Star trek

Necromance old blog posts, talk about Shamus' books or videos, or discuss allied projects like Errant Signal
Forum rules
This forum is not for swiping blog threads. Avoid talking about blog posts less than a month old.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Sat Sep 10, 2016 5:47 pm

Still no specific star trek topic?And you call yourselves nerds!For shame.

Anyway,I dont have anything specific to say about it at this point,but Im pretty sure krellen might have a few choice words about this video:

Why The Star Trek Federation is Fascist
User avatar
krellen
Location: The City in New Mexico
Contact:

Re: Star trek

Postby krellen » Sat Sep 10, 2016 6:33 pm

I'm not sure there's anything right in that video.

Starfleet is a military organisation - everything he describes refers only to Starfleet, not to all Federation citizens.

First problem: there are civilian ships. Civilian ships are less impressive and well-armed than Starfleet vessels, as a general rule, but that's because they aren't military ships.

Second problem: A lack of money is because of a lack of scarcity, not because of control. Replicators and matter/antimatter power sources mean things can be made for essentially free, so why charge for things?

Third problem: Every somewhat valid point comes from the JJ Abrams film series, which a) isn't even in the same universe as the rest of the series and b) isn't even Star Trek.

So, in short: nope.
Last edited by krellen on Sun Sep 11, 2016 5:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Steve C

Re: Star trek

Postby Steve C » Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:21 pm

Wow that was a terrible video. It took more than 5mins to say a single thing. I'm stupider for having seen it-- well half it. I don't have an innate love of Star Trek, but I couldn't get through it. It's logical fallacy after logical fallacy.
Last edited by Steve C on Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ringwraith

Re: Star trek

Postby Ringwraith » Sat Sep 10, 2016 7:22 pm

It's pretty well summed up by Star Trek itself I think.
User avatar
4th Dimension

Re: Star trek

Postby 4th Dimension » Sat Sep 10, 2016 8:45 pm

That guy, that guy is as dumb as a brick.

This first section will dive a bit into political theory. It is not an endorsement of any of these systems of government.
His first and major mistake was that he attributes "total control over all aspects of citizen's life" to fascism only. Sure that was one of the parts of that doctrine but it was not the only doctrine that stove to that goal. Various flavors of communism also stove for it. But labeling The Federation as communist is a lot less of an inflaming opinion than labeling it fascist (since a lot more people sympathize with the BASIC idea of communism than fascism) and would not have gotten him as many Youtube dollars through infamy.
The actual word he should have used is totalitarianism. Which is an umbrella term for such political systems where the state seeks to control all aspects of life for the good of state and it's citizens. The communism and fascism are kind of two most common flavors of it. The difference being what kind of policies (Left or Right wing) the state will seek to make happen using this control.

So that is strike one, he does not know what the political system is that he is accusing the Federation of.

The second and more major one as krellen pointed out is that he seems to be confusing The Federation (the government that according to what I remember form the originals is elected and has a President governing from Paris, Earth) and the Starfleet (the military space arm of the government). Although these two things kind of overlap since the Federation is also in charge of exploration and scientific research of new worlds which should be a civilian job, but the Starfleet is clearly only an arm of the Federation, albeit the face of the Federation out on the frontiers for obvious reasons.

Thirdly, and I did not watch the video in it's entirety since my head started hurting from all the stupidity (2 out of 3 statements had been completely wrong) it's clear that despite the author bragging about how much of star trek he watched he is basing his idea almost completely on newer movies which have as much to do with Star Trek as Star Wars fanfiction has to do with the actual thing. And when he mentions the old Star Trek he uses the stupidest arguments forgetting that Starfleet is a military and military has MUCH MUCH more control over their personnel because it's military. Hell even on civilian ships NOW in emergencies the captain is the god damned LAW on board answerable only to his superiors once the port is reached since he is ultimately responsible for ANYTHING that happens on board.
User avatar
JadedDM

Re: Star trek

Postby JadedDM » Sun Sep 11, 2016 5:01 pm

Speaking of Star Trek, it had its 50th anniversary the other day.

Oh, and have you all been following the news on the new show coming out next year, Discovery? I'm cautiously optimistic at this point, although I'm worried that the distribution model is going to screw it over.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Sun Sep 11, 2016 7:16 pm

Im not raising my hopes up for that one.But if the reviews end up being favorable,Ill give it a watch.

Though if it continues to follow trek show tradition,it will probably suck for at least the first season or two.
User avatar
Andrew

Re: Star trek

Postby Andrew » Wed Sep 21, 2016 3:02 am

I've been slowly making my way through Star Trek: Enterprise this year as I gear myself up for the new Star Trek series next year. Enterprise is the only star trek series I haven't seen (I tried watching it when it first came out but I got bored about 10 episodes in) so figured the time was right.

I have just finished watching Season 1 and it is much better than I remember it. I like Archer. He isn't as self-righteous as Janeway (to be fair, I don't think anyone is as self-righteous as Janeway! ) or as arrogant or reckless as Kirk. I think he reminds of a mixture of Picard and Sisko but less confident and less sure of himself (which is fair, given he is the 1st Starfleet captain to go on a deep space mission).

The Suliban are a rather uninspired villain race though. Yes, the real villain is whoever is giving them orders from the future (my guess at this stage is Crewman Daniels) but so far all we really know is that the Suliban are the bogey-monsters of the galaxy, with their genetic modifications and mass destruction policy. Of course, there are good Suliban too, innocent ones, as sci-fi cliche's would generally dictate but that just adds to their boringness for me, so far. I sincerely hope they are not the bad guys for all 4 seasons.

Anyway, I'm about to start watching season 2 and just wanted to get a few thoughts down on this. I have read that the series gets better after season 1 so I'm looking forward to this (although I also know how it ends at the conclusion of season 4 so I am definitely NOT looking forward to getting there).
User avatar
Ringwraith

Re: Star trek

Postby Ringwraith » Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:58 am

Apparently the ending of Season 4 is only the worst part, otherwise it's the season when higher-ups stopped meddling with the series so they could actually do what they wanted to, and the better for it.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Wed Sep 21, 2016 9:05 am

Ringwraith wrote:Apparently the ending of Season 4 is only the worst part, otherwise it's the season when higher-ups stopped meddling with the series so they could actually do what they wanted to, and the better for it.


So just like tng then.
User avatar
Lachlan the Mad
Location: I come from the land down under, where women blow and men chunder

Re: Star trek

Postby Lachlan the Mad » Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:15 pm

Oh hey, we have a Star Trek thread!

So I've been watching Deep Space Nine now that it's shown up on Netflix. Having seen bits and pieces of all of the first four Star Trek series, I knew that DS9 would be far and away my favourite -- I intend to pick bits and pieces from TOS and Next Gen, but I'm very interested in seeing DS9 all the way through. I might actually give Enterprise a shot since I know that, as a general rule, Niners are a bit more charitable to that series than old-school Trekkies. Also, fuck Voyager.

Unfortunately, the going has been slow, because it turns out that my girlfriend has some weird mental associations with Star Trek -- to whit, any sort of Star Trek media makes her feel really sleepy. A weird childhood association perhaps? Whatever it is, I only watch it while she's out, and she's usually home when I am. Point is I'm only up to S1E6 or thereabouts, plus having seen maybe three or four random episodes from later seasons, so yeah.

But what I really want to say is that I actually really fucking like the Bajorans. I think they're actually a really, really good allegory for oppressed religious groups. There's a fairly realistic ratio of fundamentalist nutjobs to people who are religious but just getting on with their lives, and just like in real life the second group experiences quite a bit of cognitive dissonance when they think about the first group. I'm also getting the sense that most of the government is made out of the shards of the anti-Cardassian resistance, because the anti-Cardassian resistance was the only association that was actually able to stay organised under Cardassian occupation -- kind of like how Hamas is a legit political party in Palestine now because resistance to the Israelis is pretty much the only populist position left. I also seem to recall that the series gets a bit more philosophical about Bajoran religion later, as in the Bajoran gods are actual legit super-aliens who don't give a fuck about mortal affairs? That'll be fun times.

I know that a few people really don't like the Bajorans for a couple of reasons. Some hardcore Roddenberrians don't like to see religion too much on Star Trek, because TOS deliberately avoided putting any sort of divisive ideology in the hands of its protagonists (the good guys can't be seen to be religious, capitalistic, discriminatory etc.), but to be honest that's one thing that I'm actually enjoying about DS9 over other Trek -- no divisive ideologies for the protagonists makes them harder to develop. I also know that a lot of people read the Bajorans as being a direct allegory for the Israelis or Palestinians, which may upset people who are particularly anti-Israel or anti-Palestine and read the Bajorans as being the side they don't like. I personally read them as being a more generalised allegory for oppressed religious communities in general, but that might change as the series goes on.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Wed Sep 21, 2016 2:43 pm

Lachlan the Mad wrote: I intend to pick bits and pieces from TOS and Next Gen,


Whatever you do,under no circumstances should you watch the start of tng immediately after watching tos.Picard made me genuinely angry quite a few times because of this.And I actually liked the guy before when I saw him in the movies and a few good episodes I saw.But dear god are seasons 1 and 2 dreadful.They squandered Patrick Stewart worse than bethesda.

Lachlan the Mad wrote:Some hardcore Roddenberrians don't like to see religion too much on Star Trek


Thats because the only acceptable religion according to Saint Gene is miniskirtism.Tng gets a pass with its boobism however.
User avatar
JadedDM

Re: Star trek

Postby JadedDM » Wed Sep 21, 2016 3:49 pm

Andrew wrote:I sincerely hope they are not the bad guys for all 4 seasons.

Don't worry, they aren't.

Lachlan the Mad wrote: Some hardcore Roddenberrians don't like to see religion too much on Star Trek, because TOS deliberately avoided putting any sort of divisive ideology in the hands of its protagonists

Which is weird, because TOS did bring up religion more than a few times. I remember a couple of crewmen having a Catholic wedding, for instance. But even if you think the Federation is beyond all religion (which isn't true--the Vulcans have a religion, although I think it is a non-deistic one), the Bajorans aren't in the Federation.

Daemian Lucifer wrote:Whatever you do,under no circumstances should you watch the start of tng immediately after watching tos.

I'd recommend avoiding the first season of TNG in general. It's cringe-worthy, especially in comparison to later seasons.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:02 pm

JadedDM wrote:I'd recommend avoiding the first season of TNG in general. It's cringe-worthy, especially in comparison to later seasons.


It says a lot about it when the best* episode of the season is a holodeck story.The second season,while still mostly bad,at least has the measure of a man in it.

*Not as in good,but as in least awful.
User avatar
Supahewok

Re: Star trek

Postby Supahewok » Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:07 pm

JadedDM wrote:
Daemian Lucifer wrote:Whatever you do,under no circumstances should you watch the start of tng immediately after watching tos.

I'd recommend avoiding the first season of TNG in general. It's cringe-worthy, especially in comparison to later seasons.

Hey now, you have to know Frakes' chin before you can fully appreciate The Beard.
User avatar
Andrew

Re: Star trek

Postby Andrew » Thu Sep 22, 2016 1:07 am

Lachlan the Mad wrote:Also, fuck Voyager.


Hey, woah, woah, watch your mouth! Thems fighting words where I come from!!!

I know it's not the popular choice but Voyager is far and away my favourite Star Trek series. I don't know what it is exactly because the series has some really bad stuff in it (the Kazons, the Hirogen, season 5, the oversexualisation of Seven of Nine (although that's gotten even worse in Enterprise with T'Pol and Hoshi) any scene with Harry Kim or Chakotay) but I just find the whole thing to be rather.... charming? Also, while the writing leaves a lot to be desired, the stories that came out of that writing were wonderful.

Also, Robert Picardo. How can anyone hate anything with Robert Picardo in it??

JadedDM wrote:
Andrew wrote:I sincerely hope they are not the bad guys for all 4 seasons.

Don't worry, they aren't.


Good to know, thanks. I just watched the episode from Season 2 last night (2 or 3) where the Romulans first make an appearance. I already know from a friend that the Earth-Romulan War isn't covered by Enterprise (which is a shame!) but it would be good if the Romulan's form a major part of the arc going forward. It seems that even T'Pol doesn't know much about them so I'm guessing that at this stage the fact that they are related to Vulcan's isn't common knowledge.

So far I think my least favourite character is Reed. His generally negative attitude is a real downer. I thought he was moving past it in season 1 with his birthday arc and the episode where he's stranded with Trip and they think everyone else is dead, but then last night's episode pops up where he basically spends half the episode telling Archer what a horrible captain he is because he cares too much and how he should just let him die already. Euggghh. Full Malcolm at his worst that was.
User avatar
Humanoid

Re: Star trek

Postby Humanoid » Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:15 am

I watched Wrath of Khan for the first time earlier this year. (Yes I know I surrender all nerd cred for that) It's only the second Trek movie I've watched in full I think, the other one being, uh, that one with Malcolm McDowell. I've probably seen reasonable amounts of some other ones (like the time travel one) a long time ago. I also randomly caught the last third of Galaxy Quest a couple of months ago so there you go.

It's kind of weird coming into the movies with most of the name recognition on the villains. Couldn't help but think of Khan as Vincent Ludwig in space for the most part, but admittedly The Naked Gun is a movie I quote most days of the week. And I also have to admit that at the point I watched the other one, Malcolm McDowell was just Admiral Tolwyn, though it's probably for the best that I didn't watch A Clockwork Orange as a kid.

At any rate, it was an entertaining enough diversion, though I'm in no rush to watch any others. One plus is that there are now a number of memes I can understand the context of, but I think there's just as much reverse perception at work here: it's hard to see the movies as anything other than intentional comedies at times.
User avatar
JadedDM

Re: Star trek

Postby JadedDM » Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:51 am

Andrew wrote:I know it's not the popular choice but Voyager is far and away my favourite Star Trek series.

Honestly, while it's not my favorite, I don't hate Voyager. Or Enterprise. I think they both had some good parts, along with the bad. I loved the Doctor and Seven. Voyager had some really dumb episodes, but so did every other Star Trek series, to be fair.

The only Star Trek I actively dislike are the Kelvin-verse reboots.

Andrew wrote:I already know from a friend that the Earth-Romulan War isn't covered by Enterprise (which is a shame!)

Yeah, it is a shame. I heard they were going to cover that in a later season, but the show was cancelled. They teased the Romulan war back before Nemesis came out. Then Nemesis tanked and they veered away sharply from Romulans altogether, sadly, like they thought that was the problem with Nemesis--Romulans.

I like the Romulans, though. I get so tired of the Klingons. Always with the Klingons!

Andrew wrote:So far I think my least favourite character is Reed.

My least favorite Enterprise character was Mayweather, sadly. Because the writers had no idea what to do with him. I felt the same way about Voyager's Be'lanna and Kim. Interesting characters, but never given anything to do.

Humanoid wrote:It's only the second Trek movie I've watched in full I think, the other one being, uh, that one with Malcolm McDowell.

That would be Generations.

Humanoid wrote:I've probably seen reasonable amounts of some other ones (like the time travel one) a long time ago.

The time travel one with the Borg? Or the time travel one with the whales?

Humanoid wrote:it's hard to see the movies as anything other than intentional comedies at times.

KHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!
Image
User avatar
Humanoid

Re: Star trek

Postby Humanoid » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:19 am

WHAAAAAAAAAALES! Although actually I barely remember the whales aspect of it, just the random hijinks the crew got up to in San Francisco which I thought the rest of the movie was basically an excuse for (which doesn't help any argument against the whole "Trek is a comedy series" thing).

I didn't know there was another time travel one. I also I don't know anything about Borg other than that they're ugly and travel in spaceships that look like EA's old logo.
User avatar
Daemian Lucifer

Re: Star trek

Postby Daemian Lucifer » Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:46 am

Andrew wrote: I don't know what it is exactly because the series has some really bad stuff in it (the Kazons, the Hirogen, season 5, the oversexualisation of Seven of Nine (although that's gotten even worse in Enterprise with T'Pol and Hoshi) any scene with Harry Kim or Chakotay)


To me,all of that can be overcome if not for the fatal flaw:The reset button.Not only does it not make sense with the whole premise of the show,it also stifles character growth.
User avatar
Andrew

Re: Star trek

Postby Andrew » Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:25 am

JadedDM wrote:My least favorite Enterprise character was Mayweather, sadly. Because the writers had no idea what to do with him. I felt the same way about Voyager's Be'lanna and Kim. Interesting characters, but never given anything to do.


Oh yeah, Mayweather. He's the Harry Kim of Enterprise, right?

And fair point on B'elanna and Klingons! They are everywhere and they are so one-dimensional! Oh what's that, B'elenna? You're half Klingon and your thing is that you have a temper? Wow, that's original. I think I view her a bit better because of her association with Paris. Take that away and yeah she's pretty dull.

JadedDM wrote:Yeah, it is a shame. I heard they were going to cover that in a later season, but the show was cancelled. They teased the Romulan war back before Nemesis came out. Then Nemesis tanked and they veered away sharply from Romulans altogether, sadly, like they thought that was the problem with Nemesis--Romulans.


That doesn't surprise me that it was planned to show up during Enterprise although for such an historic pre-Federation event in the Star Trek universe I would've thought that they'd start with the Earth-Romulan war. Perhaps the original plan was to end Enterprise with the formation of the Federation and that's why they were saving it?

There were so very, many, things wrong with Nemesis, but Romulans definitely wasn't one of them!!!

Humanoid wrote:WHAAAAAAAAAALES! Although actually I barely remember the whales aspect of it, just the random hijinks the crew got up to in San Francisco which I thought the rest of the movie was basically an excuse for (which doesn't help any argument against the whole "Trek is a comedy series" thing).

I didn't know there was another time travel one. I also I don't know anything about Borg other than that they're ugly and travel in spaceships that look like EA's old logo.


The other one is First Contact - the 2nd moving featuring the TNG cast.

The Whales episode is better!

Daemian Lucifer wrote:To me,all of that can be overcome if not for the fatal flaw:The reset button.Not only does it not make sense with the whole premise of the show,it also stifles character growth.


Yes, they use the reset button quite a lot in Voyager. I think that on some occasions it serves to tell a really good story like in that episode where Kes goes through a Benjamin Button thing (Before and After) and it foreshadows the arrival of the Krenim. I didn't mind that so much.

Other times, it's terrible, like in the actual episodes with the Krenim (Year of Hell) where it feels like the writers literally wrote themselves into a corner and had no way of getting out except by use of a magic button.

Off the top of my head I can think of at least 6 instances where a reset button was used, but I'm sure there were more than that.
User avatar
JadedDM

Re: Star trek

Postby JadedDM » Thu Sep 22, 2016 5:22 am

Humanoid wrote:I also I don't know anything about Borg other than that they're ugly

Well, not all of them.
Image

Andrew wrote:Oh yeah, Mayweather. He's the Harry Kim of Enterprise, right?

Yeah, basically. For some reason, Mayweather kept getting killed off in every single alternate future/reality/etc. It almost became a running gag. Like, even the writers were admitting they didn't cared about him.

Ironically, they were going to kill off Kim in Voyager, but then his actor got listed as one of the sexiest people alive in People magazine, so they offed Kes instead. But poor Kim never got promoted after 7 years of being an Ensign. At least he's finally made Captain in STO.

Andrew wrote:I think I view her a bit better because of her association with Paris.

I'm pretty convinced that the only reason she hooked up with Paris is the writers had no idea what else to do with her.
User avatar
Andrew

Re: Star trek

Postby Andrew » Thu Sep 22, 2016 11:37 am

Yeah I heard about the Harry Kim killing. Getting rid of Kes instead was... well, I don't think it really changed things much. Her storyline was rather stale anyway (basically as Neelix's partner and nothing else) and like Neelix, she was never going to make it back to Earth.
User avatar
Trix2000
Location: California

Re: Star trek

Postby Trix2000 » Thu Sep 22, 2016 7:50 pm

The fourth movie is a lot weirder when you live near SF and have SEEN most of the places they visit.

....Oh, also WHAAAAAAAAAALES
User avatar
John

Re: Star trek

Postby John » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:26 am

Oh, look. Someone started a Star Trek thread. Be cool, John. Be cool.

Like many an older nerd, pretty much the first thing I did upon getting regular and easy internet access when I went off to college in the early 90s was to get involved in arguments about Star Trek. (Of course it was. How could it ever have been otherwise?) I never got into Usenet, thank goodness. No, my forum for episode reviews, endless rehashes of the same old argument about the Borg, and vicious, bitter feuds about the degree to which Voyager did or did not suck was a heavily moderated university BBS.

It was the best of times. The fourth season of Deep Space 9 is not my favorite season of Star Trek. It was a fairly solidly-crafted season, but at the time I resented the turn from the Bajor-focused stories of the first three seasons to what I regarded as desperate-for-ratings-superfluous-Worf-Klingon-action stuff. Nevertheless, the fourth season of Deep Space 9 was, for me, the golden age of internet Star Trek commentary. Every time a new episode came out, at least half a dozen people (myself included, he said with all possible modesty) posted detailed episode reviews. Now that I think of it, it was the same sort of writing that keeps me coming back to Twentysided. A really good episode would prompt something like Shamus' posts on Jade Empire. A bad episode might get the Mass Effect treatment. It was nerd heaven.

It was the worst of times. Those years taught me that no matter how much I might like Star Trek, no matter how strong my opinions about Star Trek might be, I will never feel entirely comfortable calling myself a Star Trek fan. It's mostly because of Voyager. Like most people I knew at the time, I was pretty excited about getting a new Star Trek series. The pilot wasn't all that great but it was still better than the pilot for Next Generation or even Deep Space 9. But it was clear even just a few episodes in that the show was really not interested in dealing with its own premise in a serious way. I wasn't enjoying myself, so I stopped watching about half-way through the first season. A number of other people in the forum had a similar reaction to the show. This, according to certain posters, was treason. We were being disloyal, they said. Voyager was fine, they said. No TV show is good right at the beginning, they said. Voyager was going to get better in a couple of years--just like TNG!--they said, and for this reason we were somehow obligated to continue watching. The resulting arguments lasted maybe a year before the two sides settled into a mutual, sullen sort of hostility.

And that was my introduction to the internet. It was awesome and it sucked. Just like real life. Yay.

Return to “Twenty Sided Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests