The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Sci-Fi Now: The Secrets of Star Trek
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 10-10-2009, 07:55 PM
JSnyder4's Avatar
JSnyder4 JSnyder4 is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 942
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
If you wanna make an argument besides "TNG sucks because it is sooo PC" (which would not have anything to do with Romulans and not be true anyway), I am all ears as you often make excellent points.
Thank you for that.

I have very negative feelings with Trek TMP onwards actually, not just TNG and spinoffs.
Those are related to issues stemming from Roddenberry's ego, inflated from the convention days by fans. My opinions on his reactions to being sidelined and silenced after TMP and his "payback" with TNG are also on record. Nor is the choice of his associates and how closely they would "follow the boss" an accident.

Specifically answering your query:
In regard to Vulcans and Romulans (and by extention Humans and Klingons), the two enemy races in TOS are portrayed as dark mirrors of their respective opposite base cultures.
Romulans are the passionate warriors who embrace emotions and use them to great effect in their civilization while Vulcans deny these same base motivations. The clash of cultures (and similarities) is the interesting parts of their interactions.

Same for Humans and Klingons. The model of the historical Mongol is used as a basis for Human "civilized barbarism" to show the differences and clashing in cultures. The visual cue used for the Klingon appearance is not due to lack of "funding" but a deliberate stylistic choice to give the viewing audience a human analogy to connect with on more than just the visual aspect; but also the subtext that particular culture brings to mind. The confrontation between these cultures is the interesting part here as well, done to show how Humanity has "evolved", and at times not as much as some would like to believe.

It was unfortunate that this was jettisoned in TMP and onward in favor of other interpretations. The changes made for Romulans visually are also unfortunate since TOS heavily implied (an understatement) that Romulans were successfully infiltrating the Federation posing as Vulcans and conducting covert espionage. Balance of Terror all but underlines this in big neon letters invisibly written across the screen and was one of the salient plot points stressed.

It is not coincidence that the Roman culture was used as the subtext for Romulans either. It was a conscious choice to give the audience the clues it needed to mentally fill in the blanks about the culture. Miltiary oriented, advanced socio-politically and most probably a heavily caste system culture. These are simple subtext clues.

The changes to enemy cultures are expressed elsewhere by me on the unfortunate switch between TOS Romulan and Klingon cultures that took place in the TOS movies.

All this is not even touching the PCness of the '80's that invaded almost all of television (not Trek solely), but those are most certainly seperate issues and in which you seem to believe is my only gripe with post TOS/TAS Trek.

I never deny that those later series are Trek in the world's view. I just wave my hand and make them magically go away in my own mind is all. To me, they are as hand-in-hand with TOS Trek as Zim feels nuTrek is with Prime Trek, which is to say "in name only".
But it is still Trek to me.
Mostly. Sortof. Kinda. If I squint, while cross-eyed.
But that mostly just gives me a headache.

TMP Trek onwards just isn't my cup of choice.
I like coffee... black. Not Earl Grey Tea with sugar, Splenda, milk, lemon or whatever else is used to make it palpatible.
I suppose the same could be said for coffee, but then we'd have to go with whip cream, steamed milk, cinnamon/chocolate/caramel topping or whatever trendy crap is used to make it hip and cool and validate a $5+ pricetag per cup.

Does that meet the tune your avatar's pointed ears wished to hear?
__________________
"I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad, and it's... depressing."
"Tact is just not saying true stuff. I'll pass"
"A sacrifice a day keeps Jesus away"

Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-11-2009, 01:46 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chator View Post
Yes, that maybe so. But i would argue it has become trademark Trek for aliens to remain very human. This Trek movie throws out those rules. It tries to make the Trek universe look like its populated with aliens from the Star Wars universe.
That's true, but it's also rather human-centric to believe that human-a-likes would be the only appearance they can have.

Non-corporeal entities not included.

Is some diversity in presentation of alien races really a bad thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
I still don't understand how someone could spend all that money on background aliens who are virtually invisible and give Klingons just some dreadlocks and helmets. I guess they mixed some Gondorian designs from LOTR and some pirate designs from Pirates of the Caribbean together.
If they were working off of TOS style Klingons (and not TNG style, as seems likely) then visually there's not a great deal to go on because TOS Klingons didn't have heavy make-up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
Just in case anyone is interested in the appaling nuRomulan design, the other two parts:


http://www.scifinow.co.uk/news/exclu...trek-part-two/
http://www.scifinow.co.uk/news/exclu...ek-part-three/
Very interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by horatio View Post
NuRomulans don't have anything to do with either of them by the way.
No they don't. That fact is in the script and delivered by Nero, by the way. That he is standing apart from the Empire and acting to his own plan.

So we are, in fact, not seeing Romulans as we saw them in TOS/TNG etc and are told that.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-11-2009, 04:07 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel View Post
Special, but sometimes too far. I suppose some take issue (as far as a piece of fiction goes) about an institutionalized policy of not getting involved in anything... even if it would have been morally correct. Individuals would, but not the state. There were a few exceptions to the rule (I think) but its an interesting conflict. High morals that absolves them from taking moral stances and doing something to help.

The story about the drug addicts who didnt know that was their problem, because the feds didnt want to hurt the pushers. Not even telling them 'you didnt hear it from us but you guys are junkies and not dying from a plague." And then we got the high morals explanation. IIRC the doc simply said it was a high price to pay. It would have been a much better story conflict if she simply said the policy needs to be changed and a total cop out. Would have been a great writing setup for future stories. Oh and it was funny about the pushers in-your-face use of official policy against them.

I guess for example the Klingon civil war. The feds want to stay out of an 'internal matter', a rebellion against the legitimate government of its largest ally. Taking it to the next step, when a major power gets involved at best the feds would try to expose them but not take any action. But even to just make a barricade they needed convincing. I suppose its an attempt at a Trek statement against the realities of the cold war when each side secretly provided material support to keep the balance of power intact or in their favor.

Funny paradox but they did get involved and worked to stop rebels against the Card-whatevers. So... actively work against rebels fighting your enemy but not the ones fighting your friend.

Old old old Trek argument and there are other story examples of the same thing. Very true about ENT and would have been the perfect example to try and show why these high morals were correct.
On the flip side, TOS often showed the TOS crew interfering in the course of a planet's development (for better or worse reasons at times) and then once done, simply leaving them behind to get on with it.

There was sometimes a token line about a 'group' being left to 'help' them but it seems TOS could at times have a far more insidious nature.

We, the Federation, will come along, we will decide your people need a 'boost' and we will upset your development and then leave 'our' people behind to show you how it 'should' be done.

Because 'we' think it's the right thing to do for you.

So, when is it right to actively interfere and when is it right to use the non-interference doctrine to sit out of an issue you simply don't want to get your hands dirty with.

The Klingon Civil War was a great example of 'using' it to avoid being dragged into a conflict they didn't want to be involved in, apparently without any thought to what it might mean for the Federation if the Duras family (and by default) the Romulans had succeeded in driving them apart.

So much for the Federation standing by it's 'allies' in crisis times.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:50 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.