58 réponses à ce sujet

[Drone223]

"In the Pale Moonlight" (along with the series' introduction of story elements like Section 31), convinced some Star Trek fans that DS9 had betrayed Roddenberry's vision for Star Trek, to which my response is, "Yeah, and there are a lot of other great things about the episode too." Aside from Senator Vreenak's meme-worthy delivery of the "It's a FAKE!" line, it's is one of my favorite episodes in the whole of Star Trek canon.

I also like how Sisko is willing to make an entire plant inhospitable in order to stop the maquis. The grey morality of Sisko makes him IMO the best Star Trek captain.

P.S I doubt anyone can keep a straight face on the "It's a FAKE!" line it's pure good. XD

[spinachdiaper]

I have been told that DS9 isn't really a true Star Trek but is a kind of plagiaristic copy of Babylon 5. I don't really care if it was because I enjoy both of those shows.

[mybudgee]

I have been told that DS9 isn't really a true Star Trek but is a kind of plagiaristic copy of Babylon 5. 

How is there any doubt??

[Vortex13]

I have been told that DS9 isn't really a true Star Trek but is a kind of plagiaristic copy of Babylon 5. I don't really care if it was because I enjoy both of those shows.

 

 

I have never seen Babylon 5 so I couldn't comment on their similarities, but I will say that DS9 was the best of all the Star Trek shows (IMHO).

 

 

I liked the gritty take on the Federation, at how it wasn't some perfect utopia that everyone should be clamoring to be a part of. Though Star Trek (as a whole) does still have the underlying "humans are superior" theme going through it. Our culture, our ingenuity, our creativity, etc. is somehow better than all the other alien species in the setting, but at least DS9 toned it back quite a bit.

[Obadiah]

DS9 was the Trek series I stopped watching after about mid 2nd season. I think the "gritty" part put me off. Trek before then was always set in a society that had progressed past pettier (more human?) infighting. DS9 seemed so... political. I wanted to go back to TNG's elevated utopian-ish society progressing and solving problems.

[Vortex13]

DS9 was the Trek series I stopped watching after about mid 2nd season. I think the "gritty" part put me off. Trek before then was always set in a society that had progressed past pettier (more human?) infighting. DS9 seemed so... political. I wanted to go back to TNG's elevated utopian-ish society progressing and solving problems.

 

 

That's what I liked about DS9, the Federation was knocked off it's pedestal in the eyes of the narrative. 

 

 

I can see why fans of the original vision would have an issue with DS9's take on everything, but I for one enjoyed how it took steps to remove the demigod/god-like status of the Federation in general and humanity in particular (although there still is a subtle, pro-human slant to everything). 

 

 

One of things about the other shows that always bothered me was how they portrayed humanity as evolving beyond such petty flaws as material wants, racism, jealousy etc. because we had access to all this wonderful technology, but the aliens with the exact same technology were still stumbling along with these same issues despite (in many cases) being interstellar empires a lot longer than the Federation.

 

It all felt too Mary Sue-ish for my tastes.

[Obadiah]

Right, but knocking down the Federation basically turned Trek into literally every other sci-fi franchise out there on the TV and movies - humans still human with more technology. Trek was the only franchise with the message that, as a society, we got past this at some point and moved on to something greater. Sure it was flawed, but it was at least aspirational.

[TheClonesLegacy]

The Federation had an almost Mary Sue quality to them pre-DS9. It was always a little too infallibal...Aside from the Lawful stupid following of the Prime Directive.

Roddenberry was an innovator for making a show with a decently diverse cast. But alot if his ideas weren't all that good. He seemed really obsessed with a Trek movie about Spock saving JFK for example. An idea ironically better done in one of the rare serious episodes of Red Dwarf.

The best Star Trek movies were done after he was exiled to Executive Producer (2, 3, 4).

[Vortex13]

Right, but knocking down the Federation basically turned Trek into literally every other sci-fi franchise out there on the TV and movies - humans still human with more technology. Trek was the only franchise with the message that, as a society, we got past this at some point and moved on to something greater. Sure it was flawed, but it was at least aspirational.

 

 

Aspirational in the sense of: "It would be nice if there was no more sickness or disease. If world hunger was a thing of the past." As far as imagining a better world for ourselves, yes it was an aspiring concept, but as a form of entertainment, or as an engaging setting making the Federation/Humanity (more or less) perfect was boring. 

 

 

Any species/faction/character that a setting presents as the epitome of all that is good and perfect is a species/faction/character that I tend to not like, whether that be the Federation, JRR Tolkien's Elves, the blue cat people of Avatar, etc. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Right, but knocking down the Federation basically turned Trek into literally every other sci-fi franchise out there on the TV and movies - humans still human with more technology. Trek was the only franchise with the message that, as a society, we got past this at some point and moved on to something greater. Sure it was flawed, but it was at least aspirational.

I agree. While it may have made the Federation look unrealistically sterling, Star Trek did have a bright and optimistic view of the future.

And as I said in my first post, the fact that there is an almost undetectable line between Star Fleet, the Federation and the rest of humanity spoke to a newly developed shared sense of purpose and mindset. While this is almost against logic that human nature could be modified so heavily by the simple introduction of technology and a widened understanding of the universe, it still was quite unique for the Star Trek "brand." Take that away and you've got fairly generic sci fi.

[Obadiah]

Aspirational in the sense of: "It would be nice if there was no more sickness or disease. If world hunger was a thing of the past." As far as imagining a better world for ourselves, yes it was an aspiring concept, but as a form of entertainment, or as an engaging setting making the Federation/Humanity (more or less) perfect was boring. 
...

Boring for you maybe. I thought it was damn interesting. I like other sci-fi settings without elevated societies, or just straight up dystopian futures. I just liked elitist-Federation Trek too.

[Vortex13]

Boring for you maybe. I thought it was damn interesting. I like other sci-fi settings without elevated societies, or just straight up dystopian futures. I just liked elitist-Federation Trek too.

 

 

Eh, different strokes for different folks. I can respect that.

 

 

Personally though, I find it annoying when you are trying to get into a setting and you have that one uppity mouth breather of a species/faction/character going: "I'm the best at everything just so you know. Oh what's that? You are looking at that other species/faction/character over there? Well just so you know I'm better at whatever they can do. Oh that species/faction/character was actually better than me in this one story? Don't worry, it will be reveled later on that I was holding back to let them win, or that the other species/faction/character is secretly jealous of me and wishes that they could aspire to be just like me."

 

Its like that one kid that insisted he have all of the best superpowers when you and your friends wanted to play pretend super heroes. It kinda sucks the fun out of the game for everyone else.

[Neoleviathan]

I thought the original series gave the Federation a good balance. The society developed for sure, but you still had greed & bloodshed mixed in and even central to the story. Kirk survived a brutal colony genocide when he was young, Harry Mudd was still living the good life, & plenty of other examples. Through the series there were always Federation citizens ready to cheat or grab power. Human's still seemed to carry a reputation of being arrogant & ruthless with a few species.

I thought it remarkable enough that there are a few times Picard practically walks off the Enterprise to pursue other interests. The Federation seems to allow complete freedom, such that even a Starfleet Captain can walk away if they wanted to, that anyone can choose to pursue whatever gives them the most satisfaction in life. People aren't defined & subjugated by their roles in the Federation, they're free to explore. I find that pretty far from Communism or any present system for that matter.

[Obadiah]

...
Personally though, I find it annoying when you are trying to get into a setting and you have that one uppity mouth breather of a species/faction/character going: "I'm the best at everything just so you know. Oh what's that? You are looking at that other species/faction/character over there? Well just so you know I'm better at whatever they can do. Oh that species/faction/character was actually better than me in this one story? Don't worry, it will be reveled later on that I was holding back to let them win, or that the other species/faction/character is secretly jealous of me and wishes that they could aspire to be just like me."
...

Yikes! Apparently I wasn't into Trek enough to know what it is you're talking about. The version I remember is: we're all on the same team, and we'll work together towards this goal. Oh there's disagreement? Let's discuss and come to a resolution.

[Vortex13]

Yikes! Apparently I wasn't into Trek enough to know what it is you're talking about. The version I remember is: we're all on the same team, and we'll work together towards this goal. Oh there disagreement? Let's discuss and come to a resolution.

 

 

It was more like I had quite a few bad experiences with other settings, and Star Trek had multiple examples that matched up with a preferred element of the setting being elevated above all the other elements.

 

It's not as extreme as my little rant would indicate, but there are certain things, like Spock (pretty much) flat out admitting that his human side, and humanity was better than the Vulcan way, or how other civilizations with thousands of years of culture found human history so fascinating, but humans didn't do likewise, etc. And that's not including novels, comics and other media based on the setting.

[Sion1138]

No, it isn't.

[The Devlish Redhead]

The Federation was never that clean cut. For example Insurrection showed the dark side of the Federation. They find a world with something they want and were willing to kick the people living there off that world via any means......

 

Not so goody goody there.

 

And don't get me started on The Prime Directive which was one of the daftest things.... It was too inflexible.

[Cyonan]

The Federation was never that clean cut. For example Insurrection showed the dark side of the Federation. They find a world with something they want and were willing to kick the people living there off that world via any means......

 

Not so goody goody there.

 

And don't get me started on The Prime Directive which was one of the daftest things.... It was too inflexible.

 

The original series and the first few seasons of TNG were more goody goody, but they started easing up on it after that.

 

My understanding of the Prime Directive is mostly that it was just a way around the idea that they could use the superior firepower of the Enterprise to insta-win half the plots.

 

Of course they just break it whenever they damn well feel like it anyway, so it doesn't seem to really be all that important despite them mentioning multiple times how captains are supposed to die before breaking it.

[The Devlish Redhead]

The original series and the first few seasons of TNG were more goody goody, but they started easing up on it after that.

 

My understanding of the Prime Directive is mostly that it was just a way around the idea that they could use the superior firepower of the Enterprise to insta-win half the plots.

 

Of course they just break it whenever they damn well feel like it anyway, so it doesn't seem to really be all that important despite them mentioning multiple times how captains are supposed to die before breaking it.

 

 

Very good point, and that some breaches of the Prime Directive are instant death sentences. Like the planet the Talosians are on....... Visiting there is an instant death sentence..

[SwobyJ]

Prime Directive was more of a fundamental principle, than a directive (though it was also that). Every time it was violated, the integrity as the Federation as it understood itself was cracked.

 

It didn't necessarily stand against the concept of other species interfering with other species, but it was a kinda negative perspective on humanity; that humans aren't too good when they first interact with new peoples, even as the best of humanity can shine once it gets used to those peoples.

 

There are plenty of exceptions to the Prime Directive, but when those exceptions don't apply, then yes, one is to defend it at the cost of their or their crew's lives.

 

The Directive itself was worded inflexibly, but that's more to enforce the concept in Starfleet personnel. Captains and crew are still given a degree of agency regarding it, as the Directive has already become important to them. They just don't want to lose it as an important value.

 

Lots of Star Trek is the negotiation between human roots (both the helpful and bad parts) and the growth into something more (both the good and problematic parts). The Prime Directive is a perfect example of that - where Starfleet wishes to only engage in communications with another race once that race is ready to deal with them, and vice versa. This comes with issues of its own to be faced, but it is largely agreed to be a good standpoint to come from, compared to behaving more haphazardly.

[The Devlish Redhead]

"Pen Pals" is one of those episodes where a lot of hand wringing around the prime directive is taken.

 

I really wanted to punch Picard in the face during that episode.

[mybudgee]

Hey, uh..

 

anybody else like sexy brunettes with fair skin and long, curly hair?

 

 

 

 

   

[The Devlish Redhead]

Hey, uh..

 

anybody else like sexy brunettes with fair skin and long, curly hair?

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

Deanna Troi is amazing

 

But I prefer Dr. Beverly Crusher

[N7 Spectre525]

I have been told that DS9 isn't really a true Star Trek but is a kind of plagiaristic copy of Babylon 5. I don't really care if it was because I enjoy both of those shows.

I remember years ago reading an interview with JMS(Babylon 5's creator)stating that he pitched the idea of B5 to Paramount and they turned him down. Next thing you know we get DS9 which is my favorite Trek series but if you watched both shows it was clear Paramount jacked ideas and concepts from JMS's original treatment. 

[Sifr]

I have been told that DS9 isn't really a true Star Trek but is a kind of plagiaristic copy of Babylon 5. I don't really care if it was because I enjoy both of those shows.

 

While most of the evidence suggests that's true, you're right that they're still really good shows and I loved how the writers were willing to push the boat out more with DS9, instead of sticking to the same tired old formula and made Voyager and Enterprise a slog to sit through at times.

 

I've only recently started watching B5 and I can definitely see the DS9 parallels, although given how much B5 would go onto inspire and be homages in the Mass Effect series, it's harder not to think of ME than DS9 nowadays.

 

Deanna Troi is amazing

 

Except at driving the Enterprise...

 

Poor Marina Sirtis, the only time Troi ever got to pilot and both times she ended up crashing the Enterprise D and E into something else! Blind guys, Klingons, Robots and teenagers all managed to pilot that thing for years without any hassle, but put her in the chair for two minutes and one ship ended up totalled and the other suffered a major fender-bender (although that last one was deliberate).

 

 

As for the original topic...

 

I've always taken that the Federation is a False Utopia masquerading as as perfect society, using a form of benevolent alien invasion to basically seize dominion over the galaxy inch by inch?

 

Sure, they're nice and they offer all these nice things, but you have to trade in your unique culture, clothing and ship designs and instead adhere to Starfleet principles, wear the same godawful uniforms with a strict dress-code and little leeway to cultural items (sure, Worf wears a klingon baldric, but Ro and other Bajorans can't wear their earrings) and use the same dull, grey ships the Federation uses.

 

All this suggests that the Federation deeply values conformity, even if they claim otherwise, because if you tell people exactly how they are permitted to think, dress and act, then there's no longer and disagreements between people? No wonder they somehow stamped out war on Earth, if they're group-thinking people from birth not to go against the herd? Eddington might have been a jerk, but he wasn't wrong in pointing out that like the Borg, the Federation loves to assimilate people without them even noticing.

 

As a final note, given the sheer lack of any LGBT representation in over 50 years of Star Trek, it honestly makes me wonder whether not that Earth has simply decided to shove everyone back in the closet, and how many Krem's and Dorian's might be currently living in the Federation?