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] Hello, all. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Sol System: I suspect this may be a division of taste which we cannot breach. Some people seek out complicated plots, and if those are found in stories that are lacking in other areas, the plot makes up for it in their eyes. Others might want identifiable characters, or a story that's simply told in an aesthetically pleasing way. These different interests would seem not to be relatable. Plot does not intrinsically trump character, or vice versa. [/QB][/QUOTE]It's the old Po-TAH-to, Po-ta-TO arguement. To each their own. However, plot and character are intrinsic to each other in any form of literature. Complicated plots with complicated characters are possible; it has been done in book-form SF for years. But it is all according to taste, upon that I agree with you. [QUOTE]Originally posted by AndrewR: Despite this thread/talk - I still think TNG was GREAT. The characters I still love and I can still watch an episode - CAPTIVATED when it is repeated. [/QUOTE]This is not a TNG-bashing topic. I did not start this topic to denounce TNG, but rather to get others to look at the whole of the series critically in a literary fashion. I have stated that I too enjoyed the seven season of TNG. I also wanted to pose the question, "Was there loss potential?" It is up to everyone to decide for him/herselves. [QUOTE] Originally posted by MrNeutron: TNG had a lot of interesting potential, but it fell into formula pretty quickly, and any tensions between the characters evaporated within the first handful of episodes (and don't blame Roddenberry for that...after all, he wanted Diana Muldar (Pulaski) in the show as a foil for Data, and she wasn't nice to him at all). [/QUOTE]Indeed, he did try to add Pulaski as a foil for Data in an attempt to recreate the Spock-McCoy dynamic. However, there have been rumors that Gates McFadden's departure may have been much like the Michael O'Hare departure on B5 (not really a creative decision, but rather a studio-based one). I also wonder what would've been had Pulaski stayed, but that's another topic. But Roddenberry did dicate from the very beginning that by TNG's time, humans had gotten over their petty problems. A noble aspiration, but I tend to believe more in the Nick Meyers and JMS notion that humans will still be humans... even 400 years from now. They'll still want a burger and a smoke. Besides, no matter how perfect someone is, he or she will still have a hard time getting along with everyone on board a ship filled with 1,000+ souls. Carry on the debate. 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