Weekend Open Forum: Star Wars or Star Trek?

dividebyzero

Posts: 4,840   +1,270
So indeed Sensei DeeBeeZee, I have hopped my way through the lesson. (Although I may have torn Cliff's rice paper...)
Ah, very meta. You referencing Kung Fu to my referencing Farscape's John Crichton's pet name for Scorpius which stemmed from the characters love of pop culture , namely Kung Fu.

Hopefully that was planned, or I'd be choked up!
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

Posts: 18,529   +7,373
Ah, very meta. You referencing Kung Fu to my referencing John Crichton's pet name for Scorpius which stemmed from the characters love of pop culture , namely Kung Fu.
Constant referencing back to the title characters time and place of origin as well as it's pop culture and vernacular, actually was a plot staple of, "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century". I had thought that Gil Gerard, (who played "Rogers"), was a former football player. But as it turns out, Browder was the only former jock.

As far as off topic trivia goes, such out of context relationship dynamics, also appeared in Aldous Huxley's, "Brave New World". "John Savage", was brought up with only "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" to shape his socialization. Needless to say, he didn't assimilate well into a post modern, post apocalyptic, rather structured, extremely liberal and frivolous culture that was the "Brave New World".

In Huxley's book, sci-fi was merely a vehicle for his much broader question, "is this a utopian or dystopian culture", and "would you be able know the difference".

If you didn't have BNW forced on you in high school, or haven't read it elsewhere, it's in the public domain, only about 300 pages (*), and available as a free download. I dare you to read it, just to see how many of his social prognostications have come to pass.

http://hrsbstaff.ednet.ns.ca/engramja/ENG_11/BraveNewWorld.pdf

(*) Actually, the above PDF is only 176
 
Last edited:

dividebyzero

Posts: 4,840   +1,270
If you didn't have BNW forced on you in high school, or haven't read it elsewhere
All good, I'm well acquainted with the classics - and having grown up in a house of book readers (and hoarders) I'd already devoured works of Huxley as well as other SF as social commentary from writers such as Vonnegut Jr., Pynchon, PKD, and Kesey amongst others long before the turned up on my school reading list.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 18,529   +7,373
Star Trek - For its unreal ability to predict future gadgets and theories!
And here's another one who needs to read, (or reread), Aldous Huxley's, "Brave New World". I'm fairly sure Rodenberry must have done so.

Mr. Huxley targeted future behaviours, and hit the nail on the head, a lot more often than not.;)
 

amstech

Posts: 2,648   +1,808
Overwrought space melodrama with no character progression versus the episodic parade of stereotypes with minimal (at best) character development.
Used to like Star Trek as a kid, but it didn't take long to realize you could view the three seasons episodes in any order and it wouldn't affect the viewing experience. .
DS9 showed a significant amount of character progression throughout the series. Watching Julian and Obrien finally become friends, Garak and Odo settle past differences and learn to appreciate humanoid risk taking and thinking, how Sisko grows as a leader, Quark's development as a hidden friend and known enemy, and best of all, the Dax/Lenara kiss!

Sorry boss but Star Trek Deep Space 9 completely squashes many of your Star Trek criticisms. While there are episodes that are just there to fill in a timeslot, even some of those have great depth like when Sisko's kid Jake gets real old and his dad is stuck in time. They grow as characters but it has no ties to the main story. Mostly though with episodes there is a great underlying storyline of alliances/wars and peace between the Kardashians, Bajorans and other races get involved as the story progress.
 
Last edited:

lripplinger

Posts: 336   +138
I like both Star Trek and Star Wars for different reasons. TNG is and always will be my favorite "Trek" series. Star Wars is more of a space opera fantasy trilogy though. The more recent movies of Star Trek and Star Wars were abominations in my humble opinion, and do not reflect what makes ST or SW what they are.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 18,529   +7,373
I like both Star Trek and Star Wars for different reasons. TNG is and always will be my favorite "Trek" series.....[ ]....
I still think Patrick Stewart's Shakespearean pomposity was overbearing.

It was like his ego arrived 10 minutes before the, "captain on deck" announcement was made.
 

dividebyzero

Posts: 4,840   +1,270
Sorry boss but Star Trek Deep Space 9 completely squashes many of your Star Trek criticisms.
I'm not sure that it does. I did specifically mention DS9 as standing out from the rest of the franchises - and that is because it involves a greater serialization than the others. DS9 also features a LOT less stereotypes ( greater emphasis on alien culture, wayyyyyy less human middle-aged/old white guys running the show, less female characters going through the motions as window dressing). DS9 made a conscious effort to divest itself of the baggage that the episodic franchises seemed bogged down with which is why it is usually rated higher (at least critically) than TNG, Voyager, Enterprise etc.
So, all in all, the fact that you (as well) singled out DS9 rather than the other franchises, would tend to indicate you also see some the differences between it and the other series.
 
Last edited:

Railman

Posts: 708   +100
Sorry boss but Star Trek Deep Space 9 completely squashes many of your Star Trek criticisms.
I'm not sure that it does. I did specifically mention DS9 as standing out from the rest of the franchises - and that is because it involves a greater serialization than the others. DS9 also features a LOT less stereotypes ( greater emphasis on alien culture, wayyyyyy less human middle-aged/old white guys running the show, less female characters going through the motions as window dressing). DS9 made a conscious effort to divest itself of the baggage that the episodic franchises seemed bogged down with which is why it is usually rated higher (at least critically) than TNG, Voyager, Enterprise etc.
So, all in all, the fact that you (as well) singled out DS9 rather than the other franchises, would tend to indicate you also see some the differences between it and the other series.
I can't say that I was that keen on DS9. I much preferred Babylon 5 as the characters and stories were much better.
 

dividebyzero

Posts: 4,840   +1,270
I can't say that I was that keen on DS9. I much preferred Babylon 5 as the characters and stories were much better.
Me too. B5's storytelling (at least the first four seasons) was on a grand scale. It's probably no coincidence that the more revered SF series (Firefly, Farscape, B5) had both well fleshed out believable (complex motivation/interaction, considerable overlap of "good" and "bad") characters and an overarching plot that actively worked towards a conclusion. B5 had the luxury of playing out the entire planned storyline (then gilding the lily with TV movies and Crusade), while Firefly and Farscape's story were wrapped up in largely unsatisfactory manner due to a truncated movie (Serenity) and 3 hour miniseries (Peacekeeper Wars) - which probably says more about the drive-by nature of TV viewing which suits episodic series rather than serialization.
Hopefully the new Farscape movie and series retain the storytelling aspect of the original