Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Can Star Trek Be Saved?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mucus: [QB] Snay, Oh you're involved alright. I stand by my asssertion that you're a "deep" ST (or more specifically DS9) fan. Your most recent posts on ST before "Can ST be saved" and "ST: Missed Opportunities" involve collecting ST models and Bajoran uniforms. A bit further down we have a whole whack of posts on "How the Federation operates." These to me are not the actions of a casual ST fan. In fact, I would argue that pretty much anyone who posts on an online forum about ST is not a casual fan. Your comments about SF reveal a much bigger difference between us: [QUOTE]...they watch the show because they find ...believable characters and in response to the fictional world they live in and the fictionalized situations they find themselves in [/QUOTE]I would work from a completely different angle. Science fiction shows should focus on the fictionalized world and situation. The characters are usually just the "hook", something that gives us some personal stake in the story, some reason to care. However, this is not always the case. Since I'm going to bring up the Hugos later, I might as well [URL=http://worldcon.org/hc.html]link to a list of them[/URL] Let's start with example from written novels. I'm unfamiliar with their first choice under "novels", but I am familiar with "A Canticle for Lebowitz." A post-nuclear warfare book focusing on a monastary, consisting of four mini-stories involving completely different characters. Tts rather obvious that the main focus is how society reacts to complete devastation. The characters are less important, in fact the last story doesn't even really have characters. You could probably make the same argument about their "all-time" pick of Foundation, a series where the characters are secondary to the main concept. Moving back to the dramatic category, a good example would be Blade Runner. Nobody really cares about the characters that much, the main focus of the story is the conflict between replicants and the rest of society. Deckard's reactions to the events around him are just a bonus. This to me, is a more useful definition of what SF really is. Using your definition, a concept such as "Sally and Bob have a huge dramatic love affair....oh and they happen to be on a starship" would be sci-fi drama. This is a bad thing. As Timelord pointed out, yes there are two episodes of B5 on the list, and two from TNG and TOS each. Your unexplanable inate hostility towards [QUOTE] a bunch of people with apparently no taste for character depth and no appreciation for good writing [/QUOTE]is most puzzling. Most of the awards aren't even for TV, most of them are for literature. i.e. writing This bring us to my observation of "tunnel vision." The fact is, it wouldn't be tunnel vision if it was something most fans were easily aware of. Thats kind of the definition of tunnel vision. I'm not too familiar with your examples of good TV writing, I too haven't been able to watch much TV ever since starting my university studies. However, they do not conflict with my assertion that using ST/SW as an entry point into affects people's ability to judge other SF. This effect ranges from the casual fan that thinks ST/SW IS the entirety of science fiction, or the other extreme is the aforementioned Simpsons "comic-book-guy" that is so involved that he can't see anything else. I don't know where you would fit, or even if you really do fit the pattern. I don't personally know you. However, your straight protests aside, your statement that you only particularly like (in SF) DS9 and Highlander (more nominally classified as fantasy) only strengthens this theory. It really is something worth considering. [/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