XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise
From: annmef1@att.net
It seems the writers are playing to the overall dumbing down of America.
Look at television in general. There is no respect for the audience. TCM
is the only channel that I am aware of that doesn't flash distracting
announcements in the middle of a critical scene, nor does it display an
ID blip in the corner of the screen during actual programming. Just pure
theater as it was meant to be (formatted for typical TV screen ratios).
But, I digress.
Without bringing on a flame war, I point out the basic insult that Spike
TV appears to be to men in general. But then, what would I know--I'm not
a man.
Today's youth are growing up on steady diet of violence without reason.
Go back 60 years and you will find a better rationale for violence. Sure
there have always been street bullies, but we didn't always invite them
into our homes through television and video games. Now, in addition,
there are the ubiquitous DVDs that Americans simply cannot get enough
of.
So, what are we likely to see in the new and improved version of
Enterprise--more computer graphics, more warfare, more sex, less science
and more fantasy, and potentially more, more, more that results in less,
less, less than Gene Roddenberry could ever imagine?
Is this art imitating life or life imitating art?
Are trekkers purists, preservationists, visionaries, more critical of
the process as well as the product? Or is there some new breed of
trekker emerging--a trekker-light, less filling with a lower IQ?
Are those of us who enjoy a good drama simply not willing to settle for
a cheap imitation masquerading as the real thing?
Perhaps Enterprise doesn't deserve to carry the Star Trek moniker until
it can live up to our expectations, but in terms of survival in a medium
where great shows are cancelled routinely, it best add the emblem
quickly and sound the orchestral trumpets or the issue of quality
writing will itself become a moot point.
"wandering wastrel" wrote in message
news:MPG.199d668549c601ef989683@news.pa.comcast.giganews.com...
In article <3F330F70.80C5A7DF@lauragoodwin.org>, laura@lauragoodwin.org
says...
> wandering wastrel wrote:
> >
> > In article <1d85jvg29kqmkpl7fv73viu1tf1n3jjm2i@4ax.com>,
> > spam@wonderful.Spam says...
> > > UPN Reviving Trek Name?
> >
> > Now if only they'd consider reviving the **quality** of the show so
it
> > would get somewhere closer to the standards of Trek we might really
have
> > something worth watching, no?
>
> Maybe. What "quality" are you speaking of?
>
> IMHO, the quality that made the original Star Trek great is the
> willingness to express/extol leftist virtues, and pro-diversity
> virtues. I have NO IDEA if that is the kind of Trek you miss, or
> WHAT... but it is the kind of Trek that *I* miss.
>
Leftist? Hmmm, not what I necessarily had in mind but I can go along
with
tolerance, acceptance of diversity and a tendency to resolve problems
without first resorting to blazing guns. I don't want to get into a
left/right polarized political debate but if that's what you mean by
leftist I guess I can live with that.
But the quality I really miss is the nuanced writing, the higher
directorial standards and, most of all, the writing that displayed an
appreciation for character development and the ability to address
concepts that had some depth.
The characters on ENT are more cartoonish, with the possible exception
of
Phlox and they don't seem to have much in terms of personal core
identities which TOS developed quickly in the first season in Kirk,
Spock
and McCoy. TNG hit its stride in the second season and even the other
series DS9 and VOY had it as well, even though VOY was was least
favorite
series of the bunch (at least until ENT came along).
ENT is basically dumbed down Trek which strangely enough doesn't even
seem as sophisticated as the old animated series.
ww
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
