posted
No, TSN - thanks for that facetious comment - what I'm trying to say is... that Voyager just gave up on trying to title their episodes... creatively. I'm not talking about the quality of ANY of the episodes... I'm talking about how 'memorable' some of the episode titles are. I noticed it was about the time that Behr/Wolfe/Moore took to being more TOS like and having creative titles to their episodes... it was at this time that I'm SURE Braga went in the complete opposite direction and tried to keep them as short and as sweet as possible
I prefer titles like "All Good Things..." and "The Way of the Warrior" over "Drone" or "Endgame" - Look at Moore's story "The Barge of the Dead" - it evokes a sense of wonder - and you want to see what this episode is about.
It's annoyed me with the Trek films... "The Wrath Of Kahn" and "The Search For Spock" and "The Undiscovered Country" are way better than "Generations" "The Motion Picture" and "Insurrection".
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
Yeah, "The Motion Picture", what kind of idiotic, misplaced term is that???
I have never judged an episode title better or worse, creative or boring, I simply accept it and use it for reference so that people know which one I mean. That's what it's for.
------------------ "Babies haven't any hair; old men's heads are just as bare; between the cradle and the grave lies a haircut and a shave."
posted
"Superman: The Movie" came out the previous December, so they went it one better and called it "Star Trek: The Motion Picture." Sounds pretty classy, eh?
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
I was going to mention that "The Motion Picture" is a very Classy title... it smacked too much of "2001"'s feel though - the title that is. But appropriate for Trek's first foray onto the Big Screen.
Look, again - I'm not basing an episode's quality on the episode's name - I'm talking about the thoughtfulness, the creativeness, the memorability (is that a word) of the episode titles. "Let He Who Has Sinned" is a great - thought provoking title for an episode compared to "Drone" but one is better than the other (as a whole)...
"Looking for Par'Mach in all the Wrong Places" "Paper Moon" "Once More Unto the Breach" "The Sacrifice of Angels" "Visionary"
They're pretty good... and they all have multiple connotations. What does "The Cloud" have.
Yes, you're right - episode names help you keep track of the... episodes!!!!! It doesn't help when all the episode names sound similar and aren't very thought provoking.
And what about in TNG, weren't there some samish episode titles?? Code of Honour... A matter of Honour?? What WAS that episode where Riker serves aboard the Klingon ship called? What was the episode where Yar has to battle Yuta??
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
"Dagger of the Mind" (TOS) "How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth" (TAS) "The Undiscovered Country" (movies) "Thine Own Self" (TNG) "Once More unto the Breach" (DS9)
Macbeth King Lear Hamlet Hamlet Henry V
VOY is the only series that never named an episode w/ a line from Shakespeare. There's the problem right there... *L*
------------------ "Even the colors are pompous!" -a friend of mine, looking at a Lexus brochure
[This message has been edited by TSN (edited May 21, 2001).]
posted
Don't forget "Conscience of the King," an entire episode dealing with Shakespeare! It has a title reference, a troupe of actors, a nutty young woman, a haunted King, and a play within a play.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
For the curious or bored, here are some literary sources for titles from TOS (info from "Star Trek Concodance"):
Dagger of the Mind - Macbeth Conscience of the King - Hamlet Who Mourns for Adonis? - Percy Bysshe Shelley, "Adonais" Journey to Babel - Genesis 11:1-9 Wolf in the Fold - Lord Byron, "Destruction of Sennachrib" By Any Other Name - Romeo and Juliet Bread and Circuses ("Duas tantum res anxius optat, Panem et cencenses") - Juvenal, "Satires" And the Children Shall Lead - Isaiah 11:6 Is There in Truth No Beauty? - George Herbert, "The Temple" (1633) Day of the Dove - Matthew 10:16 Elaan of Troyius - The Iliad (sort of) Whom Gods Destroy - Euripedes, "Phraxis" Mark of Gideon - Judges 7:2 That Which Survives - Percy Bysshe Shelley, "Ozymandias" Requiem for Methuselah - Genesis 5:27 The Cloud Minders - Ecclesiates 11:4 All Our Yesterdays - Macbeth The Undiscovered Country - Hamlet (TUC is actually death, not the future.)
TAS Yesteryear - Richard II The Lorelei Signal - legend, poem by Heinrich Heine Eye of the Beholder - Lew Wallace, "The Prince of India" BEM - science fiction term for "bug-eyed monster" How Sharper Than a Serpent's Tooth - King Lear
What I think this shows is that the people who wrote and produced TOS and TAS were very well read. Not like the TV babies who are producing Star Trek now.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
[This message has been edited by Masao (edited May 21, 2001).]
posted
Maybe this shows up the Voyager writing staff's background in literature... not very much. That'd explain their tired stories.
Remember how I mentioned about a Star Trek TOS Season 1 marathon over Easter - that was so cool... I had seen Conscience of the King Before - and was pretty board by it - that was like 5 years ago. When I saw it over Easter - and after watching about 10 previous episodes - you get into the feel of Trek (I had only caught TOS sporadically before hand) - and you realise what a FUCKING awesome episode that it was. The whole scene with the Daughter and the Father and her going completely nuts... it was... Shakespearean indeed.
Andrew
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
I was watching the original series back in the sixties (okay - so I was only 8...
I was captivated (mon said that only it and Walter Cronkite could hold an.8 year-ol's attention span for more than 15 minutes).
As I grew up - high school, college), I never tired of it. Ask any of the original Trekkie generation (those of us still around). 3 years of episodes (some stinkers), and there was enough sense of wonder and excitement to keep Trek fandom alive for decades.
I think that says something about the writing quality compared to anything which has come since. And yes, I do watch all of the other series and movies - some with a sense of awe, some with interest, and some just to keep up on "current events".
BTW: Every old TOS fan knows why Klingons now have bumpy foreheads. Kirk kicked them in the ass so hard, their backbones were shoved up and over the top of their skulls - becoming frontbones.
------------------ Faster than light - no left or right.
posted
Good God! Another old fart testifying how TOS changed his life. Welcome to the club, brother!
I too am a paleo-TOS fan. I vividly remember watching Trek in color in the 1960s after my parents bought our first color set to see the Mexico City Olympics and the space program. I forced my parents to drive me to Minneapolis to see a Trek slide show given by DC Fontana when I was about 10 years old. I dressed as Spock for Halloween several times. I've been drawing starships ever since.
For those of you who were introduced to Trek through later incarnations may find it hard to understand what an amazing thing Star Trek was when it first came on. It was epic, colorful, adventurous, idealistic, romantic, and very innovative, unlike anything we had ever seen on TV or the movies. It wasn't just the techology, which was, of course, very cool for the time. I can't say that I completely understood the depth of the stories, but I was definitely hooked. I wish you all had the chance to see Star Trek as I first saw it in 1967.
I think the overall quality of the 78 TOS episodes would have been enough to sustain 35 years of fandom, perhaps even without the subsequent movies and series. I don't want to sound like an arrogant old TOS-head geezer (too late!), but I still compare every new show to TOS, to see if it gives me that same charge. Would Star Trek be still be going on if the first show had been Voyager, TNG, or DS9? Who knows? That question is probably impossible to answer since everything that came after was built on the foundation laid by TOS. But TOS certainly left an enormous impression on those who saw it when they were young. Do kids today wish they were Capt. Janeway or Sisko. Do girls fall in love with Tuvok or Chakotay?
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
I would humbly suggest that TOS's success had more to do with it being the only game in town as far as serious science fiction adventure drama went.
posted
I agree that it wasn't the serious SF that attracted me. My previous favorite show was Fireball XL-5. I was only 6 or 7 when I first saw Star Trek. I'm just thankful that I didn't get fixated or imprinted on Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Very impressive
Printer-friendly view of this topic
