Page 16 of 16
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:16 pm
by Sionnach Glic
By all means, please explain how having massively long explainations when simple, short, explainations could suffice would contribute to the story in any way.
And besides, there was no real technobabble in TOS.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:46 pm
by Grundig
I can at least imagine why the writers put the stuff in. 1) They want their wacky idea to sound believable 2) They're following a tradition by using it.
TNG was the worst. I think Voyager was almost as bad. Somehow, DS9 got away with alot less, IIRC. TOS was great, because all you needed was Scotty screaming and pulling his hair out to get the message across that the ship's in trouble. Ent was OK, but not great in this regard.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:57 pm
by Mikey
I'm with Seafort on this. There are times when "proper" technobabble can be used to indicate the advanced nature of science and technology - but often, it is used in a way which makes it obvious that it is being used to obfuscate the fact that no attempt was made to correlate real science with the writing.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:40 pm
by Graham Kennedy
I have no problem with them talking about science and technology to some extent, what's important is how they do it. You don't need to say "The enemy is disrupting our communications by generating a rotating quantum inversion field!" - you just need to say "They're jamming us!" It conveys the exact same information to the audience, without leaving them thinking "um... a what?"
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:06 am
by Reliant121
I have to agree with GK.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:19 pm
by Sionnach Glic
Aye, I agree wtih that, too. Just say what is happening (ie, the warp core is going to blow). Don't go on a long description of how and why it's happening, unless it does something to further the plot.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:26 pm
by Graham Kennedy
That's one thing I liked about Generations. Geordi didn't give a big long speech about safety systems being offline, and core ejections systems being jammed, and all that. He just said "We have a coolant leak, we're three minutes away from a warp core breach, and there's nothing I can do."
Yet people complained about it. Go figure.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:28 pm
by stitch626
I loved that part because of the lack of TB.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 9:42 pm
by Sionnach Glic
Aye, more writers should do things that way.
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:08 pm
by thelordharry
Re: Star Trek XI
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:10 pm
by Tsukiyumi