When are people gonna realize that Star Trek is just about as bad as sci-fi can get? Take off the blinders. I'm embarrased that I ever liked Trek. It's sci-fi for kindergarteners. I say this knowing that Star Trek XI will be directed by someone who actually has a brain. But I don't care anymore.
The test for science fiction is whether or not it explores new ideas, pushes the envelope, moves forward. The original Star Trek series was a bunch of standard stories set in space (the stories could have been set anywhere), Next Generation was politically correct nonsense (how many episodes ended with Picard lecturing the audience about how backwards modern America is?), Deep Space Nine was thinly disguised Israel-bashing (Cardassians = Israelis, Bajorans = "Palestinians"), while Voyager and Enterprise were just bad TV. How many people have to die in real world totalitarian nations before the socialist/communist utopian society depicted on Trek can be discredited?
I wish the franchise would die. How many people have wasted their lives devoted to the silly religion of Star Trek?
Star Trek should have died when TOS died in the late sixties.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I always thought of DS9 as Cardassians = Soviets, Bajorans = Afghanistan. Just my take on it, I guess.
Star Trek my be "bad science fiction" but I don't watch space opera for Science fiction, I watch it for fun. There are many reasons for entertainment - whether you want an intense drama to take you through an emotional ringer, a very intellectual movie to make you think, a romantic comedy to make you smile, or simple escapist fun. Most SF I watch for escapism - to identify with guys in ships in the black- whether the show may have other undertones (and I particularly avoid trying to see politics in stuff), I enjoy it for what it is.
I may have blinders on, even purposefully, but you know what, that means I get to enjoy a whole bunch of stuff, even if it isn't the best in the world - and when I am looking for entertainment, that is all I need. Entertainment. I don't want it to enlighten me, challenge me, or be "art" - I just want something I can enjoy.
Star Trek (especially DS9) does that for me.
After hundreds of episodes and nearly a dozen movies, I think a franchise Like Trek should have something important to say. If not, what's the point? But it doesn't. Even worse, many of the positions it takes are destructive.
Science fiction, by it's very definition, should challenge. If it doesn't, it isn't science fiction.
Not only is Trek bad science fiction, it doesn't even qualify as good entertainment. Why be that blind? The studios will just keep shovelling this crap at us if we just sit and take it.
I'm not going to sit around and be insulted and assaulted by bad TV with the excuse that it's "just entertainment". When you reach that point in your argument, it is a flimsy qualifier.
Entertainment for entertainment's sake is destructive. Might as well put a pacifier in your mouth and call it good.
It is unacceptable to keep accepting anything as just entertainment.
Star Trek has been the "U.N. in space" for the last 20 years.
I always liked NG. It was good although a pale comparison I admit to both the original ST in story telling (although I loved the acting better here) NG did rely too much on technobabble and a strong cast then its ability to spin a good sci fi yarn at times. It did have its heights though.
But for me the best sci fi stories came from dr. Who with its low production values and all. If you have never seen one, pick one at random and I dare you to say otherwise.
I am partial to the old days, but even Dr. who has its NG. Check out the episode where the statues come to life and tell me you are not moved even one bit.
Post a Comment