Star Trek 3 to be like TV series

[shavedape]

Wasn't that one a commentary on animal cruelty and underestimating animal intelligence (i.e. dolphins, whales, etc)?

You gotta admit, seeing a guy covered in a blanket and crawling around on all fours while pretending to be an alien creature was hilariously cheesy.

 

[shavedape]

Roddenberry himself thought that The Next generation more closely followed his original vision. TOS was the product of a transitional audience which was raised on westerns and bad horror movies, and family oriented episodic television shows. It was the mid to late 1960s. Roddenberry had to sell the whole concept to Desilu just to get it made. It had to further compromise for NBC to air it as produced. But for TNG, he already had an established property and a movie as well. He had a LOT more power. And the science was an integral part of it's production. Roddenberry himself was not a social commentator. He was a visionary. He would be disgusted with NuTrek.

This is exactly right. Westerns were HUGE back in the 50's and 60's (didn't Gunsmoke run for 22 years?) so giving ST a "wagon train to the stars" veneer was a no-brainer. Roddenberry had to do it. But thankfully he did keep science as a main support of the show.

 

[Joelist]

By the way Science Fiction and drama can indeed be in the same story - they are not the same type of element.

Science Fiction: Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginative content such as futuristic settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, time travel, faster than light travel, parallel universes and extraterrestrial life. It usually eschews the supernatural, and unlike the related genre of fantasy, its imaginary elements are largely plausible within the scientifically established context of the story. Science fiction often explores the potential consequences of scientific and other innovations, and has been called a "literature of ideas."

Fiction: Fiction is content, primarily a narrative, that is derived from imagination, in addition to, or rather than, from history or fact.

Drama: Drama is a literary type (along with comedy, epic, erotic, romance, satire, tragedy et al). Each type (and I did not list them all) has characteristics - Drama for instance is characterized by the seriousness of its tone.

{By the way, if you have the interest a good primer on this is Harmon and Holman's "A Handbook to Literature"}

So this is how Science Fiction can be drama, comedy and so forth.

 

[shavedape]

By the way Science Fiction and drama can indeed be in the same story - they are not the same type of element.

Science Fiction: Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginative content such as futuristic settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, time travel, faster than light travel, parallel universes and extraterrestrial life. It usually eschews the supernatural, and unlike the related genre of fantasy, its imaginary elements are largely plausible within the scientifically established context of the story. Science fiction often explores the potential consequences of scientific and other innovations, and has been called a "literature of ideas."

Fiction: Fiction is content, primarily a narrative, that is derived from imagination, in addition to, or rather than, from history or fact.

Drama: Drama is a literary type (along with comedy, epic, erotic, romance, satire, tragedy et al). Each type (and I did not list them all) has characteristics - Drama for instance is characterized by the seriousness of its tone.

{By the way, if you have the interest a good primer on this is Harmon and Holman's "A Handbook to Literature"}

So this is how Science Fiction can be drama, comedy and so forth.

This is also how science fiction can be used as window dressing for drama, comedy and so forth.

 

[Joelist]

This is also how science fiction can be used as window dressing for drama, comedy and so forth.

Not really Shaved. Science Fiction is inseparable from whether it is comedy, drama et al. ALL Science Fiction is also one of these literary types.

What we recoil at is actually melodrama:

A melodrama is a dramatic or literary work in which the plot, which is typically sensational and designed to appeal strongly to the emotions, takes precedence over detailed characterization. Characters are therefore often relatively simply drawn, and may appear stereotyped. {from that same handy guide to literature}

What we don't like is Science Fiction melodrama.

 

[shavedape]

Not really Shaved. Science Fiction is inseparable from whether it is comedy, drama et al. ALL Science Fiction is also one of these literary types.

What we recoil at is actually melodrama:

A melodrama is a dramatic or literary work in which the plot, which is typically sensational and designed to appeal strongly to the emotions, takes precedence over detailed characterization. Characters are therefore often relatively simply drawn, and may appear stereotyped. {from that same handy guide to literature}

What we don't like is Science Fiction melodrama.

I may be arguing semantics but I think it's an important point. Let's say you have a comedy that takes place aboard an interplanetary space ship. Would that make it a comedy or science fiction? Or both? Is there an overriding genre that is the backbone of that story? Science fiction? Comedy? Drama?

For instance, do you consider Red Dwarf to be science fiction? Or how about Galaxy Quest? Is it, centrally, a comedy? How would you classify shows and movies like this?

Of course I agree that comedy and drama, etc. can take place within science fiction stories, and no doubt vice versa. But what one has to figure out is what genre defines the theme of each story. Which genre takes precedence over the others as one almost always does? (Or doesn't it?)

 

[Joelist]

That is the balance between genre and type. Science Fiction is the genre and drama, comedy, romance et al are the type.

In your example, it is a Science Fiction comedy. It's not either/or but rather "and". The only way to literally have the genre without the type would be for your film to consist of nothing but a picture of the spaceship.

 

[shavedape]

That is the balance between genre and type. Science Fiction is the genre and drama, comedy, romance et al are the type.

In your example, it is a Science Fiction comedy. It's not either/or but rather "and". The only way to literally have the genre without the type would be for your film to consist of nothing but a picture of the spaceship.

Yes but is it really science fiction if comedy is in the forefront and things like space ships and technology are used as mere props for the jokes? Using your template wouldn't that make the genre "comedy" and the type "science fiction"? (I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm just asking for clarification.)

*Incidentally, I find the question of defining Galaxy Quest to be rather frustrating as when you look it up it's called a "comedy", a "scifi comedy", a "science fiction action comedy" (Wiki), etc.

 

[Joelist]

Not really, as genre and type are two different things both with firm definitions. One is not a subset of the other.

In other words, the fact that the setting is an interstellar spaceship means genre = science fiction. The comedic script places the type in comedy.

I just find sticking to the basic definitions of type and genre to be easier than getting into almost philosophical reasoning on whether something is "science fiction".

 

[Overmind One]

Not really Shaved. Science Fiction is inseparable from whether it is comedy, drama et al. ALL Science Fiction is also one of these literary types.

What we recoil at is actually melodrama:

A melodrama is a dramatic or literary work in which the plot, which is typically sensational and designed to appeal strongly to the emotions, takes precedence over detailed characterization. Characters are therefore often relatively simply drawn, and may appear stereotyped. {from that same handy guide to literature}

What we don't like is Science Fiction melodrama.

The bolded is not true. Cosmos (either the original or the current one) is not drama or comedy or fantasy or any of those literary types. It is science, with some dramatic elements. Europa Report was science fiction with dramatic elements (heavy ones). I can think of not a single comedy which could be considered science fiction. But an astronaut telling a joke from the International Space Station adds comedy to his scientific reports.

What you and Gatefan are doing with the definition of science fiction, attempting to widen it's meaning to include drama and comedy is disappointing:

Science Fiction
: fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component.

It is NOT cool to dull the edges and make the definition vague. That is the process of "dumbing down" we frequently talk about here. No, Star Wars and Avengers and Avatar are NOT science fiction. Red Dwarf and SGU and Galaxy Quest are NOT science fiction. The Fifth Element, Farscape and even Deep Space Nine are NOT science fiction. All of these shows and movies have elements of space travel, spaceships, and in the case of DS9 and SGU there are even references to real science in there on occasion. But they are all dramas with science fiction sauce. I am not a scientist. I am a layman with a strong interest in science. But because of that strong background, Im not okay with calling something a "thingamajig" when it has a defined name and purpose. The explanation of matter/energy transformations is not "technobabble". One does not go to school to learn "technobabble". Dumbing down science to make it understandable to non-science people might be necessary to expand the appeal of science fiction, but there is a line that (if crossed) turns the science into something other than science. SGU is a perfect example. The serious drama and acting centered around a handful of stones and trying to explain how they connect the consciousness of two people over billions of light years can NEVER be scientific or plausible. SGU was a fantasy drama.

I see this in music as well. Unlike in science, I am a fully trained musician (as in trained in a music conservatory). I have been taught harmony and composition and I play my instrument (piano and organ). I have YEARS of training in music. Having said that, NO, rappers are not musicians. Miley Cyrus, Mary J Blige and Justin Beiber are NOT musicians. They are performers. Programming piano notes on a computer and playing back the sequencer program is NOT playing an instrument. Like Justin Beiber is not a musician, drama and comedy are not science. Scientific studies dramatized for an audience remains science until the science is compromised in the interest of the drama. Science fiction has science as it's CENTRAL core. Star Trek TNG was by and large a science fiction show with some dramatic and comedic elements. Some of the episodes were pure fantasy (like those with Q).

I would like either of you to define what "dumbing down" is with relation to science fiction. What makes something "dumbed down"? When does the "dumbing down" happen? To me it is clear that when edges are dulled and things are taken out of focus, THAT is when it gets dumbed down. This remains clear to me when I have guests come over and one of them claims to be a "musician" who plays a "keyboard", yet cannot play anything on a real instrument and knows nothing about harmony or orchestration. Many times, they do not even know which key they are playing in.

 

[shavedape]

Not really, as genre and type are two different things both with firm definitions. One is not a subset of the other.

In other words, the fact that the setting is an interstellar spaceship means genre = science fiction. The comedic script places the type in comedy.

I just find sticking to the basic definitions of type and genre to be easier than getting into almost philosophical reasoning on whether something is "science fiction".

Personally I prefer genre-categorizing according to the overriding theme or "backbone" of the story. Yes, I know it's intellectually pedantic but I can't help it. It drives me crazy when I hear people say things like "Star Wars is science fiction" or "SGU was a scifi show". The way I see it, just because these examples had space ships in them that doesn't automatically make their themes science fiction. Star Wars was (is) fantasy. And SGU was bad melodrama. The futuristic scientific technology doesn't inform these stories as much as the other elements do, hence no scifi moniker from moi.

So...is Galaxy Quest science fiction or comedy?

 

[Overmind One]

Not really, as genre and type are two different things both with firm definitions. One is not a subset of the other.

In other words, the fact that the setting is an interstellar spaceship means genre = science fiction. The comedic script places the type in comedy.

I just find sticking to the basic definitions of type and genre to be easier than getting into almost philosophical reasoning on whether something is "science fiction".

Again, bolded is not true. Just putting a story on a spaceship does NOT make it science fiction. The science fiction genre is not defined by it's "setting". The Andromeda Strain (the original) is science fiction. There are no spaceships involved. Believing the bolded in your comment is why Brad Wright figured that SGU was going to be accepted by science fiction folks even though it was actually a SERIALIZED DRAMA (soap opera), just because it took place on a spaceship, and was connected to a franchise which WAS science fiction.

 

[Overmind One]

Personally I prefer genre-categorizing according to the overriding theme or "backbone" of the story. Yes, I know it's intellectually pedantic but I can't help it. It drives me crazy when I hear people say things like "Star Wars is science fiction" or "SGU was a scifi show". The way I see it, just because these examples had space ships in them that doesn't automatically make their themes science fiction. Star Wars was (is) fantasy. And SGU was bad melodrama. The futuristic scientific technology doesn't inform these stories as much as the other elements do, hence no scifi moniker from moi.

So...is Galaxy Quest science fiction or comedy?

100% agree. No, that textured soy protein "chicken" is not the real thing and it never will be. I dont care how many times you tell me it "tastes just like chicken". Science fiction is science fiction. Drama done in a spaceship does not make it science fiction. It is Soy Scifi.

How about a real bender: Ascension. It was on a spaceship, no? Was it science fiction? NO.

 

[Overmind One]

That is the balance between genre and type. Science Fiction is the genre and drama, comedy, romance et al are the type.

In your example, it is a Science Fiction comedy. It's not either/or but rather "and". The only way to literally have the genre without the type would be for your film to consist of nothing but a picture of the spaceship.

There is no such thing as a science fiction comedy.

 

[shavedape]

The bolded is not true. Cosmos (either the original or the current one) is not drama or comedy or fantasy or any of those literary types. It is science, with some dramatic elements. Europa Report was science fiction with dramatic elements (heavy ones). I can think of not a single comedy which could be considered science fiction. But an astronaut telling a joke from the International Space Station adds comedy to his scientific reports.

What you and Gatefan are doing with the definition of science fiction, attempting to widen it's meaning to include drama and comedy is disappointing:

Science Fiction
: fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component.

It is NOT cool to dull the edges and make the definition vague. That is the process of "dumbing down" we frequently talk about here. No, Star Wars and Avengers and Avatar are NOT science fiction. Red Dwarf and SGU and Galaxy Quest are NOT science fiction. The Fifth Element, Farscape and even Deep Space Nine are NOT science fiction. All of these shows and movies have elements of space travel, spaceships, and in the case of DS9 and SGU there are even references to real science in there on occasion. But they are all dramas with science fiction sauce. I am not a scientist. I am a layman with a strong interest in science. But because of that strong background, Im not okay with calling something a "thingamajig" when it has a defined name and purpose. The explanation of matter/energy transformations is not "technobabble". One does not go to school to learn "technobabble". Dumbing down science to make it understandable to non-science people might be necessary to expand the appeal of science fiction, but there is a line that (if crossed) turns the science into something other than science. SGU is a perfect example. The serious drama and acting centered around a handful of stones and trying to explain how they connect the consciousness of two people over billions of light years can NEVER be scientific or plausible. SGU was a fantasy drama.

I see this in music as well. Unlike in science, I am a fully trained musician (as in trained in a music conservatory). I have been taught harmony and composition and I play my instrument (piano and organ). I have YEARS of training in music. Having said that, NO, rappers are not musicians. Miley Cyrus, Mary J Blige and Justin Beiber are NOT musicians. They are performers. Programming piano notes on a computer and playing back the sequencer program is NOT playing an instrument. Like Justin Beiber is not a musician, drama and comedy are not science. Scientific studies dramatized for an audience remains science until the science is compromised in the interest of the drama. Science fiction has science as it's CENTRAL core. Star Trek TNG was by and large a science fiction show with some dramatic and comedic elements. Some of the episodes were pure fantasy (like those with Q).

I would like either of you to define what "dumbing down" is with relation to science fiction. What makes something "dumbed down"? When does the "dumbing down" happen? To me it is clear that when edges are dulled and things are taken out of focus, THAT is when it gets dumbed down. This remains clear to me when I have guests come over and one of them claims to be a "musician" who plays a "keyboard", yet cannot play anything on a real instrument and knows nothing about harmony or orchestration. Many times, they do not even know which key they are playing in.

Again, bolded is not true. Just putting a story on a spaceship does NOT make it science fiction. The science fiction genre is not defined by it's "setting". The Andromeda Strain (the original) is science fiction. There are no spaceships involved. Believing the bolded in your comment is why Brad Wright figured that SGU was going to be accepted by science fiction folks even though it was actually a SERIALIZED DRAMA (soap opera), just because it took place on a spaceship, and was connected to a franchise which WAS science fiction.

Really great points! :encouragement:

Definitions are important -- and "Science fiction" has a definition (as you've shown here). When we allow things to be sloppily defined we get crap like SGU.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing something like Galaxy Quest, but that was a comedy. To me this can't be denied. It clearly belongs in the comedy genre. The fact that it's a spoof on a science fiction show doesn't automatically make it scifi itself as "spoof", by it's definition, is a humorous imitation with exaggerated characteristics for comedic effect. The theme, the goal, the raison d'etre of GQ is, without a doubt, comedy.

 

[shavedape]

100% agree. No, that textured soy protein "chicken" is not the real thing and it never will be. I dont care how m any times you tell me it "tastes just like chicken". Science fiction is science fiction. Drama done in a spaceship does not make it science fiction. It is Soy Scifi.

How about a real bender: Ascension. It was on a spaceship, no? Was it science fiction? NO.

Agreed. No it was not science fiction. Like SGU, it could have been science fiction had the writers the balls to actually explore the scientific aspects of the story premises. But hey, why waste time writing about the effects of science and technology on society when you can default to writing about hot young people screwing in broom closets and swank cocktail parties?

 

[Overmind One]

Agreed. No it was not science fiction. Like SGU, it could have been science fiction had the writers the balls to actually explore the scientific aspects of the story premises. But hey, why waste time writing about the effects of science and technology on society when you can default to writing about hot young people screwing in broom closets and swank cocktail parties?

All they had to do was to change the STORY and it would have been science fiction! Now that premise would have been cool...a crew of astronauts sign away their futures to participate in earth's first interstellar flight but the actual plot is that the government wants to study the effects of prolonged space travel so they put them on the ship and study their progress. They could explore "disasters" created for them to solve, test their reaction to (manufactured) aliens whilst on their journey, etc. That sort of show would have had some legs. But instead, we got cigars, whores, criminal cliques and good guy networks. WTF? Ascencion might be the first spaceship to crash on earth and have no damage.

 

[Overmind One]

Not really Shaved. Science Fiction is inseparable from whether it is comedy, drama et al. ALL Science Fiction is also one of these literary types.

What we recoil at is actually melodrama:

A melodrama is a dramatic or literary work in which the plot, which is typically sensational and designed to appeal strongly to the emotions, takes precedence over detailed characterization. Characters are therefore often relatively simply drawn, and may appear stereotyped. {from that same handy guide to literature}

What we don't like is Science Fiction melodrama.

Give me an example of a melodrama which is also real science fiction?

 

[Joelist]

Again, bolded is not true. Just putting a story on a spaceship does NOT make it science fiction. The science fiction genre is not defined by it's "setting". The Andromeda Strain (the original) is science fiction. There are no spaceships involved. Believing the bolded in your comment is why Brad Wright figured that SGU was going to be accepted by science fiction folks even though it was actually a SERIALIZED DRAMA (soap opera), just because it took place on a spaceship, and was connected to a franchise which WAS science fiction.

Sorry but it is true. I am using an objective definition which is also the literary definition (which is why I quoted it right out of a literature textbook). Trying to define it the way you are doing is subjective - we wind up with it being a matter of opinion whether it is science fiction or not.

 

[Joelist]

In fact, lets look at the objective definition of Science fiction again:

Science Fiction: Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with imaginative content such as futuristic settings, futuristic science and technology, space travel, time travel, faster than light travel, parallel universes and extraterrestrial life. It usually eschews the supernatural, and unlike the related genre of fantasy, its imaginary elements are largely plausible within the scientifically established context of the story. Science fiction often explores the potential consequences of scientific and other innovations, and has been called a "literature of ideas."

So. SGU - is it Science Fiction?

It has the futuristic setting (Destiny) and the futuristic technology and even extraterrestrials. However, it its imaginary elements are not necessarily plausible (the stones, gating halfway across the universe). As a result SGU is more likely Fantasy.

How about Star Wars?

It also has the futuristic technology, setting and extraterrestrials. But it also has a strong supernatural element in the background (the Force) and like SGU has elements not necessarily plausible (The Death Star is borderline implausible for one). Ergo Stars is Fantasy,

And....NuTrek?

It also has the futuristic technology, setting and extraterrestrials. Again we have implausible imaginary elements (Red Matter, Khan's magic blood, transwarp beaming) so it too winds up being Fantasy.

Note that the literary definition is neither vague nor subjective. And by using it I can establish simply and factually whether something is Science Fiction or not (because of the implausibility and supernatural filter). So contrary to earlier assertions this sharpens the picture rather than muddying it.