Star Trek 4

[Podtastic]

9 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

and civics classes

That's an American thing. 

9 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Imperialist western democracies like the US, Great Britain, etc. have perpetrated just as many horrors

I know that capitalism isn't perfect by any means. 

But even so , I can't see how it can reasonably be compared to either of these totalitarian systems and their astronomical death toll. And its not just the death toll, the ideology itself is anti-human. Capitalism is at least understandable in terms of human nature. Greed is perfectly understandable and relatable.

But Communism and Fascism demand that you give up your individual identity. They demand that give up your individual rights, cut your ties with tradition and even your family - the very things that make you human - and give all your loyalty to the state. 

I have never heard of someone turning their own parents over to state police except  under one of these types of totalitarian systems. 

It isn't that Capitalism is great, its just that Communism/Fascism are immeasurably worse. They are utterly indefensible, and anyone attempting to defend them shames himself.

 

 

 

 

 

[JB0]

Again, I'm not sure you've actually watched Star Trek if that's something you think was EVER endorsed by the show's creator.

[sketchley]

4 hours ago, Podtastic said:

That's an American thing. 

I know that capitalism isn't perfect by any means. 

But even so , I can't see how it can reasonably be compared to either of these totalitarian systems and their astronomical death toll. And its not just the death toll, the ideology itself is anti-human. Capitalism is at least understandable in terms of human nature. Greed is perfectly understandable and relatable.

But Communism and Fascism demand that you give up your individual identity. They demand that give up your individual rights, cut your ties with tradition and even your family - the very things that make you human - and give all your loyalty to the state. 

I have never heard of someone turning their own parents over to state police except  under one of these types of totalitarian systems. 

It isn't that Capitalism is great, its just that Communism/Fascism are immeasurably worse. They are utterly indefensible, and anyone attempting to defend them shames himself.

Erm... I see a lot of conflation going on in your post.  Totalitarian is fundamentally different from communism.  Communism is distinctly different from Fascism as well, and it's quite shocking to see them being treated as one and the same.  In short, there's a reason why communism survived WWII, and Fascism did not—which may have something to do with the former being a political economy, and the latter being a system of government.

As for Capitalism vs Communism... some have said that Capitalism is electoral freedom, but job slavery.  Communism is the polar opposite: job freedom, electoral slavery.  There are advantages and disadvantages to each system.

I could very well make the case that a job-slavery capitalist society forces citizens (= workers) to give up their individual identity in order to keep their jobs.

As for greed... that's the main reason why communist, guided-democracies, and capitalist systems get so much bad press.  It's not Adam Smith's or Karl Marx's fault that greedy people misuse and abuse their ideas for their own personal gain.

[Roy Focker]

Hey guys this is me acting as Mod telling you all that this extended conversion on political systems is going off topic from Star Trek and more towards the realm of politics a subject that isn't allowed. 

[pengbuzz]

2 hours ago, Roy Focker said:

Hey guys this is me acting as Mod telling you all that this extended conversion on political systems is going off topic from Star Trek and more towards the realm of politics a subject that isn't allowed. 

Let's see if we can get this topic back on the rails then;

One of the biggest complaints I've always had about JJTrek is the unprofessionalism and unearned rank of Captain PineKirk (this is directed towards the writing, but also the age of the actor/ character). Prime Kirk earned his captaincy, and while something of a maverick, knew his position and took it seriously. He also took discipline and authority seriously as well. PineKirk doesn't, and at times, ti seems the entire bridge crew doesn't either. Not to mention Prime Kirk had to earn his command over a lot more years than PineKirk's what...2-3 years?  And he wasn't still a cadet at the time either.

To me, what that points to is JJ Abrams trying to make Trek into Star Wars: The Federation Years rather than Star Trek. Rank and chain of command existed for a reason in the Prime Universe, but in JJTrek, they use that chain for a jump-rope, and they toss whatever person just happens to be there (an engineer gets sent to an ice world for screwing up and suddenly they trust him to be chief engineer of the Federation Flagship?).

This is why I really don't want to see their next attempt: it's bound to be painful.

[JB0]

2 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

To me, what that points to is JJ Abrams trying to make Trek into Star Wars: The Federation Years rather than Star Trek. Rank and chain of command existed for a reason in the Prime Universe, but in JJTrek, they use that chain for a jump-rope, and they toss whatever person just happens to be there

I feel like part of that isn't unique to the Abramsverse, though it was certainly exacerbated by the show's desire to be an action film and origin story*.

The original Trek understood a lot of military concepts very well because several WW2 veterans were on staff. Later shows tend not to have a staff that knows how the military works, and that reflects in their writing. Their military background is simply "imitating what we saw in Star Trek".

The Abramsverse movies aren't a break, they're just the endgame.

 

 

 

*Speaking of origin stories... I give Abrams credit for handling what I'm sure was a decree from on high that his first film be one. There was a clear desire to hit fast-forward through that aspect as much as possible and get to the bridge of the Enterprise.

[Thom]

They did have some good lines. I really liked Pike's 'Dare you to do better,' speech. In fact, of them all, I really liked Pike the best. Shame they killed him off in 'In Too Deep.'

Looking back, it would have been better if they had started Kirk off as exec on another ship. Then he would at least have some experience to take the Big Chair.

But, Flash and Fun is the name of the JJGame!

[Seto Kaiba]

6 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

One of the biggest complaints I've always had about JJTrek is the unprofessionalism and unearned rank of Captain PineKirk (this is directed towards the writing, but also the age of the actor/ character). Prime Kirk earned his captaincy, and while something of a maverick, knew his position and took it seriously. He also took discipline and authority seriously as well. PineKirk doesn't, and at times, ti seems the entire bridge crew doesn't either. Not to mention Prime Kirk had to earn his command over a lot more years than PineKirk's what...2-3 years?  And he wasn't still a cadet at the time either.

Eh... hm... really, I feel like that's almost a symptom of a deeper, more fundamental problem with the character.

The James T. Kirk of the official Star Trek timeline was a decent, upstanding, highly principled man and a hard worker.

The James T. Kirk of the Kelvin timeline is a sh*theel.  And not even a capable sh*theel, come to that.  His (dubious) achievements are mostly attributable to a combination of riding his dead hero father's coattails and nepotism from his father's friend Captain Christopher Pike.  He's infuriating because most of us have known someone exactly like him.  He's that one brainless jock who peaked in, and mentally never left, high school.  The one who gets admitted to college as a legacy and joins the frat his father belonged to in order to spend his days drinking cheap beer, smoking pot, and trying to pick up every girl who'll give him the time of day while trusting his father's connections to keep him from being expelled or worse.

He's unprofessional and his rank is undeserved, but that's really just a symptom of the fact that he's so painfully underdeveloped as a character that he's mostly just a flat character mindlessly going through the motions of Kirk's backstory armed with only the jokes Star Trek fans have always made about the behavior of Shatner's Kirk.

 

6 hours ago, pengbuzz said:

To me, what that points to is JJ Abrams trying to make Trek into Star Wars: The Federation Years rather than Star Trek. Rank and chain of command existed for a reason in the Prime Universe, but in JJTrek, they use that chain for a jump-rope, and they toss whatever person just happens to be there (an engineer gets sent to an ice world for screwing up and suddenly they trust him to be chief engineer of the Federation Flagship?).

This is why I really don't want to see their next attempt: it's bound to be painful.

To be frank, it's just lazy writing.  The studio wanted an origin story, but for some reason they felt compelled to make it a shared origin story for ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE instead of for the main character.  So there's a lot of moon logic in play to make it work.

 

 

3 hours ago, JB0 said:

The original Trek understood a lot of military concepts very well because several WW2 veterans were on staff. Later shows tend not to have a staff that knows how the military works, and that reflects in their writing. Their military background is simply "imitating what we saw in Star Trek".

The Abramsverse movies aren't a break, they're just the endgame.

Hrm... I disagree, for one main reason.

From its inception, Star Trek's Starfleet was always intended to be at-most Mildly Military.  Gene and co. were insistent even in the early development of the original Star Trek that Starfleet was a non-military space exploration service.  A future analogue of NASA (and the Soviet space program).  That aspect actually got carried forward throughout the prime timeline clear to the end of Enterprise, with references to Starfleet being an outgrowth of the United Earth Space Probe Agency.

It wasn't until Nicholas Meyer took the helm in Star Trek II: the Wrath of Khan that Starfleet started adopting the trappings of modern navies with any real devotion.

Of course, those trappings also disappeared when he left because the creators working on the TV shows and most of the movies were following the originally laid-down concept that Starfleet was the Federation's space agency not its armed forces.  That idea also got carried through into Enterprise, where there was a clear distinction drawn between Earth Starfleet's personnel and the Earth military's MACOs.

It's not that the production staffs of the pre-Kelvin Star Trek works didn't know how the military works... it's that they were specifically NOT depicting Starfleet as a military.  It's not a bug, it's a feature.

What Abrams did was just take that to its illogical extreme with a Designated Hero who has to be The Captain because he's famous in the real world as Captain Kirk, not Cadet Kirk, so the plot bends over backwards and makes confetti out of common sense to make it happen.

[pengbuzz]

2 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Eh... hm... really, I feel like that's almost a symptom of a deeper, more fundamental problem with the character.

The James T. Kirk of the official Star Trek timeline was a decent, upstanding, highly principled man and a hard worker.

The James T. Kirk of the Kelvin timeline is a sh*theel.  And not even a capable sh*theel, come to that.  His (dubious) achievements are mostly attributable to a combination of riding his dead hero father's coattails and nepotism from his father's friend Captain Christopher Pike.  He's infuriating because most of us have known someone exactly like him.  He's that one brainless jock who peaked in, and mentally never left, high school.  The one who gets admitted to college as a legacy and joins the frat his father belonged to in order to spend his days drinking cheap beer, smoking pot, and trying to pick up every girl who'll give him the time of day while trusting his father's connections to keep him from being expelled or worse.

He's unprofessional and his rank is undeserved, but that's really just a symptom of the fact that he's so painfully underdeveloped as a character that he's mostly just a flat character mindlessly going through the motions of Kirk's backstory armed with only the jokes Star Trek fans have always made about the behavior of Shatner's Kirk.

I'll agree on all counts; just the best I could think of to get the ball rolling again!

 

2 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

To be frank, it's just lazy writing.  The studio wanted an origin story, but for some reason they felt compelled to make it a shared origin story for ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE instead of for the main character.  So there's a lot of moon logic in play to make it work.

Yeah, but it still feels like they tried to cram it into Star Wars'  shoes and the fit was utterly horrific.

 

[Seto Kaiba]

13 minutes ago, pengbuzz said:

Yeah, but it still feels like they tried to cram it into Star Wars'  shoes and the fit was utterly horrific.

It does a bit, yeah...

It'd probably have helped matters if Abrams had gone into his bastardization of Star Trek with a plan for a story arc.

The original six Star Trek movies have some overarching themes that help link them up into a rough story arc about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy coming to terms with growing older and Kirk having to confront true no-win scenarios and accept loss.

The Kelvin Trek movies don't really have anything like that... which might hurt the fourth installment, since it doesn't really have anything to build on.

[azrael]

1 hour ago, pengbuzz said:

Yeah, but it still feels like they tried to cram it into Star Wars'  shoes and the fit was utterly horrific.

Funny you should mention Abrams and Star Wars...

[pengbuzz]

17 minutes ago, azrael said:

Funny you should mention Abrams and Star Wars...

Right? Maybe someday he'll make a Star Wars movie.

Edited February 23, 2022 by pengbuzz

[pengbuzz]

1 hour ago, Seto Kaiba said:

It does a bit, yeah...

It'd probably have helped matters if Abrams had gone into his bastardization of Star Trek with a plan for a story arc.

The original six Star Trek movies have some overarching themes that help link them up into a rough story arc about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy coming to terms with growing older and Kirk having to confront true no-win scenarios and accept loss.

The Kelvin Trek movies don't really have anything like that... which might hurt the fourth installment, since it doesn't really have anything to build on.

Idea: they could kill off Chekov and PineKirk blames himself.

[Seto Kaiba]

45 minutes ago, pengbuzz said:

Right? Maybe someday he'll make a Star Wars movie.

Well, it's more likely than him making a Star Trek movie... 

 

42 minutes ago, pengbuzz said:

Idea: they could kill off Chekov and PineKirk blames himself.

Why not solve two problems and kill off Pine's Kirk again, but permanently this time?

Or, better yet, just retcon the entire Kelvin timeline out of existence at the end of Kelvin Trek 4.  Have the Federation Temporal Agency and/or Temporal Integrity Commission roll up to fix Nero's mess with the help of the Enterprise crew and Ret Gone the Narada before it can attack the Kelvin.  Then none of that sh*t has to happen and they can retool the timeline to make the characters less unpleasant to watch.

[pengbuzz]

40 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Well, it's more likely than him making a Star Trek movie... 

 

Why not solve two problems and kill off Pine's Kirk again, but permanently this time?

Or, better yet, just retcon the entire Kelvin timeline out of existence at the end of Kelvin Trek 4.  Have the Federation Temporal Agency and/or Temporal Integrity Commission roll up to fix Nero's mess with the help of the Enterprise crew and Ret Gone the Narada before it can attack the Kelvin.  Then none of that sh*t has to happen and they can retool the timeline to make the characters less unpleasant to watch.

That works; I'll get the popcorn, you get the soft drinks.

\

[Podtastic]

On 2/22/2022 at 12:43 AM, Seto Kaiba said:

f the only thing that entertains you is mindless violence, you need help.  Badly.

I'm not a left leaning American born in the 90's, I'm a conservative South African born in the 70's. Don't expect me to share your value system.

Nobody said anything about "mindless" violence. War is not mindless 

This is even more true in fiction where the conflict is a primal battle between good and evil.

Seriously, the only "mindless violence" (outside of the news) I've ever seen has been those straight to video B movies. You know the ones where everyone fornicates and swears all the time, and the only thing you CAN get out of it is the action.

On 2/22/2022 at 12:43 AM, Seto Kaiba said:

Nobody in this universe - or any other - cares.

I care. That's all that matters.

 

 

[azrael]

We ask nicely but obviously you kids don't know when to stop.