• 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.

The General Star Trek Thread of Earl Grey Tea, Baseball, and KHHHAAAANNNN

whatsinaname said:
I want to start watching Star Trek. (I've just seen a few episodes while channel surfing and the new movie) What would GAF recommend I start with & what can I skip? My local library has The Original Series, Animated Series, TNG, DS9, Voyager.
There are some TOS episodes worth seeing, like "Mirror, Mirror," "The Trouble with Tribbles," "The City on the Edge of Forever," and "Space Seed."
I'd start with the TOS movies, then move on to TNG, watch the TNG movies up until First Contact, then top it off with DS9. Only watch Voyager if you really need more Trek.
 
TOS is not going to engage you like TNG-DS9 will. It was from a different era. I'd only watch it to see where it all began, see how TV was made 50 years ago and to see William Shatner's masterful performances.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
whatsinaname said:
I want to start watching Star Trek. (I've just seen a few episodes while channel surfing and the new movie) What would GAF recommend I start with & what can I skip? My local library has The Original Series, Animated Series, TNG, DS9, Voyager.

Start from the beginning unless you think you'd have a problem with the old 60's sfx. Otherwise start with either TNG or the Original series movies (that'd be 1-6). The original movies have more modern production values but still introduce you to the franchises original cast.
 

maharg

idspispopd
I think TOS holds up, actually, remarkably well. I even think it's probably the best Trek has ever been in episodic format. TNG is much slower, and Voyager much dumber, and Enterprise is useless until the last season where you'd need some TOS background to get anything out of it anyways.

Get the remastered/CG'd versions and watch them. I think it's a great place to start.
 

Tobor

Member
maharg said:
I think TOS holds up, actually, remarkably well. I even think it's probably the best Trek has ever been in episodic format. TNG is much slower, and Voyager much dumber, and Enterprise is useless until the last season where you'd need some TOS background to get anything out of it anyways.

Get the remastered/CG'd versions and watch them. I think it's a great place to start.
100% agreed.
 
Cool. Thanks. I don't think I have issues with 60s fx (have been watching old episodes of Dr.Who). I will start with TOS and maybe jump to TNG if I don't find it very interesting. Just put a hold on TOS, season 01.

Also, do I have to watch the movies? I was thinking of getting to those later. Is there some continuity involved?
 

maharg

idspispopd
If you like the series, you'll want to see the movies anyways. There's pretty much universal agreement that 2, 4, 6, and 8 are all well worth seeing. The others vary. 2-4 form a continuous arc as well, with some of that arc spilling over into 6.

(note: I actually disagree with the majority consensus about 8, but I recognize that I'm virtually alone in that)
 

Slightly Live

Dirty tag dodger
There's actually a dozen or so quality Voyager episodes, but they are certainly not worth going through the entire series to find.
 

Tobor

Member
DrForester said:
Those remastered TOS eps are exactly how Lucas should have handled Star Wars
Yeah, I'd pay a small fortune for the Original Trilogy presented that way. Maybe after Lucas dies.
 
Finally, the day of Patrick Stewart's beheading arrived.
ps-knight-1.jpg


But since it failed, he got knighted instead.
ps-knight-2.jpg
 
Is it ever established what Picard and the Enterprise did during the Dominion War? I don't recall any reference to it but I'd like to think they got their hands dirty.
 

Tobor

Member
Gary Whitta said:
Is it ever established what Picard and the Enterprise did during the Dominion War? I don't recall any reference to it but I'd like to think they got their hands dirty.
A quick throwaway line would have been nice, but there was nothing in the actual show.
 

maharg

idspispopd
Wasn't one (or more) of the movies during the Dominion War? And it was pretty clear the Enterprise was not involved?

Wouldn't really do to have your trophy flagship get blowed up in a skirmish.
 
Gary Whitta said:
Is it ever established what Picard and the Enterprise did during the Dominion War? I don't recall any reference to it but I'd like to think they got their hands dirty.

According to the books Picard helped reorganize Starfleet command after the Breen attacked earth, it participated in the battle to retake DS9 and went on a mission with Ro Laren to destroy an artificial wormhole the Dominion was trying to create.
 

Tobor

Member
maharg said:
Wasn't one (or more) of the movies during the Dominion War? And it was pretty clear the Enterprise was not involved?

Wouldn't really do to have your trophy flagship get blowed up in a skirmish.
There was never an issue having the Enteprise fight the Borg, though. They should have at least mentioned it in the show proper. Guest stars are expensive, but a quick bit of dialogue is free.
 
Tobor said:
There was never an issue having the Enteprise fight the Borg, though. They should have at least mentioned it in the show proper. Guest stars are expensive, but a quick bit of dialogue is free.

In war you don't hoarde your big guns because you're afraid to use them. A weapon is only good if you use it. Starfleet would have had Ent-E in the fight since it was a heavy cruiser designed primarily for combat.

But its never stated in the movie because it would 1) confuse new viewers and 2) was not relevent to the plot so why waste time on a throw away line?
 

Tobor

Member
Teh Hamburglar said:
In war you don't hoarde your big guns because you're afraid to use them. A weapon is only good if you use it. Starfleet would have had Ent-E in the fight since it was a heavy cruiser designed primarily for combat.

But its never stated in the movie because it would 1) confuse new viewers and 2) was not relevent to the plot so why waste time on a throw away line?
What I mean is a throwaway line in DS9.

Somebody: I heard the Enterprise was involved in the battle for gobbledygook 7.

Worf: Something blah blah honor!
 

maharg

idspispopd
Tobor said:
There was never an issue having the Enteprise fight the Borg, though. They should have at least mentioned it in the show proper. Guest stars are expensive, but a quick bit of dialogue is free.

Starfleet mostly only seems to send ships to whatever's near them. The Enterprise usually seems either close to earth (as in, "you're the closest ship to earth and we for some inexplicable reason have no defenses") or way out on the fringe (being all explorey). Also, the Federation never had a proper war with the borg. Just occasional invasions by single cubes.

Trying to ascribe logic and planning to military strategy in Star Trek is like listening to a book on tape narrated by a mute.
 
maharg said:
Starfleet mostly only seems to send ships to whatever's near them. The Enterprise usually seems either close to earth (as in, "you're the closest ship to earth and we for some inexplicable reason have no defenses") or way out on the fringe (being all explorey).

Trying to ascribe logic and planning to military strategy in Star Trek is like listening to a book on tape narrated by a mute.

Starfleet isn't a military organization so in peace time they likely have a number of ships on detached duty or scientific/diplomatic missions. Its not until ds9 war we see starfleet mobilize for war. We see fighter craft, cruisers, command ships, etc. As far as Enterprise being the "only ship in range" well thats just because if someone was always closer we wouldn't have a show :p
 

Tobor

Member
maharg said:
Starfleet mostly only seems to send ships to whatever's near them. The Enterprise usually seems either close to earth (as in, "you're the closest ship to earth and we for some inexplicable reason have no defenses") or way out on the fringe (being all explorey).

Trying to ascribe logic and planning to military strategy in Star Trek is like listening to a book on tape narrated by a mute.
I'm looking at it from a film - tv perspective, not literal Starfleet tactics. I remember plenty of moments when they were discussing ship movements and strategy and stuff, it would have been nice fan service to give a little shout out, that's all.

It's possible they weren't allowed to mention it for some reason.
 

maharg

idspispopd
I doubt they weren't allowed. No doubt they couldn't claim its destruction, but it wouldn't have been too difficult to reference it in a way that wouldn't interfere with the films. Probably just never got around to it.

And while the Enterprise-E was a military ship, I still think its status as a weird trophy flagship (with no flag) would keep it largely out of action likely to result in its destruction unless absolutely needed (like the Ent-D at Wolf-359). I imagine they produced a few Sovereign class ships as the war ramped up.
 
Teh Hamburglar said:
In war you don't hoarde your big guns because you're afraid to use them. A weapon is only good if you use it. Starfleet would have had Ent-E in the fight since it was a heavy cruiser designed primarily for combat.

But its never stated in the movie because it would 1) confuse new viewers and 2) was not relevent to the plot so why waste time on a throw away line?
They actually did have a throwaway line in Nemesis about the Dominion War, talking about how Remans were used as shock troops.
 
Gary Whitta said:
They actually did have a throwaway line in Nemesis about the Dominion War, talking about how Remans were used as shock troops.

Right, but they never say anything about the Ent-E's activities beyond putting out "brush fires".
 
maharg said:
I doubt they weren't allowed. No doubt they couldn't claim its destruction, but it wouldn't have been too difficult to reference it in a way that wouldn't interfere with the films. Probably just never got around to it.

And while the Enterprise-E was a military ship, I still think its status as a weird trophy flagship (with no flag) would keep it largely out of action likely to result in its destruction unless absolutely needed (like the Ent-D at Wolf-359). I imagine they produced a few Sovereign class ships as the war ramped up.


Ent-D wasn't at Wolf 359 because they blew up their deflector!
 

benjipwns

Banned
maharg said:
Wasn't one (or more) of the movies during the Dominion War? And it was pretty clear the Enterprise was not involved?
Insurrection is. They mention that the Son'a create the ketracel white for the Dominion, and Picard says something about how there's a war on and he has to do some stupid diplomatic thing where he wears those beads on his head. Also laments the existence of that war getting in the way of exploring.
It's possible they weren't allowed to mention it for some reason.
It may have been that they didn't want to require knowledge of what was going on in DS9 in order to watch the movie. Or they did not want to create a plot that contradicts anything the DS9 writers did or vice versa.

There's also the fact that Rick Berman wrote it and he hated the Dominion War as being too depressing, too violent and too long.
 

XiaNaphryz

LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
maharg said:
And while the Enterprise-E was a military ship, I still think its status as a weird trophy flagship (with no flag) would keep it largely out of action likely to result in its destruction unless absolutely needed (like the Ent-D at Wolf-359). I imagine they produced a few Sovereign class ships as the war ramped up.
Yeah, I always found that weird in Star Trek. Flagships imply there's an admiral on board, so the closest we ever see that happening is in the first TOS movie with Admiral Kirk. The later ones don't really count since the Ent is relegated to a training ship by then, and by the time the Ent-A came around Kirk lost his rank anyway...besides, by that point the Excelsior would've been considered flag.

They should've just had Riker be captain with Picard as admiral - Picard always stayed on the bridge anyway, focused more on strategy and diplomacy, was always in contact with Starfleet Command, etc. while Riker did most of the legwork on away missions or elsewhere on the ship. Their dynamic on the show as it was wouldn't have had to change much anyway as they pretty much acted as those roles all this time, and the Ent-D would've been a proper flagship.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
maharg said:
I doubt they weren't allowed. No doubt they couldn't claim its destruction, but it wouldn't have been too difficult to reference it in a way that wouldn't interfere with the films. Probably just never got around to it.

And while the Enterprise-E was a military ship, I still think its status as a weird trophy flagship (with no flag) would keep it largely out of action likely to result in its destruction unless absolutely needed (like the Ent-D at Wolf-359). I imagine they produced a few Sovereign class ships as the war ramped up.


Worth noting that the Enterprise E was never actually designated as the Flagship on screen. It's just assumed it wasl.
 
DrForester said:
Worth noting that the Enterprise E was never actually designated as the Flagship on screen. It's just assumed it wasl.

And there is a lag time between Ent D being blown up and Ent E being commissioned so I doubt they went 2-3 years without a flagship. Unless they pull the rug out of some poor Captain/Admiral on some other ship.
 

DSN2K

Member
maharg said:
Also, the Federation never had a proper war with the borg. Just occasional invasions by single cubes.

always found it amusing that if borg had sent maybe 2 or 3 cubes the Federation would be fucked and would have zero chance at all. :lol
 
Okay, question: what's the point of transporter rooms? If you can beam from anywhere to anywhere, why do you need a transporter pad?
 

benjipwns

Banned
I chalk all that stuff up to what must be the giant Federation bureaucratic manual of procedures, protocols and regulations.
 

JdFoX187

Banned
Gary Whitta said:
Okay, question: what's the point of transporter rooms? If you can beam from anywhere to anywhere, why do you need a transporter pad?
I always thought it was something like they were still transported to the room, but just relayed instantaneously to wherever they were going. Not sure though.
 
JdFoX187 said:
I always thought it was something like they were still transported to the room, but just relayed instantaneously to wherever they were going. Not sure though.
How does something like that work when you're beaming down from a shipboard transporter pad to a planet surface, or any location without a pad?
 

JdFoX187

Banned
Gary Whitta said:
How does something like that work when you're beaming down from a shipboard transporter pad to a planet surface, or any location without a pad?
Again, not really sure. I mainly chalk it up to one of those sci-fi "whatever" moments ala trying to figure out how the holodeck actually works. But I think the pad is just the safest way to organize all the molecules in the transporter stream before moving to the destination.
 
I can't believe I'm actually having this conversation on the internet at home at 9:30 on a Friday night. Fuck, I need to get a life.
 

Tobor

Member
Gary Whitta said:
Okay, question: what's the point of transporter rooms? If you can beam from anywhere to anywhere, why do you need a transporter pad?
Wikipedia to the rescue:

In the original series, beaming to and from the transporter room was a necessity. This is explained in the TOS episode, "The Day of the Dove". Spock and Scotty had said that doing a site-to-site transport, as they are referred to on the show, on board the ship could be risky. They could "beam into a deck" or an inanimate object and get stuck there. However, there are apparently safeguards in place to prevent people from being beamed into hostile environments such as under water and into lava pits, although it is possible to override this safety feature; for example, in the TOS episode "And the Children Shall Lead", two security guards are beamed into open space. In the following series, however, the actual transporter room seems to become mostly obsolete, the actual equipment notwithstanding. Characters are shown activating the transporter from ordinary consoles and beaming from place to place without apparent trouble. The main operator can likewise send those in transport anywhere with ease. A possible explanation for this is put forward in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Technical Manual, where such site-to-site transports would probably use twice as much energy as would be required for transport to or from the transporter room itself, since the subject would have to be beamed to the transporter, stored, then shunted to their destination. In addition, the six circles on the platform are generally used as targets for the subjects to stand on, but they do not appear to represent any limitation of the hardware to six or fewer people. People have been transported carrying others, in a coffin style transport, and once animals, hay, and other inanimate objects.

And lives are overrated. :lol
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
Gary Whitta said:
How does something like that work when you're beaming down from a shipboard transporter pad to a planet surface, or any location without a pad?

All will be answered when this is released later this year.


51Xwo64dC0L._SS500_.jpg
 

maharg

idspispopd
Teh Hamburglar said:
And there is a lag time between Ent D being blown up and Ent E being commissioned so I doubt they went 2-3 years without a flagship. Unless they pull the rug out of some poor Captain/Admiral on some other ship.

Since it seems to be a ceremonial 'honor' thing more than anything relevant to command structure, I don't see why they couldn't have gone 2-3 years without it. Was there actually a lag, though? They never say so in the movies, but it's usually in the unofficial backstory that the ships that take on the enterprise name are originally intended to carry a different name. So it could have been commissioned pretty quickly, presumably.

There was a pretty long lag between C and D, though, for sure.

And yeah, TMP and Wrath of Khan are really the only times an Enterprise is a flagship in the classical sense. But the idea of the Enterprise being a flagship at all was only ever brought up in TNG, I think, so it would only apply unquestionably to Ent-D and maybe to Ent-E.
 

benjipwns

Banned
It was never said, but:
Ronald D. Moore said:
My working assumption was that the Enterprise-E had her keel laid sometime during TNG's last season and was probably going to be given another name. When the Enterprise-D was destroyed, that Sovereign-class ship was nearing completion and was then christened Enterprise.
The Enterprise-A was similar, I thought they did explicitly say that though.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
benjipwns said:
It was never said, but:

The Enterprise-A was similar, I thought they did explicitly say that though.


So was the Defiant 2 in DS9. But in that case it was a ship already in service that was renamed Defiant.
 
Top Bottom