Support NeoGAF

[Zzoram]

Ugh. Didn't you get enough technobabble to explain away dramatic conveniences in Voyager?

Making transporters require a beacon is something that could easily be written into the future of the franchise and it would make more sense.

Also, transporters requiring a beacon adds lots of potential for drama. You have to board a ship or land on the surface to rescue the person. A comm badge can be removed to lose the homing signal. How is it that they can know who they are locking onto and beam them up when they don't have any beacons on them and are out of sight? Even a throwaway line about all Starfleet crew having a beacon embedded in their skin would be nice. Then you can have an episode where someone digs it out and connects it to a communicator or something to boost the signal.

Having inconsistent transporter use actually removes drama because you never know when they'll decide it's now possible to transport someone/something. Having set rules forces creative stories to deal with situations where a transporter beacon isn't available and allows for cool scenes like the S3 Enterprise episode with the pirates.

 

[soundscream]

I hope if they ever do another Trek series that they include security teams like the MACOs. It makes ground combat way more entertaining to see modern hand-to-hand combat techniques and military strategy used. I also like how the MACO guns shot bursts instead of beams. The Star Trek 2009 movie went with the bursts as well and I think it looks better for fast paced combat.

Also, remember that sniper rifle in the throwaway S7 episode of DS9? It's the best weapon ever and Starfleet scrapped it, lol. It teleports bullets into targets and works through walls. I really hate it when super awesome technology is introduced in 1 episode them immediately forgotten. That rifle was imba though, I can't imagine Starfleet ever losing a fight if their officers were armed with this thing.

I dont think MACO's would work unless the story was still based in early Trek. We are supposed to be moving away from our more violent past. You will still have charter's like Sisko and Worf kicking ass, but I dont think the federation should have commando units.

 

[Zzoram]

I dont think MACO's would work unless the story was still based in early Trek. We are supposed to be moving away from our more violent past. You will still have charter's like Sisko and Worf kicking ass, but I dont think the federation should have commando units.

Why not? The Federation has been in tons of wars since it's founding. You need soldiers to fight wars. They can't give their security officers proper hand-to-hand and tactical training?

 

[maharg]

Starfleet shouldn't have section 31 either.

[nice edit ]

 

[Zzoram]

Starfleet shouldn't have section 31 either.

[nice edit ]

I removed it because it's not something that would be out in the open and on every ship. Competent security should be.

 

[soundscream]

Why not? The Federation has been in tons of wars since it's founding. You need soldiers to fight wars. They can't give their security officers proper hand-to-hand and tactical training?

They can but as a defensive force. The MACO's were an offensive force. The federation isnt about hostilely taking over territory.

 

[maharg]

That said, Kirk-era Abramsverse Starfleet is clearly a little more militaristic and paranoid than Geneverse's.

 

[Zzoram]

That said, Kirk-era Abramsverse Starfleet is clearly a little more militaristic and paranoid than Geneverse's.

Yep. The Nero Romulan attack caused Starfleet to militarize. MACOs in a new Trek series would fit in the new universe just fine. The show could even focus on one of those teams, the science officer, doctor, and captain that occasionally go with them. It would make more sense for the away team to be soldiers, scientists and doctors but not the captain. The captain should only go on diplomatic missions and should be like Picard in the TNG S4 episode "First Contact".

 

[soundscream]

Yep. The Nero Romulan attack caused Starfleet to militarize. MACOs in a new Trek series would fit in the new universe just fine. The show could even focus on one of those teams and perhaps the science officer and doctor that occasionally go with them. It would make more sense for the away team to be soldiers, scientists and doctors but not the captain.

It only makes sense in the Enterprise timeline because where humanity was at the point of the attack. We only had 1.5 warp ships and we had yet to take our place at the galactic table. While new Trek is more action packed its not so far gone that they should have space navy seals looking to head shot any aggressive species they encounter.

 

[Zzoram]

It only makes sense in the Enterprise timeline because where humanity was at the point of the attack. We only had 1.5 warp ships and we had yet to take our place at the galactic table. While new Trek is more action packed its not so far gone that they should have space navy seals looking to head shot any aggressive species they encounter.

Maybe not every ship should have that but a warship like The Defiant should have MACOs. MACOs would be a good idea to fight Jem'Hadar or even Klingons.

 

[soundscream]

Maybe not every ship should have that but a warship like The Defiant should have MACOs. MACOs would be a good idea to fight Jem'Hadar or even Klingons.

It wouldn't be Trek if there was a commando force rolling around in the universe, the Federation is above that.

Spoiler

I feel dirty now, you made me write the words it wouldn't be Trek

 

[maharg]

Yep. The Nero Romulan attack caused Starfleet to militarize. MACOs in a new Trek series would fit in the new universe just fine. The show could even focus on one of those teams, the science officer, doctor, and captain that occasionally go with them. It would make more sense for the away team to be soldiers, scientists and doctors but not the captain. The captain should only go on diplomatic missions and should be like Picard in the TNG S4 episode "First Contact".

To be clear, I don't think that's a good thing and I'd rather they roll it back than roll it even farther forward. I hope Section 31 never comes up, though. What an abomination of an idea, no matter how good the standalone stories that depend on it might have been. Just wrecks the entire premise of Trek.

 

[funkystudent]

The mirror universe episode of Enterprise is really dumb and amazing.

Also the recent TNG talk everywhere has me bummed they never did a Mirror episode of TNG. I bet that would have been great. Lore could have been part of the crew instead of Data, Picard could have grown a beard and evil Wesley could have been amazing!


Thoughts?

 

[maharg]

Haha evil Wesley. That would have been fantastic.

 

[Zzoram]

To be clear, I don't think that's a good thing and I'd rather they roll it back than roll it even farther forward. I hope Section 31 never comes up, though. What an abomination of an idea, no matter how good the standalone stories that depend on it might have been. Just wrecks the entire premise of Trek.

It's just a realistic interpretation of Trek. Even if humans want to be all nice and moral, aliens may not. If aliens attack or infiltrate the Federation, there needs to be a realistic way to protect itself. An espionage agency and soldiers are required no matter how utopian Trek wants to be.

 

[soundscream]

The mirror universe episode of Enterprise is really dumb and amazing.

Also the recent TNG talk everywhere has me bummed they never did a Mirror episode of TNG. I bet that would have been great. Lore could have been part of the crew instead of Data, Picard could have grown a beard and evil Wesley could have been amazing!


Thoughts?

DS9 Worf instead of TNG IGETMYASSKICKEDALLTHEDAMNTIMEWORF.........I'm down.

 

[Zzoram]

The mirror universe episode of Enterprise is really dumb and amazing.

Also the recent TNG talk everywhere has me bummed they never did a Mirror episode of TNG. I bet that would have been great. Lore could have been part of the crew instead of Data, Picard could have grown a beard and evil Wesley could have been amazing!


Thoughts?

Mirror Universe TNG would've been great. Lore replacing Data would be comic gold. The DS9 episodes were mostly forgettable but the Enterprise 2-part Mirror Universe episode that ties into a TOS episode was amazingly fun.

Apparently Season 5 of Enterprise would've had the start of the Romulan war and a follow up MU episode.

I wouldn't mind a true Trek reboot that they can just say occurs in an alternate universe. The idea of alternate universes has been proven true by the existence of the MU and now Abramsverse.

 

[maharg]

It's just a realistic interpretation of Trek. Even if humans want to be all nice and moral, aliens may not. If aliens attack or infiltrate the Federation, there needs to be a realistic way to protect itself. An espionage agency and soldiers are required no matter how utopian Trek wants to be.

This is BS. I'm sorry, it just really is. It turns Kirk and Picard into idiots duped into being propaganda, and it makes fools of anyone who believed in the original vision. It's fiction, it doesn't have to be realistic. It can be aspirational. And Trek is supposed to be about what humanity can achieve at its best, not what it can achieve while evil people make them feel happy and safe.

And Starfleet had an intelligence agency before Section 31 came along. There was just no indication that it had a shadow organization pulling all the strings.

 

[Zzoram]

This is BS. I'm sorry, it just really is. It turns Kirk and Picard into idiots duped into being propaganda, and it makes fools of anyone who believed in the original vision. It's fiction, it doesn't have to be realistic. It can be aspirational. And Trek is supposed to be about what humanity can achieve at its best, not what it can achieve while evil people make them feel happy and safe.

And Starfleet had an intelligence agency before Section 31 came along. There was just no indication that it had a shadow organization pulling all the strings.

Section 31 is something we can do without, perhaps, but then the real intelligence agency would still face morally questionable actions. Real soldiers isn't something the Federation could do without. When a legitimate war is started, having real soldiers instead of mall cops to fight isn't evil. Wars aren't won with pure defense.

Besides, moral inflexibility would only get humanity exterminated. Imagine if the Cardassians realized that Starfleet never attacks a facility with civilians or children in it. They would just pack children into every military base and ship and laugh their way to victory. It doesn't take a genius to enact this plan, the Taliban and terrorists already do it even today.

Star Trek can still be aspirational while acknowledging the realities of war.

 

[maharg]

It's fiction, dude. They have the choice to tell the stories that fit within the established worldview.

And it's not aspirational at all to turn the Federation into the United States.

 

[soundscream]

Section 31 is something we can do without, perhaps, but then the real intelligence agency would still face morally questionable actions. Real soldiers isn't something the Federation could do without. When a legitimate war is started, having real soldiers instead of mall cops to fight isn't evil. Wars aren't won with pure defense.

Besides, moral inflexibility would only get humanity exterminated. Imagine if the Cardassians realized that Starfleet never attacks a facility with civilians or children in it. They would just pack children into every military base and ship and laugh their way to victory. It doesn't take a genius to enact this plan, the Taliban and terrorists already do it even today.

Star Trek can still be aspirational while acknowledging the realities of war.

But your talking as if the Federation hasn't been successful in protecting itself from Klingons, Romulans, Borg and the Dominion.

 

[Zzoram]

It's fiction, dude. They have the choice to tell the stories that fit within the established worldview.

And it's not aspirational at all to turn the Federation into the United States.

Starfleet already is the United States. It's based in the US and the racial and cultural makeup of every crew seems to be American or at least Western, with the odd token "foreign" officer that has to be a cultural stereotype. Also, 90% of Starfleet is white, despite less than 20% of the world population being white.

 

[Zzoram]

But your talking as if the Federation hasn't been successful in protecting itself from Klingons, Romulans, Borg and the Dominion.

True, but I don't like how Trek has Starfleet winning due to the incompetence of the enemy over their own ingenuity.

The Borg can't beat Starfleet because it sends 1 ship at a time. We've seen in Voyager they have thousands of ships and used hundreds to assimilate random unimportant worlds in the Delta Quadrant. If they just sent even 50 cubes, Earth would be assimilated in no time.

As for the Klingons and Romulans, there have only been minor skirmishes that were ever shown on screen. DS9 had the only major conflict with the Klingons and Starfleet was losing that war until they signed a new peace treaty.

Also, the Klingons and Romulans don't even use their cloaking advantage effectively. If they can actually pass undetected into Federation space, why don't they just send a cloaked fleet into the Starfleet shipyards and open their cargo bays and release a bunch of cloaked mines, then leave? We know they both have cloaked mines and cloaked ships can deploy cloaked mines. As a first strike, a cloaked fleet deploying cloaked mines all over key star systems would wreck havoc on Starfleet and likely single-handedly win the war. All they do is de-cloak to shoot at another ship, often not even with a strong enough volley to destroy it before their shields are up and it becomes a fair fight.

I guess I just want the admirals and generals in Trek to have competent strategies. Also, why does the captain have to tell the pilot to dodge incoming missiles? Shouldn't they do that automatically? Same thing for raising shields when being fired upon. The captain should make calls like whether to fight or retreat, board or destroy, where to go and how fast to go, but micromanaging the bridge crew to the extent they typically do in Trek is so slow and impractical. Status reports are fine though, the captain does need to know if weapons are disabled or if the warp coils are fused.

 

[soundscream]

True, but I don't like how Trek has Starfleet winning due to the incompetence of the enemy over their own ingenuity.

The Borg can't beat Starfleet because it sends 1 ship at a time. We've seen in Voyager they have thousands of ships and used hundreds to assimilate random unimportant worlds in the Delta Quadrant. If they just sent even 50 cubes, Earth would be assimilated in no time.

As for the Klingons and Romulans, there have only been minor skirmishes that were ever shown on screen. DS9 had the only major conflict with the Klingons and Starfleet was losing that war until they signed a new peace treaty.

That was a draw.

And we need to rise above it so we can further evolve. Remember the Q collective was afraid of our potential. If we go about the universe like its straight up dog time, we will never achieve what humanity might be.

 

[maharg]

Starfleet already is the United States. It's based in the US and the racial and cultural makeup of every crew seems to be American or at least Western, with the odd token "foreign" officer that has to be a cultural stereotype. Also, 90% of Starfleet is white, despite less than 20% of the world population being white.

Eh. This is just sophistry. You're basically asserting that because Star Trek fails to be perfectly aspirational it shouldn't even bother to try. What inspired me about Trek as a kid was that it tried. Is it perfect? No, not at all. But stuff like Section 31 just guts everything I love about it.

I mean, I watch plenty of things that are about "the realities of war." I have no objection to facing that aspect of modern society. It's an important discussion to have and it's important that we have fiction that discusses it.

So I don't need it in Star Trek, and Star Trek presenting an aspirational vision of a future humanity that's got its collective shit together and builds coalitions on peace and prosperity and post-scarcity is interesting and valuable precisely because it is different from everything else out there.

 

[soundscream]

Starfleet already is the United States. It's based in the US and the racial and cultural makeup of every crew seems to be American or at least Western, with the odd token "foreign" officer that has to be a cultural stereotype. Also, 90% of Starfleet is white, despite less than 20% of the world population being white.

Why are you basing what Star Fleet is based on the limitations of TV/Movie Producers and their idea of what will sell?

 

[Zzoram]

Why are you basing what Star Fleet is based on the limitations of TV/Movie Producers and their idea of what will sell?

That was just me latching onto his point about Starfleet not being the US when it's clearly pretty American. I don't actually care much about it, but I was trying to point at that the future of humanity looks American as portrayed in Trek.

I know why it is the way it is, but if Trek really wanted to be aspirational and ahead of it's time like it was in the TOS era, there are enough non-white people in the US to make modern Trek crews have racial and cultural make ups more representative of the whole world. Now that would be aspirational and refreshing, a future where non-whites can have equal career opportunities in Starfleet and where this is reflected in the officers of the starship crews. You can't even argue that there aren't enough famous non-whites to cast because Trek largely hires casts of nobodies to keep costs down.

Enterprise, the most recent show at a time when the US was less white than ever before and Asia and South America were rising featured 1 black man and 1 asian woman in the main cast with minimal character development and the show focused mainly on the 3 white leads. Even Shran's slang name for humans of "pink skin" only really applies to some white people. I bet Travis would feel confused if he was called a "pink skin".

In the TOS era, Trek was aspirational by suggesting that people of different races and nationalities could work together. Yet even today, when the global and even American consumer market is less white than ever, Trek crews have gotten no less white. Trek was originally edgy by casting minorities in token but regular roles. It's no longer edgy to do so little. Any lost white viewers could be made up for by new hispanic, black, asian, arab, etc. viewers that may find a role model in a well developed Trek character that looks like them.

 

[Zzoram]

Eh. This is just sophistry. You're basically asserting that because Star Trek fails to be perfectly aspirational it shouldn't even bother to try. What inspired me about Trek as a kid was that it tried. Is it perfect? No, not at all. But stuff like Section 31 just guts everything I love about it.

I mean, I watch plenty of things that are about "the realities of war." I have no objection to facing that aspect of modern society. It's an important discussion to have and it's important that we have fiction that discusses it.

So I don't need it in Star Trek, and Star Trek presenting an aspirational vision of a future humanity that's got its collective shit together and builds coalitions on peace and prosperity and post-scarcity is interesting and valuable precisely because it is different from everything else out there.

It's not actually a post-scarcity world. Even in TOS they needed to mine dilithium and other resources and there is fighting over resources all the time in Trek. That it's dilithium instead of oil doesn't change the fact that there is still scarcity. TOS and Trek in general just projected the bad traits of humanity into aliens so that the humans could look more righteous when they beat the aliens. That results in one-dimensional aliens like the original concept of the Ferengi and Klingons. The best Trek aliens were all the ones that they let develop into more realistic people with emotions and motivations we could understand, characters that stopped just being stereotypes.

 

[soundscream]

That was just me latching onto his point about Starfleet not being the US when it's clearly pretty American. I don't actually care much about it, but I was trying to point at that the future of humanity looks American as portrayed in Trek.

I know why it is the way it is, but if Trek really wanted to be aspirational and ahead of it's time like it was in the TOS era, there are enough non-white people in the US to make modern Trek crews have racial and cultural make ups more representative of the whole world. Now that would be aspirational and refreshing, a future where non-whites can have equal career opportunities in Starfleet and where this is reflected in the officers of the starship crews. You can't even argue that there aren't enough famous non-whites to cast because Trek largely hires casts of nobodies to keep costs down.

Enterprise, the most recent show at a time when the US was less white than ever before and Asia and South America were rising featured 1 black man and 1 asian woman in the main cast with minimal character development and the show focused mainly on the 3 white leads. Even Shran's slang name for humans of "pink skin" only really applies to some white people. I bet Travis would feel confused if he was called a "pink skin".

In the TOS era, Trek was aspirational by suggesting that people of different races and nationalities could work together. Yet even today, when the global and even American consumer market is less white than ever, Trek crews have gotten no less white. Trek was originally edgy by casting minorities in token but regular roles. It's no longer edgy to do so little. Any lost white viewers could be made up for by new hispanic, black, asian, arab, etc. viewers that may find a role model in a well developed Trek character that looks like them.

But that's the Hollywood systems fault, and the Trek production team is part of that system. If they were allowed to cast without the fear of reaching certain demographics and demos it would more then likely be a more colorful cast.

 

[firehawk12]

That was just me latching onto his point about Starfleet not being the US when it's clearly pretty American. I don't actually care much about it, but I was trying to point at that the future of humanity looks American as portrayed in Trek.

I know why it is the way it is, but if Trek really wanted to be aspirational and ahead of it's time like it was in the TOS era, there are enough non-white people in the US to make modern Trek crews have racial and cultural make ups more representative of the whole world. Now that would be aspirational and refreshing, a future where non-whites can have equal career opportunities in Starfleet and where this is reflected in the officers of the starship crews. You can't even argue that there aren't enough famous non-whites to cast because Trek largely hires casts of nobodies to keep costs down.

Enterprise, the most recent show at a time when the US was less white than ever before and Asia and South America were rising featured 1 black man and 1 asian woman in the main cast with minimal character development and the show focused mainly on the 3 white leads. Even Shran's slang name for humans of "pink skin" only really applies to some white people. I bet Travis would feel confused if he was called a "pink skin".

In the TOS era, Trek was aspirational by suggesting that people of different races and nationalities could work together. Yet even today, when the global and even American consumer market is less white than ever, Trek crews have gotten no less white. Trek was originally edgy by casting minorities in token but regular roles. It's no longer edgy to do so little. Any lost white viewers could be made up for by new hispanic, black, asian, arab, etc. viewers that may find a role model in a well developed Trek character that looks like them.

The fact that there has never been an officially canon gay character in Trek pretty much tells you where they are at. The closest they've ever gotten was the whole Dax thing, but it copped out by making it a relationship that could never happen and by taking gender out of the question entirely - they just happen to both be in female bodies at the time.

Trek rides on the progressiveness of TOS and keeps harping on how positive it was... but it's quick to forget things like firing Gates McFadden for being too vocal (I swear, these TNG Blurays are the first time I've heard the story straight from the horses mouth... but then again, I was probably too young to even know where to read interviews back then) about her role as a woman on the show among other weird things that had happened throughout the franchise.

You know, Ron Moore relegated the gay character in BSG to "webisodes", but at least the character was gay at some point. lol

 

[maharg]

That was just me latching onto his point about Starfleet not being the US when it's clearly pretty American. I don't actually care much about it, but I was trying to point at that the future of humanity looks American as portrayed in Trek.

I know why it is the way it is, but if Trek really wanted to be aspirational and ahead of it's time like it was in the TOS era, there are enough non-white people in the US to make modern Trek crews have racial and cultural make ups more representative of the whole world. Now that would be aspirational and refreshing, a future where non-whites can have equal career opportunities in Starfleet and where this is reflected in the officers of the starship crews. You can't even argue that there aren't enough famous non-whites to cast because Trek largely hires casts of nobodies to keep costs down.

Enterprise, the most recent show at a time when the US was less white than ever before and Asia and South America were rising featured 1 black man and 1 asian woman in the main cast with minimal character development and the show focused mainly on the 3 white leads. Even Shran's slang name for humans of "pink skin" only really applies to some white people. I bet Travis would feel confused if he was called a "pink skin".

In the TOS era, Trek was aspirational by suggesting that people of different races and nationalities could work together. Yet even today, when the global and even American consumer market is less white than ever, Trek crews have gotten no less white. Trek was originally edgy by casting minorities in token but regular roles. It's no longer edgy to do so little. Any lost white viewers could be made up for by new hispanic, black, asian, arab, etc. viewers that may find a role model in a well developed Trek character that looks like them.

I agree with all of this. So what, exactly, does it have to do with anything? How does it argue against anything I've ever said? I'm happy you got this epic rant out of your system, but yes I want Trek to return to its roots and be more aspirational and I agree that it is lacking in that department as it stands. In fact, I'm pretty sure that when I say that Section 31 is one of the worst things to grace Trek, and that trying to reflect the real world or the gritty realities of war are things I'd rather Trek not do, that's exactly what I'm saying.

 

[Zzoram]

But that's the Hollywood systems fault, and the Trek production team is part of that system. If they were allowed to cast without the fear of reaching certain demographics and demos it would more then likely be a more colorful cast.

TOS had the most diverse casting of it's era, surely Gene had to fight against the Hollywood system to get it that way. He took a risk and it paid off. The cultural significance of Trek boils down to diverse casting and exploration of modern social and moral issues. Trek casting diversity hasn't even kept up with the increase in diversity in television viewers. It's time Trek reclaims it's original claim to fame.

 

[firehawk12]

TOS had the most diverse casting of it's era, surely Gene had to fight against the Hollywood system to get it that way. He took a risk and it paid off. The cultural significance of Trek boils down to diverse casting and exploration of modern social and moral issues. Trek casting diversity hasn't even kept up with the increase in diversity in television viewers. It's time Trek reclaims it's original claim to fame.

I guess the weird thing is that even TOS had to compromise by basically recasting the leads because the network didn't want a woman as an XO.

 

[Zzoram]

I agree with all of this. So what, exactly, does it have to do with anything?

It has to do with aspirational Trek. The most obvious way that TOS was aspirational was showing racial diversity. Trek should try once again to be more diverse than the rest of Hollywood like it did with TOS. It would be a way to create that aspirational feeling again of a future where humans from the entire world have truly come together and stand out from everything else on TV.

 

[Zzoram]

I guess the weird thing is that even TOS had to compromise by basically recasting the leads because the network didn't want a woman as an XO.

Another sad thing is that Trek never stopped making women on their shows randomly wear out of place sexy clothes like they did in TOS. It stood out so much when Deanna Troi was wearing the same Starfleet comm badge as everyone else but instead of wearing a normal uniform like Tasha Yar, she wore a low cut catsuit. She was even in Starfleet but was not required to wear a uniform so they could fulfill their cleavage quota.

 

[maharg]

It has to do with aspirational Trek. The most obvious way that TOS was aspirational was showing racial diversity. Trek should try once again to be more diverse than the rest of Hollywood like it did with TOS. It would be a way to create that aspirational feeling again of a future where humans from the entire world have truly come together and stand out from everything else on TV.

I still agree. But I don't want to trade it for gritty realisms of war, if that's what you're proposing.

 

[firehawk12]

Another sad thing is that Trek never stopped making women on their shows randomly wear out of place sexy clothes like they did in TOS. It stood out so much when Deanna Troi was wearing the same Starfleet comm badge as everyone else but instead of wearing a normal uniform like Tasha Yar, she wore a low cut catsuit. She was even in Starfleet but was not required to wear a uniform so they could fulfill their cleavage quota.

The tradition continued in Voyager and Enterprise. lol

Also, maharg, assuming you don't hate anime and everything Japanese, Aria is probably my favourite piece of science fiction ever precisely because of its optimism. Followed closely by Yokohama Kaidashi Kikou, but that only exists as a couple of OVAs in anime form unfortunately.

 

[Zzoram]

I still agree. But I don't want to trade it for gritty realisms of war, if that's what you're proposing.

The gritty realisms of war are the only relevant issue of modern times that they can really do, other than maybe genetic engineering. Healthcare is free and awesome in the Trek world so there can't be a discussion of that. Earth is also socialist but there isn't much to say about that either and it only gets brought up when they meet past humans or the Ferengi. They also aren't likely to do another Trek with no war and only peace because that would be just too jarringly unbelievable for people to connect with.

I don't really get why you're against more realistic combat. They fight a lot in Trek already, I'm just proposing that the fighting look more like trained combatants are fighting.

Fine, don't have MACOs or Section 31, but at least make the security officers use MMA moves and SWAT tactics at the very least.

 

[Zzoram]

The tradition continued in Voyager and Enterprise. lol.

Another thing DS9 did right was put female officers in uniforms that weren't catsuits or cut to show cleavage.

Dabo girls at least made sense because they were employed by the Ferengi and not Starfleet officers.

 

[Henchmen21]

Ugh. I'm really sick and tired of this "realism" crap having to invade every facet of popular entertainment. And really, it isn't "realism" that the people constantly calling for it want. It's gritty "guns, guns, guns!!!" kind of juvenile nonsense that the under 25's really want.

Reading your posts Zzoram, it seems more like you want Trek to be more like BSG*. Like Maharg posted, that's not why most of us (at least those of us who grew up with Trek pre-Gene's death) watched trek in the first place.







*Ron Moore is a douche

 

[MC Safety]

It has to do with aspirational Trek. The most obvious way that TOS was aspirational was showing racial diversity. Trek should try once again to be more diverse than the rest of Hollywood like it did with TOS. It would be a way to create that aspirational feeling again of a future where humans from the entire world have truly come together and stand out from everything else on TV.

The aspirational part came from having a federation dedicated to peaceful exploration and attempting to resolve conflict non-violently, not in that it met its quota of varied cultural types.

 

[Zzoram]

I like Trek more than BSG by far.

Trek is still the best but that doesn't mean it can't be better.

 

[firehawk12]

The aspirational part came from having a federation dedicated to peaceful exploration and attempting to resolve conflict non-violently, not in that it met its quota of varied cultural types.

And yet despite the prime directive and the idea of non-interference, there was the implicit cultural colonialism that came with Star Fleet and its American values being the right values almost all of the time.

 

[Zzoram]

The aspirational part came from having a federation dedicated to peaceful exploration and attempting to resolve conflict non-violently, not in that it met its quota of varied cultural types.

People keep saying that but Kirk punches someone every other episode. Picard is the non-violent one and an exceptional diplomat, the best ever shown in Trek, but even he gets into a few fights.

TOS was aspirational because it showed a united humanity no longer divided by race or nation. That was hard to believe during the 1960s when blacks were still fighting for their rights, Russia and the US were looking like they were going to destroy the world over whether communism or democracy was better, Japanese internment camps in North America were in recent memory and the Vietnam War was going on.

A modern equivalent would be to have a Trek crew with "real" Chinese, Indian, Brazilian, Russian, American, Nigerian and Iraqi bridge officers. Maybe make the main trio the American, Chinese and Iraqi characters, with the American being the woman. Do this because Americans are scared of the Chinese and Arab men due to economics and terrorism. This would be equivalently edgy to having Japanese and Russian bridge officers after WWII and during the Cold War.

 

[MC Safety]

People keep saying that but Kirk punches someone every other episode. Picard is the non-violent one. TOS was aspirational because it showed a united humanity no longer divided by race or nation.

The federation hasn't thrown away the notion of defending itself. It's just that a peaceful solution is always sought first. And you missed the Star Trek movie where Picard picks up a machine gun and starts gleefully shooting his own people.

.

A modern equivalent would be to have a Trek crew with "real" Chinese, Indian, Brazilian, Russian, American, Nigerian and Iraqi bridge officers. Maybe make the main trio the American, Chinese and Iraqi characters, with the American being the woman. Do this because Americans are scared of the Chinese and Arab men due to economics and terrorism. This would be equivalently edgy to having Japanese and Russian bridge officers after WWII and during the Cold War.

Diversity by checklist? I'm not a fan. Maybe someone can make a Trek that hits a magical diversity quotient without being heavyhanded and forced. It would certainly be a feat.

 

[Zzoram]

The federation hasn't thrown away the notion of defending itself. It's just that a peaceful solution is always sought first. And you missed the Star Trek movie where Picard picks up a machine gun and starts gleefully shooting his own people.

Movie Picard isn't the real one, he's just Kirk 2.0. Despite the movies, he's still the least violent captain.

I'm not saying the Federation shouldn't pursue peace first. I just think that if they have to fight, it would make sense if they had trained soldiers using even remotely realistic tactics.

 

[firehawk12]

The federation hasn't thrown away the notion of defending itself. It's just that a peaceful solution is always sought first. And you missed the Star Trek movie where Picard picks up a machine gun and starts gleefully shooting his own people.

And in that movie, he's chastised for it. In a rather, in hindsight, heavy handed way with the whole Ahab thing. lol

 

[Zzoram]

Diversity by checklist? I'm not a fan. Maybe someone can make a Trek that a magical diversity quotient without being heavyhanded and forced. It would certainly be a feat.

Heavy handed diversity beats not attempting real diversity. Hollywood will continue to cast overwhelmingly white with token minorities. That's also diversity by checklist but the minority characters don't get to do as much as the central characters. TOS had heavy handed diversity because it was still required in it's time. Our time is not much better, yet.

 

[Htown]

I do like the non-lyric themes better but the Enterprise one was still good and appropriate.

let's not say anything we can't take back.

 

[Zzoram]

let's not say anything we can't take back.

The uptempo beat version isn't appropriate during the Xindi arc. The lyrics themselves were fine though.