The politics of Star Trek: Why I like the first series..

[Pogo]

Yet Picard again refuses, citing the non-interference directive that Gowron has already waived by requesting assistance. Picard, the Klingons learn, is not a very valuable friend. What accounts for this incoherent foreign policy? Nothing less than Picard’s commitment to non-commitment. He represents a new, non-judgmental liberalism far shallower than that embraced in Roddenberry’s era. Where Kirk pursues justice, Picard avoids conflict. Just as Kirk’s devotion to universal principles goes deeper than politics, so does Picard’s sentimentalism. When it comes to the universe of real suffering, real need, and a real search for truth, he is content not to decide, not to take responsibility, and not to know.

Actually that particular evolution has to do directly with the audience. When the original series was on TV in the mid-'60s, violence was a way of life (still is, but more so then). By the '90s when TNG came on (with far better writing FWIW), the audience -- the public in general -- had come to figure out that alternatives exist to the idea of dealing with every situation with brute force, fisticuffs, phasers, photon torpedoes and the Vulcan death grip.

Not that complex. You write for, and reflect, the vaues of your current audience.
Same reason cowboys-and-Indians shows don't exist any more -- we outgrew them.

Yeah....you obviously didn't watch the series or understand it....they didn't hate anyone, but stood up to violent aggressors...something you morons don't get.....

How many of the 1960s ST episodes did NOT feature a fistfight somewhere? Were there any at all?

Really? We outgrew them?

The biggest grossing film of the year is Jurassic World.

Followed by Age of Ultron.

And then FUrious 7.

Who brought up movies?

 

[Katzndogz]

Kirk, my old enemy must I remind you of the Klingon saying? "Revenge is a dish best served cold".

The Klingons have the same old sayings as the French!

 

[Correll]

Yet Picard again refuses, citing the non-interference directive that Gowron has already waived by requesting assistance. Picard, the Klingons learn, is not a very valuable friend. What accounts for this incoherent foreign policy? Nothing less than Picard’s commitment to non-commitment. He represents a new, non-judgmental liberalism far shallower than that embraced in Roddenberry’s era. Where Kirk pursues justice, Picard avoids conflict. Just as Kirk’s devotion to universal principles goes deeper than politics, so does Picard’s sentimentalism. When it comes to the universe of real suffering, real need, and a real search for truth, he is content not to decide, not to take responsibility, and not to know.

Actually that particular evolution has to do directly with the audience. When the original series was on TV in the mid-'60s, violence was a way of life (still is, but more so then). By the '90s when TNG came on (with far better writing FWIW), the audience -- the public in general -- had come to figure out that alternatives exist to the idea of dealing with every situation with brute force, fisticuffs, phasers, photon torpedoes and the Vulcan death grip.

Not that complex. You write for, and reflect, the vaues of your current audience.
Same reason cowboys-and-Indians shows don't exist any more -- we outgrew them.

Yeah....you obviously didn't watch the series or understand it....they didn't hate anyone, but stood up to violent aggressors...something you morons don't get.....

How many of the 1960s ST episodes did NOT feature a fistfight somewhere? Were there any at all?

Really? We outgrew them?

The biggest grossing film of the year is Jurassic World.

Followed by Age of Ultron.

And then FUrious 7.

Who brought up movies?

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

 

[Rozman]

star trek rocked...It is part of the reason why I love science and think the investment of such is so important.

We could have a wonderful future where tech makes our lives so much better.

Be careful what you wish for....
We push too far out into space and we may encounter a species known as Q
or worse....

The Borg.

And knowing our history with Illegals Obama would allow the Borg to enter and assimilate the human race.....
Well the Borg would do that anyway....

They would just blow the hell out of the wall the Donald would put up....

All is lost if we face the Borg....
But the improvements in Science and Infrastructure would be astronomical....
But at what cost.

 

[Pogo]

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

 

[David_42]

Star Trek was a post scarcity society with a strong government.. Sounds great.

 

[Correll]

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

 

[Pogo]

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

 

[Correll]

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

 

[Montrovant]

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

 

[Correll]

Because the tv and movie audiences are not related?

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.

YOu want me to check tv shows? Sure.

Mmm, well I admit to some quality there.

But plenty of crap getting plenty of ratings.

And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

You NEED to see the Deep Space 9 episode about the Tribbles, if you watch nothing else.

And the one, Little Green Men.

Both KICKED ASS!

 

[Montrovant]

Because that's not where we were. But close enough.
I have no clue what those movies are anyway.


And that's never not been the case. The description "vast wasteland" was coined in 1961.

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

You NEED to see the Deep Space 9 episode about the Tribbles, if you watch nothing else.

And the one, Little Green Men.

Both KICKED ASS!

I still want to watch Babylon 5 one of these days, I doubt I'll ever get around to watching any DS9 episodes.

 

[Correll]

Crap then, crap now, no growth noted.

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

You NEED to see the Deep Space 9 episode about the Tribbles, if you watch nothing else.

And the one, Little Green Men.

Both KICKED ASS!

I still want to watch Babylon 5 one of these days, I doubt I'll ever get around to watching any DS9 episodes.

First Season seems like a rip off of Deep Space Nine.

DO not despair.

So much is given the ends up tying into later story arcs.

Wade though it, come Season Two, the ride starts...


Me and my buddy used to watch together.

Many episodes we ended up literally jumping out of our chairs at the end.

 

[Pogo]

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

You NEED to see the Deep Space 9 episode about the Tribbles, if you watch nothing else.

And the one, Little Green Men.

Both KICKED ASS!

I still want to watch Babylon 5 one of these days, I doubt I'll ever get around to watching any DS9 episodes.

First Season seems like a rip off of Deep Space Nine.

DO not despair.

So much is given the ends up tying into later story arcs.

Wade though it, come Season Two, the ride starts...


Me and my buddy used to watch together.

Many episodes we ended up literally jumping out of our chairs at the end.

DS9 put me right to sleep. I wanted it to work, eventually just gave up.

Guess it just didn't "kick ass".

 

[Montrovant]

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

You NEED to see the Deep Space 9 episode about the Tribbles, if you watch nothing else.

And the one, Little Green Men.

Both KICKED ASS!

I still want to watch Babylon 5 one of these days, I doubt I'll ever get around to watching any DS9 episodes.

First Season seems like a rip off of Deep Space Nine.

DO not despair.

So much is given the ends up tying into later story arcs.

Wade though it, come Season Two, the ride starts...


Me and my buddy used to watch together.

Many episodes we ended up literally jumping out of our chairs at the end.

DS9 put me right to sleep. I wanted it to work, eventually just gave up.

Guess it just didn't "kick ass".

I remember in the first episode the shapeshifter turned into something like a cloth sack. I can handle a shapeshifter, warp speed, teleportation, etc......but for some reason, changing mass so that he wasn't a ridiculously heavy, dense sack bothered me.

 

[Montrovant]

And that's inevitable. The medium is inherently flawed.

Gotta say Roddenberry's fare was among the less-sucky though. Especially TNG, but again that's because TNG used writing as an art form whereas the vast majority of the vast wasteland has no use for it.

I gave the TNG a couple of episodes. IMO, it sucked.

Well, your opinion on entertainment is clearly worthless.

TNG was the only spin-off I was willing to watch, and it was superior to the original series. Many of my friends also enjoyed Deep Space 9, but I could never get past some issues with the first episode and the fact that it was a Star Trek show where they didn't explore the galaxy.

It would probably be hard to watch TNG now, though. Too dated.

You NEED to see the Deep Space 9 episode about the Tribbles, if you watch nothing else.

And the one, Little Green Men.

Both KICKED ASS!

I still want to watch Babylon 5 one of these days, I doubt I'll ever get around to watching any DS9 episodes.

First Season seems like a rip off of Deep Space Nine.

DO not despair.

So much is given the ends up tying into later story arcs.

Wade though it, come Season Two, the ride starts...


Me and my buddy used to watch together.

Many episodes we ended up literally jumping out of our chairs at the end.

I've always heard good things about B5, and have enjoyed some things JMS has written. I just hope that when I do finally decide to sit and watch it isn't so dated I can't enjoy it.