STAR TREK: CANCELLED

PST: discuss Star Trek without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

Post Reply
User avatar
Jay
Padawan Learner
Posts: 368
Joined: 2005-01-14 01:57pm
Location: Newcastle, England

Post by Jay »

ARC BAD! ME LOVE MONSTER OF WEEK!' Well, for those of us who actually grew out of our six year old phase, the essentials of character and story growth have sunk in.
I believe DW summed this up. Charicter development and story arc are not one and the same thing. Charicters can develop, but each story, from week to week should stand or fall by its own merits. Not relying on the threads of the previous week and every week before it.

Also, demonstrate that enjoying an episodic show is representative of an immature intellect.
Arcing can be fucked up horribly(X-Files is a good example of it being done poorly), but can also be done beautifully(Dr. Who and Stargate, the new powerhouse of sci-fi television, demonstrate this well. At least until BSG dethrones the Gate.)
Yes, because every story in Doctor Who was not affected by the one before it and the one after it. Each story was divided into sereral parts, yes, but you didn't need to see the 'Pyramids of Mars' to fully understand 'Castrovalva.' Doctor who did not have an Arc plot. It had stand alone stories which *is* what I have been promoting.
The Reset Button is a cheap out for writers who can't focus for more than one sitting...
No-one has argued otherwise. Stand alone stories are not the same thing as time-travel-cop-outs or the likes. If a ship is heavily mauled at the end of one episode, the next episode can be about getting it repaired, provided the two episodes are understandable and enjoyable to the casual viwer on their own[/quote]
...and knowing is half the battle
Petrosjko
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5237
Joined: 2004-09-18 10:46am

Post by Petrosjko »

*joins the pile-on on CDS* Take that! And that! *thwap thwap*

Seriously, TOS was a step forward in bringing science fiction out of the realm of serials and kids shows, so it does have an honorable place in the history of science fiction. While it was unabashedly space opera, it touched on the deeper themes available in science fiction literature, and mayhap opened some eyes to the fact that science fiction wasn't entirely bug-eyed aliens bent on conquering Terra for some lame reason.
User avatar
CDS
Padawan Learner
Posts: 301
Joined: 2004-12-15 03:55pm
Location: Lancaster University, UK
Contact:

Post by CDS »

Petrosjko wrote:Seriously, TOS was a step forward in bringing science fiction out of the realm of serials and kids shows, so it does have an honorable place in the history of science fiction. While it was unabashedly space opera, it touched on the deeper themes available in science fiction literature, and mayhap opened some eyes to the fact that science fiction wasn't entirely bug-eyed aliens bent on conquering Terra for some lame reason.
Well, at least someone knows what I mean.... I think :p
Image
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein
nimoll.co.uk technology website | N forums | Nimoll web design and hosting | Macguide
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

jasonicusuk wrote:
ARC BAD! ME LOVE MONSTER OF WEEK!' Well, for those of us who actually grew out of our six year old phase, the essentials of character and story growth have sunk in.
I believe DW summed this up. Charicter development and story arc are not one and the same thing. Charicters can develop, but each story, from week to week should stand or fall by its own merits. Not relying on the threads of the previous week and every week before it.
Why? Because you say so? Thank you for demonstrating your monumental arrogance; you're an idiot jackass. And, of course, you show you're just strawmanning the whole concept of Arcs: Nothing says that an ongoing stories parts cannot be judged each on their own.

Also, thank you for demonstrating you can't read English: Story growth is the existance of arcs, either blatantly(To Be Continued..), or the revival of an old villain/plot point in an ongoing story.
Also, demonstrate that enjoying an episodic show is representative of an immature intellect.
Another strawman? My my, you'd think you could actually tackle what I said, without twisting it...

What represents immaturity is wanking to the idea of Monster Of The Week: Just another mindless collection of powers and dangers without anything to justify it. Dowd: Monster of Week. Borg: Story arc, especially in TNG. Not necessarily a good one, but an arc none the less, as we see the same villains change over time.
Arcing can be fucked up horribly(X-Files is a good example of it being done poorly), but can also be done beautifully(Dr. Who and Stargate, the new powerhouse of sci-fi television, demonstrate this well. At least until BSG dethrones the Gate.)
Yes, because every story in Doctor Who was not affected by the one before it and the one after it. Each story was divided into sereral parts, yes, but you didn't need to see the 'Pyramids of Mars' to fully understand 'Castrovalva.' Doctor who did not have an Arc plot. It had stand alone stories which *is* what I have been promoting.
Ah, so your entire argument here is based on the fact you have no clue what arcing is, basing it entirely on the most poorly put together versions of it. That explains so much.
The Reset Button is a cheap out for writers who can't focus for more than one sitting...
No-one has argued otherwise. Stand alone stories are not the same thing as time-travel-cop-outs or the likes. If a ship is heavily mauled at the end of one episode, the next episode can be about getting it repaired, provided the two episodes are understandable and enjoyable to the casual viwer on their own
Welcome to a two-episode arc, dumbass. A minor one, yes, but still the same plot continuing between episodes and effecting things down the line. This would be rather different from the Monster Of The Week shit being espoused by the more mentally challenged here.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
Jay
Padawan Learner
Posts: 368
Joined: 2005-01-14 01:57pm
Location: Newcastle, England

Post by Jay »

Perhaps I am functioning on a bad interpretation of the word 'Arc' and if that makes me a monumentally arroganct idiot jackass, I'll take it.
And, of course, you show you're just strawmanning the whole concept of Arcs: Nothing says that an ongoing stories parts cannot be judged each on their own

'stand or fall by its own merits' was perhaps a poor choice of words. What I'm trying to get across is that you cannot just pick a random episode of farscape or Babylon Five and watch it. You have to have a working knowledge of just about every episode that preceeds it. Whilst I will admit this is good for some shows, I believe it is bad for Trek, as a lot of people are not able to catch every single episode.

and yes, individual segments of an overall story can be enjoyed and appraised apart from the rest, but if the plot is lost to the casual watcher in a haze of back-story, they are not going to watch again.
Welcome to a two-episode arc, dumbass. A minor one, yes, but still the same plot continuing between episodes and effecting things down the line. This would be rather different from the Monster Of The Week shit being espoused by the more mentally challenged here.
This concludes that I am working on a faulty premise. I am missuising the word Arc. Conceeded. My position on any future trek remains unchanged, however, I believe that each episode should be watchable, enjoyable and understandable without any form of external influence.
...and knowing is half the battle
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

jasonicusuk wrote:Perhaps I am functioning on a bad interpretation of the word 'Arc' and if that makes me a monumentally arroganct idiot jackass, I'll take it.
I suspect you're operating off the definition seen in X-Files or Enterprise: Where you either need to take notes, or the Arc is used as an excuse for a really shitty episode.
And, of course, you show you're just strawmanning the whole concept of Arcs: Nothing says that an ongoing stories parts cannot be judged each on their own

'stand or fall by its own merits' was perhaps a poor choice of words. What I'm trying to get across is that you cannot just pick a random episode of farscape or Babylon Five and watch it. You have to have a working knowledge of just about every episode that preceeds it. Whilst I will admit this is good for some shows, I believe it is bad for Trek, as a lot of people are not able to catch every single episode.
...Have you actually watched B5? There are many, many episodes where you can pick it up and watch. Especially if you get the basic underpinnings(Shadows like chaos, Vorlons like order, everyone hates each other, Narns are slaves, etc). There's quite a few episodic episodes in there, and the arcs are not the 'Must take notes' variety, as confirmed by the fact I've enjoyed the show while only seeing a half-dozen episodes.
and yes, individual segments of an overall story can be enjoyed and appraised apart from the rest, but if the plot is lost to the casual watcher in a haze of back-story, they are not going to watch again.
Alright, question time: Do you think we should cast off every episode with the Borg in it?
Welcome to a two-episode arc, dumbass. A minor one, yes, but still the same plot continuing between episodes and effecting things down the line. This would be rather different from the Monster Of The Week shit being espoused by the more mentally challenged here.
This concludes that I am working on a faulty premise. I am missuising the word Arc. Conceeded. My position on any future trek remains unchanged, however, I believe that each episode should be watchable, enjoyable and understandable without any form of external influence.
That's just ridiculous. Should we not have, for example, the Vulcans, without having to devote half the show to explaining them every time?
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
CDS
Padawan Learner
Posts: 301
Joined: 2004-12-15 03:55pm
Location: Lancaster University, UK
Contact:

Post by CDS »

SirNitram wrote:I suspect you're operating off the definition seen in X-Files or Enterprise: Where you either need to take notes, or the Arc is used as an excuse for a really shitty episode.
Is Enterprise not Star Trek anymore?
Image
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein
nimoll.co.uk technology website | N forums | Nimoll web design and hosting | Macguide
User avatar
Jay
Padawan Learner
Posts: 368
Joined: 2005-01-14 01:57pm
Location: Newcastle, England

Post by Jay »

...Have you actually watched B5? There are many, many episodes where you can pick it up and watch. Especially if you get the basic underpinnings(Shadows like chaos, Vorlons like order, everyone hates each other, Narns are slaves, etc). There's quite a few episodic episodes in there, and the arcs are not the 'Must take notes' variety, as confirmed by the fact I've enjoyed the show while only seeing a half-dozen episodes.
More power to you then. I have watched about a seasons worth and I hate it. I now understand all the Zathras references my friends keep making, but other than that it pretty much sucked for me. I am perhaps a little tetchi about it when it is brought up, because if I ever ctitique it the only responce its supporters seem to have is: 'but it has an arc plot.'
Alright, question time: Do you think we should cast off every episode with the Borg in it?
No. I don't think we should. This is a clear demonstation of my misunderstanding of the word Arc. I am happy to see returning villians, provided their return can be enjoyed independantly. A little exposition goes along way.

it's the grand sweeping, 'note-taking arcs' as you call them, that I think would be bad for Trek. The later X-files is especially guilty of this.
That's just ridiculous. Should we not have, for example, the Vulcans, without having to devote half the show to explaining them every time?
I think my above responce covers this one. Perhaps I can sum it up though. I saw 'the Wrath of Khan ' when I was younger, long before I first saw the episode 'space seed.' That didn't matter though, because the movie was still understandable and enjoyable on its own.

Had I needed to ask every five seconds 'who's this Khan guy.' or 'what episode does this bit relate too' i'd have not enjoyed it at all. [/quote]
...and knowing is half the battle
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

CDS wrote:
SirNitram wrote:I suspect you're operating off the definition seen in X-Files or Enterprise: Where you either need to take notes, or the Arc is used as an excuse for a really shitty episode.
Is Enterprise not Star Trek anymore?
The only episodes I saw did not have Star Trek in front of it, so I see no reason to add it.

Of course, I could also expect the denizens of this thread to have three braincells apeice and be able to puzzle out what I meant, given there's only one show named Enterprise spoken of here.

Nitpicking stupidity...
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

jasonicusuk wrote:
...Have you actually watched B5? There are many, many episodes where you can pick it up and watch. Especially if you get the basic underpinnings(Shadows like chaos, Vorlons like order, everyone hates each other, Narns are slaves, etc). There's quite a few episodic episodes in there, and the arcs are not the 'Must take notes' variety, as confirmed by the fact I've enjoyed the show while only seeing a half-dozen episodes.
More power to you then. I have watched about a seasons worth and I hate it. I now understand all the Zathras references my friends keep making, but other than that it pretty much sucked for me. I am perhaps a little tetchi about it when it is brought up, because if I ever ctitique it the only responce its supporters seem to have is: 'but it has an arc plot.'
WOW! Fanwhores exist? I DIDN"T KNOW THAT. Dear fucking christ.
Alright, question time: Do you think we should cast off every episode with the Borg in it?
No. I don't think we should. This is a clear demonstation of my misunderstanding of the word Arc. I am happy to see returning villians, provided their return can be enjoyed independantly. A little exposition goes along way.

it's the grand sweeping, 'note-taking arcs' as you call them, that I think would be bad for Trek. The later X-files is especially guilty of this.
They're bad for any show. Because they don't make it accessable, and thus able to take on new folks.
That's just ridiculous. Should we not have, for example, the Vulcans, without having to devote half the show to explaining them every time?
I think my above responce covers this one. Perhaps I can sum it up though. I saw 'the Wrath of Khan ' when I was younger, long before I first saw the episode 'space seed.' That didn't matter though, because the movie was still understandable and enjoyable on its own.

Had I needed to ask every five seconds 'who's this Khan guy.' or 'what episode does this bit relate too' i'd have not enjoyed it at all.
[/quote]

And here is where you demonstrate the stupidity of the comment I was criticizing: You do not need zero outside input. You just need to make it accessable enough to hook folks.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
Jay
Padawan Learner
Posts: 368
Joined: 2005-01-14 01:57pm
Location: Newcastle, England

Post by Jay »

And here is where you demonstrate the stupidity of the comment I was criticizing: You do not need zero outside input. You just need to make it accessable enough to hook folks.
Conceeded.
...and knowing is half the battle
User avatar
Jason von Evil
Sol Badguy
Posts: 8103
Joined: 2002-11-29 02:13am
Location: Writer of the fictions
Contact:

Post by Jason von Evil »

Hmm..tomorrows episode looks interesting. They were starting to hint at the beginning of the Federation.
"It was the hooker rationing that finally drove people over the edge." - Mike on coup in Thailand.
Image
User avatar
Sothis
Jedi Knight
Posts: 664
Joined: 2002-07-03 06:07pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Sothis »

I don't know if anyone else has been to the Star Trek messageboards on the official site since the news broke, but I am growing increasingly annoyed with the fanboys who cry 'you didn't watch it, you're not a true fan!'. Such people are crawling out of the woodwork to attack anyone who criticised Enterprise.

I am a Star Trek fan who did not enjoy Enterprise. Because I did not enjoy enjoy it, I did not watch it a lot. For some reason, this makes me the enemy. Not B&B's ideas, or the storylines, or UPN's promotion of the show. Noooooooo, instead, it's fans who didn't show Enterprise unwavering loyalty, whether we liked it or not.
Hakuna Matata
The Forums of Sothis! http://www.1-2-free-forums.com/mf/sothis.html
User avatar
THEHOOLIGANJEDI
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2002-07-11 03:44pm
Location: Highland Park, New Jersey
Contact:

Post by THEHOOLIGANJEDI »

Personally I think this is sad news that they are cancelling the show when it was finally getting out fo the shadow of B&Bs awful writing. The show was really starting to show promise. Personally I think this season from what I've seen show that this show could have been better than Voyager. I think they should have pulled the plug sooner.
Image
Stupid risks are what make life worth living.-Homer Simpson

-PC Load Letter?! What the Fuck does that mean!?!?!- Micheal Bolton
-Bullshit! I'll bet you can suck a golf ball through a garden hose! - Sgt. Hartman
-I'll bet your the kind of guy who would fuck a person in the ass and not even have the Goddamn common courtesy to give him a reacharound!- Sgt. Hartman
User avatar
JME2
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12258
Joined: 2003-02-02 04:04pm

Post by JME2 »

Aya wrote:Hmm..tomorrows episode looks interesting. They were starting to hint at the beginning of the Federation.
That's exactly what I'm afraid of. Berman and Braga are writing the final episode and we still have half a season to go. I can't help but worry that they could end the final episode with the formation of the UFP as a way of getting back at the fans who have dissed them.
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Post by Stofsk »

Lord Poe wrote:
Stofsk wrote:I feel like I've asked this before, but what is the source of your information?
"Inside Trek", a book by Roddenberry's mistress of 20 or so years.

+http://www.insidetrek.com
Thanks for the link, but she no longer publishes it on her website. And I'm too much of a cheapskate to pay for it. (actually I'm broke) :)
Image
User avatar
Lord Poe
Sith Apprentice
Posts: 6988
Joined: 2002-07-14 03:15am
Location: Callyfornia
Contact:

Post by Lord Poe »

Stofsk wrote:Thanks for the link, but she no longer publishes it on her website. And I'm too much of a cheapskate to pay for it. (actually I'm broke) :)
Take a look at the library, or a used bookstore. Its a good read.
Image

"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
User avatar
Spanky The Dolphin
Mammy Two-Shoes
Posts: 30776
Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland (not really)

Post by Spanky The Dolphin »

I'd also recommend Inside Star Trek: The Real Story by Herbert Solow and Robert Justman, executive in charge of production and associate producer for TOS, respectively. I haven't read the book Wayne recommends, but I do know that they're very similar in the types of details revealed about the show.

Just be warned that you might lose essentially any respect you might have previously had for Gene Roddenberry.
Image
I believe in a sign of Zeta.

[BOTM|WG|JL|Mecha Maniacs|Pax Cybertronia|Veteran of the Psychic Wars|Eva Expert]

"And besides, who cares if a monster destroys Australia?"
User avatar
Stofsk
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12925
Joined: 2003-11-10 12:36am

Post by Stofsk »

I read Harlan Ellison's script for City on the Edge of Forever, and read the lengthy diatribe 'introduction' where he ranted and raved against Gene Rottenberry. Trust me, I have no heroic illusions to subscribe to the man.
Image
Enforcer Talen
Warlock
Posts: 10285
Joined: 2002-07-05 02:28am
Location: Boston
Contact:

Post by Enforcer Talen »

Image
This day is Fantastic!
Myers Briggs: ENTJ
Political Compass: -3/-6
DOOMer WoW
"I really hate it when the guy you were pegging as Mr. Worst Case starts saying, "Oh, I was wrong, it's going to be much worse." " - Adrian Laguna
User avatar
Gorefiend
Padawan Learner
Posts: 288
Joined: 2004-11-22 08:38am

Post by Gorefiend »

he/she (?) pretty much hit the point, if you dont like it, dont watch it.

I tuned in to a few episodes that sounded nice otherwise i just didn't bother. The only episodes I really liked about Ent where the three of the augment arc, which I taped and watched in one go. Even if I am going to get beaten for it, I taped those because of the Orions (which are my favourtie Trek Race just for the sake of them not being nice guys,like every other race in trek, they are interstellar Pirates and Slavers) and for Brent of course. ;)

Maybe I missed a few good Ent Episodes but I don't know and really don't care, its like Voy, after Episoed just kept getting worse I stopped watching (somewhere through the second season).

I am sad to see Ent go, but it is understandable. I was already surprised Voy lasted as long as it did.
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18733
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

Post by Rogue 9 »

HALLELUJAH, PRAISE THE LORD! :D
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by Stark »

Isnt a 'Star Trek fan' like a 'McDonalds fan' or a 'Dodge fan'? Someone who likes something because of its branding? I like SPACESHIPS. I like EXPLOSIONS. I enjoyed ST back in the day because it had these things; the actual ST schtick never interested me at all. I DON'T like lawyers or doctors, hence my preference for science fiction over 95% of television.

People who whinge about branding in fiction are ridiculous. I liked old ST, I like a bit of SG1, Doctor Who and B7 are fun... but not BECAUSE they've got a fucking NAME. Because of what they ARE. Firefly has many elements of shows like B7; I'm not running around calling it a 'ripoff' and demanding the return of 'real' B7 (real defined as 'bought the license') Complaining about 'true ST fans' and being 'loyal' is inane - such brand-based loyalty is why people watch utter shit, and why that utter shit doesn't die when it should.

Fuck you, Enterprise.
User avatar
mr friendly guy
The Doctor
Posts: 11235
Joined: 2004-12-12 10:55pm
Location: In a 1960s police telephone box somewhere in Australia

Post by mr friendly guy »

When they start borrowing ideas from themselves to write episodes, that struck the death blow for me (shoddy continuity had already started the rot).

An example is that episode when Trip gets stuck on a planet with a hostile alien, and he ends up making friends with said alien. When I saw that episode I felt I had seen it before. Then I remembered. It was a voyager episode where Chakotay gets stuck with that Kazon kid played by the same actor who plagged Nog on DS9.

Its time to give Trek a rest. I guess I am optimistic that someone with enough writing skill and who understands how not to shit on fans will be able to revive it. But it seriously needs a rest, at least 5 years, preferably greater than ten. Given that more than 15 years past between the end of TOS and the start of TNG, its not unreasonable. I would hope that if a new series is done years later, they set it post 24th century, so it gives the series a new start.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.

Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
User avatar
GrandMasterTerwynn
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 6787
Joined: 2002-07-29 06:14pm
Location: Somewhere on Earth.

Post by GrandMasterTerwynn »

mr friendly guy wrote:When they start borrowing ideas from themselves to write episodes, that struck the death blow for me (shoddy continuity had already started the rot).

An example is that episode when Trip gets stuck on a planet with a hostile alien, and he ends up making friends with said alien. When I saw that episode I felt I had seen it before. Then I remembered. It was a voyager episode where Chakotay gets stuck with that Kazon kid played by the same actor who plagged Nog on DS9.
Reusing old plot devices over and over and over again to the point of absurdity is a classic Star Trek staple! Even Picard had to befriend a random alien once on TNG, the one that spoke in obtuse metaphors.
Post Reply