Some of the other series and movies miss the point more dramatically for me by just becoming space opera. Star Trek was always political.
I imagine it was too long and because he just died they chose to use his name.
Gandhi?
Mandela?
Like with Q, he has to give lectures to literal god! Perhaps shut up for 5 minutes to get more information?
Or when meeting borg...?
Patrick was great actor, he was still able to carry Star Trek. But writing was horrible! Vegetarian communist utopia tries to imagine real combat!
Look at the colors: a tribe of C-suite nerds zip around in an atomic powered space-faring Hyatt Regency trying to train the universe to Taylorize all production methods. Its protagonists are utterly entitled and classist, who teach war as the essential force by which their lives incur meaning.
It's is a soap-operatic long tail of Western empire indulging in fatuous "adventure", which amounts literally beaming into alien realms to cause disturbance and justifying it through dominion or ignorance, while the executives try to believe they've moved beyond themselves so they can feel noble.
As a dramatic art, the show offers some moments of transcendence, but these end up sequestered to the commercial dictates of the franchise, which is an epic advert for consumerist Americana.
I feel deep suspicion about anyone who regards cosplay as instructive about what makes for "good men with power". And as Vox is a notable outlet in the great system of commercial attention-whoring that defines our culture, I feel double the suspicion.
Also See:
Phase IV (1974) Futureworld (1976) Lathe of Heaven (1980)
A pretty good use of six hours.
People make fun of this but cartoons and sci-fi series are great models to learn about and guide the development of society.
At a moment where a sizeable part of the world is rising against the externalities of datacenters and the dangers of having two companies trying to do regulatory capture on AI in the US (and probably in the vassal EU too), using an episode of Star Trek to push the narrative that "Good men consider LLMs should have the same rights as humans" just makes me sick.
You guys are seriously unwell and totally falling for a narrative that's pushed on you.
> He's fictional though
Aren't most of our heroes? Yes, we create scenarios in art to exemplify extraordinary human behavior. To explore humanity.
> Patrick Stewart or the show writers?
Both, but mostly Patrick Stewart. Let me give you the same material and crew and see if you can evoke the same cultural reaction.
But, if you watch the first season of TNG, it feels like there is a turning point where Patrick Stewart starts taking the role seriously (Symbiosis) and understands that he's depicting Starfleet as an institution and the restrictions (the prime directive) that institutions must enforce. The fellow actors also seem to take the series more seriously after that episode while before it felt campy.
It's clear he brought a gravitas to the role that inspired a team of young/new actors around him. As he later joked in Making it So, he once took things too seriously on set yelling "We're not here to have fun!" It became more than a job/role to him and in doing so he and the other actors inspired a science-inclined subset of a generation and brought Roddenberry's utopia vision to life.
tqi•52m ago
rhaynes•50m ago
vigilantpuma•48m ago
tqi•33m ago
My feeling is that while enjoyable and thought provoking, TNG is still a work of fiction, and as such favored entertainment and legibility within a 45 minute window over nuance or subtly. That meant there were clear distinctions between "good" and "bad" sides, and scenarios often felt like they were constructed backwards from an outcome/clever solution.
I think that in turn causes people to view the real world in the same way, except they are always the "good" side and solutions that require compromise and tradeoffs are seen as unacceptable failures.
Arainach•18m ago
fullshark•48m ago
PaulDavisThe1st•48m ago
ajeet_dhaliwal•45m ago
CursedSilicon•44m ago
Twice
criddell•35m ago
whalabi•44m ago
In this case it's like a what if: what if humans were the best they could be.
And that couldn't be less silly.
dyyd3333•31m ago
Avicebron•43m ago
andyjohnson0•41m ago
orev•41m ago
People tend to follow examples they’ve seen before, even if they know it was a bad one. When faced with a new situation, they might just parrot the bad behavior because it’s the only example they know.
swed420•24m ago
Maybe it exacerbated it, but The Office was mostly a documentary of preexisting behavior.
This is a classic breakdown:
https://ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-t...
Droobfest•17m ago
add-sub-mul-div•39m ago
tqi•29m ago
BugsJustFindMe•34m ago
Teever•31m ago
An interesting question to ask: Is the world a better place because of the existence of Star Trek and the influences that it has on society?
How can we improve society with fiction?
DonHopkins•28m ago
Patrick Stewart as Macbeth ("Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow")
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZnaXDRwu84
gmerc•26m ago
happytoexplain•26m ago
fph•24m ago
nilamo•18m ago
ip26•12m ago
GenerWork•5m ago
hnbad•2m ago
Or to put it bluntly: all paragons are made-up fictions, some just use real persons as framing devices, but that doesn't mean they're any more "real".