Tag: sci-fi (page 32 of 35)

Trek Through Trek: The Original Series

Trek

Between the Fan Collective DVD sets to which I have access, either through direct ownership or asking my parents very nicely, and the intelligent and hilarious opinionated reviews by sfdebris (even funnier in video format), I’ve been watching plenty of Star Trek lately. It’s not just good entertainment, it’s rich background material for anybody doing something creative in the science fiction genre. Ronald D. Moore used his experiences as a producer on The Next Generation to shape his re-launch of Battlestar Galactica, and when it came time for Joss Whedon to put Firefly down on paper, he likely looked at Star Trek almost as a reminder of what he didn’t want to do – no faster-than-light travel, no aliens, etc. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

What I’d like to do is look at the five Trek TV series on the whole, discuss how they came to be, what makes them stand out and where, with the benefit of hindsight, one might see room for improvement. It makes sense to begin at the beginning, with Gene Roddenberry’s original series.

NCC-1701

It was the 1960s. A bitter Cold War was on between the United States and the Soviet Union, exemplified in, among other things, the space race. Voices of the generation were raised against what they saw as unjust or dictatorial practices, seeking equal rights for minorities and women as well as protesting the evils of war. Nuclear annihilation was a daily fear and television was coming into its own as a form of escapism for any household fortunate enough to own a color set.

This was the world into which Gene Roddenberry introduced Star Trek. Up until this point, popular science fiction had been limited to the campy likes of Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon, movie serials playing in the local cinema rather than the comfort of one’s own home. Most of the general population, then, expected Star Trek to be full of ray guns, rocket ships spouting fire from their backsides and villains dressed in bright robes with names like Ming the Merciless. The closest thing to what Star Trek brought to television was 1956’s Forbidden Planet.

Kirk

In Star Trek we have the interstellar star ship the USS Enterprise, captained by one James T Kirk. Kirk and his crew are representatives of the United Federation of Planets, an organization of worlds promoting peace and exploration. In keeping with this somewhat Utopian society, the bridge crew includes an alien, a black woman, an Asian helmsman and, from the second season onward, a Russian navigator. The ship also has a Scotsman down in the engine room and a cranky country doctor in sickbay. This diverse crew will be doing more than flying really fast and shooting at bad guys: they negotiate treaties, investigate the unknown and travel through time.

The crew also slipped quite a few things passed NBC’s censors. Instead of being simple shallow entertainment, Star Trek’s writers, like the fictional crew, boldly forged into new territory. They tackled topics like race relations, sexism and war, using the Enterprise and her crew as an allegory for the United States of the day. While the scripts of the show were not immune to the frequent tampering by network executives and corporate sponsors, couching these controversial themes in science fiction trappings allowed a lot of the true innovation of the series to slip by unnoticed. Thus, at the same time communicators and transporters are introduced, we see hated enemies coming to an understanding and even grudging respect (“Balance of Terror”) and television’s first interracial kiss between fictional characters (“Plato’s Stepchildren”).

However – and this might be where I start getting flamed, folks – the show isn’t perfect. Roddenberry was adamant that his crew avoid interpersonal conflict. When Kirk and Spock battle in “Amok Time,” it’s done with Spock under the influence of the Vulcan pon farr, meaning he really isn’t himself and would never harm Kirk in other circumstances. While this reinforces the Utopian ideal of the Federation, it isn’t what I would consider realistic. Individuals with different upbringings are going to have differing opinions that may escalate into arguments and conflict, and this is just when those in questions are all humans. Throw aliens into the mix and the chances of conflict rise exponentially. Also, while the writing often goes in bold directions for the time, there is the occasional inexplicable weirdness of episodes like “Shore Leave,” where McCoy encounters Alice’s White Rabbit, “The Savage Curtain,” where the Enterprise crew battles evil alongside Abraham Lincoln, and “The Way to Eden,” in which the Enterprise is hijacked by hippies. Finally, the show was produced in the 1960s, so some of the effects can seem somewhat dated by today’s standards.

Despite the previous paragraph of nit-picking, science fiction wouldn’t be where it is today without the sizable contribution of Star Trek. In addition to it’s various innovations, it’s good television, more often than not written well with compelling characters and interesting stories. Unfortunately it only lasted three seasons before finally succumbing to the machinations of the network. It was followed by the well-done animated series in 1973, of which I’ve only seen a few episodes, and the first seven films of the Star Trek franchise, which may gain their own entries in upcoming IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! posts. In any event, what keeps it from being a mere footnote in the ever-evolving field of science fiction is the quality of the storytelling. Yes, the effects might not have aged well and sometimes the 60s-era writers get a little baked and produce something odd, but overall Star Trek set the standard for innovative, socially-aware and damn good science fiction delivered right to your TV set.

Jotting in the Margins: Consistent Characters

Writing

I’m going to jump ahead a bit. My next post on building character is going to deal with antagonists & adversaries who aren’t necessarily evil and allies who aren’t necessarily the kind of people you want to invite over for dinner. Spoiler warning: I’m going to be talking about Q.

Q

In that future post, I’ll be talking about what makes Q exemplary in this role of adversarial ally. But that’s the pinnacle of his character, and here I want to discuss the ups and downs. It’s something that comes from different writers handling the same character with varying degrees of success. Charles Sonnenburg has discussed the Q character arc at length in his opinionated episode guide videos of his episodes, and I recommend checking those out.

When we first meet Q, in Encounter at Farpoint, he’s an officious and clearly omnipotent being with every intention of wiping humanity out of existence. Hide and Q casts Q as Mephistopheles and also establishes his penchant for playing games with mortals. Q Who introduces us to the Borg, and Q is more grounded and less flamboyant. The result is a dimension of depth to the character that will be explored later. We also see what happens when Q is stripped of his powers and interacts with other Q beings. Yet at the same time, we’re ‘treated’ to what happens when Q goes gift-shopping and, despite his protestations that humans are unevolved savages with disgusting biological processes, chases skirts.

It would have taken the writers of some of the weaker episodes in the Q arc all of five minutes to check on the characterization & information established in his previous appearances. Alas, they seemed more interest in playing his “omnipotence” for laughs. It’s one thing to take the ball & run with it. That’s what you do when you catch a ball. However, you don’t want to run in entirely the wrong direction. It’s not just a case of a writer not doing the research, it can also lead to a serious case of dis-continuity and character decay, which may become terminal.

How do you avoid this? Keep notes, and check them often. Lend an ear to feedback you receive on your work, both positive and negative. Above all, keep your characters consistent. Say what you like about Stephanie Meyer, the character of Bella Swan remains co-dependent and nearly obsessed with Edward throughout her books, so at least she got the consistency right.

In other news, this is my 100th post, so… yay?

100!

Everything’s Cooler In Space: Mood Music

Jupiter & Callisto

Kicking around in the back of my head as I work on novels, video entries and freelance gaming submissions, the sci-fi tabletop project continues to slowly but surely take shape. Assisting that is a few pieces of music. I’ll list them for you, talk about their merits & nuances, and what they mean to this project.

Holst – “Mars, the Bringer of War”
[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/mars.mp3]

This is the opening movement to Gustav Holst’s famous suite on the planets. To me, there are few pieces of music that capture the excitement, pioneering attitude and downright scariness of true science fiction. It moves with a purpose, shifting between almost militaristic cadences and long, sweeping passages.

It fits this project for a variety of reasons. There’s the spectre of impending war that hangs over the interplanetary landscape, the feeling that mankind is teetering on the edge of something it doesn’t quite comprehend even as it quarrels with itself and the knowledge that the machinations of ambitious or even insane men are at work behind the scenes to drive the fate of humanity in one direction or another. “Mars” captures all of these feelings pretty well.

VNV Nation – “Sentinal”
[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/sentinal.mp3]

The first vocal track from their latest album, VNV Nation’s music has always captured a mood somewhere between revolutionary and soulful. Behind the strong beat and cascading note sequences, there’s a feeling of weariness. While there’s a desire for change, to better one’s self, there’s also the impression that a lot of time has been spent dreaming of a better tomorrow while greater forces in the world work against that goal.

In the future envisioned with this project, battles have been fought both great and small, with no clear victor in the end equation despite accolades and propaganda on both sides. The players, in a way, begin somewhere in the middle, where they can either move to an overarching view of the volatile situation or choose an allegiance with one side or the other. The reason for doing this, on any scale, is to usher in better days, be it for a particular faction or humanity as a whole.

Tool – “Lateralus”
[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/lateralus.mp3]

Incorporating the Fibonacci sequence and featuring a refrains scored in a rotating 9/8,8/8,7/8 time signature, the title track from Tool’s third studio album talks of man’s desire to explore himself and his interpretation of the world around him. The idea is to be unafraid of the unknown, willing to explore beyond the boundaries of what we know and learning to accept the things we do not. If someone can do that, if they can move across the borders between the everyday and the singular, one just might “go where no one’s been.”

To me, this song encapsulates the mentality of the foolishly brave men and women willing to hurl themselves headlong into the void of space. It fits perfectly with the dark sci-fi nature of the project. Also, by seeking to be different and transcend the particulars of their origins, players can move into new territory for them, influencing struggles of power between entire planets and possible redefining the destiny of mankind itself.

It may sound a bit ambitious, but I’ve never been accused of thinking too small.

IT CAME FROM NETFLIX! Push

Logo courtesy Netflix.  No logos were harmed in the creation of this banner.

[audio:http://www.blueinkalchemy.com/uploads/push.mp3]

Push came out in the midst of the resurgence of the super-hero film. After the success of X-Men and Spider-Man, and the advent of Heroes on television, there have been super-hero stories both good and bad brought to the big screen. Comparisons between Push and, say, Iron Man are pretty much inevitable. While it doesn’t quite reach those heights, it doesn’t hit the nadir of X-Men Origins: Wolverine either. The film stars Chris Evans, Dakota Fanning, Camilla Belle, Cliff Curtis, Ming-Na and Djimon Hounsou.

Courtesy Summit Entertainment

Back in the 1940s, some brilliant and somewhat crazy Germans thought it would be a swell idea to genetically enhance the psychic potential of human subjects in order to weaponize their abilities. After the war, the research continued and was taken over by a mysterious paragovernmental group called the Division. Nick Gant (Chris Evans) is the son of one of their more successful subjects, a Mover. The psychics have rather descriptive titles: Movers are telekinetics, Watchers see possible futures, Shifters cast illusions, Bleeders make you bleed by screaming at you and Pushers literally push their way into your mind, making you think whatever they want you to think and making lies as real as the truth. The list goes on, but that covers most of the major ones. Anyway, Division has had one of its subjects go rogue with a syringe full of a MacGuffin serum and Nick is key to it’s recovery – but since Division gunned down his dad before his eyes, Nick’s not exactly in a helpful mood.

Like most movies I enjoy watching end to end without wanting to wander back onto the Internet, Push has something of a brain in its head. It doesn’t try to impress us with special effects that are overly flashy or out of this world. Despite characters moving massive objects and deflecting bullets with their minds, outfoxing each other’s visions and yelling more than a given character in Dragonball Z, their powers are actually somewhat grounded in reality. This means the audience spends less time suspending their disbelief and are more focused on who these people are and how defined they become by their powers. Naturally, this grounding of the movie leads some people to call Push boring. This being the Internet, those people are entitled to their opinion, just as I am entitled to the opinion that they’re morons.

Dakota Fanning as Cassie the Watcher shows us she’s more than capable of handling a role that involves more than staring at something constructed of CGI and wibbling in prelude to a scream. Cassie’s a jaded, street-smart adolescent whose entire life has been shackled to her ability. Hook, Cliff Curtis’ character, is on the other end of things, using his Shifting to make his life more comfortable and filled with fine wine and beautiful women. Nick’s in the middle, trying to use his telekinesis as an edge in life but trying not to let it be the be-all end-all of his existence. All in all, most of the characters we meet show at least some depth, and their conversations never feel too stilted or flimsy.

But there is a lot of talking in what is probably meant to be a ground-breaking action sci-fi thriller. Push keeps a lot of balls in the air, and it stumbles here and there keeping everything going, which again might lead to idiots in the audience dozing off because the flick’s not violent enough and nobody gets their tits out. To the credit of Push, nothing gets completely dropped and the story never grinds to a complete halt. When Nick develops his idea to fool the Watcher who always seems to be one step ahead of even the prodigious abilities of Cassie, the knowledge we have of his plan keeps us interested until the end. There are lulls here and there as exposition is covered or Djimon Hounsou’s cold and calculating Carver plays mind games with Nick without having to Push the young man at all. There’s a lot of conversation that goes on with one of our heroes holding a gun on the head of someone else, and the action itself is somewhat sparse. You don’t have any of the truly jaw-dropping visuals or white-knuckle moments of other films of this type, but unless you’re popping Ritalin or you’re coming off of a five-hour Halo or Gears of War marathon, you’re not completely bored either.

Push isn’t an award-winning film, but it balances a few good elements with weaknesses that would drag down other stories. The premise isn’t exploring any new territory but it’s executed in a clean, straight-forward and realistic manner that helps it feel fresh. The characters don’t experience huge changes in motivation or show any major growth, but they have enough depth to be interesting and grow just enough to show a little humanity. The powers on display aren’t out to blow our minds in the way of Spider-Man or Hellboy but the Hong Kong setting has enough unique visuals for us Western viewers that over-the-top super-powers aren’t necessary. All in all, it’s like a very good episode of Heroes extended to almost two hours, for better or worse. It’s not a timeless classic or superlative cinema, but after you’ve watched Push, you shouldn’t feel like you’ve wasted your time. It’s not a perfect movie, and the flaws might be too glaring for some people to overcome. However, if you like decent action, supernatural aspects grounded in reality and thirteen year old girls with a streetwise attitude giving advice to cynical adults twice their age, Push is time well spent. I enjoyed it, and if you can forgive some of its flaws and get into its mythology without needing to see people popping adamantium claws or setting folks on fire, you might too.

Josh Loomis can’t always make it to the local megaplex, and thus must turn to alternative forms of cinematic entertainment. There might not be overpriced soda pop & over-buttered popcorn, and it’s unclear if this week’s film came in the mail or was delivered via the dark & mysterious tubes of the Internet. Only one thing is certain… IT CAME FROM NETFLIX.

Everything’s Cooler in Space: It Ain’t Rocket Science

Jupiter & Callisto

Okay, I lied. I mentioned last week I’d go over more skills and perks, but seriously, what good will it do me to expound upon those aspects of the game if nobody wants to play it? So the question I’m going to try and answer should be obvious: why would someone want to play it? Seems to be a somewhat straightforward question, and despite the subject matter, I shouldn’t need a degree in rocket science to figure it out.

It’s not a space opera.

The mood & themes of the game are somewhat operatic, since they’re born out of short stories that are inspired by Greek mythology, and the Greeks know their tragedies. Instead of the glitzy magic-fueled universe of Star Wars or the semi-utopian ideal envisioned by Gene Roddenberry for Star Trek, the solar system here has become something of an 1850s United States: fractured to the point of civil war due to divisive issues and a have/have-not atmosphere between the inner planets and Jupiter’s moons. It’s much more a space western than a space opera. If this were a space opera, you can expect it’d be scored by Wagner and most of the characters would be dead by the end. How does this appeal to players?

People like playing heroes & anti-heroes.

Role-playing is wish fulfillment. People want to feel important, heroic and/or badass. And here, much like in other RPGs, the player characters are there to make a difference. We’ve got two rival governments, one well-established and cloaked in propaganda (Terran) and one nascent and unrefined (Jovian), that are either going to find a way to coexist, ally or even merge, or go at each other like a couple of angry pit bulls. The player characters can tip the scales either way, or can even work to maintain the balance. The idea here is to give players who enjoy the sort of science fiction that’s been shown to be popular in forms like Firefly and Battlestar Galactica a somewhat familiar and somewhat feasible sandbox in which to play.

Science fiction doesn’t necessitate ray guns and warp drive.

There are plenty of games that feature high-energy weaponry and distant alien worlds if that’s what you’re after in a sci-fi fantasy. Rifts, Traveller and the aforementioned franchises all spring to mind. Even the grittier grimdark world of Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader have bumpy-headed aliens and guns that make people explode. This game goes more of the Serenity route with slower-than-light travel that’s still pretty fast by modern standards and a rich social-political setting with the added bonus of familiar place-names and well-documented and measurable distances. By removing some of the conventional sci-fi trappings, my hope is that more of the excitement will be generated by the characters rather than an alien disintegrator.

Grabbing a player’s attention.

So provided I can get this game past the concept stage and out into circulation, how will it be described? “A Storytelling Game of Personal Horror” tells you everything you need to know about Vampire: the Masquerade, outside of the title. All Flesh Must Be Eaten is exactly what it says on the tin. Traveller is described as “Science-Fiction Adventure in the Far Future”. So how do I describe this project of mine in a single, condensed sentence?

“Future Action, Intrigue and Exploration in our Solar System.”

Not sure how I feel about it, but it’s a start.

Older posts Newer posts

© 2024 Blue Ink Alchemy

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑