Posted on 09/27/2012 6:46:06 AM PDT by C19fan
I recently watched Starship Troopers for the first time. It’s brilliant, isn’t it? I can’t believe I’d never seen it before. If you can set aside the laboured subtext about militarism and the whole America policing the world thing, it’s a brilliant epic about love and the indomitability of the human spirit. And they’re all pretty hot, which helps. But I had another train of thought watching this movie. It reminded me of a guilty secret, and of a violent change in attitude I’ve had toward science fiction in the past few years, and toward Star Trek in particular.
(Excerpt) Read more at kernelmag.com ...
In fact Star Trek, particularly the universe of the later The Next Generation movies and indeed the entire TNG television series that went out in the late eighties and early nineties, is a particularly, peculiarly and almost unbearably saccharine, socialist world, at pains to underscore its rejection of money and the moral good of exploration for its own sake.
Here’s something else to think about Star Trek: http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20050530_106573_106573
I recall one TNG episode where the Enterprise finds a adrift ship with people who had terminal diseases and had been in cryogenic sleep until there would be a cure in the future. Picard reams of the guys who wants to get back to Earth and his financial holdings. Picard says “your bank no longer exists”.
I recall one TNG episode where the Enterprise finds a adrift ship with people who had terminal diseases and had been in cryogenic sleep until there would be a cure in the future. Picard reams of the guys who wants to get back to Earth and his financial holdings. Picard says “your bank no longer exists”.
“I recently watched Starship Troopers for the first time. It’s brilliant, isn’t it?”
The book Starship troopers is a classic.
The movie is pure crap. Thats enough to let me know the writer is a fool.
“is a particularly, peculiarly and almost unbearably saccharine, socialist world, at pains to underscore its rejection of money and the moral good of exploration for its own sake.”
and yet some people always have more than others, why is that?
btt
Guy loses any credibility as far as discussing science fiction by starting off praising the inexcusable Starship Troopers movie. Means he never read the actual book, which is a pretty good indicator of how little SF he reads.
Now, he does have a point about the PC-ness in Next Generation, which later Star Trek shows especially DS9 kind of undercut.
In the first episode of ST TNG they used money, the crew was shopping at FarPoint
I remember a line from Quark when he had enough of the holier-than-thou humans bad mouthing his race. It something to do with genocide and Hitler but I forget the words to even paraphrase.
I was a big fan of the original series. After watching the premier episode of tng, I dubbed it “Star Trek for women”.
I loved the movie, I did watch it for the first time with about 20 Marines right before a deployment so it may hold a bit of nostalgia for me. It was fun and entertaining.
I loved the movie, I did watch it for the first time with about 20 Marines right before a deployment so it may hold a bit of nostalgia for me. It was fun and entertaining.
Although the world of Star Trek TNG seems socialistic, remember that the most memorable villains ~ The Borg Collective, represented communism; utter collectivism. I think a reason for the phoniness of the world in Star Trek is that the writers/creators could not envision how capitalism would work in a world in which robots/androids did all the heavy lifting. Food and drink could be produced artificially. What sorts of jobs could they portray? The only jobs left to depict were Starfleet assignments.
It's Heinlein. You want no PC try Stranger in a Strange Land.
Heinlein to me is the best. Period.
I am a trekkie since the original series in the 1960s. I agree that some of the versions of Star Trek were not that good. However, the last version, Star Trek Enterprise, I thought was the best as Captain Archer embodied the spirit of adventure, exploration and even rebellion that has been part of the American ethos since we started our trek across the continent. The way the Vulcans were depicted in that series as controlling know-it all elites to me was a perfect example of the liberal nanny state.
Please, even the original ST engaged in social engineering.
Recall Frank Gorshin’s character...
As far as TNG goes, that was Gene Roddenberry's fault. The writers wanted to make the series more realistic but Gene was stuck on his utopia dream.
After Gene died, they continued to battle because some wanted to continue on with Gene's vision.
Roddenberry was a huge lib. His original series wasn't what he wanted that's why he went on to do TNG series. He could have only done that because of the success of his first series. The writers and network influences made that possible otherwise the series would have flopped and been forgotten if it had stayed on Gene's true vision.
I beg to disagree, Asimov was the best.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.