• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Star Trek: The Great Netflix Watch

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jin34

Member
Teh Hamburglar said:
The major reason we fight is because we live in a world of infinite wants and finite resources. The haves and have-nots. I can see that eliminating the problem of scarcity would lead to a utopian society.

That is certainly the biggest reason and would go a long way but it won't make us anywhere near to what Star Trek is. There is still the issue of land and whoever invents such a thing as a replicator won't just give it freely.
 
Jin34 said:
That is certainly the biggest reason and would go a long way but it won't make us anywhere near to what Star Trek is. There is still the issue of land and whoever invents such a thing as a replicator won't just give it freely.
The issue of land wouldn't matter if we're colonizing space. And even if the person(s) who invented the replicator wouldn't give it out initially, it would only be a matter of time before the knowledge became widely known. No invention is kept secret forever.
 

ckohler

Member
Dax01 said:
The invention of something like the replicator would change everything.
According to Star Trek canon, it was actually first contact following a dibilitating 3rd World War that made us change.
 

bengraven

Member
Dax01 said:
I'm not following. :/

We had a conversation a couple years ago and you said something to the effect of "I'm gaining a respect for the older series" though you said it was inferior to the newer works.

I had forgotten about that convo until you mentioned The Menagerie.
 
bengraven said:
We had a conversation a couple years ago and you said something to the effect of "I'm gaining a respect for the older series" though you said it was inferior to the newer works.

I had forgotten about that convo until you mentioned The Menagerie.
I don't remember that at all. It's true that I think DS9 and TNG are better, and it's an opinion that's only being solidified with this recent viewing. I respect it, but that doesn't mean I like it more.

The things about "The Menagerie" that really prevented me from enjoying as best as I can were some cheesy lines, some aspects of 60s film style, and inconsistency within the own episode (Spock smiling, hyperdrive).

Still enjoyed it regardless.
 

Jin34

Member
The Big Rig said:
I'm kinda glad Tasha Yar died. She was a really awkward character.

Should I spoiler that?

Well I didn't know she died but I knew she wasn't in the crew for most of the show's run so it really doesn't matter much how she exited the show.
BAN BIG RIG! I VOTE THAT WE SHOULD PRETEND THAT ONLY TOS EXISTS UNTIL WE GET TO TNG! ANY MENTION OF PICARD = BAN!!!
 
Willy105 said:
How did you get to watch the second part?
DVD>Netflix

Anyway. Just finished "Balance of Terror." Awesome episode. Of course there were some parts that confused me...like the Romulans' weapon traveling at warp speed, Spock being able to get a clear view of their bridge, and Uhura walking over to the other side of the ship when it got hit (lawl).
 
Jin34 said:
Well I didn't know she died but I knew she wasn't in the crew for most of the show's run so it really doesn't matter much how she exited the show.
BAN BIG RIG! I VOTE THAT WE SHOULD PRETEND THAT ONLY TOS EXISTS UNTIL WE GET TO TNG! ANY MENTION OF PICARD = BAN!!!
I think it would be weirder if they just dropped her and no one ever spoke of her again.
 

An-Det

Member
The Big Rig said:
I think it would be weirder if they just dropped her and no one ever spoke of her again.

Definitely. I think they did well with including the occasional reference to her (such as her holo-picture during Data's trial in Measure of a Man) and the occasional cameo or pseudo-cameo (Sela).
 

Zzoram

Member
Dares said:
So is there any hint at all that there will be a new Trek TV series soon?

JJ Abrahms has a deal in place where no Trek TV show is allowed to be made as long as he's involved with Trek movies. This is to prevent a bad TV show from hurting his movies.
 
Zzoram said:
JJ Abrahms has a deal in place where no Trek TV show is allowed to be made as long as he's involved with Trek movies. This is to prevent a bad TV show from hurting his movies.

Tomorrow's headline: "JJ Abrams signs lifetime deal to be involved in Trek movies; will become android"
 

Zzoram

Member
DrForester said:
Never heard about that deal. I thought it was just Paramount worried about hurting the new brand.

Apparently it was in his contract or something. JJ would have to approve of any new TV show, which he won't.
 

Cheerilee

Member
Technosteve said:
Watching first season of TNG why is wesley being made out to be some kind of god.
Because, even though Star Trek fans basically invented and mocked the hated "Mary Sue" concept, Eugene Wesley Roddenberry thought it would be a good idea to write a perfect, idealized version of himself at a younger age into the show.
 

Zzoram

Member
Dares said:
Le sigh. I almost would rather have a TV series, I think.

Star Trek works best as a TV series, because then they can explore conflicts that are morally ambiguous.

In movies, you can't do sci-fi without a villain to fight, but Star Trek villains were always best when built up slowly over many years.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
JJ should just make a new TV series instead of more movies... Star Trek with the kind of writing Lost had would be ridiculously awesome.


as long as they dont bring in Q as a villain in one of the movies it'll probably be fine either way, right?
 

Tobor

Member
I'd love a new tv show, as long as it's the TOS crew. There are so many more stories to tell with those characters.
 

WillyFive

Member
Dares said:
Le sigh. I almost would rather have a TV series, I think.

I agree. J.J. Abrams makes great movies, but he can also make great shows that last a lot longer.

I would have loved that the new Star Trek was a TV show, it was painful to see the movie end, and to see that TOS was nothing like it.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
ckohler said:
According to Star Trek canon, it was actually first contact following a dibilitating 3rd World War that made us change.


its a bit far fetched isn't it? I can see discovering alien intelligence would unite the world, but then we'd all just start hating the aliens and it'd end in war. I don't buy the earth at the heart of a federation, just not sustainable with our tendencies.
 

Fox Mulder

Member
Zzoram said:
JJ Abrahms has a deal in place where no Trek TV show is allowed to be made as long as he's involved with Trek movies. This is to prevent a bad TV show from hurting his movies.

What a waste of the franchise. It'll be like 4 years since his Star Trek movie if the sequel gets bumped to summer 2013.
 
Honestly, after Enterprise...I don't want to see another Trek TV series for at LEAST another 5-10 years.

The brand really has to be rebuilt. The 09 Trek film helped a TON, but they really have to keep at it.
 

ocadman

Member
Just saw "A Matter of Honor" where Riker joins the Klingon ship. Probably one of my favorites and Riker is such a boss.
 
Started watching season 2 of TNG. If anyone is planning on seeing The Child, watch the guy who maintains the plasma plague. He's possibly the worst actor I've ever seen in Star Trek.
 

Jin34

Member
The Big Rig said:
I think it would be weirder if they just dropped her and no one ever spoke of her again.

I was making fun of the Game of Thrones thread where you have to pretend the books don't exist. My point about the spoiler was that it didn't bother me because I already knew she wasn't on during most of the show, hell when I saw the pilot I thought she was a character that was only there for that episode.
 

Jin34

Member
ruby_onix said:
Because, even though Star Trek fans basically invented and mocked the hated "Mary Sue" concept, Eugene Wesley Roddenberry thought it would be a good idea to write a perfect, idealized version of himself at a younger age into the show.

So it was Gene including himself into the show? Everything related to that character is goddamned absurd. Hey we are making first contact with a planet full of hedonists, lets send a teenager! We are on a critical mission or in danger, lets have Wes on the bridge!
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
Well, for those following the schedule, this week we've got a really good lineup. And for those of you not following, hope you're having fun all the same.

Week Ending July 16
"Balance Of Terror"
"The Squire Of Gothos"
"The Arena"
"Space Seed"

Balance of Terror is widely regarded as one of the shows finest episodes, and features the first Trek appearance of Mark Lenard, who would play several roles in later episodes and movies, most notably Sarek, the father of Spock.

The Squire of Gothos is a very fun episode. If you saw the Futurama episode with all the Star Trek actors, you'll see where a bit plot inspiration for the episode comes from.

The Arena is most famous for one of Treks most famous location shots at the Vasquez Rocks in California. Used in many movies (sometimes to parody Star Trek), and was HQ for the early Power Rangers.

250px-Vasquez_Rocks_April_2005.jpg


Space Seed is another famous Trek episode, as it sets up one of Trek's greatest villains, Khan Noonien Singh. While not on Netflix streaming, I would highly encourage a rental of the film "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" once you're finished with TOS (don't watch the movies before you finish the series, either fully, or what's on the schedule)
 

Escape Goat

Member
I was surprised at how provocative Starfleet was in TOS. As seen in "The Enterprise Incident", Starfleet intentionally sends Kirk into the Neutral Zone to steal a cloaking device from the Romulans.
 
V

Vilix

Unconfirmed Member
Anyone having problems viewing Star Trek Ep 13: The Menagerie Pt 2? No picture. Only sound. Having no other problems streaming any other programs or movies on Netflix.
 
michaeltraps said:
So I'm watching Star Trek for the first time, starting with Voyager (no real reason, just picked one). I really like it, though I'm not understanding why Voyager seems to get so much hate. Any reasons in particular?

It was just poorly done. The original premise didn't work within the universes technical concepts (given stated speeds and distances, it would have taken closer to 3 years rather than 70) and they didn't stick to the "stranded without supplies" philosophy. It would have been fairly easy to stick to the philosophy as well. Go with the 3 year distance instead of the 70 year since that gives you a reasonable time frame for a TV series and can be extended by having delays. Actually keep track of where everything large, such as the warp cores getting fucked up, shuttles being lost and other things, and having alien replacements through barter (and the moral issues that come from bartering military technology). They just got lazy and had random episodes that had nothing to do with the philosophy of the show.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
NovemberMike said:
It was just poorly done. The original premise didn't work within the universes technical concepts (given stated speeds and distances, it would have taken closer to 3 years rather than 70) and they didn't stick to the "stranded without supplies" philosophy. It would have been fairly easy to stick to the philosophy as well. Go with the 3 year distance instead of the 70 year since that gives you a reasonable time frame for a TV series and can be extended by having delays. Actually keep track of where everything large, such as the warp cores getting fucked up, shuttles being lost and other things, and having alien replacements through barter (and the moral issues that come from bartering military technology). They just got lazy and had random episodes that had nothing to do with the philosophy of the show.


Where do you get the 3 years from? TOS was a bit inconsistent on speeds and distances, but TNG and onwards were pretty consistent and 70 years was about right.
 

Walshicus

Member
NovemberMike said:
It was just poorly done. The original premise didn't work within the universes technical concepts (given stated speeds and distances, it would have taken closer to 3 years rather than 70) and they didn't stick to the "stranded without supplies" philosophy. It would have been fairly easy to stick to the philosophy as well. Go with the 3 year distance instead of the 70 year since that gives you a reasonable time frame for a TV series and can be extended by having delays. Actually keep track of where everything large, such as the warp cores getting fucked up, shuttles being lost and other things, and having alien replacements through barter (and the moral issues that come from bartering military technology). They just got lazy and had random episodes that had nothing to do with the philosophy of the show.
I think someone mentioned the "it wouldn't take 70 years" thing before on the Star Trek Online forums. Generally it was accepted that the ship wouldn't be travelling at maximum warp the whole time, but would be cruising at a much lower speed.
 
Sir Fragula said:
I think someone mentioned the "it wouldn't take 70 years" thing before on the Star Trek Online forums. Generally it was accepted that the ship wouldn't be travelling at maximum warp the whole time, but would be cruising at a much lower speed.

The 70 year thing was based on a constant speed of Warp 9.6, which would have to equal ~933*c. They gave an equation for determining Warp speed in the TNG time frame and Warp 9 ~ 1500*c. The calculation changes after warp 9, but it still doesn't add up.

It's a small point, but it's still something that should be kept consistent in a show that has a fanbase like this.
 

Ridli

Member
So I finished week one's recommended episodes, also watching "The Man Trap." Honestly I wish I just started with "The Menagerie" and went straight into "Balance of Terror."

In particular, watching Man Trap right after the Cage was a bad idea. Two back-to-back episodes of wish fulfillment mind illusions was not a good combination and I was starting to lose interest very fast. Add "Where No Man Has Gone Before's" deification process of a throwaway character and I was starting to regret watching. I read the plot summary to "Charlie X" but didn't watch because I was wondering if there was an early Trek episode that didn't involve fantastic god-like powers and the eventual morality question that would follow.

"The Enemy Within" just kind of annoyed me. To be honest, I was feeling a little put-off by the previous episodes and I don't think I gave it a fair shake. The idea that Sulu and crew were stuck on the planet's surface due to the transporter issue didn't hold with me. Why the hell don't they just fly a shuttle down to extract them instead? Add to that *another* doppleganger, and I was feeling less than charitable.

But!

"The Menagerie" felt much closer to the Star Trek I'm familiar with. Secret orders and Spock's gambit to help his former captain was great. I know they were just re-using footage, but I was much happier with the general pacing of the story this time around.

Then "Balance of Terror" comes along and I'm waist deep in Star Trek mythos again. Romulan Bird of Prey that's traipsing past the neutral zone? Now we're talking! I'm clearly quite comfortable with the militaristic side of Starfleet, so an entire episode that's basically a submarine hunt is right up my alley. Plus, Kirk gets to show off his tactical prowess and match wits with an equally skilled captain.

I was a little confused about the Romulan/Vulcan reveal. But I suppose I'm not familiar with a time where it wasn't common knowledge that Romulans and Vulcans are related.

"Squire of Gothos" was enjoyable, but I know that I'm watching the episode through Q-colored lenses. It's hard not to draw comparisons between the two characters. I had no idea going in that this was the inspiration for the Futurama episode, so that was a nice little laugh at the end.

After a rocky start, I'm looking forward to the next batch of episodes.
 
Season 2 of TNG is really getting good. I guess this is when the show really came into it's own and they started building the story. I'm eagerly awaiting the Borg.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
Ridli said:
"Squire of Gothos" was enjoyable, but I know that I'm watching the episode through Q-colored lenses. It's hard not to draw comparisons between the two characters. I had no idea going in that this was the inspiration for the Futurama episode, so that was a nice little laugh at the end.

There's actually a TNG book called "Q-Squared" that goes with the idea that Trelane was an adolescent Q.
 
Balance of Terror - So Good.

The Star Trek movies need to look to this for how to do ship battles. Wrath of Khan got it right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom