Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Encounter at Farpoint-- loss potential
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Middy Seafort: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Snay: [qb] If by your comparison of Hill Street Blues to Babylon 5, you mean that TNG should have had arc storylines, certainly. If, however, you mean that Babylon 5 wasn't the unmitigated dung heap of a show it was, then, uh, no. TNG was always superior. [/qb][/QUOTE]To each his own. Babylon 5, like TNG had its flaws, but it was far superior and daring than TNG ever was. TNG, while littered with several fine episodes, played it safe with its characters and storylines. In an interview years ago, David Gerrold said that back in the 60's "Star Trek" was a subversive show going against the mainstream culture; but in the 80's and 90's it became the "McDonald's of SF," churning out one generic plot after another. I also blame, not only Paramount, but Roddenberry himself. While GR was a great one for ideas, he was not a details man. He also became more and more amored with the "great philosopher" notion propagated by the fan base. At the time of TNG's conception, the "Star Trek" movies (except IV, which used the famous reset button) were taking risks, changing the characters and the world they lived in-- much to Roddenberry's disliking. When TNG finally came along, GR saw it as a chance to re-invent the creation that became an albatross around his neck. Early outlines and plots for "Phase: II" already showed the new direction that GR saw for Trek; but it was not as bland and sterile like TNG. In fact, it would've been interesting to see that series played out in the 70's and the risks it also could've taken (more sexual freedom and so on). Many of those ideas demonstrated GR's acceptance that Trek was his great philosophical contribution to society. This was even enhanced more in the concepts of TNG in its formative years, and later taken on by writers unfamiliar with SF or the original series. I liken Roddenberry's change of heart towards Trek to the works of Ayn Rand. She wrote two novels that shaped a new philosophical notion: objectivism. The first, "Fountainhead," was her philosophy on a smaller scale, a personal story of a man's struggle against the greater collective of society. It was well-written with great care to literary concerns as well as philosophical. However, when it came to time, years later, to further outline her philosophy, she wrote "Atlas Shrugged." It is the weaker of her works, as it is more of a thousand-plus page dissertation on her philosophy, and tends to ignore the literary needs of the story. The character's are not as vivid and full of a "sense of life" as they are in the "Fountainhead." That is the same with TOS and TNG. GR was so entranced with his philosophical notions that he could not see past them and allowed it to interfere with the literary, or story/characters, of his last creation. All literary works should on some level be a philosophical debate, showing how the author/writer/director sees the world around him or her. But literature, whether it be book, movie or television, should raise questions, not provide a simple answer. Roddenberry, as a writer, was more interested in answering rather than questioning. I also think that GR was trapped in the anthological-style of 60's television. He figured audiences wouldn't tolerate following a continuing storyline over the course of several episodes. At the time of the late 80's, that couldn't be farther from the truth. People showed a willingness to follow the prime-time soap opera's of "Dallas" and "Dynasty," and the ongoing struggles of a police force in Any City U.S. in "Hill Street Blues." Television was changing, Roddenberry, unfortunately, did not change with it. Middy Seafort [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3