Star Trek is the worst.

[fncceo]

Forbidden Planet is a re-write of The Tempest by Shakespeare.

Yes it was... and one of the best SciFi movies on the 1950's. Arguably of all time.

 

[toobfreak]

you have no idea about some of the writers on that show do you?.....

Seriously. It was a veritable Who's Who of Sci-Fi writers of the day.

 

[MisterBeale]

Maybe so.....but Mr Spock was cool as fuck.

 

[meaner gene]

The problem with Star Trek is that the script is written by stupid people who know nothing about science, and don't bother to show respect towards science.

Science and realty don't always mix. The original series did time travel by slingshotting around the sun, which has no scientific basic, where later involved wormholes, and later unexplained technology from the 29th century temporal cold wars.

 

[meaner gene]

Yes it was... and one of the best SciFi movies on the 1950's. Arguably of all time.

Don't forget the day the earth stood still.

 

[fncceo]

Don't forget the day the earth stood still.

Yes ... tied in first place for best SciFi movie of the '50s. But, less conducive to a TV series.

I will, of course, never dare to mention the abominable 2008 re-make because I will lose my Internet temper.

 

[White 6]

"Star Trek", the original series, was ... but the standards of the day ... cutting edge television.

It was innovative, controversial, and provocative.

Yes, it was over dramatized (we're looking at you, Shatner). Many of the scripts were simplistic and overly preachy. Yes, the fight choreography was hilarious and, yes, even the music was terrible.

Only about 1/3 of the original series episodes can we watched today without being considered satire.

But ... viewed against everything else on TV in 1966 ... it was a phenomenon and REALLY GOOD TV.

However, what is most important about "Star Trek" wasn't the dated episodes, but the inspiration it brought to millions of fans that, just perhaps, the future could be a little better, a little more civilized, and a little more exciting than it is today.

It was the last Science Fiction franchise with a vision of an optimistic future, before we decided that all science fiction had to be dystopic.

Each episode was always a morality play, using futuristic science fiction as a vehicle to explore issues man has tried to come to grips with throughout history.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

When I was a kid I liked Star Trek. But really, when you think about it, Star Trek is one of the worst television shows in history. The reason it survives is because it's science fiction, and the standards for science fiction is very low.

The problem with Star Trek is that the script is written by stupid people who know nothing about science, and don't bother to show respect towards science.

Also, the characters are stiff and boring, except in the original show.

When I was a kid I liked Star Trek. But really, when you think about it, Star Trek is one of the worst television shows in history. The reason it survives is because it's science fiction, and the standards for science fiction is very low.

Damn this is easily by far your worst post you have ever made here at usmb.the original was awesome,they delved into topics thst are still relevant today such as over overpopulation and the danger of nuclear war.

 

[meaner gene]

That's more to do with the writers.

A utopia were everyone is happy isn't good for writing. You need conflict to make a good story, like Reg having trouble fitting in.

And he did fit in better as time went one.

They realized they could only come up with so many big stories. TNG was starting to get old until Q introduced them to the Borg, which became central to TNG and Voyager.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Quite the opposite,

Star Trek was one of the only SciFi shows that did follow the science - actual physics. Rodenberry demanded that everything on the show be plausible according to actual physicists.

It can't all be airplanes in space.

Exactly.It was also realistic in ways like one episode dealt in time travel and they spoke about how a lady had to die Taos she did before or history would be altered in a really horrible way fir the worst.thst actually would occur if you could go back and time and you tried to change an event,everything would totally be changed dramatically like we can’t even imagine.

 

[Turtlesoup]

"Star Trek", the original series, was ... but the standards of the day ... cutting edge television.

It was innovative, controversial, and provocative.

Yes, it was over dramatized (we're looking at you, Shatner). Many of the scripts were simplistic and overly preachy. Yes, the fight choreography was hilarious and, yes, even the music was terrible.

Only about 1/3 of the original series episodes can we watched today without being considered satire.

But ... viewed against everything else on TV in 1966 ... it was a phenomenon and REALLY GOOD TV.

However, what is most important about "Star Trek" wasn't the dated episodes, but the inspiration it brought to millions of fans that, just perhaps, the future could be a little better, a little more civilized, and a little more exciting than it is today.

It was the last Science Fiction franchise with a vision of an optimistic future, before we decided that all science fiction had to be dystopic.

Gene Roddenberry was a visionary.....he was dead on with not interfering with primitive cultures. A lesson we all should have realized.

 

[meaner gene]

I will, of course, never dare to mention the abominable 2008 re-make because I will lose my Internet temper.

Many remakes rely on better technology (CGI etc) and fall short on the originality of the first movie. It's like when a band makes an identical cover of a classic song. I'd rather hear the original.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The problem with Star Trek is that the script is written by stupid people who know nothing about science, and don't bother to show respect towards science.

Also, the characters are stiff and boring, except in the original show.

Had you just said thst last sentence then this would be an excellent post because the original series indeed had exciting characters,the spin-offs all sucked indeed with boring characters.the first paragraph is just plain idiotic though.

 

[meaner gene]

Each episode was always a morality play, using futuristic science fiction as a vehicle to explore issues man has tried to come to grips with throughout history.

They also addressed modern problems, like racism and over-population.

 

[fncceo]

he was dead on with not interfering with primitive cultures.

The problem was ... they totally did interfere with primitive cultures ... in nearly every episode. The "Prime Directive" was broken so many time I lost count.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Original Star Trek is miles better than TNG DS9 or even Voyager...

More themes included in every episode that were fresh and contemporary... even ahead of the headlines. They definitely had issues in translating them to the screen...but they were ahead of their time in so many ways when new.

The original is one of the best shows ever,maybe even the best,the spin-offs are for retards,they can’t touch the original.the big three of Nimoy,Kelly and shatner,they had like the best chemistry of a three pair of actors of any show ever,you can’t replace that,you can’t replace Spock.

 

[meaner gene]

Exactly.It was also realistic in ways like one episode dealt in time travel and they spoke about how a lady had to die Taos she did before or history would be altered in a really horrible way fir the worst.thst actually would occur if you could go back and time and you tried to change an event,everything would totally be changed dramatically like we can’t even imagine.

Yet the new star trek movies decided to have Nero go back in time, and blow up Vulcan. They threw away the history books.

 

[fncceo]

They threw away the history books.

Different time line ... every SciFi writer's license to throw series canon into the shredder.

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[meaner gene]

The original is one of the best shows ever,maybe even the best,the spin-offs are for retards,they can’t touch the original.the big three of Nimoy,Kelly and shatner,they had like the best chemistry of a three pair of actors of any show ever,you can’t replace that,you can’t replace Spock.

The best chemistry was not realistic. Kirk treated them as friends instead as subordinates he was in charge of.

And as far as replacing Spock, every subsequent ship had a science officer to come up with the "star trek tech" answer to save them. TNG had DATA, and Voyager had 7 of 9. Even Enterprise went back to a vulcan T'pol.