Have fun with this rant, please.
1 posted on
03/13/2002 3:13:18 PM PST by
ReveBM
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
To: ReveBM
And, don't even get me started on the series before that, Deep Space 9, with its "angry pissed-off black man in space" Damn! You sound like you think every "black man" on TV is angry and POed.
In fact you sound like some black guys who think every white guy is out to get them.
Oh, and currently Enterprise is the worst Star Trek of the five. It's stories are too drab and unexciting (might change though).
DS9 is the best. IMHO
67 posted on
03/13/2002 9:33:51 PM PST by
rwb
To: ReveBM
It's a crazy insane Rant. wink wink
And for the record Star Trek: Deep Space Nine was the best Star Trek ever!!!!And they only had a couple of angry black man episodes which aired near the end of the shows run. And were completely out of place.
I think that you are missing the bigger issues on ST:E. For example they just had an episode called Dear Doctor. Where they encounter a pre-warp race threaten by an uncurable desease. There is a second less advanced race living on the planet as servants for the first race. After lecturing the humans not to judge the treatment of the servant race, the Doctor tells the Capt that he doubts a cure can be found. But surprise surprise, the very next day he finds a cure and determines that they second race would be better off if the first race died out. So he tells Capt Archer that he wants to withhold the cure. Because, get this, he does not want to interfere with evolution. The Doctor has concluded that the second race might be evolving into something better. And if they are evolving, they might be better off on their own. So he thinks that it would be just great to withhold the cure, let the first race die out. So that maybe thousands of years in the future the second race might be better off. Archer ends up taking the "enlighten" view that they should let the first race die out so that they don't interfer with evolution. In the "Scientific" future they don't want to interfer with blind chance.
They also have an anti-hunting show coming up. Where they visit a planet of hunters. It turns out that the hunters favorite prey is intelligent. See animals are people too.
To: ReveBM
In the the "Great Plume" episode, the Doctor participates in a religious ritual. The Vulcan babe has been shown expressing her beliefs in something that resembles a combination of yoga and pantheism. A cogent argument could be made that Enterprise advocates freedom of religion, not exactly a novel concept to our Founding Fathers.
With regard to the capitalism comments on this thread, the transport ship episode showed interstellar commerce, and multiple episodes show businesses in a favorable light. However, it seems entirely appropriate to separate the commerce from the military. To criticize Enterprise for not spending more time showing capitalism is kind of like complaining that "Saving Private Ryan" didn't focus on the merchant marines.
To: ReveBM
You can actually watch it?
The acting is weak.
The stories are poor.
The dialog is worse.
The predictability of the situation is beyond
boring The Star Trek Universe - what ever bad happens at the start, will be set right in under 55 minutes.
The only thing it has going for it is the opening song. Richard Dean Anderson, StarGate SGI is much more fun. (ShowTime)
75 posted on
03/14/2002 3:15:08 AM PST by
Utopia
To: ReveBM
I think your dead on! This has always been the thing that turned me off about startrek most. Other than their leftist views its been a good show. We should hope our future is as productive as the show depicts. Of course they will have to quit being godless socialists or it will never happen except in the movies.
80 posted on
03/14/2002 5:17:45 AM PST by
Khepera
To: ReveBM
Let's step back a bit and realize that in the Star Trek universe at this point Earth is just emerging from a hard 100+ years of recovering from nuclear war. I always hated what TNG did to Star Trek history. In the original there was a eugenics war, the nations of the world united after this and went on to populate the solar system. They sent the first insterstellar voyage to Alpha Centauri where they established contact with the Centaurians, one of which was Zefrem Cochrane, the first warp capable starships were built by the time the first interstellar mission returned to Earth. The idea that an alcoholic Cochrane could've built a warp-capable ship in a post apocalyptic world is laughable.
81 posted on
03/14/2002 5:48:53 AM PST by
Brett66
To: ReveBM
It's fine and understandable to run across aliens who are committed religiously, particularly the Vulcans, but I have yet in my memory to run across a significant Star Trek character who is committed to Christianity. Since the original Kirk Star Trek the shows really have dealt with "earth based" religions (you know what I mean) other than Chakotay's (sp?) dealing with his Native American heritage. There may be other references I'm missing.
The Next Generation sort of dealt with the "all powerful Q" but even with his powers, he was certainly flawed.
I haven't watched Enterprise that much because of when it's on (I'm probably usually on FR). But I'm not bothered by the lack of "Christian" characters. I can't imagine they would be portrayed in a favorable light. So, I'm actually happier they just leave them out.
To: ReveBM
I love the Ferengi. My favorite line:
"Are we going to take the elevator? But it's so expensive!"
Second favorite line:
"It's very wet on the Ferengi home world. In the Ferengi language there is no word for crisp."
89 posted on
03/14/2002 6:31:28 AM PST by
DManA
To: ReveBM
You want
Babylon 5.I was a longtime Trek fan, but B5 edged it out for me on a number of fronts. One of the most remarkable was that the series' creator, J. Kichael Straczynsi, though an atheist, peopled B5 with sincere and credible practitioners of recognizable human religions, along with alien religions.
Trek is totally counter, by contrast. But then Roddenberry was a thoroughgoing humanist who hated Christianity.
Dan
90 posted on
03/14/2002 6:32:08 AM PST by
BibChr
To: ReveBM
The Saudi Ambassador to the U.N. has just finished giving a speech, and walks out into the lobby where he meets his American counterpart. They shake hands and as they walk the Saudi says,
"You know, I have just one question about what I have seen in America."
The American says, "Well, your Excellency, anything I can do to help you I will do."
The Saudi whispers, "My son watches this show 'Star Trek' and in it there are Russians and Blacks and Asians, but never any Arabs. He is very upset. He doesn't understand why there are never any Arabs in Star Trek."
The American laughs and leans over..... "That's because it takes place in the future."
To: ReveBM
The bible says God created Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Eve and Little Green Men.
Little Green Men exist in Star Trek. Therefore, the bible was proven a novel (Which, I think it is) the day the Vulcans landed on earth (2064??). It makes sense that Star Trek doesn't recognize God. (At least the way the Bible says we should recognize him).
Sorry...You can't have it both ways. Either you believe in the bible or you believe NOTHING like Star Trek will EVER be true. (Thus, a lot of my problem with organized religions).
Just my thoughts...
To: ReveBM
I don't remember where I found it, but here is the link to the most hated character in the entire Star Trek franchise:
Amazingly Annoying Twerp: Wil Wheaton Not only hated but obviously a first class liberal of Baldwin proportions. Here is an excerpt from one of the little sphincters earlier flatulations:
"Here's what I think: I currently live in The Corporate States of America. George Bush was appointed CEO by the Board of Directors, and we, the people, are just the pesky shareholders. But we don't even have the good stock, so they really don't have to listen to us, and they rarely do."
Actually I'm glad to find out that this freak is such a flaming liberal.
Annoying Twerp <--> Flaming Liberal
Yes, the universe is OK!
To: ReveBM
Don't forget that tonight's episode was extra-ordinarily anti-Hunting.....
First the Captain, while visiting with an alien race that was activly engaged in a panned game hunt that "hunting grew out of fashion centuries ago in our culture".
Strike one...
Then the captain winds up in contact with one of the species hunted and he gives them a "cover scent" so to speak to help "level the playing field".
He proceeds to ridicule the alien species for hunting.... and their lack of success......
To: ReveBM
First, let me say that I agree with you.
However, if you read some of the science fiction that
may have formed the cradle of the Star Trek Series, you will
find a similar disregard for religion in terms of human
progress. I find that there is a great deal of parallel
thought between Star Trek and the writings of Isaac Asimov
in particular. While I am an Asimov fan, he was in general
quite critical of religion. His view, along with many other
atheist science fiction writers was that religion would
be replaced by rational thought and would eventually become nothing more then a relic of the past. Star Trek seems to
pretty much go with this theory though it's never explicitly stated.
The only exception to this that I know of in the Star Trek Universe is in the DS9 series. Major Kira and her people
("the Bejorans?) were all involved with this worship of the 'prophets' or whatever. They managed to portray a respectable, intelligent character who had beliefs of a religious nature. Most of the other religious characters in the star trek universe usually end up being obssesed fanatics intent on destroying or converting all who don't agree with them. (sounds a lot like descriptions of Christianity coming from the extreme left of the atheist world).
I would also like to see more characters like major Kira,
and, in general, a more realistic treatment of religion with regards to humanity and it's progress through the ages.
115 posted on
05/06/2004 2:57:43 PM PDT by
mgardne
To: ReveBM
I enjoy "Enterprise" too, especially Captain Archer (kudos to Scott Bakula!). That said, I still think Star Trek is most definitely humanistic and is thus naturally in direct opposition to Christianity.
119 posted on
05/06/2004 3:23:51 PM PDT by
k2blader
(Some folks should worry less about how conservatives vote and more about how to advance conservatism)
To: ReveBM
I used to love Star Trek: TNG when I was younger, but now that I've grown up I've noticed that it seems a bit hair-brained at times.
126 posted on
05/06/2004 3:42:19 PM PDT by
Sofa King
(MY rights are not subject to YOUR approval http://www.angelfire.com/art2/sofaking/index.html)
To: ReveBM
I swore off Star Trek during Voyager when I finally decided I'd had enough of the leftist messages the series kept pushing:
- Janeway's self-hating dementia that continually caused her to endanger her ship for some new underprivileged alien she encountered. Typical bleeding-heart liberalism.
- I defy anyone to find any reference to capitalism that doesn't present it in the most unfavorable light possible. They even created a race (the Ferengi) to embody the worst characteristics of capitalism.
- The abolition of money is of course well-known. So, let me see...the Federation's economy is therefore 100% communist where the government rations out everything, right? And of course this is always presented in glowing terms...
- The people who made the series stubbornly put forward the view that violence was never, ever acceptable, even when one was in danger. How many times have we heard the phrase: "you're the only ones in the sector". To me this is a subtle message to leave onself as thinly defended as possible. This only changed when B5 started cleaning their clocks and they were forced to make DS9 take a more agressive stance.
- Religion? I think the best way to categorize religion in Trek is ABH (Anything But Human). Or, to not put too fine a point on it, ABC (Anything But Christianity). Apparently humans aren't allowed to be religious in the Trek universe, and Christianity went extinct with all our other "agressive tendencies". They wouldn't be putting forth that "opiate of the masses" message, would they, no, of course not (or are they merely anti-Christian and pro-some-other-religion?)
I used to be a Trek junkie, but as far as I'm concerned the Trek franchise is nothing more then Das Kapital repackaged for today's generation, and I consider the people who produce the series domestic enemies in the truest sense of the phrase.
132 posted on
05/06/2004 3:53:57 PM PDT by
Windcatcher
(There's a reason why we say America starts in PA.)
To: ReveBM
Just a guess, but in a future with "no money," something that might be seen is a world of two types of people. One group who is "institutionalized," being given everything that they need to survive, and living on their own somewhere, contributing nothing to society, and those who do want to do something with their lives, who do things like joining Star Fleet.
Actually, the first group sounds a lot like those who would live their lives in a holodeck!
Mark
138 posted on
05/07/2004 4:20:38 AM PDT by
MarkL
(The meek shall inherit the earth... But usually in plots 6' x 3' x 6' deep...)
To: ReveBM
Enterprise is the first Star Trek spin off show that will not make it to seven seasons.
143 posted on
05/07/2004 5:03:05 AM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: ReveBM
BUMP for tonight's entertainment.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson