As for Q, the Borg, and the many other fanciful creatures the heroes have encountered in Star Trek. They would be right at home in a fantasy setting with sailors. Countless tales revolve around sailors being tormented by spiteful gods, people being abducted and physically altered, and strange sea monsters terrorizing the deep.
And that's all they were, fanciful tales.
It never really happened, not to real sailors.
The closest you'd come to a actual sea monster attack was an annoyed whale or a chance encounter with a deep sea squid.
Odds are high the latter didn't happen at all, because even now, we only find deep sea squids when they die and end up on a beach or floating in the ocean.
Now, let's compare Dr Who to the Bill.
Both long running tv series, one sci-fi, the other a cop beat show.
Dr Who got renewed, as of yet, nobody has ever considered bringing the Bill back.
NCIS or CSI, I always attributed their success to mindless escapism.
Drama on it's own, regardless of the subject is just mass-produced.
Sure, the acting cast may be good at their jobs, but it still doesn't change the fact they're just recycling the same plot endlessly.
In my book, to be considered quality, a show needs to do something to stand out, to be different.
Otherwise nobody will really notice when it goes away, because they aren't invested in it.
And then they'll just switch to watching the replacement show.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
As for Q, the Borg, and the many other fanciful creatures the heroes have encountered in Star Trek. They would be right at home in a fantasy setting with sailors. Countless tales revolve around sailors being tormented by spiteful gods, people being abducted and physically altered, and strange sea monsters terrorizing the deep.
And that's all they were, fanciful tales.
It never really happened, not to real sailors.
The closest you'd come to a actual sea monster attack was an annoyed whale or a chance encounter with a deep sea squid.
Odds are high the latter didn't happen at all, because even now, we only find deep sea squids when they die and end up on a beach or floating in the ocean.
Now, let's compare Dr Who to the Bill.
Both long running tv series, one sci-fi, the other a cop beat show.
Dr Who got renewed, as of yet, nobody has ever considered bringing the Bill back.
NCIS or CSI, I always attributed their success to mindless escapism.
Drama on it's own, regardless of the subject is just mass-produced.
Sure, the acting cast may be good at their jobs, but it still doesn't change the fact they're just recycling the same plot endlessly.
In my book, to be considered quality, a show needs to do something to stand out, to be different.
Otherwise nobody will really notice when it goes away, because they aren't invested in it.
And then they'll just switch to watching the replacement show.
I absolutely loved the Bill, and always wanted to write for it. I wonder if it had reached the end, in so much as how many new characters can be brought in, before it changes the tone of the show too much... My favorites were:
Frank Burnside
Ted Roach
Tosh Lines
Don Beach
Gina Gold
Kate Spiers
Roz Clarke
Dale Smith
Mickey Webb
Gabriel Kent
Danny Glaze
Now, let's compare Dr Who to the Bill.
Both long running tv series, one sci-fi, the other a cop beat show.
Dr Who got renewed, as of yet, nobody has ever considered bringing the Bill back.
I absolutely loved the Bill, and always wanted to write for it. I wonder if it had reached the end.
According to the info I have here, the final episodes of the Bill were broadcast on 24th and 31st August 2010.
Since that was six years ago, obviously it was cancelled.
But BBC shows don't seem to follow normal rules, sometimes a lot of time can go by before they are renewed.
I didn't believe it when Dr Who came back after all this time.
But from the few episodes I've seen, they're horrible, too much special effects, not enough story and they don't respect canon.
So maybe the fact that the Bill didn't come back is a blessing in disguise.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Now, let's compare Dr Who to the Bill.
Both long running tv series, one sci-fi, the other a cop beat show.
Dr Who got renewed, as of yet, nobody has ever considered bringing the Bill back.
I absolutely loved the Bill, and always wanted to write for it. I wonder if it had reached the end.
According to the info I have here, the final episodes of the Bill were broadcast on 24th and 31st August 2010.
Since that was six years ago, obviously it was cancelled.
But BBC shows don't seem to follow normal rules, sometimes a lot of time can go by before they are renewed.
I didn't believe it when Dr Who came back after all this time.
But from the few episodes I've seen, they're horrible, too much special effects, not enough story and they don't respect canon.
So maybe the fact that the Bill didn't come back is a blessing in disguise.
Yes, I know the Bill has been cancelled... As I said, I think it had to do with how many new characters can be brought in, before it changes the tone of the show too much...
The difference between the Bill and Doctor Who, or more accurately, BBC and ITV, is that BBC shows are funded by the licence fee, meaning that the Beeb feel they have the right to do whatever they want, because it's 'their' money their spending. ITV (and most other stations) on the other hand, rely on advertising, and if folks aren't prepared to keep financing a show, because not enough people are watching, then it will be cancelled...
The Bill, like Baywatch, is an example of where a rotating cast of characters affects the dynamic of a show in a way which soap operas seem to get a free pass for (ie telling the same story with different characters) With episodic shows like the Bill and Baywatch, it can make people eventually lose interest, but with the format of soaps, for some reason, they keep going, albeit with different viewers... I used to watch Neighbours in the Jason and Kylie days... I remember Melanie's laugh... I couldn't even tell you who's in the show nowadays... I expect there's probably still a Robinson (or Robinson connection) and a Ramsey (or a Ramsey connection) somewhere though...
As for Nu Who, it really depends... As much as RTD's constant incluson of homosexual references grated, he had way more respect for the canon of the show than Stephen Moffatt. Moffatt's good at writing 'out of control robot' stories (and not much else)
While I think it's a shame the Bill ended, on the other hand, I acknowledge that everything has it's time, and indeed, everything comes to an end eventually...
Mostly it was the portrayal of the new Cybermen that irked me.
Suddenly they've got turbospeed and can move in bullet time, making everyone else freeze from their relative perspective?
And then they stated if the one organic component remaining degrades (the brain), the body goes looking for a new one to replace it. In the old version, if the brain was destroyed, all you've got is a machine with nobody to control it.
Not sure how to take the fact that the Cybermen are now taking females as conversion subjects, in the past, they just terminated them outright or kept them as prisoners, depending on whatever the plot required.
It was never explained why they didn't convert them.
They are called Cybermen for a reason........
And then we have the massive giant Cyberman built from steampunk technology and charged up with rotating wooden wheels.
Yes, that is when they lost me!
As I stated above, too much money to spend on special effects brought the quality down.
I wonder, if somebody was saying, the Borg are scarier then Cybermen, so we have to make them overpowered to compensate.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Aww, do you miss your green bubble wrap? Do you think the set, prop, and monster makers of the 60s were using cardboard out of choice? They'd salivate to have the opportunity to use modern effects.
As for Nu Who, it really depends... As much as RTD's constant incluson of homosexual references grated, he had way more respect for the canon of the show than Stephen Moffatt. Moffatt's good at writing 'out of control robot' stories (and not much else)
Canon? Doctor Who? I don't see it. How many times did Atlantis sink? How many Loch Ness monsters were there? Are the Cybermen from Telos or Mondas?
And then they stated if the one organic component remaining degrades (the brain), the body goes looking for a new one to replace it. In the old version, if the brain was destroyed, all you've got is a machine with nobody to control it.
Ignoring the fact that that has happened, why shouldn't it? The body is a robot. Why would't it have a CPU independent of the brain?
Not sure how to take the fact that the Cybermen are now taking females as conversion subjects, in the past, they just terminated them outright or kept them as prisoners, depending on whatever the plot required.
It was never explained why they didn't convert them.
They are called Cybermen for a reason........
Yes. It is an old way of saying Human, as in 'mankind'. I have no idea where you got that delusion from but the entire planet of Mondas was turned into Cybermen, not just the males.
They've never been shown to kill females specifically nor to keep prisoners as a matter of course for reasons other than conversion.
And then we have the massive giant Cyberman built from steampunk technology and charged up with rotating wooden wheels.
Yes, that is when they lost me!
More so than the stupid dancing ones from The Wheel in Space? Or the brain-dead plot of Revenge of the Cybermen.
I wonder, if somebody was saying, the Borg are scarier then Cybermen, so we have to make them overpowered to compensate.
The Cybermen could already overpower the Borg. They had regular time travel and no queen. They were bullet and laser proof and were fighting a war against an enemy who's territory spanned three galaxies.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
(...)
Canon? Doctor Who? I don't see it. How many times did Atlantis sink? How many Loch Ness monsters were there? Are the Cybermen from Telos or Mondas? (...)
How many times did "time" implode/explode?
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
gee, i don't know...maybe any episode with 'dalek' in the name might be a pretty good indication it's a dalek-centric episode?
failing that, doctor who, like everything else, has its own wiki, which would list every episode the daleks show up in under their article on said wiki
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
NuWho Dalek episodes:
Christopher Eccleston - 'Dalek'
'Bad Wolf'
'Parting of the Ways'
David Tennant - 'Doomsday, Pt.1 and 2' (Also features the Cybermen)
'Daleks in Manhatten'
'Evolution of the Daleks'
'Stolen Earth'
'Journey's End'
Matt Smith - 'Victory of the Daleks'
'Asylum of the Daleks'
And that's before I even reach Peter Capaldi's run as the Doctor! There have been more episodes in NuWho centred on the Daleks than the Cybermen. Also, the Cybermen featured in 'Rise of the Cybermen', 'Age of Steel' and 'Doomsday' aren't from Mondas, they're from a parallel Earth. Different rules. (All the ones after that are, presumably, Mondas/Telos Cybermen who have evolved their design based on the events of 'Doomsday').
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
In any case, the Daleks have been beaten as badly as the Borg at this point. Seeing one of them, or a Cyberman for that matter, is less a menacing moment than it is a Yeeeeh... one.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I liked how in the Torchwood episode, Cyberwoman, the hardware on the partially converted Lisa was so similar to clearly inspired by Maria's original robot form in Metropolis
In Kirk's defence in that scenario, I'd have to say that there really was only one target in the area, which was actively attacking the Enterprise, and unlikely to be anything else. It was the right call for that specific engagement. The rule book is the beginning of a commander's discretion, not the end of it. A good commander knows when to bend them, and when to follow them...
"In Worf's defense in that scenario, I'd have to say that there was really only one target in the area, which was actively attacking the Defiant and its convoy, and unlikely to be anything else. It was the right call for that specific engagement. The rule book is the beginning of a commander's discretion, not the end of it. A good commander knows when to bend them, and when to follow them..."
You see the problem here? Lack of a target that could fire through its cloak aside, the two setups are exactly the same. But for some reason Worf gets pilloried for making the exact same tactical decision that Kirk did and got lauded for, just because he hit another ship that had, as already proven, no logical reason to be there other than, as it turned out, to deliberately get him to hit it.
I'd need to see the episode again to be sure, but was the Defiant either in combat when the freighter decloaked, or passing through an active battle-zone? Kirk blew Chang out of the sky over Khitomer, where there shouldn't've been other cloaked/hostile vessels (minimal risk of collateral damage) Worf was in an area where he knew to expect that he would be coming under fire. The scenarios are the same, but the setup and specifics are very different, IMHO... That's not to say Kirk deserves a free pass, as pointed out above, his shenanigans in the other movies deserved to see him kicked out of Starfleet, not given a free pass because he happened to save Earth. Kirk and Worf:Plot Armor to Maximum!!!
Worf was escorting a Federation convoy through the border regions and was engaged by Klingon ships that were repeatedly cloaking to reposition themselves. He wasn't expecting to come under attack, he was actively under attack and acting accordingly. As far as whether there was a potential for collateral damage? Again, it's f*cking space, not a city street. The highest risk for collateral damage by far would be Worf accidentally hitting one of his own transports because anybody else ought to have the brains to stay a few thousand kilometers away. And yet again, a point equally true of Kirk v. Chang: even in planetary orbit there's a ton of room to maneuver, especially when thanks to your technology level you don't have to worry overmuch about orbital mechanics.
Which means that the judge is not honest, because it's established in the first five minutes that under Starfleet rules of engagement, the only rules that legally apply to an active-duty Starfleet officer in combat, he did everything right. And yet for some reason she feels compelled to allow the Klingons to try him under Klingon law despite the fact he was engaged in combat against the Klingons, during a time of war against the Klingons. Which means the judge is transparently corrupt and there's a lot worse things going on than are hinted at in the episode.
Not so... I believe the UCMJ allows for foreign powers to extradite someone who has broken their laws... In this instance, the Klingons were the aggrieved party, so they were within their rights to choose if they wanted to extradite Worf to face Klingon 'justice', or let Starfleet deal with him in their own way... As before, both O'Brien and Sisko said that Worf should have confirmed his target, so arguably, he wasn't following Starfleet's rules of engagement (I believe, that actual rules of engagement can vary depending upon deployment, they aren't necessarily always the same...) or, to be more accurate, best practice'.
Really? I point out the line that it's explicitly stated there are at the time of the episode no diplomatic relations between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. It's pretty clear the judge is being pressured to throw Worf under the bus as a sop to the Klingons to get them back to the bargaining table.
And again, per the episode, Worf's actions were acceptable under Starfleet law, not the opinions of Sisko or O'Brien (the latter of whom directly pointed out regarding his own opinion that he was being asked to armchair-quarterback the battle weeks later and did not experience the actual conditions under which Worf acted), and extradition laws traditionally do not apply to valid military or political actions. And by the way, I looked it up. Handing active military personnel over to other jurisdictions usually only happens when there is no corresponding charge in the UCMJ itself. Not applicable due to Article 119b, Involuntary Manslaughter. Ergo, there is no possible scenario under which Worf gets extradited except that of a corrupt judge.
This is what you get for letting your non-attorney CO represent you instead of getting a JAG, Worf. You too, Jadzia.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
In Kirk's defence in that scenario, I'd have to say that there really was only one target in the area, which was actively attacking the Enterprise, and unlikely to be anything else. It was the right call for that specific engagement. The rule book is the beginning of a commander's discretion, not the end of it. A good commander knows when to bend them, and when to follow them...
"In Worf's defense in that scenario, I'd have to say that there was really only one target in the area, which was actively attacking the Defiant and its convoy, and unlikely to be anything else. It was the right call for that specific engagement. The rule book is the beginning of a commander's discretion, not the end of it. A good commander knows when to bend them, and when to follow them..."
You see the problem here? Lack of a target that could fire through its cloak aside, the two setups are exactly the same. But for some reason Worf gets pilloried for making the exact same tactical decision that Kirk did and got lauded for, just because he hit another ship that had, as already proven, no logical reason to be there other than, as it turned out, to deliberately get him to hit it.
I'd need to see the episode again to be sure, but was the Defiant either in combat when the freighter decloaked, or passing through an active battle-zone? Kirk blew Chang out of the sky over Khitomer, where there shouldn't've been other cloaked/hostile vessels (minimal risk of collateral damage) Worf was in an area where he knew to expect that he would be coming under fire. The scenarios are the same, but the setup and specifics are very different, IMHO... That's not to say Kirk deserves a free pass, as pointed out above, his shenanigans in the other movies deserved to see him kicked out of Starfleet, not given a free pass because he happened to save Earth. Kirk and Worf:Plot Armor to Maximum!!!
Worf was escorting a Federation convoy through the border regions and was engaged by Klingon ships that were repeatedly cloaking to reposition themselves. He wasn't expecting to come under attack, he was actively under attack and acting accordingly. As far as whether there was a potential for collateral damage? Again, it's f*cking space, not a city street. The highest risk for collateral damage by far would be Worf accidentally hitting one of his own transports because anybody else ought to have the brains to stay a few thousand kilometers away. And yet again, a point equally true of Kirk v. Chang: even in planetary orbit there's a ton of room to maneuver, especially when thanks to your technology level you don't have to worry overmuch about orbital mechanics.
Which means that the judge is not honest, because it's established in the first five minutes that under Starfleet rules of engagement, the only rules that legally apply to an active-duty Starfleet officer in combat, he did everything right. And yet for some reason she feels compelled to allow the Klingons to try him under Klingon law despite the fact he was engaged in combat against the Klingons, during a time of war against the Klingons. Which means the judge is transparently corrupt and there's a lot worse things going on than are hinted at in the episode.
Not so... I believe the UCMJ allows for foreign powers to extradite someone who has broken their laws... In this instance, the Klingons were the aggrieved party, so they were within their rights to choose if they wanted to extradite Worf to face Klingon 'justice', or let Starfleet deal with him in their own way... As before, both O'Brien and Sisko said that Worf should have confirmed his target, so arguably, he wasn't following Starfleet's rules of engagement (I believe, that actual rules of engagement can vary depending upon deployment, they aren't necessarily always the same...) or, to be more accurate, best practice'.
Really? I point out the line that it's explicitly stated there are at the time of the episode no diplomatic relations between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. It's pretty clear the judge is being pressured to throw Worf under the bus as a sop to the Klingons to get them back to the bargaining table.
And again, per the episode, Worf's actions were acceptable under Starfleet law, not the opinions of Sisko or O'Brien (the latter of whom directly pointed out regarding his own opinion that he was being asked to armchair-quarterback the battle weeks later and did not experience the actual conditions under which Worf acted), and extradition laws traditionally do not apply to valid military or political actions. And by the way, I looked it up. Handing active military personnel over to other jurisdictions usually only happens when there is no corresponding charge in the UCMJ itself. Not applicable due to Article 119b, Involuntary Manslaughter. Ergo, there is no possible scenario under which Worf gets extradited except that of a corrupt judge.
This is what you get for letting your non-attorney CO represent you instead of getting a JAG, Worf. You too, Jadzia.
Jadzia doesn't count. She was being charged with a Civilian Offence, not as a military officer. Under those terms, she was under the jurisdiction of the Bajoran Republic. Bajoran Space, Bajoran Station, Bajoran Law. In terms of the Hearing's legality, Sisko had no basis to dispute other than whether Jadzia could be charged for a crime Curzon was accused of purely on the basis of Dax. Worf was charged with a military offence, aboard a Starfleet Vessel in Federation Space engaged in conflict with the Klingons. Even under present International Law, a serving military officer can be extradited for a war crime to face trial (although this is usually conducted at the ICCJ at The Hague, under International Law, not in the accuser's territory under their law).
The Cybermen were originally from Mondas, but they accidentally blew up their own planet.
Telos was a planet they conquered because it had suitable environmental conditions to build a cryogenic storage facility.
I know, but it's later referred to as their Homeworld.
Telos is also the one that established the "we don't convert females" rule.
Tomb of the Cyberman was it's first appearance and it was stated that the "Tomb" was a trap to lure "superior intellectuals" for conversion.
And it ends with one of the Cyberman killing the sole female member of that expedition.
It was continued much later with a 6th Doctor episode.
The first you see of it is a Cyberman intending to kill the Doctor's female companion because she is of no value to them.
Then we meet the remaining Telosians, all females, there isn't a single male among them.
And we are also introduced to a captive Telosian held by the Cybermen as a prisoner, they are interrogating her for information.
It would have been more efficient to convert her and that way, they get the information she held without having to force it out of her.
But given that they didn't would indicate they don't want to convert her.
All of that is your own forced interpretation of the facts. There was only one female member of the expedition in Tomb. Note they also killed all the males except Toberman. And Peri is of no use to anybody if that's the companion you're referring to.
The Cybermen in Tomb don't react to Zoe but as she's a future genius she'd be of more use than the others (save the Doctor) unless they only wanted muscle (note they didn't convert Toberman, only enhance him).
The reason they didn't convert the Telosian is because the Cybermen were suffering from the decay that had set in since Revenge (skipping Earthshock) and would't abate until Rise of the Cybermen.
The Cyberman aren't robots, not technically. They're living metal that has infected a human and converted most of the organic tissue into a metal body. While this does reconstruct certain organs (specifically the lungs/respiratory tracts), they've never indicated it adds extra features, like secondary nervous systems.
That's not true. You see the faces of the Cybermen under their masks in Tenth Planet as well as their exposed hands. You see the chins under the helmets of the Earthshock and Nemesis Cybermen. You see partially converted drones (like Toberman or the director from Invasion) who have the metal parts grafted on. It's never specified what parts remain organic but some obviously do.
When a Cyberman gets beheaded, they die, just like everyone else.
And this is shown onscreen, one of their prisoners decapitates the unfortunate Cyberman.
To really make the point, we have this: Raston Warrior Robot - off with his head!
The deadliest combat machine in existence, it killed an entire squad of Cybermen with arrows and an inbuilt sword!
And? The Cybermen learnt from the Cyberwar. The Cybermen of Pandorica post date that war (despite the costuming error that keeps the Cybus logo they later removed for Good Man) and have better failsafes.
The Cybermen only had one time machine and it was destroyed when their Telosian prisoner blew up the central command facility. It was also a stolen time machine, they didn't invent it.
They've used it other times as well. Earthshock. The Cyberman version of the Borg's First Contact.
And there was also a weapon called the Glittergun which took this to an extreme, an entire war against the Cybermen was won by issuing this to the troops. The losses taken were so significant that the Cyberhost had to retreat or face total annihilation.
Um no. They Cyber-Wars were ended with this...
The destruction of the Tiberian galaxy and the deaths of a billion trillion Cybermen.
Immune to regular lasers yes, Cybergun lasers, not so much. All it would take is the Borg obtaining one Cybergun, learning how to incorporate the technology into their drones' beam weapons and game over for the Cyberman. Plus as an extra bonus, the reverse engineering process would allow them to modulate their own shields to make the drones immune to Cyberguns.
Oh dear. Another person that thinks the Borg stand even the tiniest modicum of a chance of even stalemating the Cybermen?
Firstly, Cybermen can adapt to energy weapons such as the specially designed Anti-Cyber gun from the Cyber-Wars...
, secondly the Borg can be picked up and thrown around like rag dolls by Data and Worf. Now Cybermen are at least as strong as Data and posses electric hands that can rip the top off a Dalek, a creature encased in one of the strongest and most impervius metals known.
Also, Time Travel. They Cybermen weaponise it, the Borg accidentally use it. The Cybermen outnumber the Borg several trillion to one and Cyberformed the Tiberian galaxy wheras the Borg are stuck in one corner of Mutter's Spiral.
And just to make extra sure, gold melee weapons and gold tipped assimilation tubules.
The Borg don't use melee weapons, they don't adapt, they don't upgrade. Despite it being their shtick they never learn.
Also, newer Cybermen are immune to the gold weakness.
To be honest, it sounds like the data is based on the new series, not the old one which set up the rules in the first place.
If it's breaking all the rules, then it isn't respecting canon.
Ugh. There is no new or old there are no rules, there is no changing of canon.
I'll stick with your Cybermen. Gold was their weakness initially because it clogged up their breathing units and their systems couldn't break it down to purge it. Then canon changed to sudgest that the touch of gold is lethal. That's your 'old canon'. So where between the series do you now draw out the 'old canon' and the 'older canon'? Even further back when their weakness was not gold but solvents?
It's just as bad as the KT haters. Season 27 is not a reboot it is set in the same continuity as season 26 and the preceding seasons, there is no 'nu-who' or any distinction made except in merchandising.
Adaptation to gold is no different to their sudden weakness to it in the first place.
Also, it's DOCTOR WHO, there are no rules. There's not even a canon policy unlike other large Sci-Fi franchises. It's all material for itself.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
In Kirk's defence in that scenario, I'd have to say that there really was only one target in the area, which was actively attacking the Enterprise, and unlikely to be anything else. It was the right call for that specific engagement. The rule book is the beginning of a commander's discretion, not the end of it. A good commander knows when to bend them, and when to follow them...
"In Worf's defense in that scenario, I'd have to say that there was really only one target in the area, which was actively attacking the Defiant and its convoy, and unlikely to be anything else. It was the right call for that specific engagement. The rule book is the beginning of a commander's discretion, not the end of it. A good commander knows when to bend them, and when to follow them..."
You see the problem here? Lack of a target that could fire through its cloak aside, the two setups are exactly the same. But for some reason Worf gets pilloried for making the exact same tactical decision that Kirk did and got lauded for, just because he hit another ship that had, as already proven, no logical reason to be there other than, as it turned out, to deliberately get him to hit it.
I'd need to see the episode again to be sure, but was the Defiant either in combat when the freighter decloaked, or passing through an active battle-zone? Kirk blew Chang out of the sky over Khitomer, where there shouldn't've been other cloaked/hostile vessels (minimal risk of collateral damage) Worf was in an area where he knew to expect that he would be coming under fire. The scenarios are the same, but the setup and specifics are very different, IMHO... That's not to say Kirk deserves a free pass, as pointed out above, his shenanigans in the other movies deserved to see him kicked out of Starfleet, not given a free pass because he happened to save Earth. Kirk and Worf:Plot Armor to Maximum!!!
Worf was escorting a Federation convoy through the border regions and was engaged by Klingon ships that were repeatedly cloaking to reposition themselves. He wasn't expecting to come under attack, he was actively under attack and acting accordingly. As far as whether there was a potential for collateral damage? Again, it's f*cking space, not a city street. The highest risk for collateral damage by far would be Worf accidentally hitting one of his own transports because anybody else ought to have the brains to stay a few thousand kilometers away. And yet again, a point equally true of Kirk v. Chang: even in planetary orbit there's a ton of room to maneuver, especially when thanks to your technology level you don't have to worry overmuch about orbital mechanics.
Which means that the judge is not honest, because it's established in the first five minutes that under Starfleet rules of engagement, the only rules that legally apply to an active-duty Starfleet officer in combat, he did everything right. And yet for some reason she feels compelled to allow the Klingons to try him under Klingon law despite the fact he was engaged in combat against the Klingons, during a time of war against the Klingons. Which means the judge is transparently corrupt and there's a lot worse things going on than are hinted at in the episode.
Not so... I believe the UCMJ allows for foreign powers to extradite someone who has broken their laws... In this instance, the Klingons were the aggrieved party, so they were within their rights to choose if they wanted to extradite Worf to face Klingon 'justice', or let Starfleet deal with him in their own way... As before, both O'Brien and Sisko said that Worf should have confirmed his target, so arguably, he wasn't following Starfleet's rules of engagement (I believe, that actual rules of engagement can vary depending upon deployment, they aren't necessarily always the same...) or, to be more accurate, best practice'.
Really? I point out the line that it's explicitly stated there are at the time of the episode no diplomatic relations between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. It's pretty clear the judge is being pressured to throw Worf under the bus as a sop to the Klingons to get them back to the bargaining table.
And again, per the episode, Worf's actions were acceptable under Starfleet law, not the opinions of Sisko or O'Brien (the latter of whom directly pointed out regarding his own opinion that he was being asked to armchair-quarterback the battle weeks later and did not experience the actual conditions under which Worf acted), and extradition laws traditionally do not apply to valid military or political actions. And by the way, I looked it up. Handing active military personnel over to other jurisdictions usually only happens when there is no corresponding charge in the UCMJ itself. Not applicable due to Article 119b, Involuntary Manslaughter. Ergo, there is no possible scenario under which Worf gets extradited except that of a corrupt judge.
This is what you get for letting your non-attorney CO represent you instead of getting a JAG, Worf. You too, Jadzia.
So in a nutshell, The Red Mist descended, and he stopped checking targets... The Klingon lawyer proved that Worf couldn't even control his temper under the stress of a hearing. It's a valid proposition that his judgement was equally clouded during the battle...
With regards the distances: Yes, IRL, Space is Massively Vast, but we're talking about fiction, written by folks who don't always give the greatest considerations to accuracy. Kirk's trip to the center of the galaxy, for example... If Voyager had been capable of those speeds, Mad Kathy would have been back home before Mark could sell the puppies
With regards your second point about the extradition aspect, ryan's already addressed it, but I will add, that if the Federation and the Empire had no formal diplomatic relations with the Empire, perhaps this could also be seen as a reconciliatory effort on the Federation's part, by showing the Empire that they would not automatically protect an officer. Throwing Worf under the bus? Maybe so, but as the Vulcans say, the needs of the many... Equally, the notion of 'throwing under the bus' would presume that Worf was an entirely innocent party. He was not. Think of it as an Intergalactic example of Bait Car or To Catch a Predator: Worf was unquestionably set up by the Empire (his family has been their political punchbag for decades, so no surprise there', but he did do the thing they were accusing him of: Firing on an unconfirmed target, and it was Only the revelation of the freighter's true nature, which let Worf off the hook with regards accidentally killing civilians, but that still can't hide the fact that he didn't confirm his target...
Also, it's DOCTOR WHO, there are no rules. There's not even a canon policy unlike other large Sci-Fi franchises. It's all material for itself.
I like the BBC for not taking a position on the canonicity of the show. Not something that anyone can do anyway given that it's changed so much over the years by the show's writers and by Big Finish for the audio Drama's. Take as an example the Dalek invasion of 2009, which, thanks to cracks in time, never actually happened.
As to the first post, Star Trek without any Sci-fi elements in it would be like Doctor Who without the Doctor, pointless, there'd be no heart to it at all. You wouldn't be able to get anything interesting done without space travel or equipment, nothing interesting to explore, no scrapes to get into. Unless you have an interest in the soap opera-ish interactions of characters it would quickly bore you to tears.
I shouldn't have mentioned Dr Who.
Or the Cyberman.
It seems to be derailing the thread.
Let's try and stay on topic.
But if it's relevant, feel free to cite other sci-fi shows and how they might have been different if they were not sci-fi.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Person of Interest - sci-fi = random vigilante show. The series plain doesn't work without the Machine.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
[TOS DID wind up in the bin! After two seasons! It was only fans writing into the studio that the third season even came to pass, and it still got cancelled! Even Enterprise had a longer run! So f*ck Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley, and the horses they rode in on!
If everything which made TOS what it was as a series (other than the sci-fi setting) had been used in any other production, I don't see why it wouldn't've been just as good (and bad) And the vast majority of the episodes still would have worked!
So this is the response to my use of a specific example. Fine. New tact:
I know I've watched enough "insider assassin kills someone(s) for political gain" episodes to know that they exist outside of Star Trek's "Journey to Babel".
Did any of these episodes "strike such a cord" with you to remember what series they were in and how the impact on characterization, plot, show running, etc. etc. affected that series so much better than "Journey to Babel" did for Star Trek?
I know there's been enough "false flag" framing-someone episodes, whether it was "age of sail", "naval", or even "police/militaristic in general" to ask the same questions, have these episodes "struck such a cord" with you to say that it was significantly better than Worf's little jaunt that's plastered all over this thread?
As I've maintained throughout this piece, it's not just one or two aspects of a show that ultimately determine it's success or failure. To wit:
Would any Age of Sail show inspire cell phones?
Would any greek mythology show inspire tablet computing?
Would any show about a 5 year near-light-speed mission to Alpha Centauri inspire the search for a viable method to travel faster than light?
These are all "fallout" from Star Trek's overall success, because it was in a specific sci-fi setting.
Of any other 60's era TV show - Get Smart. Bonanza. Beverly Hillbillies. Dragnet. Do any of these shows have a passionate fan base seeking to set up a 50th anniversary of it's first airing (or, if said show was "early 60s", did it already have one)?
Of the shows that attempt to generate "universes", Bonanza I think tied into another 60s show. Happy Days was part of a "universe" with Laverne & Shirley, Mork & Mindy, and Joanie loves Chachi - do they have the same overall level of success that the TNG era run has?
Will any of the "current" shows doing this "universe" thing, whether it was the relatively recent Stargate family, or the still ongoing NCIS and CSI families, do the same - inspire lots and lots of good things and/or be celebrated in 25th/50th anniversaries?
Star Trek is, ultimately and overall, a unique phenomenon that no matter what you may think of the various sub-parts, there's so much involved, overall, in the whole thing - spawning from that unique combination of setting, script writing, and acting - that any attempt to tweak even one thing that has happened with any of them and attempt to spin it into the level of success and cultural influence Star Trek has generated is impossible.
Personally, I wasn't a fan of DS9 going "war", or Voyager needing to apply "eye candy". However, would either of these series have succeeded in the same fashion that they did, without having gone the way they did? No. Does that "lessen" my appreciation for what these series have done for the lore? No. And I don't sit in this thread complaining about how Worf is a shallow characterization - a cheesy hybrid of samurai and Viking lores that shouldn't exist on a TV screen, nevermind practically lead acting an entire episode or arc?
Because without him, TNG and DS9 are a lot "shallower" and potentially a lot closer to "failure" than what he did to propel those shows to where they wound up.
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
[TOS DID wind up in the bin! After two seasons! It was only fans writing into the studio that the third season even came to pass, and it still got cancelled! Even Enterprise had a longer run! So f*ck Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley, and the horses they rode in on!
If everything which made TOS what it was as a series (other than the sci-fi setting) had been used in any other production, I don't see why it wouldn't've been just as good (and bad) And the vast majority of the episodes still would have worked!
So this is the response to my use of a specific example. Fine. New tact:
I know I've watched enough "insider assassin kills someone(s) for political gain" episodes to know that they exist outside of Star Trek's "Journey to Babel".
Did any of these episodes "strike such a cord" with you to remember what series they were in and how the impact on characterization, plot, show running, etc. etc. affected that series so much better than "Journey to Babel" did for Star Trek?
I know there's been enough "false flag" framing-someone episodes, whether it was "age of sail", "naval", or even "police/militaristic in general" to ask the same questions, have these episodes "struck such a cord" with you to say that it was significantly better than Worf's little jaunt that's plastered all over this thread?
As I've maintained throughout this piece, it's not just one or two aspects of a show that ultimately determine it's success or failure. To wit:
Would any Age of Sail show inspire cell phones?
Would any greek mythology show inspire tablet computing?
Would any show about a 5 year near-light-speed mission to Alpha Centauri inspire the search for a viable method to travel faster than light?
These are all "fallout" from Star Trek's overall success, because it was in a specific sci-fi setting.
Of any other 60's era TV show - Get Smart. Bonanza. Beverly Hillbillies. Dragnet. Do any of these shows have a passionate fan base seeking to set up a 50th anniversary of it's first airing (or, if said show was "early 60s", did it already have one)?
Of the shows that attempt to generate "universes", Bonanza I think tied into another 60s show. Happy Days was part of a "universe" with Laverne & Shirley, Mork & Mindy, and Joanie loves Chachi - do they have the same overall level of success that the TNG era run has?
Will any of the "current" shows doing this "universe" thing, whether it was the relatively recent Stargate family, or the still ongoing NCIS and CSI families, do the same - inspire lots and lots of good things and/or be celebrated in 25th/50th anniversaries?
Star Trek is, ultimately and overall, a unique phenomenon that no matter what you may think of the various sub-parts, there's so much involved, overall, in the whole thing - spawning from that unique combination of setting, script writing, and acting - that any attempt to tweak even one thing that has happened with any of them and attempt to spin it into the level of success and cultural influence Star Trek has generated is impossible.
Personally, I wasn't a fan of DS9 going "war", or Voyager needing to apply "eye candy". However, would either of these series have succeeded in the same fashion that they did, without having gone the way they did? No. Does that "lessen" my appreciation for what these series have done for the lore? No. And I don't sit in this thread complaining about how Worf is a shallow characterization - a cheesy hybrid of samurai and Viking lores that shouldn't exist on a TV screen, nevermind practically lead acting an entire episode or arc?
Because without him, TNG and DS9 are a lot "shallower" and potentially a lot closer to "failure" than what he did to propel those shows to where they wound up.
All utterly irrelevant strawman questions. It doesn't matter what a series inspires, or what achievements and inventions arise from a series, for the series to be considered popular or successful. Because a show could not inspire the kind of things you have suggested, does not mean it is or would be unsuccessful, so that is an utterly false criteria for judgement. I can't think of any advancement or invention inspired by Game of Thrones, but that is a massively popular and successful series.
I didn't particularly like the idea of the war in DS-9, but so what? You cannot -- simply Can Not -- state that DS-9 or VOY would have been less successful had they taken different paths, because that is nothing but your opinion and utterly unverifiable conjecture! Also, I haven't once said Worf is a shallow characterization, so don't try and put words in my mouth... Worf might be a dead-beat dad, and unfit to sit in the Captain's Chair (a demonstrable fact about the character) but he is a far from shallow characterization. In fact, I'd say he was one of Trek's most developed and layered characters (and one of my favorites, but that doesn't blind me to his flaws of character, not to be confused with flaws as a character...
[TOS DID wind up in the bin! After two seasons! It was only fans writing into the studio that the third season even came to pass, and it still got cancelled! Even Enterprise had a longer run! So f*ck Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley, and the horses they rode in on!
If everything which made TOS what it was as a series (other than the sci-fi setting) had been used in any other production, I don't see why it wouldn't've been just as good (and bad) And the vast majority of the episodes still would have worked!
So this is the response to my use of a specific example. Fine. New tact:
I know I've watched enough "insider assassin kills someone(s) for political gain" episodes to know that they exist outside of Star Trek's "Journey to Babel".
Did any of these episodes "strike such a cord" with you to remember what series they were in and how the impact on characterization, plot, show running, etc. etc. affected that series so much better than "Journey to Babel" did for Star Trek?
I know there's been enough "false flag" framing-someone episodes, whether it was "age of sail", "naval", or even "police/militaristic in general" to ask the same questions, have these episodes "struck such a cord" with you to say that it was significantly better than Worf's little jaunt that's plastered all over this thread?
As I've maintained throughout this piece, it's not just one or two aspects of a show that ultimately determine it's success or failure. To wit:
Would any Age of Sail show inspire cell phones?
Would any greek mythology show inspire tablet computing?
Would any show about a 5 year near-light-speed mission to Alpha Centauri inspire the search for a viable method to travel faster than light?
These are all "fallout" from Star Trek's overall success, because it was in a specific sci-fi setting.
Of any other 60's era TV show - Get Smart. Bonanza. Beverly Hillbillies. Dragnet. Do any of these shows have a passionate fan base seeking to set up a 50th anniversary of it's first airing (or, if said show was "early 60s", did it already have one)?
Of the shows that attempt to generate "universes", Bonanza I think tied into another 60s show. Happy Days was part of a "universe" with Laverne & Shirley, Mork & Mindy, and Joanie loves Chachi - do they have the same overall level of success that the TNG era run has?
Will any of the "current" shows doing this "universe" thing, whether it was the relatively recent Stargate family, or the still ongoing NCIS and CSI families, do the same - inspire lots and lots of good things and/or be celebrated in 25th/50th anniversaries?
Star Trek is, ultimately and overall, a unique phenomenon that no matter what you may think of the various sub-parts, there's so much involved, overall, in the whole thing - spawning from that unique combination of setting, script writing, and acting - that any attempt to tweak even one thing that has happened with any of them and attempt to spin it into the level of success and cultural influence Star Trek has generated is impossible.
Personally, I wasn't a fan of DS9 going "war", or Voyager needing to apply "eye candy". However, would either of these series have succeeded in the same fashion that they did, without having gone the way they did? No. Does that "lessen" my appreciation for what these series have done for the lore? No. And I don't sit in this thread complaining about how Worf is a shallow characterization - a cheesy hybrid of samurai and Viking lores that shouldn't exist on a TV screen, nevermind practically lead acting an entire episode or arc?
Because without him, TNG and DS9 are a lot "shallower" and potentially a lot closer to "failure" than what he did to propel those shows to where they wound up.
All utterly irrelevant strawman questions. It doesn't matter what a series inspires, or what achievements and inventions arise from a series, for the series to be considered popular or successful. Because a show could not inspire the kind of things you have suggested, does not mean it is or would be unsuccessful, so that is an utterly false criteria for judgement. I can't think of any advancement or invention inspired by Game of Thrones, but that is a massively popular and successful series.
I didn't particularly like the idea of the war in DS-9, but so what? You cannot -- simply Can Not -- state that DS-9 or VOY would have been less successful had they taken different paths, because that is nothing but your opinion and utterly unverifiable conjecture! Also, I haven't once said Worf is a shallow characterization, so don't try and put words in my mouth... Worf might be a dead-beat dad, and unfit to sit in the Captain's Chair (a demonstrable fact about the character) but he is a far from shallow characterization. In fact, I'd say he was one of Trek's most developed and layered characters (and one of my favorites, but that doesn't blind me to his flaws of character, not to be confused with flaws as a character...
So let me get this straight.
We're posing in a thread where the OP is seeking a conjecture as to our thoughts as to whether or not Star Trek would be as successful a franchise if it was to be stripped of it's very Science Fiction roots.
And you're calling me out for conjecture?
Meanwhile, I'll concede one point. It can be... extremely hard... for a non-sci-fi show to spawn technological innovations.
But you didn't address the other point I had mixed up in there.
Show me a series that's matched, or is on the way to matching, Star Trek's "success" as defined by lasting for 30+ years in 5 different "formats/variants/series" of the original production material, stretches to exist in at least one other media (movies from the television roots), and winds up with a "critically accepted" 80% "overall success" rate - no matter what the "initial" success metrics said. (This accounts for "Enterprise" still being considered a general failure after it's run, while every actual "Star Trek" title is currently considered a success).
And it has to do so without "Science Fiction". And, if one wants to really "stretch it some", let's also discount "fantasy" that relies on "magic" as a centerpiece of the series - if a "actions of a significantly technologically advanced society is viewable as 'magic' to the lesser races", one can say that talking ponies or even a rogue's gallery filled of plant controllers, hyper cold indviduals, and horribly scarred survivors can be acting in realms of "magic/superior technology".
So all these series that I remember as a kid that have/are/will shortly be encountering some sort of 30th anniversary? Things like Transformers, Robotech, My Little Pony, Sailor Moon, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Or things even older than Star Trek like Superman, Batman, Spider Man, the Fantasic Four, and literally the rest of the comic book superhero world? All "discounted" because they're either straight-up Sci-Fi, or "borderline enough" but uses "magic" instead of "science" to make the impossible "possible".
So, what's out there? Bonanza and the rest of the "westerns"? Happy Days - of which one sub-aspect of it went "science fiction" anyway - Mork and Mindy wasn't exactly all "human". Well???
Where's the ongoing adventures of the Spartans/300? Is Game of Thrones well on it's way to have 45 more years of success and a handful of other shows that highlight different kingdoms - almost all of which are as successful as Game of Thrones? Are we going to say that those "cheesy pseudo-police procedurals" like CSI and NCIS are "reality" enough to escape my "no fantasy" clause above, or are we going to admit that while everything "looks" fairly realistic, the timeframes and methodologies they operate within are clearly only obtainable through the realms of fantasy?
Do you have any evidence, proof, or even solid enough conjecture that this is even possible?
Detecting big-time "anti-old-school" bias here. NX? Lobi. TOS/TMP Connie? Super-promotion-box. (aka the two hardest ways to get ships) Excelsior & all 3 TNG "big hero" ships? C-Store. Please Equalize...
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
What I am reasoning is that while the sci-fi tech may only be part of the recipe that resulted in a successful long running/much loved franchise, is that if we took all that away, would anyone have looked at it twice?
Or even once?
You'd basically be restricting the scriptwriters to come up with only real world events, reducing Star Trek to no more then another historical drama or contemporary sea voyage show.
Jean Luc Picard, Captain of the Navy Flagship Enterprise.
Any of the innovative ideas they may have had would have been impossible to do, so it would be highly likely that none of the current creative staff would have ever worked on the show to begin with, seeking employment on another show that was more to their tastes.
Which would probably change the quality/production process quite significantly.
And that's a whole other legal kerfuffle right there, I think there is some clause that if you depict military organisations, you are required to have an actual military advisor on call to make sure it treats the military as realistic as possible.
So if Star Trek was to be set in the modern era, they'd need a Navy liason.
Stargate had them from the US Air Force.
That aerial command center we see in the first live action Transformers movie? It's the actual real plane and most of the extras are the genuine operators/enlisted personnel!
I suspect Dareau is correct, if we were to remove every sci-fi or fantasy aspect from everything, all we'd have are a bunch of identical franchises exploring the real world, but dramatized.
Detective stories, police stories, legal dramas, hospital shows, sitcoms, historical dramas, whatever.
Everything would end up just being too similar and that would mean it would be very hard to win a permanent fanbase if you're just one of 100 entertainment properties all on the same topic.
That's not even factoring in fanbase loyalty, fans are dedicated to whatever they consider to be "the best" and shun the competition, regardless of how good it is.
So one or two might rise above the others, but the rest would be doomed to languish in obscurity.
Post edited by tilarta on
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
What I am reasoning is that while the sci-fi tech may only be part of the recipe that resulted in a successful long running/much loved franchise, is that if we took all that away, would anyone have looked at it twice?
Or even once?
You'd basically be restricting the scriptwriters to come up with only real world events, reducing Star Trek to no more then another historical drama or contemporary sea voyage show.
Jean Luc Picard, Captain of the Navy Flagship Enterprise.
Any of the innovative ideas they may have had would have been impossible to do, so it would be highly likely that none of the current creative staff would have ever worked on the show to begin with, seeking employment on another show that was more to their tastes.
Which would probably change the quality/production process quite significantly.
And that's a whole other legal kerfuffle right there, I think there is some clause that if you depict military organisations, you are required to have an actual military advisor on call to make sure it treats the military as realistic as possible.
So if Star Trek was to be set in the modern era, they'd need a Navy liason.
Stargate had them from the US Army.
That aerial command center we see in the first live action Transformers movie? It's the actual real plane and most of the extras are the genuine operators/enlisted personnel!
I suspect Dareau is correct, if we were to remove every sci-fi or fantasy aspect from everything, all we'd have are a bunch of identical franchises exploring the real world, but dramatized.
Detective stories, police stories, legal dramas, hospital shows, sitcoms, historical dramas, whatever.
Everything would end up just being too similar and that would mean it would be very hard to win a permanent fanbase if you're just one of 100 entertainment properties all on the same topic.
That's not even factoring in fanbase loyalty, fans are dedicated to whatever they consider to be "the best" and shun the competition, regardless of how good it is.
So one or two might rise above the others, but the rest would be doomed to languish in obscurity.
I'm not sure that would apply for the Royal Navy, which would be a more appropriate choice for an Age of Sail show IMO, but I haven't seen any shows around the RN so I couldn't say for sure.
There's also the fact that many of Star Trek's stories just plain don't have the same impact in a historical setting. The kind of intense nationalistic/racial hatred berated in 'Let this be your Last Battlefield' was entirely accepted during the Age of Sail. You could do an episode on the Rights of Man in the form of the Abolition patrols performed in the 1800s to end the Slave Trade, but you can't write a story about racism as effective as 'Let this be your Last Battlefield' in that setting.
You also can't pull off episodes like 'Balance of Terror', 'The Enterprise Incident' or 'Errand of Mercy', because all the tension just vanishes if you replace the Klingons/Romulans with any real-world nation of the time: it was called the Pax Britannica for a reason. With the exceptions of the Crimean War and American Civil War, there weren't any major sea-based conflicts between the end of Napoleon and the end of sail.
It's not just the quality of the storytelling (because if we judge by that, Star Trek was no better than most other serial television shows of the time), but the stories you tell, which determine whether a series becomes popular. Above are 4 of TOS' most popular episodes, and none of them work nearly as well outside a sci-fi setting ('...Battlefield' certainly doesn't work in any setting prior to the 1960s). Might such a show become popular? Maybe. But it couldn't match Star Trek's popularity using the same stories, and once you change that, we're no longer talking about Star Trek 'in an Age of Sail setting', we're talking about something new entirely.
@tilarta: Actually, there's no law or anything that says you're required to get DOD involved in depictions of the US military, not even copyright or trademark law (because anything the US government creates is automatically public domain), but a lot of productions choose to do so for various reasons: for example, getting to film on location at active military bases or on real ships, which saves money on sets and extras. Stargate SG-1 chose to ask the US AIR FORCE (not the Army) to send them technical advisors so they'd avoid making silly mistakes in portrayal.
Some managed to creep in anyway, though: for example there's a background character in the pilot who for some reason is wearing both sergeant's chevrons and a colonel's bird. XD
There are downsides, though: getting backing from the Pentagon means there's certain limitations on how you can portray the military. For example, DOD declined to help with The Avengers on grounds that SHIELD's relationship to the US government wasn't clear (i.e. they didn't like the idea of the US military taking orders from anybody other than the US government).
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
[TOS DID wind up in the bin! After two seasons! It was only fans writing into the studio that the third season even came to pass, and it still got cancelled! Even Enterprise had a longer run! So f*ck Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley, and the horses they rode in on!
If everything which made TOS what it was as a series (other than the sci-fi setting) had been used in any other production, I don't see why it wouldn't've been just as good (and bad) And the vast majority of the episodes still would have worked!
So this is the response to my use of a specific example. Fine. New tact:
I know I've watched enough "insider assassin kills someone(s) for political gain" episodes to know that they exist outside of Star Trek's "Journey to Babel".
Did any of these episodes "strike such a cord" with you to remember what series they were in and how the impact on characterization, plot, show running, etc. etc. affected that series so much better than "Journey to Babel" did for Star Trek?
I know there's been enough "false flag" framing-someone episodes, whether it was "age of sail", "naval", or even "police/militaristic in general" to ask the same questions, have these episodes "struck such a cord" with you to say that it was significantly better than Worf's little jaunt that's plastered all over this thread?
As I've maintained throughout this piece, it's not just one or two aspects of a show that ultimately determine it's success or failure. To wit:
Would any Age of Sail show inspire cell phones?
Would any greek mythology show inspire tablet computing?
Would any show about a 5 year near-light-speed mission to Alpha Centauri inspire the search for a viable method to travel faster than light?
These are all "fallout" from Star Trek's overall success, because it was in a specific sci-fi setting.
Of any other 60's era TV show - Get Smart. Bonanza. Beverly Hillbillies. Dragnet. Do any of these shows have a passionate fan base seeking to set up a 50th anniversary of it's first airing (or, if said show was "early 60s", did it already have one)?
Of the shows that attempt to generate "universes", Bonanza I think tied into another 60s show. Happy Days was part of a "universe" with Laverne & Shirley, Mork & Mindy, and Joanie loves Chachi - do they have the same overall level of success that the TNG era run has?
Will any of the "current" shows doing this "universe" thing, whether it was the relatively recent Stargate family, or the still ongoing NCIS and CSI families, do the same - inspire lots and lots of good things and/or be celebrated in 25th/50th anniversaries?
Star Trek is, ultimately and overall, a unique phenomenon that no matter what you may think of the various sub-parts, there's so much involved, overall, in the whole thing - spawning from that unique combination of setting, script writing, and acting - that any attempt to tweak even one thing that has happened with any of them and attempt to spin it into the level of success and cultural influence Star Trek has generated is impossible.
Personally, I wasn't a fan of DS9 going "war", or Voyager needing to apply "eye candy". However, would either of these series have succeeded in the same fashion that they did, without having gone the way they did? No. Does that "lessen" my appreciation for what these series have done for the lore? No. And I don't sit in this thread complaining about how Worf is a shallow characterization - a cheesy hybrid of samurai and Viking lores that shouldn't exist on a TV screen, nevermind practically lead acting an entire episode or arc?
Because without him, TNG and DS9 are a lot "shallower" and potentially a lot closer to "failure" than what he did to propel those shows to where they wound up.
All utterly irrelevant strawman questions. It doesn't matter what a series inspires, or what achievements and inventions arise from a series, for the series to be considered popular or successful. Because a show could not inspire the kind of things you have suggested, does not mean it is or would be unsuccessful, so that is an utterly false criteria for judgement. I can't think of any advancement or invention inspired by Game of Thrones, but that is a massively popular and successful series.
I didn't particularly like the idea of the war in DS-9, but so what? You cannot -- simply Can Not -- state that DS-9 or VOY would have been less successful had they taken different paths, because that is nothing but your opinion and utterly unverifiable conjecture! Also, I haven't once said Worf is a shallow characterization, so don't try and put words in my mouth... Worf might be a dead-beat dad, and unfit to sit in the Captain's Chair (a demonstrable fact about the character) but he is a far from shallow characterization. In fact, I'd say he was one of Trek's most developed and layered characters (and one of my favorites, but that doesn't blind me to his flaws of character, not to be confused with flaws as a character...
So let me get this straight.
We're posing in a thread where the OP is seeking a conjecture as to our thoughts as to whether or not Star Trek would be as successful a franchise if it was to be stripped of it's very Science Fiction roots.
And you're calling me out for conjecture?
Meanwhile, I'll concede one point. It can be... extremely hard... for a non-sci-fi show to spawn technological innovations.
But you didn't address the other point I had mixed up in there.
Show me a series that's matched, or is on the way to matching, Star Trek's "success" as defined by lasting for 30+ years in 5 different "formats/variants/series" of the original production material, stretches to exist in at least one other media (movies from the television roots), and winds up with a "critically accepted" 80% "overall success" rate - no matter what the "initial" success metrics said. (This accounts for "Enterprise" still being considered a general failure after it's run, while every actual "Star Trek" title is currently considered a success).
And it has to do so without "Science Fiction". And, if one wants to really "stretch it some", let's also discount "fantasy" that relies on "magic" as a centerpiece of the series - if a "actions of a significantly technologically advanced society is viewable as 'magic' to the lesser races", one can say that talking ponies or even a rogue's gallery filled of plant controllers, hyper cold indviduals, and horribly scarred survivors can be acting in realms of "magic/superior technology".
So all these series that I remember as a kid that have/are/will shortly be encountering some sort of 30th anniversary? Things like Transformers, Robotech, My Little Pony, Sailor Moon, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Or things even older than Star Trek like Superman, Batman, Spider Man, the Fantasic Four, and literally the rest of the comic book superhero world? All "discounted" because they're either straight-up Sci-Fi, or "borderline enough" but uses "magic" instead of "science" to make the impossible "possible".
So, what's out there? Bonanza and the rest of the "westerns"? Happy Days - of which one sub-aspect of it went "science fiction" anyway - Mork and Mindy wasn't exactly all "human". Well???
Where's the ongoing adventures of the Spartans/300? Is Game of Thrones well on it's way to have 45 more years of success and a handful of other shows that highlight different kingdoms - almost all of which are as successful as Game of Thrones? Are we going to say that those "cheesy pseudo-police procedurals" like CSI and NCIS are "reality" enough to escape my "no fantasy" clause above, or are we going to admit that while everything "looks" fairly realistic, the timeframes and methodologies they operate within are clearly only obtainable through the realms of fantasy?
Do you have any evidence, proof, or even solid enough conjecture that this is even possible?
Yes I am, because you're stating your conjectured opinion as if it is fact...
Again with the false questions to try and force an answer... Well, 'homie don't play dat...'
The only show I can really think of which has a comparable run-length of output to Star Trek, is Doctor Who. That only gets that due to the ability for the Doctor to regenerate, and for the show to be amended and tailored to the audience. The only other I might mention, would be Coronation Street. But what does it matter what I can and can't name?
The other series you mentioned are certainly enduring in terms of popularity, but there are also sci-fi series which haven't endured to such an extent... Alien Nation, Blake's 7, UFO, Sea-Quest, Farscape, Space Precinct... While I'm sure there are fandoms out there for those shows, I can't say that they have had the same 'cultural staying power' as Star Trek has had. The amount of fandom I see for Firefly, frankly astounds me. I enjoyed watching it (well, most of it) but I can see why it was cancelled, and *activates covariant shielding* I can see why it was cancelled, and I think it deserved to be cancelled, because as a series, I couldn't see it 'going any further'...
Firefly is an example that it's better to burn out, than to fade away... ENT faded away, and I suspect, that TRIBBLE will do the same... Defiance, is another example of 'going out strong'. I think in terms of themes and storytelling, it was not just as strong as anything written in TOS, and just as daring in terms of content shown, but it went further, and pushed more boundaries. In Babylon 5, we saw G'Kar have an eye taken out on an insane emperor's whim (although we were not shown the actual removal, but the impact was the same) In Defiance, we saw Stahma giving Datak a hand-job during a prison visit... We saw Niles being made to strip and then get urinated upon... Trek would never have had the chutzpah to show content like that, even though both would likely be considered 'easy going' compared to what one can expect in Cardassian 'hospitality'...
Sci-fi isn't what makes Star Trek enduring. That sci-fi attracts not just a vague audience, but also attracts a specific demographic of obsessives* which means that it has an unshakable legion of supporters to make it popular. And that should not be confused with true endurability, because not all sci-fi shows have that endurability, even if they do keep fandoms...
*Like the video Jeri Ryan posted a while back of where she was at a convention, and some window-licker got her to sign the crotch of the garment she wore beneath her catsuits... Manu Intraymi commented how she managed to stay classy and did it with a smile on her face, but that it was a shame there are folks like that out there. And damn that was creepy and perverted... No one deserves to be put in that kind of situation... I'd settle for a hug and a handshake, I don't want the woman's underwear...
I'm not sure that would apply for the Royal Navy, which would be a more appropriate choice for an Age of Sail show IMO, but I haven't seen any shows around the RN so I couldn't say for sure.
Actually, I was thinking the American Navy, as I doubt the British Empire is a world superpower anymore.
Under that scenario, this is what the Enterprise-D would have been: Blue Ridge class command ship.
Alternatively, if it had been an Age of Sail show, this is what the Enterprise-D would have been: Indus 80 (1860).
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Comments
And that's all they were, fanciful tales.
It never really happened, not to real sailors.
The closest you'd come to a actual sea monster attack was an annoyed whale or a chance encounter with a deep sea squid.
Odds are high the latter didn't happen at all, because even now, we only find deep sea squids when they die and end up on a beach or floating in the ocean.
Now, let's compare Dr Who to the Bill.
Both long running tv series, one sci-fi, the other a cop beat show.
Dr Who got renewed, as of yet, nobody has ever considered bringing the Bill back.
NCIS or CSI, I always attributed their success to mindless escapism.
Drama on it's own, regardless of the subject is just mass-produced.
Sure, the acting cast may be good at their jobs, but it still doesn't change the fact they're just recycling the same plot endlessly.
In my book, to be considered quality, a show needs to do something to stand out, to be different.
Otherwise nobody will really notice when it goes away, because they aren't invested in it.
And then they'll just switch to watching the replacement show.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Frank Burnside
Ted Roach
Tosh Lines
Don Beach
Gina Gold
Kate Spiers
Roz Clarke
Dale Smith
Mickey Webb
Gabriel Kent
Danny Glaze
According to the info I have here, the final episodes of the Bill were broadcast on 24th and 31st August 2010.
Since that was six years ago, obviously it was cancelled.
But BBC shows don't seem to follow normal rules, sometimes a lot of time can go by before they are renewed.
I didn't believe it when Dr Who came back after all this time.
But from the few episodes I've seen, they're horrible, too much special effects, not enough story and they don't respect canon.
So maybe the fact that the Bill didn't come back is a blessing in disguise.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
The difference between the Bill and Doctor Who, or more accurately, BBC and ITV, is that BBC shows are funded by the licence fee, meaning that the Beeb feel they have the right to do whatever they want, because it's 'their' money their spending. ITV (and most other stations) on the other hand, rely on advertising, and if folks aren't prepared to keep financing a show, because not enough people are watching, then it will be cancelled...
The Bill, like Baywatch, is an example of where a rotating cast of characters affects the dynamic of a show in a way which soap operas seem to get a free pass for (ie telling the same story with different characters) With episodic shows like the Bill and Baywatch, it can make people eventually lose interest, but with the format of soaps, for some reason, they keep going, albeit with different viewers... I used to watch Neighbours in the Jason and Kylie days... I remember Melanie's laugh... I couldn't even tell you who's in the show nowadays... I expect there's probably still a Robinson (or Robinson connection) and a Ramsey (or a Ramsey connection) somewhere though...
As for Nu Who, it really depends... As much as RTD's constant incluson of homosexual references grated, he had way more respect for the canon of the show than Stephen Moffatt. Moffatt's good at writing 'out of control robot' stories (and not much else)
While I think it's a shame the Bill ended, on the other hand, I acknowledge that everything has it's time, and indeed, everything comes to an end eventually...
Suddenly they've got turbospeed and can move in bullet time, making everyone else freeze from their relative perspective?
And then they stated if the one organic component remaining degrades (the brain), the body goes looking for a new one to replace it. In the old version, if the brain was destroyed, all you've got is a machine with nobody to control it.
Not sure how to take the fact that the Cybermen are now taking females as conversion subjects, in the past, they just terminated them outright or kept them as prisoners, depending on whatever the plot required.
It was never explained why they didn't convert them.
They are called Cybermen for a reason........
And then we have the massive giant Cyberman built from steampunk technology and charged up with rotating wooden wheels.
Yes, that is when they lost me!
As I stated above, too much money to spend on special effects brought the quality down.
I wonder, if somebody was saying, the Borg are scarier then Cybermen, so we have to make them overpowered to compensate.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
Doctor Who, not Dr.
Imagine if we all judged the pre 2005 by the standards of the first half of McCoy's run?
Aww, do you miss your green bubble wrap? Do you think the set, prop, and monster makers of the 60s were using cardboard out of choice? They'd salivate to have the opportunity to use modern effects.
Massive stories, spanning many series. Lots of interconnected plots and themes. You not liking the stories dosn't mean they aren't there.
Lol.
See below...
Canon? Doctor Who? I don't see it. How many times did Atlantis sink? How many Loch Ness monsters were there? Are the Cybermen from Telos or Mondas?
One Drone in one episode did that.
Ignoring the fact that that has happened, why shouldn't it? The body is a robot. Why would't it have a CPU independent of the brain?
Yes. It is an old way of saying Human, as in 'mankind'. I have no idea where you got that delusion from but the entire planet of Mondas was turned into Cybermen, not just the males.
They've never been shown to kill females specifically nor to keep prisoners as a matter of course for reasons other than conversion.
More so than the stupid dancing ones from The Wheel in Space? Or the brain-dead plot of Revenge of the Cybermen.
It really hasn't. I'd take Heaven Bent over Fury from the Deep anyday. Midnight over The Daleks.
The Cybermen could already overpower the Borg. They had regular time travel and no queen. They were bullet and laser proof and were fighting a war against an enemy who's territory spanned three galaxies.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
How many times did "time" implode/explode?
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
failing that, doctor who, like everything else, has its own wiki, which would list every episode the daleks show up in under their article on said wiki
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Christopher Eccleston - 'Dalek'
'Bad Wolf'
'Parting of the Ways'
David Tennant - 'Doomsday, Pt.1 and 2' (Also features the Cybermen)
'Daleks in Manhatten'
'Evolution of the Daleks'
'Stolen Earth'
'Journey's End'
Matt Smith - 'Victory of the Daleks'
'Asylum of the Daleks'
And that's before I even reach Peter Capaldi's run as the Doctor! There have been more episodes in NuWho centred on the Daleks than the Cybermen. Also, the Cybermen featured in 'Rise of the Cybermen', 'Age of Steel' and 'Doomsday' aren't from Mondas, they're from a parallel Earth. Different rules. (All the ones after that are, presumably, Mondas/Telos Cybermen who have evolved their design based on the events of 'Doomsday').
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Oh yeah! I forgot 'Daleks in Manhatten' was a two-parter. I'll fix that.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Really? I point out the line that it's explicitly stated there are at the time of the episode no diplomatic relations between the Federation and the Klingon Empire. It's pretty clear the judge is being pressured to throw Worf under the bus as a sop to the Klingons to get them back to the bargaining table.
And again, per the episode, Worf's actions were acceptable under Starfleet law, not the opinions of Sisko or O'Brien (the latter of whom directly pointed out regarding his own opinion that he was being asked to armchair-quarterback the battle weeks later and did not experience the actual conditions under which Worf acted), and extradition laws traditionally do not apply to valid military or political actions. And by the way, I looked it up. Handing active military personnel over to other jurisdictions usually only happens when there is no corresponding charge in the UCMJ itself. Not applicable due to Article 119b, Involuntary Manslaughter. Ergo, there is no possible scenario under which Worf gets extradited except that of a corrupt judge.
This is what you get for letting your non-attorney CO represent you instead of getting a JAG, Worf. You too, Jadzia.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Jadzia doesn't count. She was being charged with a Civilian Offence, not as a military officer. Under those terms, she was under the jurisdiction of the Bajoran Republic. Bajoran Space, Bajoran Station, Bajoran Law. In terms of the Hearing's legality, Sisko had no basis to dispute other than whether Jadzia could be charged for a crime Curzon was accused of purely on the basis of Dax. Worf was charged with a military offence, aboard a Starfleet Vessel in Federation Space engaged in conflict with the Klingons. Even under present International Law, a serving military officer can be extradited for a war crime to face trial (although this is usually conducted at the ICCJ at The Hague, under International Law, not in the accuser's territory under their law).
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Twice or thrice depending on whether you count non TV works.
Somebody should tell the Borad (Timelash)
I know, but it's later referred to as their Homeworld.
All of that is your own forced interpretation of the facts. There was only one female member of the expedition in Tomb. Note they also killed all the males except Toberman. And Peri is of no use to anybody if that's the companion you're referring to.
The Cybermen in Tomb don't react to Zoe but as she's a future genius she'd be of more use than the others (save the Doctor) unless they only wanted muscle (note they didn't convert Toberman, only enhance him).
The reason they didn't convert the Telosian is because the Cybermen were suffering from the decay that had set in since Revenge (skipping Earthshock) and would't abate until Rise of the Cybermen.
That's not true. You see the faces of the Cybermen under their masks in Tenth Planet as well as their exposed hands. You see the chins under the helmets of the Earthshock and Nemesis Cybermen. You see partially converted drones (like Toberman or the director from Invasion) who have the metal parts grafted on. It's never specified what parts remain organic but some obviously do.
And? The Cybermen learnt from the Cyberwar. The Cybermen of Pandorica post date that war (despite the costuming error that keeps the Cybus logo they later removed for Good Man) and have better failsafes.
One Drone. One. Not the others from that episode, not the ones from Nightmare, nor from Name of the Doctor, or any others. One.
They've used it other times as well. Earthshock. The Cyberman version of the Borg's First Contact.
They are nothing alike. The Queen dies, the Collective dies with her. A Cybercontroler (or Leader, Planner, or Lord) dies and another takes over.
Immediately? It didn't help them in Invasion did it.
Um no. They Cyber-Wars were ended with this...
Oh dear. Another person that thinks the Borg stand even the tiniest modicum of a chance of even stalemating the Cybermen?
Firstly, Cybermen can adapt to energy weapons such as the specially designed Anti-Cyber gun from the Cyber-Wars...
Also, Time Travel. They Cybermen weaponise it, the Borg accidentally use it. The Cybermen outnumber the Borg several trillion to one and Cyberformed the Tiberian galaxy wheras the Borg are stuck in one corner of Mutter's Spiral.
The Borg don't use melee weapons, they don't adapt, they don't upgrade. Despite it being their shtick they never learn.
Also, newer Cybermen are immune to the gold weakness.
Ugh. There is no new or old there are no rules, there is no changing of canon.
I'll stick with your Cybermen. Gold was their weakness initially because it clogged up their breathing units and their systems couldn't break it down to purge it. Then canon changed to sudgest that the touch of gold is lethal. That's your 'old canon'. So where between the series do you now draw out the 'old canon' and the 'older canon'? Even further back when their weakness was not gold but solvents?
It's just as bad as the KT haters. Season 27 is not a reboot it is set in the same continuity as season 26 and the preceding seasons, there is no 'nu-who' or any distinction made except in merchandising.
Adaptation to gold is no different to their sudden weakness to it in the first place.
Also, it's DOCTOR WHO, there are no rules. There's not even a canon policy unlike other large Sci-Fi franchises. It's all material for itself.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
With regards the distances: Yes, IRL, Space is Massively Vast, but we're talking about fiction, written by folks who don't always give the greatest considerations to accuracy. Kirk's trip to the center of the galaxy, for example... If Voyager had been capable of those speeds, Mad Kathy would have been back home before Mark could sell the puppies
With regards your second point about the extradition aspect, ryan's already addressed it, but I will add, that if the Federation and the Empire had no formal diplomatic relations with the Empire, perhaps this could also be seen as a reconciliatory effort on the Federation's part, by showing the Empire that they would not automatically protect an officer. Throwing Worf under the bus? Maybe so, but as the Vulcans say, the needs of the many... Equally, the notion of 'throwing under the bus' would presume that Worf was an entirely innocent party. He was not. Think of it as an Intergalactic example of Bait Car or To Catch a Predator: Worf was unquestionably set up by the Empire (his family has been their political punchbag for decades, so no surprise there', but he did do the thing they were accusing him of: Firing on an unconfirmed target, and it was Only the revelation of the freighter's true nature, which let Worf off the hook with regards accidentally killing civilians, but that still can't hide the fact that he didn't confirm his target...
I like the BBC for not taking a position on the canonicity of the show. Not something that anyone can do anyway given that it's changed so much over the years by the show's writers and by Big Finish for the audio Drama's. Take as an example the Dalek invasion of 2009, which, thanks to cracks in time, never actually happened.
Did you know as more for instances that the Sixth Doctor now has a fully fleshed out regeneration story http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sixth_Doctor:_The_Last_Adventure_(audio_anthology).
And we now know the events that led to the start of the Time War and some of what happened in it's final years http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Only_the_Monstrous_(audio_anthology) http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Infernal_Devices_(audio_anthology)
As to the first post, Star Trek without any Sci-fi elements in it would be like Doctor Who without the Doctor, pointless, there'd be no heart to it at all. You wouldn't be able to get anything interesting done without space travel or equipment, nothing interesting to explore, no scrapes to get into. Unless you have an interest in the soap opera-ish interactions of characters it would quickly bore you to tears.
Or the Cyberman.
It seems to be derailing the thread.
Let's try and stay on topic.
But if it's relevant, feel free to cite other sci-fi shows and how they might have been different if they were not sci-fi.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
So this is the response to my use of a specific example. Fine. New tact:
I know I've watched enough "insider assassin kills someone(s) for political gain" episodes to know that they exist outside of Star Trek's "Journey to Babel".
Did any of these episodes "strike such a cord" with you to remember what series they were in and how the impact on characterization, plot, show running, etc. etc. affected that series so much better than "Journey to Babel" did for Star Trek?
I know there's been enough "false flag" framing-someone episodes, whether it was "age of sail", "naval", or even "police/militaristic in general" to ask the same questions, have these episodes "struck such a cord" with you to say that it was significantly better than Worf's little jaunt that's plastered all over this thread?
As I've maintained throughout this piece, it's not just one or two aspects of a show that ultimately determine it's success or failure. To wit:
Would any Age of Sail show inspire cell phones?
Would any greek mythology show inspire tablet computing?
Would any show about a 5 year near-light-speed mission to Alpha Centauri inspire the search for a viable method to travel faster than light?
These are all "fallout" from Star Trek's overall success, because it was in a specific sci-fi setting.
Of any other 60's era TV show - Get Smart. Bonanza. Beverly Hillbillies. Dragnet. Do any of these shows have a passionate fan base seeking to set up a 50th anniversary of it's first airing (or, if said show was "early 60s", did it already have one)?
Of the shows that attempt to generate "universes", Bonanza I think tied into another 60s show. Happy Days was part of a "universe" with Laverne & Shirley, Mork & Mindy, and Joanie loves Chachi - do they have the same overall level of success that the TNG era run has?
Will any of the "current" shows doing this "universe" thing, whether it was the relatively recent Stargate family, or the still ongoing NCIS and CSI families, do the same - inspire lots and lots of good things and/or be celebrated in 25th/50th anniversaries?
Star Trek is, ultimately and overall, a unique phenomenon that no matter what you may think of the various sub-parts, there's so much involved, overall, in the whole thing - spawning from that unique combination of setting, script writing, and acting - that any attempt to tweak even one thing that has happened with any of them and attempt to spin it into the level of success and cultural influence Star Trek has generated is impossible.
Personally, I wasn't a fan of DS9 going "war", or Voyager needing to apply "eye candy". However, would either of these series have succeeded in the same fashion that they did, without having gone the way they did? No. Does that "lessen" my appreciation for what these series have done for the lore? No. And I don't sit in this thread complaining about how Worf is a shallow characterization - a cheesy hybrid of samurai and Viking lores that shouldn't exist on a TV screen, nevermind practically lead acting an entire episode or arc?
Because without him, TNG and DS9 are a lot "shallower" and potentially a lot closer to "failure" than what he did to propel those shows to where they wound up.
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
All utterly irrelevant strawman questions. It doesn't matter what a series inspires, or what achievements and inventions arise from a series, for the series to be considered popular or successful. Because a show could not inspire the kind of things you have suggested, does not mean it is or would be unsuccessful, so that is an utterly false criteria for judgement. I can't think of any advancement or invention inspired by Game of Thrones, but that is a massively popular and successful series.
I didn't particularly like the idea of the war in DS-9, but so what? You cannot -- simply Can Not -- state that DS-9 or VOY would have been less successful had they taken different paths, because that is nothing but your opinion and utterly unverifiable conjecture! Also, I haven't once said Worf is a shallow characterization, so don't try and put words in my mouth... Worf might be a dead-beat dad, and unfit to sit in the Captain's Chair (a demonstrable fact about the character) but he is a far from shallow characterization. In fact, I'd say he was one of Trek's most developed and layered characters (and one of my favorites, but that doesn't blind me to his flaws of character, not to be confused with flaws as a character...
So let me get this straight.
We're posing in a thread where the OP is seeking a conjecture as to our thoughts as to whether or not Star Trek would be as successful a franchise if it was to be stripped of it's very Science Fiction roots.
And you're calling me out for conjecture?
Meanwhile, I'll concede one point. It can be... extremely hard... for a non-sci-fi show to spawn technological innovations.
But you didn't address the other point I had mixed up in there.
Show me a series that's matched, or is on the way to matching, Star Trek's "success" as defined by lasting for 30+ years in 5 different "formats/variants/series" of the original production material, stretches to exist in at least one other media (movies from the television roots), and winds up with a "critically accepted" 80% "overall success" rate - no matter what the "initial" success metrics said. (This accounts for "Enterprise" still being considered a general failure after it's run, while every actual "Star Trek" title is currently considered a success).
And it has to do so without "Science Fiction". And, if one wants to really "stretch it some", let's also discount "fantasy" that relies on "magic" as a centerpiece of the series - if a "actions of a significantly technologically advanced society is viewable as 'magic' to the lesser races", one can say that talking ponies or even a rogue's gallery filled of plant controllers, hyper cold indviduals, and horribly scarred survivors can be acting in realms of "magic/superior technology".
So all these series that I remember as a kid that have/are/will shortly be encountering some sort of 30th anniversary? Things like Transformers, Robotech, My Little Pony, Sailor Moon, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Or things even older than Star Trek like Superman, Batman, Spider Man, the Fantasic Four, and literally the rest of the comic book superhero world? All "discounted" because they're either straight-up Sci-Fi, or "borderline enough" but uses "magic" instead of "science" to make the impossible "possible".
So, what's out there? Bonanza and the rest of the "westerns"? Happy Days - of which one sub-aspect of it went "science fiction" anyway - Mork and Mindy wasn't exactly all "human". Well???
Where's the ongoing adventures of the Spartans/300? Is Game of Thrones well on it's way to have 45 more years of success and a handful of other shows that highlight different kingdoms - almost all of which are as successful as Game of Thrones? Are we going to say that those "cheesy pseudo-police procedurals" like CSI and NCIS are "reality" enough to escape my "no fantasy" clause above, or are we going to admit that while everything "looks" fairly realistic, the timeframes and methodologies they operate within are clearly only obtainable through the realms of fantasy?
Do you have any evidence, proof, or even solid enough conjecture that this is even possible?
To rob a line: [quote: Mariemaia Kushrenada] Forum Posting is much like an endless waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever. However, opinions will change upon the reading of my post.[/quote]
Or even once?
You'd basically be restricting the scriptwriters to come up with only real world events, reducing Star Trek to no more then another historical drama or contemporary sea voyage show.
Jean Luc Picard, Captain of the Navy Flagship Enterprise.
Any of the innovative ideas they may have had would have been impossible to do, so it would be highly likely that none of the current creative staff would have ever worked on the show to begin with, seeking employment on another show that was more to their tastes.
Which would probably change the quality/production process quite significantly.
And that's a whole other legal kerfuffle right there, I think there is some clause that if you depict military organisations, you are required to have an actual military advisor on call to make sure it treats the military as realistic as possible.
So if Star Trek was to be set in the modern era, they'd need a Navy liason.
Stargate had them from the US Air Force.
That aerial command center we see in the first live action Transformers movie? It's the actual real plane and most of the extras are the genuine operators/enlisted personnel!
I suspect Dareau is correct, if we were to remove every sci-fi or fantasy aspect from everything, all we'd have are a bunch of identical franchises exploring the real world, but dramatized.
Detective stories, police stories, legal dramas, hospital shows, sitcoms, historical dramas, whatever.
Everything would end up just being too similar and that would mean it would be very hard to win a permanent fanbase if you're just one of 100 entertainment properties all on the same topic.
That's not even factoring in fanbase loyalty, fans are dedicated to whatever they consider to be "the best" and shun the competition, regardless of how good it is.
So one or two might rise above the others, but the rest would be doomed to languish in obscurity.
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad
I'm not sure that would apply for the Royal Navy, which would be a more appropriate choice for an Age of Sail show IMO, but I haven't seen any shows around the RN so I couldn't say for sure.
There's also the fact that many of Star Trek's stories just plain don't have the same impact in a historical setting. The kind of intense nationalistic/racial hatred berated in 'Let this be your Last Battlefield' was entirely accepted during the Age of Sail. You could do an episode on the Rights of Man in the form of the Abolition patrols performed in the 1800s to end the Slave Trade, but you can't write a story about racism as effective as 'Let this be your Last Battlefield' in that setting.
You also can't pull off episodes like 'Balance of Terror', 'The Enterprise Incident' or 'Errand of Mercy', because all the tension just vanishes if you replace the Klingons/Romulans with any real-world nation of the time: it was called the Pax Britannica for a reason. With the exceptions of the Crimean War and American Civil War, there weren't any major sea-based conflicts between the end of Napoleon and the end of sail.
It's not just the quality of the storytelling (because if we judge by that, Star Trek was no better than most other serial television shows of the time), but the stories you tell, which determine whether a series becomes popular. Above are 4 of TOS' most popular episodes, and none of them work nearly as well outside a sci-fi setting ('...Battlefield' certainly doesn't work in any setting prior to the 1960s). Might such a show become popular? Maybe. But it couldn't match Star Trek's popularity using the same stories, and once you change that, we're no longer talking about Star Trek 'in an Age of Sail setting', we're talking about something new entirely.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Without the Machine, it's basically Batman in Gotham City. With the Machine, it's something more.
Mustrum "Yes, I said it: John Reese is better than Batman" Ridcully
Some managed to creep in anyway, though: for example there's a background character in the pilot who for some reason is wearing both sergeant's chevrons and a colonel's bird. XD
There are downsides, though: getting backing from the Pentagon means there's certain limitations on how you can portray the military. For example, DOD declined to help with The Avengers on grounds that SHIELD's relationship to the US government wasn't clear (i.e. they didn't like the idea of the US military taking orders from anybody other than the US government).
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Yes I am, because you're stating your conjectured opinion as if it is fact...
Again with the false questions to try and force an answer... Well, 'homie don't play dat...'
The only show I can really think of which has a comparable run-length of output to Star Trek, is Doctor Who. That only gets that due to the ability for the Doctor to regenerate, and for the show to be amended and tailored to the audience. The only other I might mention, would be Coronation Street. But what does it matter what I can and can't name?
The other series you mentioned are certainly enduring in terms of popularity, but there are also sci-fi series which haven't endured to such an extent... Alien Nation, Blake's 7, UFO, Sea-Quest, Farscape, Space Precinct... While I'm sure there are fandoms out there for those shows, I can't say that they have had the same 'cultural staying power' as Star Trek has had. The amount of fandom I see for Firefly, frankly astounds me. I enjoyed watching it (well, most of it) but I can see why it was cancelled, and *activates covariant shielding* I can see why it was cancelled, and I think it deserved to be cancelled, because as a series, I couldn't see it 'going any further'...
Firefly is an example that it's better to burn out, than to fade away... ENT faded away, and I suspect, that TRIBBLE will do the same... Defiance, is another example of 'going out strong'. I think in terms of themes and storytelling, it was not just as strong as anything written in TOS, and just as daring in terms of content shown, but it went further, and pushed more boundaries. In Babylon 5, we saw G'Kar have an eye taken out on an insane emperor's whim (although we were not shown the actual removal, but the impact was the same) In Defiance, we saw Stahma giving Datak a hand-job during a prison visit... We saw Niles being made to strip and then get urinated upon... Trek would never have had the chutzpah to show content like that, even though both would likely be considered 'easy going' compared to what one can expect in Cardassian 'hospitality'...
Sci-fi isn't what makes Star Trek enduring. That sci-fi attracts not just a vague audience, but also attracts a specific demographic of obsessives* which means that it has an unshakable legion of supporters to make it popular. And that should not be confused with true endurability, because not all sci-fi shows have that endurability, even if they do keep fandoms...
*Like the video Jeri Ryan posted a while back of where she was at a convention, and some window-licker got her to sign the crotch of the garment she wore beneath her catsuits... Manu Intraymi commented how she managed to stay classy and did it with a smile on her face, but that it was a shame there are folks like that out there. And damn that was creepy and perverted... No one deserves to be put in that kind of situation... I'd settle for a hug and a handshake, I don't want the woman's underwear...
Actually, I was thinking the American Navy, as I doubt the British Empire is a world superpower anymore.
Under that scenario, this is what the Enterprise-D would have been:
Blue Ridge class command ship.
Alternatively, if it had been an Age of Sail show, this is what the Enterprise-D would have been:
Indus 80 (1860).
Bees like honey, they don't like vinegar.
Everytime someone makes a character that is an copy of an existing superhuman, Creativity is sad