of Generations, DS9, and Voyager. It became too insipid for me to follow or care about anymore, so my comments are undoubtedly rather out of date, but I find it interesting that the more the franchise focused in on what the fans wanted, the less success they had. By the time of "Enterprise" - a show I've never seen - they were evidently spending three and four episodes at a time just doing continuity porn for the mouthbreathing trek fanatics, and non-culty people stayed away in droves. A lot has been said about Roddenberry's vision, his optomism, his faith in humanity, but I've come to conclude that's all kind of crap. He made an action/adventure show that differed from other action/adventure shows only in its pretention and its aggressive sexism. Its purpose - AFAICT - was strictly to further the cult of Roddenberry, and his self-proclaimed brilliance. He was quick to drop it when he thought he had a screenwriting career starting, and quick to come back when the word got out that he couldn't write for sour apples. I'm not dissing Trek as a whole - there's a lot of fun hours of entertainment in there, and the occasional thought-provoking issue, mostly in the first series - but as time wore on, it became entirely self-serving, no longer about the story, or the ideas, or really anything beyond "Keep the franchise alive." You know what I mean, the same exact thing happened to Saturday Night Live. Which, I suppose, is why the reboot was so successful: They went out of their way to take it away from the mouthbreathing fans (Who'll watch anything, anyway, long as it has that damn Arrowhead logo involved somewhere), and essentially *Distanced* themselves from Roddenberrys (myopic) "Vision," once again turning it in to something normal people would give a damn about. Sorry to be vitriolic, but as a guy who loves SF, and thinks it's important, I'm just sick to death of the Cult 'o Trek pretending they alone represent the entire genre, that nothing apart from their silly-assed show is important, and that every other vision, idea, and set design is somehow wrong and must be destroyed. That's just repellent to me. SF is aobut ideas and possibilities, and in the last 30 years, Trek has turned in to a thing that, by it's very nature, opposes ideas. I myself gave up on Trek around the time of the one-two-three punch of Generations, DS9, and Voyager. It became too insipid for me to follow or care about anymore, so my comments are undoubtedly rather out of date, but I find it interesting that the more the franchise focused in on what the fans wanted, the less success they had. By the time of “Enterprise” – a show I’ve never seen – they were evidently spending three and four episodes at a time just doing continuity porn for the mouthbreathing trek fanatics, and non-culty people stayed away in droves.

A lot has been said about Roddenberry’s vision, his optomism, his faith in humanity, but I’ve come to conclude that’s all kind of crap. He made an action/adventure show that differed from other action/adventure shows only in its pretention and its aggressive sexism. Its purpose – AFAICT – was strictly to further the cult of Roddenberry, and his self-proclaimed brilliance. He was quick to drop it when he thought he had a screenwriting career starting, and quick to come back when the word got out that he couldn’t write for sour apples.

I’m not dissing Trek as a whole – there’s a lot of fun hours of entertainment in there, and the occasional thought-provoking issue, mostly in the first series – but as time wore on, it became entirely self-serving, no longer about the story, or the ideas, or really anything beyond “Keep the franchise alive.” You know what I mean, the same exact thing happened to Saturday Night Live.

Which, I suppose, is why the reboot was so successful: They went out of their way to take it away from the mouthbreathing fans (Who’ll watch anything, anyway, long as it has that damn Arrowhead logo involved somewhere), and essentially *Distanced* themselves from Roddenberrys (myopic) “Vision,” once again turning it in to something normal people would give a damn about.

Sorry to be vitriolic, but as a guy who loves SF, and thinks it’s important, I’m just sick to death of the Cult ‘o Trek pretending they alone represent the entire genre, that nothing apart from their silly-assed show is important, and that every other vision, idea, and set design is somehow wrong and must be destroyed. That’s just repellent to me. SF is aobut ideas and possibilities, and in the last 30 years, Trek has turned in to a thing that, by it’s very nature, opposes ideas.

]]> By: republibot 2.0 http://www.threedonia.com/archives/13019/comment-page-1#comment-47410 republibot 2.0 Sat, 12 Sep 2009 13:41:44 +0000 http://www.threedonia.com/?p=13019#comment-47410 Gene would've hated DS9--- all that conflict! And they used money! (gasp) Gene would’ve hated DS9— all that conflict! And they used money! (gasp)

]]> By: Kit http://www.threedonia.com/archives/13019/comment-page-1#comment-47377 Kit Sat, 12 Sep 2009 01:40:10 +0000 http://www.threedonia.com/?p=13019#comment-47377 Roddenberry and Lucas have some similarities, both of whom were lacking as writers and had their respective franchises saves by others -who never got credit. (Actually, other people get credit for helping Lucas with ESB and ROTJ) The best STAR TREK series was DEEP SPACE NINE, and Gene was dead by the time that came on. Roddenberry and Lucas have some similarities, both of whom were lacking as writers and had their respective franchises saves by others -who never got credit. (Actually, other people get credit for helping Lucas with ESB and ROTJ)

The best STAR TREK series was DEEP SPACE NINE, and Gene was dead by the time that came on.

]]> By: republibot 2.0 http://www.threedonia.com/archives/13019/comment-page-1#comment-47372 republibot 2.0 Fri, 11 Sep 2009 23:41:53 +0000 http://www.threedonia.com/?p=13019#comment-47372 One thing about Trek, is its optimism- that we can survive and thrive beyond our current circumstances. (Let's forget Roddenberry's neo-maoist tendencies for a moment) This is why I believe that we as conservatives NEED to be involved in producing new science fiction- we have a vision of the future where freedom and responsibility, liberty and justice allow the human race to excel; we have to get what OUR vision looks like out to people. I'll get off my soapbox now... One thing about Trek, is its optimism- that we can survive and thrive beyond our current circumstances. (Let’s forget Roddenberry’s neo-maoist tendencies for a moment)

This is why I believe that we as conservatives NEED to be involved in producing new science fiction- we have a vision of the future where freedom and responsibility, liberty and justice allow the human race to excel; we have to get what OUR vision looks like out to people.

I’ll get off my soapbox now…

]]>