Some Trek Movie News!

[Kirk Johnson-Weider]

Another thing they should take from TOS is the limited number of protagonists. I mean, let's not kid, every series since has had a large cast with a bevy of regulars that all fight for screen time. While this is fine for TV it doesn't work well on film. Think X-Men.

This is a good point, but there are shows that can handle an ensemble far better than Star Trek. Yet, I think you are right, why have a big cast if you are not going to utilize them properly. Additionally, if you have a character who doesn't fit or isn't interesting kill them off and bring in someone new. As for the movies I agree less is more in terms of characters.

[REG]

you'd have to read the book.

No, I won't.

[REG]

I agree with this statement. Such and inclusion would indicate welcomed daring with the franchise. Just don't know if I could handle man-to-man snogging

Meh. Personally, it would be daring if they actually had a religious earthling. Maybe it's me, but it's nothing original about having a gay character thanks to Ellen, Will & Grace, Bunky & Marcellas of Big Brothers, Rosie O'Donnell, etc. I'm not saying we should exclude such a character, it's just not that important.

[Kirk Johnson-Weider]

Meh. Personally, it would be daring if they actually had a religious earthling. Maybe it's me, but it's nothing original about having a gay character thanks to Ellen, Will & Grace, Bunky & Marcellas of Big Brothers, Rosie O'Donnell, etc. I'm not saying we should exclude such a character, it's just not that important.

This is something I completely agree with. Trek is pretty anti-religion, it seems that only aliens are spiritual in the future. This is another thing that I believe disconnects Trek from audiences.

[Tobian]

I quite disagree about religion... I think it's what's makes the show more universaly appealing, because it simply sidesteps the issue of 'what is religion in the future' - and it's also fairly relevant to the future too, as most modern western countries are moving away from traditional religion and focusing more on the pure humanist angle: Trek is incredibly humanist, and it creates the chalenge of writing without a religious context.

NB: We do have a religious earthling: Chakotay is highly religious, has slowly expanded his faith throughout the series and had several religious and cultural epiphanies throughout the show. it's just his religion happens to be the spiritualist indian beliefs, rather than catholic, islam or something more 'conventional'. If you didn't happen to like either his character, treks interpretation of his belief system or the choice of religion.. well tough, because it exists and stands

[Kirk Johnson-Weider]

I quite disagree about religion... I think it's what's makes the show more universaly appealing, because it simply sidesteps the issue of 'what is religion in the future' - and it's also fairly relevant to the future too, as most modern western countries are moving away from traditional religion and focusing more on the pure humanist angle: Trek is incredibly humanist, and it creates the chalenge of writing without a religious context.

NB: We do have a religious earthling: Chakotay is highly religious, has slowly expanded his faith throughout the series and had several religious and cultural epiphanies throughout the show. it's just his religion happens to be the spiritualist indian beliefs, rather than catholic, islam or something more 'conventional'. If you didn't happen to like either his character, treks interpretation of his belief system or the choice of religion.. well tough, because it exists and stands

Well not so much in the US, which is becoming more religious, for better or worse.

Chakotay actually proves the point, instead of actually exploring Native American beliefs they create a Hollywood-esque hodgepodge of beliefs to create a animistic spirituality for the future. The only religious human character has no connection with the major faiths we know as human, which means that the major faiths disappear in the future, or that Starfleet doesn't recruit religious individuals. Troubling thought. Take the Bajorans, they are basically a fusion of Hinduism, Buddhism, and other South Asia religions with a dash of plot devices (orbs and wormholes). They are probably one of the more interesting races in Star Trek because of this, but their religious leader is used as a symbol of corruption and evil...hmmm that is a very positive portrayal of religion.

[Tobian]

There's a reason why people don't talk about Religion on most forums! - LOL

It has to be said Startrek is Science Fiction - and in Trek religion on earth is more or less dead, except for some small colonies who went it alone, to preserve their faith, such as Chakotays people or something like the Bringloidi. It's not hard to imagine that the socio-religious makeup of Earth can have changed radically in 3-400 years, after a world shattering world war 3 - in those 300 years we invented world changing technology and had faith changing interactions with countless alien species, and like it or not, it's simply something you have to 'suspend your disbelief' over, much like all the other notions, such as the ability to travel faster than the speed of light, the fact there's no money and you can dissasociate someone's atoms and reassemble them 40,000 KM away in the blink of an eye It's no different than simply accepting that everyone talks like it's the wild west in firefly: It's a stylistic choice made by the producers!

It also has to be said that religion could simply not be relevant to a military organisation: I.e. you have to wear regulation uniform and perform your duty according to your oaths and leave your baggage at the door, with regards to preconceptions and judgementalism. Crew may very well practice their religions in private or indeed do anything 'lawful' in private. I'm reminded that Ro Laren wasn't allowed to wear her Bajoran Earings without a special dispensation from the captain, so maybe wearing a crucifix is likewise inapropriate for the workplace! The prime directive and other regulations would mean that officers would have to be especially careful not to introduce any outside influence to alien cultures, and forcing your religion down aliens throats would be highly inapropriate!! Maybe it's just people in Treks time have 'grown up' and feel confident enough in their faith they don't try and sell it to everyone else. Or maybe it's just the first ship of Jehovas whitnesses flying into Klingon space went really, really, badly

With regards to the Bajorans: Kai Opaka was a strong courageous bold and heroic figure: The Bajoran religion was not shown as bad: It's just Kai Winn was shown to be a bad mirror to it: The bad side of religion, ad how faith can be maniplated to bad ends, and why I can imagine Starfleet has to be context neutral with regards to religion, especially because the Federation has to embrace so many differing beliefs! It also has to be said several characters had christian roots: Especially when I think of Bones, the sayins he said etc: TNG was 3-4 generations on and I can imagine it being different again!

Anyway we should possibly take this to another thread, as it's getting really off topic !

[Jem'hadar]

INB: We do have a religious earthling: Chakotay is highly religious...D

I wou'dn't characterize Chakotay as highly religious but more that he's spiritual or that he at least has a spiritual side. The word has a different connotation. I'm not familiar w/ American Indian beliefs so I can't say how accurate the portrayal of Chakotay's beliefs are on VOY but I think it just added another dimension to the character.

Star Trek often has multi-dimensional characters so I think it's a good thing to show a major character w/ a spiritual side. Chakotay was contrasted w/ Capt. Janeway who was seemed only to believe in science, although she was respectful of Chakotay's & others beliefs. Then there was the episode that tested Janeway's "faith" in science & gave her something to think about.

Worf has a spiritual side too, although it's about Klingon beliefs which are completely fictional. We've seen Worf performing Klingon rituals which are both cultural & religious in nature.

But perhaps the most "religious" character on Star Trek was DS9's Major (later Colonel) Kira. She was avowedly religious like many Bajorans. Her character truly believed the wormhole aliens were the Prophets & Capt. Sisko was the Emissary. There was no doubt in her mind. Yet, religion was not the all-consuming focal point of her character. Kira was multi-dimensional like many characters on Star Trek.

Quark has his Ferengi religious beliefs too, such as the Divine Treasury & the Vault of Eternal Destitution.

I also don't think Star Trek is anti-religion. Just b/c religion was not the focal point of the show or they didn't discuss human religions in the 24th Century in great detail doesn't make the show anti-religion.

[Doug Burke]

I also don't think Star Trek is anti-religion. Just b/c religion was not the focal point of the show or they didn't discuss human religions in the 24th Century in great detail doesn't make the show anti-religion.

I agree with Jem'hadar here. I was raised Presbyterian and Catholic. I'v egone through my religious phases (just not in one now) and never brought up my religion for the purpose of showing how religious I was, even at my most faithful moments. It just wasn't relevant to the issues I was facing at the time (usually just life in general). Why should people in the future be any different?

[REG]

I also don't think Star Trek is anti-religion.

I never claimed that Trek is against Earth's religions. Just as having a gay character would make for an interesting mix, why not have a religious character?

Not that I would advocate any one or both of them. My advocacy is for a string of good stories to would stop me from saying, "well, that's one hour of my life wasted this week."

[Kirk Johnson-Weider]

I guess anti-religious is too hard a term...but Trek is obviously afraid of real world religion and trying to introduce it into the future. They are more than happy to show aliens as religious, make up religions (Chakotay), but they generally reject the idea that humans are religious.

Here is my thought, it is relevant. Sure religion may not play that much a role in everyone's life, but it does at certain points. Such as when people die, when one struggles with some life-changing event, and so forth...stuff that happens every few episodes in any Trek series. It should play as much a role as a love of baseball, obsession about family legacy, or running holodeck programs.

Still this is way off track of the thread, but there are a lot of reasons that Trek has become disconnected from audiences and this is one of them. I agree a good story is key, but the problem is more than that.

[First of Two]

Y'know, sex scenes aren't all that common in Star Trek. And when sexually suggestive scenes DO appear, they're generally panned as pandering to base instincts to get ratings (see: decon chamber).

So... if a character is gay, how will we know? I mean, in ways that will advance the story?

[Kirk Johnson-Weider]

Well if nothing else it makes the future more inclusive, plus Trek has skirted the issue of gay characters before (for some reason always with Trill). So it is less controversial than religion with Trek. But it is the same reason you have a Russian, African, Asian, and Native American characters, it provides a new perspective in some cases, or at least symbolizes diversity.

I think my problem with Enterprise is that it was uninteresting and not that inspirational the half-dozen episodes I watched of the first season. Humanity came across as pretty contemporary and the show really provided no vision for a better future like TOS or better yet TNG. More advanced technology is not enough. For example, why didn't they take a chance or two in their portrayal of the future. Lt. Sato could have been gay (doubt this would have caused any stir). Replace Meriweather with a Muslim and make Reed Jewish, and have them actually get along. Don't reveal their sexual or religious beliefs too directly, just drop little clues every not and then. It could be subtle and also give viewers a vision of a humanity not so seriously divided as it is today. I am not arguing for blatant 'hit the audience with a hammer' stuff, I am talking subtle and clever uses of these real world elements.

I think the argument for a good story is OK, but let's face it Trek is about more than a good story it is about a vision of an utopian future where good stories take place. Really in the troubling times in which we live, this is what we need more than anything else, a Trek that let's us see a better tomorrow.

So where will Star Trek XI go? I don't know, but I hope it is forward, even if that means going back to the beginning.

[Tobian]

Actually, now that you mention the issue, a 'gay' character or any overt sexuality would probably fall hard on it's ass in the show, excactly because of things like 7 of 9's catsuit, decon shower scenes and naked masages: Because it's been so badly handled, adding it to the show would just feel like they were trying to do the BAD parts of Trek: appeal to the horny teenager!

I just watched The Motion Picture today again, and it really hit home how bad Nemesis was, in terms of the story and the scale: it felt too 'small' - you can't portray a utopianist vision of the future in the set the size of a living room And they need to recapture the wonder and awe of discovery again! In all honesty, give it a few years and we'll all bored with 'gritty and realistic' and want some utopia. Not being able to see ourselves as becoming better than we are just makes us small

[Kirk Johnson-Weider]

You are right it is that sense of discovery that has been missing, everything is so formulaic with the last few incarnations of Trek. Is there just no new stories? When you consider all the Trek that has been done they just might have emptied the creativity well of the franchise. Well here is hoping that XI refills the well and gives us a sense of wonder again.