The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Post subject: Re: Live Long and Prosper; the Trek Thread
Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 8:51 pm
The Master
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm Posts: 31614 Location: Garbage Dump
bada wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
Roddenberry's mandate that no one be hot-headed or adversarial.
Yeah he was a little too optimistic. Great idea man but the shows tended to work better in other people's hands.
I actually totally disagree. That concept is what made the show so beautiful and unique to me. I think the show really lost something after he died. That unabashed optimism is crucial to my love of Trek.
Roddenberry's mandate that no one be hot-headed or adversarial.
Yeah he was a little too optimistic. Great idea man but the shows tended to work better in other people's hands.
I actually totally disagree. That concept is what made the show so beautiful and unique to me. I think the show really lost something after he died. That unabashed optimism is crucial to my love of Trek.
I disagree. TNG especially didn't get really interesting until Gene let go a bit and allowed for some kind of actual dramatic conflict. It's why the show got better after season one.
The concept never changed, the optimism is still there (and though I know you'll disagree with me here) it's in the new incarnation as well. That hasn't changed. Like bada said, his ideas are great and without him we wouldn't have any of it. But he wasn't a competent writer. He didn't understand dramatic structure very well at all. But it's his foundation and it should always remain so.
Post subject: Re: Live Long and Prosper; the Trek Thread
Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 8:59 pm
The Master
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm Posts: 31614 Location: Garbage Dump
durdencommatyler wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
bada wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
Roddenberry's mandate that no one be hot-headed or adversarial.
Yeah he was a little too optimistic. Great idea man but the shows tended to work better in other people's hands.
I actually totally disagree. That concept is what made the show so beautiful and unique to me. I think the show really lost something after he died. That unabashed optimism is crucial to my love of Trek.
I disagree. TNG especially didn't get really interesting until Gene let go a bit and allowed for some kind of actual dramatic conflict. It's why the show got better after season one.
The concept never changed, the optimism is still there (and though I know you'll disagree with me here) it's in the new incarnation as well. That hasn't changed. Like bada said, his ideas are great and without him we wouldn't have any of it. But he wasn't a competent writer. He didn't understand dramatic structure very well at all. But it's his foundation and it should always remain so.
Roddenberry's mandate that no one be hot-headed or adversarial.
Yeah he was a little too optimistic. Great idea man but the shows tended to work better in other people's hands.
I actually totally disagree. That concept is what made the show so beautiful and unique to me. I think the show really lost something after he died. That unabashed optimism is crucial to my love of Trek.
I disagree. TNG especially didn't get really interesting until Gene let go a bit and allowed for some kind of actual dramatic conflict. It's why the show got better after season one.
The concept never changed, the optimism is still there (and though I know you'll disagree with me here) it's in the new incarnation as well. That hasn't changed. Like bada said, his ideas are great and without him we wouldn't have any of it. But he wasn't a competent writer. He didn't understand dramatic structure very well at all. But it's his foundation and it should always remain so.
Post subject: Re: Live Long and Prosper; the Trek Thread
Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 9:02 pm
The Master
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm Posts: 31614 Location: Garbage Dump
But seriously, I think TNG flourished while he was alive. Dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. The show went downhill after he passed.
But seriously, I think TNG flourished while he was alive. Dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. The show went downhill after he passed.
Of course dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. But ignoring one of the truest and oldest aspects of human nature isn't interesting or believable or sustainable. I get what he was going for, but again, there's no dramatic tension in it.
Post subject: Re: Live Long and Prosper; the Trek Thread
Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 9:09 pm
The Master
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm Posts: 31614 Location: Garbage Dump
durdencommatyler wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
But seriously, I think TNG flourished while he was alive. Dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. The show went downhill after he passed.
Of course dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. But ignoring one of the truest and oldest aspects of human nature isn't interesting or believable or sustainable. I get what he was going for, but again, there's no dramatic tension in it.
people like you are the reason we don't have spaceships
But seriously, I think TNG flourished while he was alive. Dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. The show went downhill after he passed.
Of course dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. But ignoring one of the truest and oldest aspects of human nature isn't interesting or believable or sustainable. I get what he was going for, but again, there's no dramatic tension in it.
people like you are the reason we don't have spaceships
Post subject: Re: Live Long and Prosper; the Trek Thread
Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 9:16 pm
The Master
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm Posts: 31614 Location: Garbage Dump
durdencommatyler wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
durdencommatyler wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
But seriously, I think TNG flourished while he was alive. Dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. The show went downhill after he passed.
Of course dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. But ignoring one of the truest and oldest aspects of human nature isn't interesting or believable or sustainable. I get what he was going for, but again, there's no dramatic tension in it.
people like you are the reason we don't have spaceships
wut
Again, serious response now: I just flat-out disagree with you. What you're talking is the entire core vision for the show. Roddenberry's whole concept was that humans would only be able to achieve the amazing things they did in the show after they evolve out of all the petty conflict that has been holding us back since the dawn of time. The "believability" of that is debatable and subjective, but I absolutely think it's sustainable and interesting. That's why I think the show became LESS interesting as they slowly moved away from that. It always mostly remained, but they strayed. It's the whole reason I responded to Trek in the first place.
Also, in today's installment of "That's So LV!", I think "dramatic conflict" is possibly the most overrated thing ever.
But seriously, I think TNG flourished while he was alive. Dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. The show went downhill after he passed.
Of course dramatic conflict doesn't have to be interpersonal among the crew. But ignoring one of the truest and oldest aspects of human nature isn't interesting or believable or sustainable. I get what he was going for, but again, there's no dramatic tension in it.
people like you are the reason we don't have spaceships
wut
Again, serious response now: I just flat-out disagree with you. What you're talking is the entire core vision for the show. Roddenberry's whole concept was that humans would only be able to achieve the amazing things they did in the show after they evolve out of all the petty conflict that has been holding us back since the dawn of time. The "believability" of that is debatable and subjective, but I absolutely think it's sustainable and interesting. That's why I think the show became LESS interesting as they slowly moved away from that. It always mostly remained, but they strayed. It's the whole reason I responded to Trek in the first place.
Also, in today's installment of "That's So LV!", I think "dramatic conflict" is possibly the most overrated thing ever.
Boy oh boy. I'm comfortable disagreeing with you on just about anything. But absolutely not on the idea of dramatic conflict. Absolutely not. What you're saying is absurd. It's ignorant. And I appreciate your "subjective" arguments but this isn't one of them. You sound ignorant. And I know you're not so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and just let it go. We'll call it an agree to disagree subject and move along without anyone getting hurt.
But regarding your first paragraph. Those aren't mutually exclusive ideas. And that's what Roddenberry didn't seem to understand either. Dramatic conflict doesn't mean "humans haven't evolved past petty conflict." Dramatic conflict isn't petty conflict.
Post subject: Re: Live Long and Prosper; the Trek Thread
Posted: Tue May 24, 2016 9:45 pm
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm Posts: 39820 Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
So far, by my count, LV doesn't consider dramatic conflict, writing, dialogue, and plot to be important parts of filmmaking. At some point I expect him to say light, sound and movement are irrelevant as well. It's only a matter of time.
So far, by my count, LV doesn't consider dramatic conflict, writing, dialogue, and plot to be important parts of filmmaking. At some point I expect him to say light, sound and movement are irrelevant as well. It's only a matter of time.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
