f13.net

Found my self on the job hunt as of Dec 1st so I had an epiphany.... I purchased the DVD collection of the 60's Star Trek series for all 3 seasons.  I never really had the time I wanted to see all the episodes - and now I have.

Characters.  Spock as a scientist and Scotty as an engineer are powerful iconic images that come from this film that position these professions in a cool light.  Hardly news to anyone who posts here - but the shabby special effects today are irrelevant compared to the power of the characters developed in this series that interacted with each other so well.

Music.  It may sound like an odd observation, but the old series made great use of music to set the mood for so many emotions/ encounters in the series.

Plots.  I could never stand the New Generation as it seemed so SLOW.  The old series, however, seemed to have such a nice crisp pace - things were always moving.  The plots were fantastic.   Some of my favorite episodes:

- Kirk fights Spock on Vulcan.  (Amok Time).  In this episode "Live long and propser" was first introduced.  The logic of Spocks wife in selecting Kirk to be her combative representative was fantastic - great writing.

- The doomsday machine - the floating cone that grinded up and destroyed planets.  Again the tension - and the pace - of the Enterprise and a disabled vessel tackling this foe was terrific.

- Tholian web.  Some great ideas here - and again a nice job of setting in motion parallel plot elements that wove a theme of urgency.

- Nomad.  A great episode where an old deep space probe returns to sterilize imperfection.  Clearly the plot basis for the first film of Star Trek that came decades later.

- Disease.  The series had several episodes of disease and infectious madness that the ship had to race to combat.  Then and now I have always found this plot element quite a thrill.  The acting is terrific - and you really get that sense of urgent and tense analysis that is crucial to the success of the crew.

- A Piece of the Action.  Kirk and Spock are forced to adapt to the way of life of a planet that has modeled itself after Chicago gangs in the 30's in order to broker peace on the planet to achieve a stable government.  The earth like similarity - as usual - was a weak plot element (but driven by cost obviously).  Otherwise, a great episode that I think has inspired many versions of it.  The Spock - Kirk dynamic as they try to pull of the Federation look like a gangster outfit was hilarious.

- The Enemy Within.  Tranporter malfunction gives two Kirks - one evil and one good.  The film depicts how the "good" Kirk, deprived of his other half, slowly loses ability to make quick and firm decisions.  Great stuff - true sci fi - action and thought provoking.

- Patterns of Force.  Finding a planet that a former Federation advisor had seeded with the culture and command infrastructure of Nazi Germany...his justification at the end of the episode was interesting.

- The Arena.  To this day - one of the most exciting single combat conflicts I have ever seen depicted.  Great plot elements - with no budget.  This is the episode where Kirk and the Gorn captian (reptile - immense strength) are forced to fight in single combat on a planet and build the weapons they need.

On and on.  This series is a great example of how good scripts, plots. characters and acting trump special effects - even in a science fiction series.

Great stuff.

But what do you think of Gremlins 2?

The original series is still my favorite.

Much as it pains me to admit, I agree. I'd have thought that with four series to refine the formula, they'd have exceeded it. But they haven't. Old Series may be corny as hell sometimes, but it achieved a fine mix of pulp serial excess and unexpected profundity that I've only seen again in Firefly.

Consider "Tribbles." Funny fucking episode, some of the best character moments in the Old Series, and an environmental metaphor that long predated zebra mussels. If the latter-day series had tried something similar, it would have been weighed down with hand-wringing and moralizing monologues.

Product of the times, I guess. I doubt we'll see it's like again.

First interracial kiss on television.

Not the biggest fan of the original series actually.

I liked the movies though.

So you could say that I actually do like the original series in a way. Or at least, the original cast. It's just that the films refined and stuck to the good parts -- Especially the humor.

Those films, as well as DS9's finer moments (Dukat) are the best that Trek has to offer.

You're cherry picking.  All of you!

All of humanity cherry picks about everything.   :-o

Anywho, I think the 60s Star Trek was the purist Sci-Fi of them all.  It was made back in an age of a public that could properly appreciate Sci-Fi.  The later Star Treks had their moments, but none of the plots had quite the sheer amount of creative power as the episodes in the original season, which were Twilight Zone-esque in their power at times.  TV Sci-Fi is mostly dead these days, having ot resort to gimmicks such as likeable or cuddly characters to get ratings.  Even the vaulted "Sci-Fi Channel" has resorted to airing comedy and horror movies to try to keep their ratings above zero.

^^ Im afraid I have to disagree.  Battlestar Galactica might be one of the best Scifi series ever on television including Trek.

But of course its part of the "Its genre thats palatable to nongenre fans." movement that includes stuff like Heroes.

Not stuff that is embarrassed by the genre, but keeps the best parts but takes from outside its usual comfort zone.

I'm a Next Generation fan. But if we're talking about sci-fi, XFiles season 1-4 all the way. It's really the only sci-fi I've ever been able to stand more than 1 episode at a time. Well, Supernatural too.

Despite Dune being my favorite sci-fi book series, and despite me liking DS9, I tend to like sci-fi that's completely alien, imaginative (or optimistic) about the future, and funny if possible. I like sci-fi to be fun and/or fantasy filled.

Battlestar Galactica turns me off because it does none of this.  It seems more like a mirror of our own attitudes "now" than anything else. And when I watch science fiction, I don't care about "now". Not caring about "now" is the whole freakin' point.

I get enough of what it does, and better, out of the real world and more down to earth shows/films. If I want to weep, I'll watch the Bicycle Thief or the Pawnbroker. Not Space Marines.

I've said before that I think Futurama is the greatest sci-fi show -- and I mean it.

Also, if someone could pull it off it for a good length of time, something like the 1st season of that 80's Buck Rogers show would top my list. What's cooler than an intergalactic pimp?

Other favorites: Any funny or adventurous characters like Bones, Data, Han Solo, Rockwell's Beeblebrox, the cat and mouse between Quark and Odo in DS9 (Galen's funny too), holodeck episodes in general, Spaceballs, and Mulder when he's not too serious.

Also, Space Bars.

You are right about BSG, of course, but I'd say it is very different from original Star Trek.  The first series was pulpy and adventurous, the crew against the galaxy.  The core was smaller, leaner, and less time was spent on developing sixty characters to various degrees.  I'd use the word "bloat" to describe TNG and later series; fine show or not, they took a different tack than the original.  More politcal, bureaucratic, whiny, etc.  More character driven stories, more things about Troi or Worf or Data rather than OH SHIT ALIEN MENACE, TIME FOR SPACE GAMBLING!  Less is more, or something.

BSG, that's not really about the Cylons.  It's about people, and while it does have some great social puzzles, it's really about the extended cast of characters.  It's Dallas in Space.  I'm OK with that, because it's incredibly entertaining.  Just not for the same reasons I liked original Star Trek.

Slow... so fucking slow.  Next Gen has good elements but I could leave the room for 15 minutes and come back and pick-up the plot.

I like the action element.  It amazes me that the only truely fit and capable guy on the new Generation cast was its oldest member - Captain Pickard.

I am not a pure egg head - I like action.  Even to this day - I look at some of the moves performed by Shatner (not his stunt double) and I say damn he was in good shape and I am not sure I could do what he just did.

After 60's Trek - I give the nod to Babylon 5 - the first 3 seasons had an amazing plot.  Not a whole lot of "science fiction" per se - but good political intrigue.

Growing up I considered Kirk to be my hero of sorts - I was always intrigued by the depiction of his problem solving abilities under pressure.  In looking at the plots for 60's Trek while some were formulaic - I found many left me with "how the hell is the Enterprise going to get out of this one" - which I really enjoyed.

One thing I've always found stunning about the original Star Trek is the film quality, especially in regards to the colors, same goes for the analog-visceral sound effects.

I somewhat mildly enjoyed some of the later Star Trek series, but have always been disappointed that none of them really continued with much of the original spirit; the later series are more soap opera in space than the psychedelic morality play mind blowers of the original. Shows like Wild Wild Wild West, the Prisoner, and The Fugitive have more in common with the original Star Trek, in terms of those basic elements, than any of the later Trek series do IMO. I was hoping with Enterprise that they would make a new series that dropped any pretensions at the storyline continuity crap and started again from scratch, guess the marketeer wankers wouldn't like that.

I grew up watching the original Star Trek, when the original was nearly twenty years old.  It captured my imagination like nothing else before or since.  I have some difficulty watching it now, because the effects, dialog and acting are a bit dated.  Many of the ideas that went into it are not however, and it remains a classic for that reason.  I do think that TNG and BSG stack up well against hit however, not because they are suitable replacements, but because they stand up well in their own right.  Neither is like the other or TOS with respect to tone, intent, etc; but they are all examples of good SciFi.  If they get more criticism, I think it's because they are latter acts and are expected to meet higher expectations, not because they are poorer shows. 

The other Star Treks I can do without, although they were sometimes entertaining.  They lack the staying power.  I enjoy Stargate (both), but it lacks that quality as well. 

Is this the one where evil Kirk had a goatee?  Or was it only Spock where character+goatee=evil was true?

No, that one was "Mirror, Mirror" and the evil & good guys were from parallel dimensions and switched places.  (Later to be way, WAY overused in DS-9)  In TEW, both Kirks were in this dimension at the same time.

TNG can be slow sometimes, it depends a lot on the episodes. Slow pacing and weak plot resolution plagued TNG a lot, but overall I quite enjoy it. For me TOS is also a mixed bag, it has some great parts but many episodes are just dreck.

I like BSG but that also has pacing problems in the first season at least. And it certainly isn't speculative fiction. One thing that really turned me off is the use of mythology like the Arrow of Apollo or whatever...it just seems goofy that it is set in the future and everyone is discussing things we consider pure fiction even today, it just doesn't ring true to me.

---

StGabe: Clearly "Enterprise" was the best Trek as it was the newest. Craft has come a long way since the 60s. We have better effects, better techniques, better cameras. The art of acting and storytelling has only advanced. Enterprise must be the best - to think otherwise would be - illogical.

I had a problem getting through all of TNG and Voyager. I had problems getting into DS9 at the get go, but then it kept me glued to my screen in the latter half of the series. The original series is up and down. Enterprise got pretty good right when they canceled it -- could have been another DS9. Tripp, to my surprise, really started becoming a great character. General Shran/Jeffrey Combs was great as well....But then, he's great in everything he does.

I watched lots of TNG when I was real young; it was mostly decent. I never really got into DS9 for whatever reason, but it's mostly good from what I have seen, especially the late stuff with giant battles. Voyager is probably the series I followed the most, and I liked most of it. I thought the series got a lot better with the addition of Jeri Ryan. Yeah, perhaps too many episodes revolved around her character, but she was one of the best actors on the show anyway.

I never got into either TOS or Enterprise.

DS9 was hard to get into. It had a lot of early episodes where the side-plot overshadowed the main plot, the main plot *was* a side plot, etc. And it had Terry Ferrel, the worst actor/actress to ever be a main character, playing the most complex main character in Trek history. What they could have done with that character vs. what they did do is a laugh.

The overall plot and intrigue was done well, and it had a definite story progression making it different from most other Treks. It did seem to pick up steam in later years.

I agree with you and would posit that Brent Spiner actually did an amazing job in that same "role" in TNG.  He was given a lot of schlocky Pinocchio stuff and turned it into pretty compelling TV a lot of the time.

Well, that's because Brent Spiner is awesome.

I wish there was a way or spot to tell someone just where they should pick up DS9, but there isn't. Since it's kind of a soap opera, it's a good idea to just get acquainted with the characters and plot points right from the start. Even if you have to suffer through some of it. Either that or not watch it at all.

DS9 was a very episode-by-episode show to me.  Good episodes were ones about...

O'Brien
Quark
Odo (but not if it had to do with him being emo about his people)
Quark & Odo
Worf (sometimes)
Sisko (but not if it was about that Emissary stuff)
Garak or Dukat, or even better both  (Dukat is right up there with Khan for Trek villains.  For real.)

Whereas shitty episodes were usually about...

Kira
The Bajorans in general
The Prophets
Bashir (Except the James Bond episode with Garak, that owned.)
Sisko worrying about being the Emissary
Odo being a homesick weenie and not a hardass space cop

On the whole though, yeah, easily the best Trek show since the original.

I agree with everything except that. I thought Kira was cool. She was a terrorist turned politician. The Yassir Arafat of DS9. ;)

The idealogy war between Vedek Bariel and Vedek Winn was great. If somewhat shortlived.

The coolest Bajoran was in a Voyager episode though (Flesh and Blood). He was a charismatic religious leader of a crew full of Humans, Klingons and other Alpha Quadrant races. It turned out that they were all just holograms like the Doctor, created from technology the Voyager crew had given to the Hirogens (kind of a Predator like race) a few seasons back. The Hirogens ended up using the holograms to play out their headhunting games.....But it backfired on them. This Bajoran, being programmed with religious and rebellious ideals, started a Holy War and fought back in the name of the Prophets.

[edit]


Both true and funny as hell.   :-D

TOS was pretty good for its time. I still watch it for the characters. The special effects are pretty painful though. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have yet to be equaled. TOS is probably the only series where I liked every single character without exception. When I was a kid I had a hard time choosing between Uhura and Yeomen Rand for my dream Sci-Fi girl. (they both later lost out to Princess Leah of course. Gold Bikini for the win!)

TNG was my Star Trek. I grew up watching it in High School much like my mother did with TOS. Data was the main draw for me. He fascinated me even more than Spock did. Here was a character whose whole purpose was to question what is life and sentience? Worf also grew on me quite a bit as the series passed. Like alot of people I thought Troi was a wasted character. Oh, and Picard was cool, but he was no James T. Kirk!

I tried to watch DS9 and like it. But I didn't even make it past the second season. The number one reason was most of the characters didn't click with me and I didn't like Sisko. I loathed him actually. I think part of it is because in those early episodes it felt to me like the actor brought race politics into Star Trek. I don't know why because it was nothing overt, just a feeling I had about that actor, like he was the Spike Lee of Star Trek and it totally turned me off of the show.

Voyager was ok, ironically I got bored with it before 7 of 9 came on and never managed to make myself go back to it even though I was fully aware of her hotness. I liked the pilot (Tom Paris?) who was in trouble back in the Alpha quadrant. I also liked the Klingon woman who he married if memory serves.

Enterprise, um, the Vulcan chick was hot. That's all I remember about that show. That and being disappointed that a scifi show with Scott Bakula could actually suck that bad.

I liked Enterprise ok.  I was dumbstruck when I heard that Bakkula would be captain, although he did surpass my (very low) expectations.  I thought it was mediocre as a show, but I enjoyed watching it.  Right up until the Space Nazi Vampire Cliff Hanger.  That one thirty second shot ruined not only that episode (which I was enjoying) but the entire show for me.  I didn't return to watch, even though from what I heard they tried to ditch that plot as fast as possible and moved on to better stuff.  They may as well have posted a neon sign at the end of the show saying WE'RE JUMPING THE SHARK NOW, KTHX. 

It really, honestly, did get better after the Space Nazi Vampire.  If I remember, they fired all those writers and hired a new group.  That group did some good stuff in the last season. (Tripp & T'pal's baby was a sad storyline)  Shame they blew their entire audience with that one blunder.

I agree about early DS-9 seeming to make a big deal about, "Omg he's BLACK!." However, I might just be remembering the general promotion and media reactions at the time.  They did a similar thing with Janeway, but I found Voyager to be just too damn forgettable. The ship was always fucking fixed, and each 'harrowing' encounter only killed about 3 people. Eh?

DS-9 I can say got much better, so long as you avoided paying attention to the soap-opera 'who's relationship is doomed THIS week!' crap.  The relationships in that show felt more forced than Anakin & Padme's dialogue in EP2.

Or they did a time-warp to undo it. I remember some multi episode story arc where voyager was pretty much fucked, and then they undid it.

The original is the best, bar none.

Next Generation had it's moments, but was basically too boring and PC for me.

Voyager was pure shit with an utterly unlikeable cast and terrible writing.

Enterprise had potential, and wasn't bad at the very beginning.  I loved that opening sequence with the Wright brothers and the moon landing and stuff.  There were also some fun "the tech isn't quite up to speed yet" moments, like people having a "WTF!" reaction to being beamed for the first time, or an alien's speech trailing off into gibberish as the universal translator suddenly went on the fritz.  Eventually it just turned into Voyager 2.0 though, complete with Borg.  And Space Nazis.  Jesus.

Deep Space Nine was kinda just "Love Boat in space" for the first couple of seasons.  Riggs, you should check out some of the episodes after Avery Brooks shaved his head and became Hawk from Spencer for Hire in space, and Michael Dorn joined the cast.  Worf was a million times better character with a million times more to do on DS9 than on TNG.

Just a note: DS9 is basically two seperate shows.

The first show encompasses the first few seasons, and has all the flaws of TNG and Voyager.
The second show encompasses the last few seasons (basically the entire war with the Dominion, and included some fucking good acting by Sisko, whom I hated at first), and is utterly different from the rest of Trek.

Why did this occur? Because the people in charge of the Trek license abandoned DS9 to focus on Voyager, and the DS9 writers, crew, and directors were more or less left alone.

DS9 was "good" because the people who are solely responsible for the license let someone else handle it for half the show.

Also: It became good because of Dukat.

Enough can't be said about him.

Yup. And that someone else was Ronald D. Moore.

I still can't get into BSG though.  :-P

Totally!  He is one of my favorite character actors.  And we share the same birthday!

Its absolutely different from Trek.  Trek is generally positive, idealistic, and optimistic.  BSG is more realistic.  And being realistic, people in general kind of suck, and even heroes fuck up.
Its sort of why I will miss BSG switching nights.

It was PERFECT with the new Dr Who series.  Dr Who even when its sad is generally positive, funny, and uplifting.  BSG is grim and depressing.  You got both ends of the spectrum.

But I like a wide variety of stuff.

Of course I have limits which is why I avoid most fantasy and scifi novels.  Its all stuff like Stephen Colbert's parody, or Anne Rice styled world building ruined by the author(ess) being too horny and uninterested in playing in their own world.

Oh yeah.  I picked up a cool Trek book today.  Star Trek MANGA.  The art looks kinda cool but I haven't had a chance to read it.  Even if its a trainwreck it ought to be a lot of fun.  Itll tide me over till they start showing more Trek Remastered.  The giant space cornucopia episode is due sometime this Winter!

The Doomsday Machine.  The episode that leaves you wondering why, if the Enterprise is supposedly capable of planet-wide destruction and a megaton-scale blast down the throat was enough to kill the flying Horn of Plenty, they didn't just shoot a couple photon torpedoes down it's gullet and call it a day.

EDIT:

Going back to DS9, I loved that episode where Quark had to rescue his mother from the Dominion.  They need to trade a prisoner of theirs to get her back, but their prisoner comes down with a sudden case of death.  They clamp a "neural stimulator" or something to his forehead as they're trying to revive him, but all they get is a twitch of his arm.  So they're like "Wait, if one will make his arm move, then a whole lot of them might..."

Next thing you know, this guy's corpse is covered in stimulators, and they're making him clumsily walk down the corridor as a remote controlled zombie.  They totally pwn the big bad Dominion with a Weekend at Bernie's routine.  Fucking classic, and NOT the sort of shit you would ever see on TNG.

Regards Deep Space Nine, one of my vivid memories was an episode in which Quark and some random Delta Quadrant alien were sealed in some room of the Defiant, with a live torpedo stuck through the hull. The two hated each other, but in true Star Trek style they worked together to defuse the weapon, and came to grudging accord.

The same week in Babylon 5, Londo and G'Kar were stuck in an elevator, with a fire burning outside. Londo suggested they work together to escape. G'Kar, whose people had recently been conquered by Londo's, chuckled and said, "No."

Then G'Kar settled back, content, and waited for the fire to roast them alive.

The numbers were given in the episode - which I don't have handy.  It seemed that detonating a starship at point blank range inside the Doomsday machine would have produced far greater destructive power then what could have been achieved with their weapons.  That at least was my interpretation of why they gave the numbers behind the number of megatons starship destruction represented.

We are arguing about numbers here - not ideas.  When the shuttle was seized by the other starship captain - and detonated inside the mouth of the Doomsday machine - that compelled Kirk et al to suspect the strategy worked - they just needed more firepower.  In that context - starship self destruction was evoked.

I'm pretty sure, based on all the movies that self-destruction was supposed to be used by the captains as a weapon. That and as a, "Don't try to take over our ship - we'll self-destruct and take out is and you." type of thing.

That reminds me, how's that remastered TOS (with the digital effects) working out?

It was 97.835 megatons.  Google for the win.  For the record, the Russians had a 100 megaton bomb back in 1961, although they replaced some of the uranium with lead to keep it down to a "mere" 50 when they tested it.


It was a good concept and a very good episode.  I know talking about the firepower seems nitpicky, but they didn't need to tell me the exact yield of the explosion down to the third bloody decimal place if they didn't want me putting that number into context.

I mean Star Wars doesn't have a scrap of scientific validity to it's name, but that doesn't bother me because it doesn't pretend otherwise.  Like I'm not going to nitpick over the reason a lightsaber works, because they never give a reason.  It just works, so on with the show.

Did people have ready access to what the numbers meant back then?  Google wasn't exactly around at the time.

It was simply technospeak (which I do hate) to give Spock another chance to show his alien mindset.

I saw TOS in it's original run, and in reruns for the next 10 years or so.  It wore a bit with time, but the characters held up pretty well.

One advantage it had was the character of the times.  Vietnam, the Cold War, the Civil Rights Movement, there were a lot of issues out there, and TV dealt with a lot of them.  Just saw an old Gunsmoke episode, 'Jesse', that had some clear things to say by implication about race and justice.  Festus as a spokesman for racial equality.

Later incarnations all had their moments.  The TNG episode where they get caught in a time loop and keep rerunning the same scenes for the first half of the show, starting with a poker game and ending with the Enterprise blowing up as they go to commercial was pretty neat to me.  Quark outhinking a greedy Klingon in a test of honor was good.  And I had to laugh at the Voyager episode where a rogue member of a future Federation time police force tries to destroy the ship because they keep screwing up the time lines.  Enterprise was uneven, but had it's moments; I liked the undercurrent of Human-Vulcan conflict.

B5 gets a nod for the AIDS-themed episode where the good guys don't save the day, and the entire alien species dies, with the final scene being the barman telling a dead alien joke.  And G'Kar and Londo.  And Bester.  Heroic villians.

BSG is a wonderful re-imagining of the schlocky original.  Farscape and Firefly, and, yeah, the X-files beautiful job of keeping the monster in the shadows, so it was hard to be certain what was reality.  Hell, even throw Buffy in there.

Come a long way from Forbidden Planet.

Well there was no Google, but it wasn't exactly the Stone Age.  For someone writing a television script, the effort of cracking open a book or giving someone in the military a phone call for the purposes of fact-checking isn't unreasonable.

I mean, don't get me wrong.  A hundred megatons is a giant motherfucking explosion, six or seven thousand times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb and twice as powerful as the largest explosion humans have actually bothered to create.  But it's still something achievable with sixties technology, and you'd think an interstellar warship would be able to raise more hell than that.


Totally, and it was a good episode.  It just annoys me when writers toss in lines without thinking about the repercussions.  Like that episode with Nomad, where it shoots the Enterprise and Spock announces that the blast was equivalent to ninety of their photon torpedoes.  And yet they're not dead, and in every battle ever portrayed it takes a hell of a lot fewer than ninety torpedoes to blow a ship to hell.  Huh?

That's just a reflection of the refinement and and sohistication of the audiences.  People today have more knowledge at their disposal and expect Tv shows to 'get it right'.  It wasn't so much the case 'back then.'

Also, in the midst of the Cold-War a phone call to the military asking 'hey how big is a nuke' might get you a nice visit the same way calling an airline and asking 'hey, do you do cavity searches for explosives still?' might today.

Also, back then nobody had ever met a Trekkie.  Or a Furry.  It was a more innocent time.

There was this history of comics show on the History channel awhile back that pointed out an old 60's magazine coverstory with Spider-Man, the Hulk, and Che Guevara as "counter-culture icons of the year". Don't remember the magazine though, but it was a major publication.

Anyways, the segment went into how the Batman TV series ruined whatever cool rep these things had in the mainstream, even for the more relevant Marvel characters. I suppose Star Trek and the like suffered a similar sort of fate.

Star Trek is like roleplaying.  It's good nerdy fun, but you're reluctant to tell anyone you enjoy it for fear of being associated with the fat hunchback degenerates that have turned it into an entire lifestyle.

What, that someone would nit-pick a fictional TV series to death fourty years later on the internet?  Shame on them for not considering that.  FOR SHAME, SIR!   
:roll:

(hint: the show was not meant to be taken anywhere near that seriously.  seriously.)

A "guilty pleasure".  Hell, in a social/professional setting I would feel more comfortable saying I watched porn the day before rather than confess my viewing of a Trek episode ;)