Boycott ENTERPRISE .. it's just that bad.

POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Monday, January 24, 2005 20:10
VIEWED: 38245
PAGE 13 of 15

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CosmicFugitive:
It's true about the state of conventions. In the U.K, the numbers are going down slowly every year.

---

Yes, 'Fanboy consumerism' has deminished Fandom. Worse, the "conventions" have been commercialized and are now called, ironically, "Cons". See, corporate interests are not to have Sci-Fi and Fantasy flurish, only to make as much money as fast as possible and damn anything that gets i the way... like good Sci-Fi such as Firelfy.

Quote:

---

Although, Enterprise is set closer to our timeline and the show needs to reflect that.

In the Trek universe, humankind went through centuries of war (WWIII as hinted in First Contact and the Eugenics war or something as hinted in the original series?), before they changed their ways and formed the Federation.

---

The wars you mention, the hardship of humanity comming to be a space faring species... is ignored from the first ep of Enterprise.

Ah, from my old Trek Memory Alpha I can tell you that the Eugenics War was in 1996, it was from this conflict (mostly in the Middle East region of Earth) that Khan (Noonien Singh) escaped in a "sleeper" spaceship.

And the Federation was formed after the Romulan War, before that Earth was simply the "United Earth" and the United Earth Space Probe Agency was still the authority for Star Fleet in Kirks time.

Quote:

---

Enterprise is just part of that process showing that war's never good and that humans aren't perfect at dealing with it no matter what type of enemy they face.

---

Nope. Enterprise is a new timeline. Ask Brannon Braga or his evil mutant Lord Berman. They have already admitted it.

Quote:

---

Why no one else thinks that is a good thing to be mad about says far more about them than me.

I'd really like to hear your opinion on this.

Other examples of similarities to real life in Star Trek:

The Borg were a representation of The Roman empire who assimilated other cultures into its own. The same might apply to early christianity when it assimilated the gods and holidays from paganism into its religeon.

---

I think you're being too specific with your examples but are essentially correct.

Quote:

---

In Voyager, the Kazon were a mild reference to the troubles that early American settlers had with Native Americans. Technology differences between the two tribes? Native Americans without shotguns = Kazon without phasers.

---

Well, an accurate parallel to the Native slaughter by the white man wouldn't look nearly as pretty. You certainly get interesting insights on your own.

Quote:

---

Sci -fi is just a new way of re-telling myths based on human truths. It's old stuff. The Gods have just been replace by man. Their powers and the way they used it have been replaced by technology. Instead of the land and sea (which were humankind's final frontier in ancient times)it's now space.

---

Allegory.
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm
I think there are few posts above that cover this pretty well. Star Trek is basically a greek play every week, heavy on the allegory. A large part of it's success is this simple and effective ancient story telling structure.

Thanks to Joss Whedon for keeping that going.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman.
"And considering the USA is a fascist state these days it's important for everyone to PUT DOWN THE FANBOY CRAP AND GRAB A LITTLE REALITY! TAKE THE RED PILL!!!"

---

Quote:

---

Bush ignored the will of those against the reasons for going to war in Iraq. It was wrong. When they protested, he ignored that percentage's opinions. He was so strong willed in his beliefs that nothing could change it. He thought he was right. Do you fall into that category?

---

Well, check out the "Real World Politics" forum here. My opinions about liars are pretty clear.

Quote:

---

"It's senseless to get annoyed with the world, for it isn't in the least bit bothered if you do." - MARCUS AURELIUS, Roman Caesar.

---

I'm not sure if I've answere

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

"Is it bad that what she just said made perfect sense to me?" -MAL, 'Safe'

---

Thanks for replying, Ghoulman. I'll try to answer your comments as best as I can.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman

"Ah, from my old Trek Memory Alpha I can tell you that the Eugenics War was in 1996, it was from this conflict (mostly in the Middle East region of Earth) that Khan (Noonien Singh) escaped in a "sleeper" spaceship.

And the Federation was formed after the Romulan War, before that Earth was simply the "United Earth" and the United Earth Space Probe Agency was still the authority for Star Fleet in Kirks time.

---

That's cool. I was misinformed. The old braincells aren't as sharp as they once were.

I have to admit Rick Berman had destroyed the Trek universe a little. Is it true that Gene Roddenberry hated him?

I read that Enterprise will be touching on more of the original series and TNG?

Do you see that as a good thing?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Well, an accurate parallel to the Native slaughter by the white man wouldn't look nearly as pretty.

---

It wasn't a direct link, but that's how I interpreted it at first.

Voyager was all about survival in new territory. The Kazon had the upperhand on the Voyager crew because they knew the territory, but they were technologically weaker - similar to the Native Americans and the early settlers.

The Voyager crew were split into two factions too. They had to learn to co-exist with each other. It was funny that the second in command (Chakotay) had a Native American background. That's how I read it.

I don't understand why the show's racist or sexist. What do you mean? I'm counting on your comments here.

I read the link on Plato's cave. I agree. We still live in a world of bread and circuses.

This thread is a lot better. It's hard to disagree on much.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CosmicFugitive

Bush ignored the will of those against the reasons for going to war in Iraq. It was wrong. When they protested, he ignored that percentage's opinions. He was so strong willed in his beliefs that nothing could change it. He thought he was right. Do you fall into that category?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Well, check out the "Real World Politics" forum here. My opinions about liars are pretty clear.

---

You misunderstood me.

A lot of what you're saying makes sense, but it's done in the wrong way - or people take it the wrong way. It comes across as a little extreme. That's not a criticism. Their behaviour can just be as bad too. Hell, it's been just as bad.

That's been part of the problem. There's been too many people with their thumbs up their a on the thread to bother about the bigger picture. (Plato's cave?)

It's easy for both sides to hurl abuse at each other when they don't understand what they're both trying to say. It's just how the world works.

It's good for people to be passionate about what they believe in too, and I respect that, but it's not a good look when they (both) don't listen to what others have to say. It becomes fascist.

I'm no Dr Phil , but I'm learning from this. It's been a lot easier to read than the other stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman.

You certainly get interesting insights on your own.

---

I have a few interesting insights on stuff. There are things I believe that people get a little wigged out on. It's not their fault, 'cause they aren't aware of the facts. I respect their beliefs though.

Although, I have a fairly sober approach to what I believe. I'm not just gonna believe stuff outright. That would be crazy. I try to keep it balanced. It's always about challenging those beliefs.

It's easy to get bogged down in it too. Whenever I do, I just say: "It's all mad!"

Thanks for taking the time to work through this, and it would be good to hear your thoughts..

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman
"Ah, from my old Trek Memory Alpha I can tell you that the Eugenics War was in 1996, it was from this conflict (mostly in the Middle East region of Earth) that Khan (Noonien Singh) escaped in a "sleeper" spaceship.

And the Federation was formed after the Romulan War, before that Earth was simply the "United Earth" and the United Earth Space Probe Agency was still the authority for Star Fleet in Kirks time.

---

That's cool. I was misinformed. The old braincells aren't as sharp as they once were.

I have to admit Rick Berman had destroyed the Trek universe a little. Is it true that Gene Roddenberry hated him?

---

Yes. Rick Berman was nothing but a bean counter who got the Trek franchise handed to him by Paramount once Roddenberry became ill. No one was happy about it but the "Fanboys" credit Berman with making TNG great since his reign began in season 3. Of course, Berman had nothing to do with the shows improvments in reality.

Quote:

---

I read that Enterprise will be touching on more of the original series and TNG?

Do you see that as a good thing?

---

Well here's the thing - Enterprise should be portraying the early years of Star Trek, it IS a prequel... right?, but it's about Capt. Proton and his laser gun ship. Warp speed, phasers, Klingons, Ferrengi, etc. But it should not be that. Enterprise is about stealing Star Trek from it's roots. As a writer, it's obvious to me that the ENT people think Trek fans are morons who will watch anything. They are right of course.

You know - if you took the premise seriously Enteprise should be a nuclear powered ship.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Well, an accurate parallel to the Native slaughter by the white man wouldn't look nearly as pretty.

---

It wasn't a direct link, but that's how I interpreted it at first.

Voyager was all about survival in new territory. The Kazon had the upperhand on the Voyager crew because they knew the territory, but they were technologically weaker - similar to the Native Americans and the early settlers.

The Voyager crew were split into two factions too. They had to learn to co-exist with each other. It was funny that the second in command (Chakotay) had a Native American background. That's how I read it.

---

Well, Voyager is a show that dropped it's premise right after the first show. After that, Bermans' orders were to make the show as bland as possible. Or I can only imagine. Ever notice how the Voyager actors barely talk about the show and hated the experience? It's because the show was crap on a stick. Voyager was the hint that showed there was a real moral problem developing with Star Trek - that is, the stories were lacking in even basic morality (Janeways tendancy to murder whole species)... then came the camel toe from Borg.

Quote:

---

I don't understand why the show's racist or sexist. What do you mean? I'm counting on your comments here.

---

The eps Fusion and Stigma from Enteprirse demonstrate the mysoginistic aspects of ENT very well.

In these shows, T'Pol is raped, but she doesn't seem to know it. The Captain lets the rapist go, even after said rapist attacks the Captain. Then to make matters even more horrifically sexist and just plain unbelievable, T'Pol gains mind meld Vulcan AIDS - for one episode.

Frell me with a wet noodle!

See... what I'm pointing out is obvious. And has been talked about on Trek threads for a few years, since these eps were aired. Guess I'm more of a "Trekkie" than anyone else posting here?

Quote:

---

I read the link on Plato's cave. I agree. We still live in a world of bread and circuses.

---

"Bread and Circuses" refers to the Roman Spectaculum or "The Games" (and one of my fav Trek eps!). Gladiators and all that. It was the "opiot for the masses" that distracted people from the truth of thier society. Plato's cave refers to personal delusion. Something we all live with.

Quote:

---

This thread is a lot better. It's hard

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME