I dunno... I kinda liked Voyager... heck the 2-parter "Year of Hell" Janeway wouldn't abandon or give up on her ship... and there were other episodes that I thought endeared one to that ship... but maybe thats just me.
Star Trek 4 (14)
Posted 09 May 2018 - 06:59 PM
Id say the same with Enterprise, but maybe not to the same extent.
Archer for sure had a lot of affection for that ship.
Posted 10 May 2018 - 03:09 AM
Voyager definitely treated the ship as a character. I dont know how many times the crew referred to her as their home, or showed some kind of endearment to her.
Hm. I might be wrong here. I only remember the Year of Hell moment.
Enterprise however... I just didn't see much noteworthy affection for the ship (from the Characters). Archer was driven to prove that his fathers engine worked. He did that in the pilot. After that it was "the ship is yours, T'pol". And he was driven to prove that humanity was ready for deep space explorations. But the ship itself? It seemed more like a means to an end for him.
Now that I think about it... the E-D did not get that much affection as well. Picard once lovingly tapped the tactical station, when no one was on the bridge, but I think his heart was more attached to the Stargazer.
Posted 10 May 2018 - 03:29 AM
"Bliss" is another episode where due to Naomi and Seven's affinity to Voyager as their "Home" it saves the day.
In Enterprise, Tucker had much affinity for the ship... but I think one of the great things about most Trek series is there is also great chemistry with the crews, so you can focus more on the people and charters than the ship... but many people consider the ship core to what Star Trek is about, so I think people can have it any way you like it!
Posted 10 May 2018 - 04:49 AM
Why not both? The characters are always the most important thing of course. I don't dispute that. But no one says the ship can't be treated like a character as well. Especially the enterprise. The name get's a bit tarnished and robbed of that "special thing" if you just plow threw the letters like they are potato chips. I mean, it's not a big deal, but In the end, it hurts the movies/scripts themselves a bit. For instance, the Giacchino-score suggests that the destruction of the Abrams-Prise is something to be sad about. Something emotional. But... I had no connection to the ship. I felt nothing, so the whole scene fell a bit flat. (but that may just be me and overall, I really liked beyond).
All I'm saying is... if the producers/writers want to keep on playing the old "we damage/destroy the ship again, that's always kewl"-game, they should try to make me care first. Otherwise it's just pew-pew and I've seen to much of that to be on the edge of my seat.
Posted 10 May 2018 - 05:49 AM
Exactly. there is no wrong answer! ...and I agree, in general I prefer compelling thought provoking sci-fi story... "Pew pew" is fun every now and then but your right there is plenty of that out there.
As a tangent, I watched Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom again the other day, which is the lowest rated of the franchise, and I was thinking while re-watching it is that it felt like just so many action scenes stitched together in such a fast past that you never really believed there was any chemistry in the main characters. In other words it was just a bunch of "pew pew pewing" :-) Also everyone screams way too much!
Posted 10 May 2018 - 08:54 AM
When you're boldly going where no man has gone before, you treat your vessel like it's your home because out there, in the cold, vast darkness of space, that's all you have.
That's the way these ships should be written; as home, or at the very least a tether to the homes left behind.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users