|
I only saw Trek 09 and I was a lot less invested in Trek then than I am now but even just by the standards of "action movie" it was brainless and didn't bring enough really great action to elevate it above "completely disposable."Bogus Adventure posted:Sorry, I'll shut up. I just miss goofy stories about away teams visiting planets full of hippies and projectile plants, babbys in space ships, and kids with psychic powers. May I offer you some Lower Decks in these trying times?
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2021 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 05:45 |
|
|
VinylonUnderground posted:When Star Trek was first created the Space Race and the Sexual Revolution were in full swing. The possibilities for the future were endless and bright. There was also the Cold War and the constant threat of nuclear annihilation. But the only thing holding humanity back was humanity. Hell, the Cuban Missile Crisis, terrifying as it was, was a clear example that if well-intentioned people just spoke to each other they could solve anything. The 60s had its own nightmares with poverty and wars and alienation. The extent that our cyberpunk dystopia feels inescapable is more effect than cause of Star Trek (among many, many other forms of fiction) turning their hand at "better things aren't possible."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2021 02:55
|
|
|
VinylonUnderground posted:I'm either not parsing your statement correctly or you have a lot more faith in fiction driving history than I do. I'm talking about fiction's ability to drive and affect fiction, and quickly following that, emotions. I don't have a lot of faith, really any, that our fiction meaningfully reflects any particular non-fiction.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2021 15:00
|
|
|
Replicators are not a necessary condition for the post-scarcity economics of Star Trek, and more to the point are not sufficient. I'd hope to god by now that everyone here is aware that a post-scarcity situation can be turned into a scarcity situation through political power and force.mind the walrus posted:I think that's because even as far back as the mid-90s, Star Trek had written itself into multiple corners and had outlived its usefulness as a setting. See, this to me feels like holding onto the parts of Star Trek that are worn out while discarding the parts that are still fertile. At least to my mind the flaw is that Star Trek sticks so rigidly to portraying an incredibly narrow slice of the Federation. Lower Decks is boundary pushing just by making the Captain & friends secondary characters rather than primary characters. Most of the complaints that people have here, me included, are that Trek has been infected with gritty high-tension war on terror action morality, about hard men making hard choices to prevent mysterious shifty terrorists from doing their mysterious shifty plots. It's Tom Clancy crap that we've seen a billion times and wasn't even interesting the first time, and I don't really think the transporters or Irish Unification of 2024 or what have you is the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2021 14:16
|
|