Is Star Trek Science Fiction? Fantasy? Broadway Musical? Or something else...

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies' started by Joelist, Dec 30, 2015.

  1. Joelist

    Joelist I'm showing this for a reason! Staff Member

    Reputation:
    295,536
    This is the place to discuss whether Star Trek is Science Fiction, Fantasy or any genre. Let's move the posts and discussion here from the two Star Wars VII threads where it is a bit wide of the topic :D
     
  2. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    Star Trek is science fiction.

    Star Trek is not it's characters, it's a concept. The TV show is centered around our familiar Enterprise cast, but the concept of Star Trek does not need them, or the Enterprise. Compare that with Star Wars and you cannot really do Star Wars without it's iconic characters, ships and locales. Take a cargo freighter which is not part of Starfleet, manned by non-Federation characters we have never seen and as long as the show centers around space journeys and new cultures and encounters with new alien races, using technology which has been explained and demonstrated as you watch, you still have Star Trek.

    This is a major reason that NuTrek does not work. It mistakenly centers the story around the cast but destroys the universe of Star Trek which contains the whole reason that starships exist and why the technology looks and works the way it does. It takes the reason the Enterprise exists and what it's crew has committed to and discards it. JJ missed the point. It is not about the characters, it's about the Trek.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. shavedape

    shavedape Well Known GateFan Staff Member

    Reputation:
    608,897
    The original premise of Star Trek is science fiction. Warp drive -- a scientifically fictional construct -- is at the center of the story. The effects that this scientifically fictional construct, i.e. warp drive, has on humanity is what makes ST science fiction.

    As OM1 has pointed out nuTrek seems to be drifting from the science fiction premise in favor of exploring dramatic aspects between characters.

    No, ST is not a Broadway musical -- yet. Give it time though. ;)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    y
    I can totally see a musical interlude in a JJ NuTrek movie. Even a dance-off like in Guardians of the Galaxy. :) Warp Drive IS the central element that makes Star Trek what it is. Without it, we cannot have Star Trek. The invention of warp drive and that first warp flight by Zephram Cochrane led to First Contact which led to the Star Trek. Every spaceship in Star Trek has warp capability, indeed that is a prerequisite for even being able to associate with the alien cultures we see in Star Trek. Stick those warp nacelles on a ship and put it in the Milky Way somewhere and have "standard Trek technology", and you can craft a Star Trek series easily. This is why I do not think the new Kurtzman series on CBS will do anything for Trek fans. There is no visionary behind any of this NuTrek garbage.
     
  5. yongjin02

    yongjin02 Well Known GateFan

    Reputation:
    345,723
    can you write down the real world formula (or whatever) for building the Cochrane warp drive?
    ------------------------

    B5 is better then all of the rest, movie,series, Trek,SW's--this thread is moot cause B5 rules them all

    :smiley-money-mouth:
     
  6. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    Hmmm. If anyone could do that, then we would have actual warp drive in real life and this conversation would be pointless, eh? :) But we can discuss the principle of how it is supposed to work, and how the various elements of the warp drive are supposed to function to create the warp bubble. Star Trek has provided us with this information over time, and though all of it is fiction, it still makes sense from a theoretical point of view.

    Babylon 5 is in a whole different category than Star Trek in general, but could be closely compared to Deep Space Nine.
     
  7. heisenberg

    heisenberg Earl Grey Staff Member

    Reputation:
    228,117
    :facepalm:. God so many errors...I don't know where to begin....
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. Joelist

    Joelist I'm showing this for a reason! Staff Member

    Reputation:
    295,536
    It's typical WatchMojo stuff. The categories are arbitrary and their verdicts are a bit weird too (like holding the effects of the 1960's Star Trek series as a minus while failing to consider that Trek predates the dawn of modern SFX and Star Wars was just after the start of it).
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. Bluce Ree

    Bluce Ree Tech Admin / Council Member

    Reputation:
    610,398
    I can throw any old equation up and you would neither be able to prove nor disprove its legitimacy. :icon_lol:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  10. yongjin02

    yongjin02 Well Known GateFan

    Reputation:
    345,723
    ok-then it would be in the realm of 'nonsense'= fantasy
     
  11. yongjin02

    yongjin02 Well Known GateFan

    Reputation:
    345,723
    "theoretical points of view" does not entertainment make--at least not for me. probably why we got so little of cochrane and his theory on screen--just boring for so many.

    I don't see B5 in any different category

    it is set in space

    they use jump gate tech and have space flight

    there are alien species and shipping in between the species

    there is drama in both as well as comedy and action

    again--another point of friction between us that I would not even try to bridge as we see these things in nearly totally different ways

    and, you can't cherry pick and,as a fan, decide what is trek and waht is not; DS9 IS Trek-plain and simple
     
  12. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    How would such a jump gate work? Sorry, but being specific about defining one genre from another is necessarily "cherry picking". DS9 is a Star Trek show. But it is not, in the sense of it being in the core Star Trek interpretation. It is not a Trek. It is not about exploring strange new worlds and new civilizations. It is a show which was created to compete with Babylon 5, and though I liked Babylon 5 better, Trek handled the science more logically IMO. You cannot distill Trek down to space travel and shipping and alien species. That is what JJ Abrams did and that is why we still do not have Star Trek.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  13. yongjin02

    yongjin02 Well Known GateFan

    Reputation:
    345,723
    :love_heart:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Gatefan1976

    Gatefan1976 Well Known GateFan

    Reputation:
    639,107
    It uses an element called Bull-lithium to achieve (pseudo-scientific gobbledygook) and it's valid cause it is based on (real world theory involving space folding)
    Pure science fiction.
    do not like.gif
    Voyager was not about exploring strange new worlds, it was the journey home, so it's not Trek.
    ENT did not have strange new worlds, we knew them all already, so it's not Trek
    Looks like the only trek is TOS and TNG.
    It employed more bullshit.
    Alien Species: 5 year mission to seek out new life and new civilizations
    Space Travel: To boldly go where no one has gone before
    Shipping:
    star-trek-graph.jpg
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    I hope you realize that you not liking aspects of Trek means fuq-all with relation to it, right? Part of why you do not get the core of Trek is because you have a "fuzzy" interpretation of what even science fiction is itself. We have had lengthy discussions about that here.

    This is just dumb. The entire story of Voyager, starting with the first episode was exploring new worlds and civilizations and was a TREK home. Do you know what a trek is (little "t")? Enterprise came before Kirk in the Trek timeline, and it was Star Trek even though it got lots of Trek wrong. It was much more Star Trek than NuTrek. These comments alone expose you as Trek-tarded. :)

    You just don't get it! And being mostly a Star Wars fan, you are not expected to get Trek. OF COURSE you do not see a star trek in Voyager's trip home. And you do not seem to get why DS9 and Enterprise are still Star Trek, but they do not represent the core of the Star trek concept, because you do not fully understand the Star Trek core concept. That is perfectly OK!
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2016
  16. Gatefan1976

    Gatefan1976 Well Known GateFan

    Reputation:
    639,107
    Funny, cause that's exactly what you are doing :)
    LOL!!!
    You mean, I don't lockstep agree with you?
    Yep.

    Wipe your chin dude, you are frothing.

    I'm not "mostly a Star Wars fan" at all, that's just another bullshit assumption, like every other one you make, to which:


    Spock bullshit.png
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    It does not matter if you agree with me personally or not. You are wrong regardless of my comments. Voyager was not a star trek and did not explore new worlds and civilizations? That is ALL it did for the most part. And TOS and TNG are the only Trek? Nobody here said that except you.

    No, that is icing from my WIN cake on my chin. :) You know the Star Wars EU in and out and you can recite the tiniest details of it. You cannot do the same for Star Trek. And you actually use the term "technobabble". No real Trek fan would ever use that word, even in connection with a different TV show.
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2016
  18. Overmind One

    Overmind One GateFans Gatemaster Staff Member

    Reputation:
    646,242
    Im not understanding the purpose of this thread as opposed to the other thread that is titled Star Wars vs Star Trek. There is no question that Star Trek is science fiction and not a fantasy or Broadway Musical. Should we merge the two threads?
     
  19. Joelist

    Joelist I'm showing this for a reason! Staff Member

    Reputation:
    295,536
    Sure if you wish. This was the first one then you suggested making the second one later on. The Broadway Musical quip was just me being humorous (btw did you know Enterprise supposedly had a proposed season 5 script where Porthos would be in command for some reason?).
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. shavedape

    shavedape Well Known GateFan Staff Member

    Reputation:
    608,897
    You say that like it's a bad thing. :icon_lol:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
Loading...

Share This Page