From: ian@ug.cs.dal.ca (Ian Littlewood)
Subject: Re: Shatner proposes idea for Star Trek VII
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Distribution: dal
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 20:23:40 GMT

In <1992Jul23.024930.4268@r-node.gts.org> yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yung) writes:

>In article <1992Jul19.231837.6135@leela.cs.orst.edu> petersm@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Marguerite Petersen) writes:
>>
>>And that is exactly the point I (and the movie, IMHO) was trying to make.
>>We should always beware of "false prophets" and "gods".   It became quite
>>clear to the Big 3 and Sybok (as well as to me) that this *being* was not
>>God or any god of any sort.

>No offense but.... it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure THAT
>out. The non-god thing said so himself (or was it just in the novel?). 
>So, again, there is no question, no search, no quest. Kirk & company was 
>there just to *react* to the situation.  

>>
>>And what's wrong with the ending?  "Geez, I guess that guy wasn't God."
>>A number of individuals thought it was and they were proven wrong. 

>Who's *they*? Sybok and who?

>> It
>>was entirely a creation of Sybok's own ego.  Something we should all be
>>wary of.  (Creating God or gods in our own image.)  If indeed God exists
>>(and I have my doubts) he/she/it is beyond our comprehension and cannot
>>be put into a neat package.  As Kirk says (at least, in part, an answer
>>for himself if not for others) if god does indeed exist, then perhaps
>>it is inside the *better* part of ourselves; our caring for others, our
>>loyalty, our compassion.
>>

>That's what I called pointing out the obvious. Would you care if they make
>a Star Trek movie about the importance of brushing our teeth before going
>to bed? Maybe I am particularly serious about this topic, but I think the
>search of god is the ultimate quest of mankind, the true final frontier
>of knowledge, and ST V trivialized it as if it is somekind of a storybook
>with a moral for a five years old.



>-- 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Amos Yung          | Macintosh Jr.: The power to crush the other kid.
>yung@r-node.gts.org| 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------


I'd hate to be forced to live your life; it must be so incredibly boring...
you go on and on about some of the weak points in Star Trek (SOME of the scenes
from STV:TFF for instance - on the whole the movie was very good; and remember,
although it was slayed by people like you, and most Trekkies/Trekkers consider
it the weakest in the series, it was STILL a hit movie in terms of revenue
taken in - it made very decent profits. I liked the movie a lot; it was a little
weak in places, but hell; how many people can perfect the art of writing a 
MOVIE first try? I sure as hell bet you couldn't...) 

Anyway, what I was saying is that you automatically presume that this will be a
bad movie because it's Star Trek... excuse me, but it's these actors who ARE
Star Trek; without them, there is no Star Trek; that pitiful excuse they pump
out of the organgrinder each week called TNG is *NOT* Star Trek; it's pulp
"let's show them some more special effects" sci-fi in the same league as 
Battlestar Galactica and Lost In Space. If you don't like Star Trek, then go 
to a conference about a show you DO like.

One more thing; someone said something about STVI:TUC being a good way to end
the movies (I agree, it is a good way to end the series and thus, Star Trek) but
I'd much rather see more Star Trek than just stop now for the reasons you were
presenting; "because sooner or later they will make a bad movie and who wants
to see Star Trek end badly" (?????) Do you live your entire life that way? Do
you live so sheltered a life that you're SO afraid to take risks? Pitiful...
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.misc