The New Scotty BEAM ME UP JAMES

Welcome to TheBestTrek, thank you for visiting the site, to see everying and to participate in discussions Register, its free, quick and easy to do plus, you get all the benefits.

[lordmutt]

Disagree. Some scripts are great, but the directing, acting, effects etc ruin the film. Good film needs all four up to par

[Valkyrie]

Hmmm, not necessarily.  A great script if it's well acted can make you forget the bad effects & not as good directing.  Mind you, if you have all four, then you have a stellar piece of work.  But an excellent actor can shine regardless of what is thrown at him.  He can make you forget everything else.  It happens once in a while.

[lordmutt]

True. Heard "Soldiers (1998)" script was great, but the movie sucked because of the acting and effects. Point is, script isn't everything

[Valkyrie]

Ya that's true.  You have to have more than one factor to make a great film.

[compman777]

well, now the producers of these movies are trying to remake the movie as darker and some of these new movies have done very well.

[Valkyrie]

You think they will?  Maybe more towards the idea of BSG?  I thought Nemesis was bloody dark but not in a good way.

[lordmutt]

Hope they do, DS9 thrived on that premise

[Valkyrie]

Hmmm, I was never that fond of DS9, tbh.  It was too much of a switch for me from TNG I think.  The thing is, I grew up with TOS, so that is how Star Trek should be to my mind.  The 60's were a simpler less complicated time, and TNG was in keeping with that.  DS9 was messy, more in keeping with modern life.  It was a shock to my system.

[lordmutt]

It's good because of that. TNG never shocked anyone - it was just drama, phasers, character development, reset button. It got old, DS9 showed us humans as what we truly are.

[Valkyrie]

:)  I know.  But for me TOS was a lovely fantasy about what the future could be like.  It was my first exposure to scifi.  I didn't think of the future as messy until I started reading it in the 70's, long before TNG came on air.  It was refreshing & less terrifying because of the vision being so positive.  At the time I was in university & the real future ahead was terrifying enough because I hadn't figured out what I wanted to do.  What I'd gone in for was quickly proving that it wasn't worth the time & what I switched to was equally dreadful.  I'm a person that likes to know exactly what's ahead (ya, ya, I know life doesn't work like that), so it was a horrid time in my life.  ST:TNG was a lovely escape.  DS9 was terrifying.  It showed it again as how it was more likely run.  No more escape.

[lordmutt]

All tv is an escape. Different people just like different escapes.

[Valkyrie]

There is that.  But for me when it's too close to the real world, it's no longer an escape.  That doesn't mean it doesn't have merit or entertainment value, it's just a different category.  I have to be in the mood for it.  I'm looking for fantasy when I watch Star Trek, I think.

[lordmutt]

One way of looking at it. Some people think escapes are simply watching other people's "lives" like law and order etc. Real world, but an escape as well (for some)

[Valkyrie]

I do enjoy watching the CSI shows & NYPD Blue was a favourite & so was Hill Street Blues.  But those all take place in the present on earth.  So for me that is entertainment, because I know it's probably never going to happen to me, but it might happen to my neighbour or someone I know.  But with scifi, although I don't mind if it reflects current problems on earth, I like it to be a little more unreal than that.  I want a more hopeful feel to it.  May be why I've never tried BSG :