Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2019 11:20:41 GMT -7
This guy has several nice videos on the topic of FASA Trek
|
|
|
|
Post by tinker on Oct 5, 2019 6:55:54 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 5, 2019 8:11:03 GMT -7
It is unfortunate for us that FASA is lost and junk like JJJunk and Dis-covered has become so popular. Besides the mechanics of it, the continuity was a major draw for me. Almost everything they did just made sense and each era flowed right into the next. As for the military/combat nature? Well, it is after all a wargame!
|
|
|
|
Post by tinker on Oct 7, 2019 4:55:30 GMT -7
That is what Paramount really didn't understand. Despite the Utopian nature of Star Trek, for board games of the era...wargaming was it. In the PRG, there was definitely more flexibility in how the universe was portrayed, but there was a reason for the success of Star Fleet Battles!
|
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Oct 7, 2019 7:05:50 GMT -7
I always thought it was pretty two-faced for Gene to get so upset about a Star Trek wargame given all the conflict written into the original series. Starfleet is a military organization. He created it that way. Then he got butt hurt when other people explored the obvious implications of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 7, 2019 12:00:31 GMT -7
You know, you have to give him credit for creating the whole thing but, like most geniuses, he fell short in one major area and that was the military conflict side of the house. A little more development in that arena and we might have had a continuing story line from TOS to TNG! Imagine a weekly series following “Enterprise” and all its reincarnations along with all the conflicts and so much more! Ah, lost opportunities :-(
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Oct 7, 2019 17:07:15 GMT -7
Gene was definitely guilty of drinking his own kool-aid...
It's fairly clear from classic Trek that Star Fleet is at least partially military. Just the one line in Errand of Mercy - "I'm a soldier, not a diplomat" says quite a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by thescreamingswede on Oct 7, 2019 22:34:57 GMT -7
I've watched all of his Star Trek related stuff and I like most of it. His take on the Northampton class is a rather unique idea that I kind of like.
As for Gene's vision of the future and a starship's role in it, a lot of similarities that can be made between TOS Star Trek and the old wooden sailing vessels during the heyday of exploration around the globe. I think there is a lot about that time that spills over into Star Trek. Exploring strange new worlds (places), seeking out new life and new civilizations (pretty much speaks for itself) and boldly going where no man (western European) has gone before. The old sailing vessels were as much an exploration force as they were a military one, but some have romanticized that era so much that the military aspect is overshadowed.
Regardless of anyone's "opinion" of Gene Roddenberry or his vision, it is quite likely he suffered from the same romantic imagery; a fleet of ships exploring the globe overshadowing the fact they were military hardware. Starships, at least as far as the viewpoint of the Federation and Starfleet, are exactly that; military hardware used in a primarily exploratory function.
As such, sometimes exploration meant "conquest" more than it did peaceful contact in the days of the sailing ships. Mr. Roddenberry obviously didn't like that connection, so he resisted, in error, the thought that his creation was military, though clearly it was.
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Oct 8, 2019 7:37:08 GMT -7
In the "lazy days of sail" (stolen from Dire Straights) ships were exploring the globe for many reasons, not always conquest. In many cases, the original intent was simply trade with foreign lands (very profitable, if you know what you are doing). Colonization was also possible though, in the case of Australia - that was for a prison colony. Conquest very often was a side-effect of the various wars going on in Europe.
One oddball conquest being that of India - not actually involving the regular British military but rather, the "Honorable" East India Company!
|
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 8, 2019 12:28:29 GMT -7
I hadn’t made that sailing era connection. Most of the comparisons have been to WWII. Now it all makes more sense. Thanks guys
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Oct 8, 2019 13:01:39 GMT -7
The sailing ship connection does make a bit of since...considering when he first pitched the show...he told the execs to think of it as a wagon train to the stars....
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Oct 8, 2019 17:04:31 GMT -7
But, it was actually more likely based on Horatio Hornblower in space...
|
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Oct 9, 2019 5:24:46 GMT -7
I've always seen the comparison with the age of sail and Hornblower. Wasn't it mentioned in the early series 'bibles', and without looking it up, I'm sure it's mentioned in the book "The Making of Star Trek" by Stephen Whitfield (probably in it's listing of said bibles). As for the videos, yes I like them too. It's cool to see the FASA designs in motion, and battle! Like Swede says, his interpretation of the Northampton class, with variable geometry nacelles, is interesting!  |
|
|
|
Post by krebizfan on Oct 9, 2019 7:11:04 GMT -7
Patrick Stewart's recounting of being hired indicates that he was handed a stack of Hornblower novels to define the character.
Gene Roddenberry chose Wagon Train for the one line explanation since Wagon Train was the number 1 or 2 rated series for four years on NBC and retained solid ratings even on ABC. Serious military series in the Sixties didn't break the top thirty except for Combat! in 1964 and Rat Patrol in 1966.
|
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 11, 2019 13:13:51 GMT -7
I've always seen the comparison with the age of sail and Hornblower. Wasn't it mentioned in the early series 'bibles', and without looking it up, I'm sure it's mentioned in the book "The Making of Star Trek" by Stephen Whitfield (probably in it's listing of said bibles). As for the videos, yes I like them too. It's cool to see the FASA designs in motion, and battle! Like Swede says, his interpretation of the Northampton class, with variable geometry nacelles, is interesting! :) Does your copy of “The Making..” have a scratch in there of an early version of the ship he was thinking of that looks a lot like the Deadulus? Atleast something with the ball-shaped primary hull? |
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 11, 2019 13:17:36 GMT -7
Serious military series in the Sixties didn't break the top thirty except for Combat! in 1964 and Rat Patrol in 1966.
Now THAT is some serious flashback material!!
|
|
|
|
Post by trynda1701 on Oct 11, 2019 14:38:24 GMT -7
I've always seen the comparison with the age of sail and Hornblower. Wasn't it mentioned in the early series 'bibles', and without looking it up, I'm sure it's mentioned in the book "The Making of Star Trek" by Stephen Whitfield (probably in it's listing of said bibles). As for the videos, yes I like them too. It's cool to see the FASA designs in motion, and battle! Like Swede says, his interpretation of the Northampton class, with variable geometry nacelles, is interesting! Does your copy of “The Making..” have a scratch in there of an early version of the ship he was thinking of that looks a lot like the Deadulus? Atleast something with the ball-shaped primary hull? Yes, my copy has that sketch. krebizfanI remember watching Combat here in the UK as a kid. Haven't seen Rat Patrol though. |
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 11, 2019 15:29:50 GMT -7
What was the name (and #) they showed there? I was thinking it was U. S. S. Columbia or Columbus
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2019 7:23:35 GMT -7
tosfan1956 - I like the new avatar (you may have had it for a while, I don't come here as often as I used to). JAFisher44 - I don't subscribe to the notion of Mr. Roddenberry's apparent two-facedness on this issue. Star Trek (TOS) was a series that told morality tales. One of those morality tales was the futility of war. Without the specter of war, or even occasional battles, there is no vehicle to show that futility, or to show that there might be other resolutions. Where I do take issue with Roddenberry is that he was lacking so many morals, and yet thought he should preach morality to others.
|
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 13, 2019 9:05:41 GMT -7
Ironnerd: there is alot of that kind of preaching going around. But, that’s for another thread. Lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2019 14:39:04 GMT -7
Ironnerd: there is alot of that kind of preaching going around. But, that’s for another thread. Lol There is. I'm guilty of it myself.
And what a glorious thread that would be!
|
|
|
|
Post by JAFisher44 on Oct 14, 2019 6:55:39 GMT -7
Where I do take issue with Roddenberry is that he was lacking so many morals, and yet thought he should preach morality to others. I'm curious what you mean by this. In what way was Roddenberry lacking in so many morals? |
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Oct 14, 2019 8:09:53 GMT -7
Well - we all know how he tended to be with women...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2019 8:23:56 GMT -7
Where I do take issue with Roddenberry is that he was lacking so many morals, and yet thought he should preach morality to others. I'm curious what you mean by this. In what way was Roddenberry lacking in so many morals? Google it. |
|
|
|
Post by tosfan1956 on Oct 14, 2019 9:10:54 GMT -7
Trynda1701 said: I remember watching Combat here in the UK as a kid. Haven't seen Rat Patrol though. :)
Christopher George starred in it. 2 keeps mounted with .50 cal machine guns running all over North Africa during WWII. According to the show they nearly brought down the Afrika Corps by them selves! Lol. But it was fun to watch. Can’t remember who played Rommel but, he was a recurrent star also
|
|
