Roddenberry was a veteran with 89 combat missions; the Enterprise crew were professionals who respected the chain of command. The modern Trek writers have watched every season of Grey's Anatomy; they believe Star Fleet's best and brightest would behave like teenagers on a field trip.
"they believe Star Fleet's best and brightest would behave like teenagers on a field trip." This is PRECISELY why I did NOT like the JJ Abrams Star Trek movies!
James Doohan losing a finger at the D-Day invasion as part of the Canadian Army. These were men’s men. *Spelling corrected - autocorrect thought it knew English better than I
What a great summary of the diversion in mindset to modern TV writers. I'm going to quote you in a future article in a niche online publication Joe Stoffa.
My problem with modern Trek isn't necessarily the disappearance of masculinity (though the emasculation of most male characters is a problem, I'd agree)...it's twofold: (1) the writers seem to have forgotten how to write episodes with moral ambiguity, and (2) They seem obsessed with tearing down iconic characters. When you watch episodes of Star Trek from the '80s and '90s, they still presented two sides. You could see the evil characters' motivations. Even if the episode eventually picked aside and Captain Picard or Captain Sisko explained why at the end (more Picard than Sisko, since Sisko was more willing to exist in the grey areas), You as a viewer were still given The full picture of the issue being explored in the episode. Now, that seems to have disappeared. Now we have "This is bad, 100% bad and shame on anyone who thinks this way and we must triumph. Throw in a few men looking like buffoons while the women solve all the problems, and that's your episode. Second, look what they're doing to Captain Picard in the new show. When this show was announced, over and over again they said that it was happening because his positivity was needed in today's world. But where is the positivity in the show? The first season was all about tearing him down. Tearing down this mythical Starfleet character. More often than not, you had women shouting at him or belittling him or telling him that he didn't understand something or other because he was a man, or that he was out of touch. "Lol, what do you know old man?" was the gist of 90% of the conversations. He wasn't allowed to be positive. Instead, we as a viewer were treated to his entire worldview being torn down along with him. We see him question himself repeatedly. That never would have happened before. And then at the end of course, they literally remake him as something new. I know that the video posits that it's millennials that do this, but at least in season one of Picard, the showrunner was not a millennial. The director of several the episodes was, but the writers were not. And yet they still felt this was a good idea. That's why I am thankful for UA-cam channels that show old Trek and new Trek side by side to show everyone the difference. How horrible it's gotten.
When Kirk shows up, your odds of surviving any given threat double. When Michael Burnham shows up, your odds of getting out of a scene without talking about your feelings get cut in half.
Q: How many of your woke Millennial screenwriter peers in Hollywood have a divorced, absent and/or abusive father? Is it.... A. All of them. B. All of them. C. All of them. or D. So nearly all of them that you might as well say, "ALL OF THEM!!"
William Shatner is a flawed individual like us all, but his portrayal of Captain Kirk is legendary and can never be topped or replaced. He IS Captain Kirk.
The part about subtext is spot on - thank you for describing that. I saw a audience review of Dune that said there was no emotion, which confused me because I thought the actors portrayed the pain & horror of the situation. Then it struck me the actors weren't shrieking, rending their clothing and yelling the plot. They subtly conveyed deep stress & emotion the way strong, trained men & women with massive responsibilities might do in a crisis, which made it that much more powerful for me.
You described perfectly the problem with modern writing. I think this is highlighted by the manner to which novels always seem to produce the most believable characters in TV or film. Can you imagine the last 2 seasons of Game of thrones being as universally disliked as they are, had the writers not been given the opportunity to make it up the last missing books.
A great example of the use of subtext in the original Star Trek is in the Season 2 episode Amok Time. Subtext: Vulcans were once such an emotional people they almost wiped themselves out in nuclear wars. It took hundreds of years before the philosophy of Surak, who taught pacifism and logic based on suppression of all strong emotions, was adopted and brought widespread peace to their society. Modern Vulcan view those who show emotions in public the way Bible thumpers view Satan worshippers. Chief among these strong emotions was a monstrous libido, which even the Surak philosophy cannot wholly suppress, and attempts to do so can last only seven years before driving Vulcans into a killing frenzy. Spock, science officer aboard the Enterprise, hoped that he would be spared the embarrassment of this _pon farr_ state, but the symptoms are growing too pronounced to ignore. Because the fugue state is so shameful, no one outside Vulcan is even aware of its existence. All Captain Kirk knows is that Spock’s behavior is becoming increasingly erratic. Text: Captain, I respectfully request shore leave on my home planet. Well, Spock, I’m afraid that won’t be possible anytime soon. We’ve been ordered to the Altair system, to show the flag during the peace negotiations. But the shore leave facilities at Altair are perfectly fine, so you can- No, Captain, it must be on Vulcan! No other planet is possible! Spock! Is there something wrong? I have made my request! All I require of you is an answer, yes or no! The explication of this into J. J. Abrams-whining is left as an exercise for the student.
Kirk was a take charge man. He was brash, confident, sexually assertive, loyal to his crew and even more to his friends. He would walk through fire to save his friends at the cost of his career as seen in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. He was a brilliant tactician. As McCoy said in that film when Kirk doubts his actions and asks what he has done, Bones replied: " You did what you had to do...what you always do... turn death into a fighting chance to live. " Then there is the character, the sharp mind, the ease of masculinity, the swagger. A lot of young boys when I was growing up wanted to be as confident as James Tiberius Kirk.
Captain Kirk was a ladies man. He didn't abuse women. They liked him. Often it was the women who were "sexually assertive" and made the first move on the original Star Trek. Watch some of the old shows and see.
I think you hit the nail on the head with Kirk. Whatever situation he was in, he used his unwavering moral compass to make a firm decision. Right or wrong, he would accept responsibility. That's a leader. Mark Hamill did the best he could with Luke, but even he admitted that Luke wouldn't say or act like that.
There was even the episode were he broke the Prime Directive to arm the one side of the war on the low tech planet to protect them from the side sponsored by the Klingons.
@@Flackon Nazis might think that. But a lot of regular, unassuming, non-Nazi people would disagree that this is where Luke's dramatic arc was headed at all, especially as many had already seen the arc play out in a different way in the old novels and that was also solid.
@@Flackon "Nazis shit on Last Jedi (because of breaking with expectations)"". "People who don't like Last Jedi are Nazis" that's what you're saying since you're not differentiating.At least if people complain about the whole "Subverting expectations for the sake of subverting expectations" even when it makes for a poorer story. Piss off. Last Jedi is a confused mess with no actual coherence. And HELL TO THE FUCK NO it's NOT the most natural way possible. You say that the person who thought that Darth Vader could be saved EVEN JUST CONTEMPLATING his NEPHEW could fall to the dark side AND THEREFORE HE SHOULD MURDER HIM is the "most natural possible way"?
Nazi is a very heavy word. Nazi dehumanize their opponent so that they could do terrible things to other fellow humans and even to their own civilian people who are questioning their actions. And they take pride in what they did since they believe they are superior. But it only feeds to grand delusion of the group. I think it is also the same to the imperial japanese back then when the samurai lost in their civil war, the samurai families sent their children to military school since they could no longer enjoy their samurai previleges. The nostalgia and desire get back in power spreads and fester among the military ranks. Even before WW2 started they have a democratic process. But it was useless since the military won't listen and intimidate opposition through assassination. The politicians cower to the military might They couldn't control. They invade and exploit resources from other nations to feed their military. And aim to unify Asia under their version banner of holy crusade of expansion. You have to ask yourself who currently has large amount of concentration camps and detain people simply because of their ethnicity and religion for brainwashing cultural assimilation. Imprison and intimidate dissent with forced live confession in national tv because of a "wrong think crime". I think those are the modern version of Nazi.
@@smartalec2001 If you disagree that it follows from his character, it just means you haven't been paying attention. There's nothing wrong with the way Luke was handled in TLJ
Actually in 80 or so episodes of Star Trek, Kirk "womanized" a hand full of times. Also, the majority of those times were about manipulating the antagonists ("Cat's Paw," "Blink of an Eye) or a situation ("The Gamesters of Triskelion," "By Any Other Name"). There were episodes in which he was controlled by others such as "Dagger of the Mind," Elaan of Troyius," or the episode with the famous kiss, "Plato's Stepchildren." He lost his memory in "The Paradise Syndrome" but had a loving relationship. He was a jerk in "The Conscience of the King" but his motivation was understandable. Most of Kirk's encounters with woman were professional or about relationships (past ones), "Shore Leave," "Court Martial," and falling in love, "City on the Edge of Forever," "Requiem for Methuselah."The false cliche arose about Kirk over time by focusing in on episodes such as "The Gamesters of Triskelion" and ignoring the bulk of episodes where no kind of relationship with women took place other than as crewmen etc. and the others mentioned.
Glad someone else caught this! The "ladies man" Kirk is more of a fan joke that's evolved into an accepted truth that doesn't actually mesh with the facts of the series.
Well said. And spot on. This is yet another example of wokesters trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. They did the same thing with James Bond, with the recent director even going so far as saying that Bond was guilty of sexual assault. Yet when one understands the context, Bond was a spy. And he was trained to use whatever means necessary to achieve his objective and to protect his life. It is literally in the 'license to kill' label.
Thank you. I came here to say this but you said it better than I could have done. I'd also add that his reputation for breaking the rules is also undeserved. He was meticulous in following regulation except in situations where he had to make a moral judgement which is understandable when one remembers that the Enterprise is on a 5 year mission in deep space. People always have to remember that it's 'Hornblower in space' and that, as was the case in the Age of Sail, the captain of a ship far from home is god. He *is* Starfleet and he must make the calls as best he can with his first concern always to be the safety and welfare of his crew.
@@chrislyne377 However....I would say that breaking the rules under reasonable circumstances, under a moral judgment, etc does seem realistic to still get a reputation for it by bureaucracy, so perhaps that is still somewhat fitting nonetheless!
Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock were role models for many, myself included, as I was 14 when the show began. What they portrayed was that intellect and morality were peas in the same pod. Thanks for your perspectives.
Anyone else remember those long-lost days when you just watched the performance and didn't know (certainly didn't care about) the actor's personal opinions on any particular political party or their stance on problematic social issues? I miss those times.
@@GedH-316 It goes back further than the 2000's, but social media multiplied the stupidity. I don't know if Jane Fonda was the first "activist" celebrity, but she was the first to be really fucking annoying (and possibly treasonous) about it.
It's actually very rare for me to know those things. Of course, I don't get on twitter and I stay away from tabloids. So most of the things that celebrities say misses me.
What I miss most about older movies...characters are allowed to be characters. Doesn't matter if the actor is male, female, black, white, gay straight, that shit never mattered. But now, pretty much every movie acts like that that kind of thing is the most important aspect in the world and bend over backwards to draw attention to it.
It's sad to see this message being handed to us that we can only relate to those who look like us. Representation is important yet there is a difference from that and tokenization. Write a good character and almost anyone can relate to them. Write a character solely to mark off a box and you get nothing.
@@stephw1702 exactly. I grew up in the 90s and guess what. I absolutely related to Mulan despite the fact that I'm a white dude because she was a well written character.
If I can offer a non-US perspective (I live in Southeast Asia). As Western shows and movies become ever more woke and politicized I can see Western cultural influences fading in real-time as Korean, Japanese and Thai content start grabbing people's attention over here. Hell, from what I've seen, even Western audiences are turning to the East for more compelling content. The irony is that a movie like Train to Busan offers a lot of criticism about Korean society, politics and social justice and yet it doesn't hit seem to hit you on the head with its message like so many of the standout examples of wokeness does. Probably because the creators dont hate the characters they create and can still write realistic characters with realistic motivations. edit: agree with everything you said by the way. Always very interesting to hear your thoughts.
The West is being consumed with self-hate, specifically anything of "white identity". I quote that because among woke circles, they like to tout that there is no such thing as "whiteness", that it's a made up term by racists or whatever. Yet, when it comes time to attack or criticize anything remotely of western and European identity, suddenly that "whiteness" exists and is a monolithic identity for all white people. I just hate all this woke crap. I've never watched anything Asian-made that consisted of entirely Asian actors, culture, and history, and thought to myself "I can't get into this, there are just too many Asians in this, it needs more white people in it for diversity". Yet that's exactly what they do here, take Lord of the Rings for example. White = bad. Diversity is their new religion and whiteness = their original sin.
I actually love of lot of costume drama histories coming out of Asia, lately. When I had more money I'd search for titles and find out something about them, usually a trailer. Truly enjoy them. Sometimes the culture and motivations confuse me, but the story telling was always deep..characters, interesting. I like the 'soft magic' of the taoist concept of the Chi and the Tao.
@@AngryToasterOven The contradictions in their arguments are incredible. My only explanation is that at some point during their sociology courses they get taken to a room where someone spends an afternoon randomly applying patch cables to their brains.
@@AngryToasterOven I just finished All of Us Are Dead, a Korean zombie series, and before that another Korean series called Signal a supernatural tinged crime drama, and never once did I think, "Oh I can't watch this since there's no white people in it." Or "I hate this because there's no one in it who looks EXACTLY like me." Yes some of it did make me squirm a bit but I never hated it, it was just a different country with different cultures and traditions to my own. That was what made it so compelling.
I definitely agree that modern entertainment lacks a lot of subtext. Listening to you discuss how people used to outline their stories with subtext resonated with me because that's how I instinctually outline my stories. Even if I never explicitly explore any of it in the final product, it helps me to keep things consistent, but still multi-dimensional. I'm also tired of all the self- righteous woke BS that's permeating Hollywood. There's a time and place for everything. The way they portrayed Captain Kirk and the crew in the new Star Trek wasn't great.
William Shatner said his model for Captain Kirk was Alexander the Great, an heroic leader who fought alongside his own troops and was nearly killed in battle a few times. Alexander was histrionic, dramatic, but ultimately a bold, fearless, and highly intelligent leader. I never liked Picard. He's a gray, dreary bureaucrat. Give me the swashbuckling Kirk any day of the week.
They are vastly different takes on command. I like both. It would have been a terrible mistake for Stewart to simply imitate Shatner's Kirk. Of course, the best take on command ( IMO) in the Trek canon is still Avery Brooks delivery as Capt. Benjamin Sisko.
@@frederickrose3967 Patrick Stewart as a person is a funny, charming man. Patrick Stewart as an actor shows his Shakespearean stage experience: he's stiff on the screen. The guy's a stage actor. Avery Brooks was awesome. Loved him as "Hawk" in the "Spenser" tv show.
When I was a teenager, Captain Kirk was my HERO! From the second he walked onto the bridge of the Enterprise, he was completely in charge. And just about every week, he "had" a different beautiful gal. I could have cared less about his overacting. He's still a hero. I want to fly into space when I'm 90! I watched the last season of Trek in Vietnam, whenever I was in camp. We ALL felt the same about him! We wanted to BE Kirk!
I wanted to marry Kirk and I was only 8 when I first laid my eyes on him. I looked for someone who was brave, funny and a real man like him but sadly I never found anyone that could match him so I never married anyone. I still think Kirk was the best guy ever:)
I'm a millenial myself. Grew up around the prequel trilogy (8 when my dad took me to see The Phantom Menace in theaters) so I could never truly hate them since they hold a special place in my heart. They turned me on to an entire world of science fiction that's been living under my nose apparently. But I'm fully checked out of all these franchises now. They've just been ruined for me. There's no longer any interest in telling great stories and writing interesting characters. My dad and I will always have the old movies and TV series and I'll keep on re-buying those with no remorse. There are people my age who feel the same. Appreciated you clarifying that in the video. If I ever have kids I'll just show them the classics.
Same with me brother, my kids haven't seen any of the remakes. Mulan, Ghostbusters etc. Well....we did watch the newest Ghostbusters with the child cast and enjoyed it. But not that piffle that came out b4 it.
If you wish to see good writing try some of the recent anime classics. The sky Crawlers is a classic example of less dialog can mean more story. Ergo Proxy is a TV-series example of this, both are sci-fi and rather good.
Pronoun pedophiles, wow. So correct. And you were right about everything else. I like your sense of humor too. Thanks for putting 20 years of existential angst into less than ten minutes of brilliant commentary. They hate Kirk, and they hate all guys that looked up to him, as I did, and do. Thank you again.
Kirk was undoubtedly a leader. He was cocky, arrogant, occasionally obnoxious, impatient, humane, moral. He made mistakes and sometimes they were very serious. But he was still a hero and he was compelling in the stories. Captain Kirk was not a message, a token or a "lesson". Star Trek had its share of moral lessons, but they didn't hit you over the head with it.
In the current culture your leaders have to be nice, polite, soft spoken and respectful - a good economy, border security and a strong influence on international affairs are secondary.
Nowhere was that more perfectly illustrated than in "The Enemy Within", a brilliant episode that occurred so early in the series. And a pretty bold statement to say some of those "negative" qualities are what made him a great leader.
As a millennial I stan Kirk. He was confident and steadfast in his decisions and if he fucked up he owned it. He respected his peers and earned respect back. His sexual conquests while aggressive was with consent. The ladies loved him because he was assertive , confident and strong accepting his humanity and he in return always honored his debt be it emotional or financial. Kirk never used sleezy tactics to get what he wanted from good people and he gave anyone with a brain agency and let them do their own thing to further the success of the mission regardless of gender or identity. Heck even in modern interpretations writers can not simply deny that Kirk is awesome enough that he motivates his best friend who is from a species of unfeeling logical beings to throw down with him. Spock loves Kirk and vise versa and does what he can so his best friend accomplishes his goals which benefit everyone. He doesn't try to change him or guide him. Spock trusts Kirk and has faith in him as a person. A Vulcan has faith in a man a flawed one at that but a man all the same.
@All Prophit Keep in mind that Kirk barely budged with the ladies in Season 1. I think it was something like 3 women he was involved with. 1 was an old flame, 1 was the insane daughter of a mass murderer he was leading on, and 1 he fell in love with. Kirk was hardly the ladies man of legend---at least, through the first season.
You are right. Too much wussology. I also can’t stand Star Trek “ Discovery” to me it’s not cannon. Call me old fashioned. But, like my dad would often say, “ The good and great movies, the ones that would grab your attention didn’t need cuss words or use sex to sell the story line. The story line was just good.” He’s correct. 👍🏼🇺🇸
Yes, so true, you know great writing, when you can have a scene were almost nothing is happening, but you can't pull your eyes away from the screen. That is good writing.
My favorite character of the reboot was Karl Urban's 'Bones'. I was apprehensive based on the fact I thought 'Bones' required a more nuance than he'd been asked to do before but I think he nailed the balance & probably exceeded the quality of the script he was given. I also liked the line about his nickname since it's been donkey's years since doctors were nicknamed "Sawbones".
I absolutely LOVE your perspectives. I used to be a TV and movie freak. I cant watch these train wrecks. Every single franchise has been devastated by new world order monsters. 👹
I've noticed the Hollywood version of the 1980's isn't like anything I experienced in the 1980's. Today's writers never lived through it so all their knowledge of the 80's is from movies and TV. The real 80's were filled with things from the past... Hollywood 80's only has objects made in the 80's. At the end of every college year each class spits out 30 brand new qualified writers. Being a writer is now like going to college to learn how to calculate someone's taxes. Just because you have a certificate to write it doesn't mean you can actually write.
I can always date a book by the way they have characters interact. They have an execrable tendency to think everyone talks the way they talk, regardless of time-period
It's the nature of the beast, and is the same in (almost everything). When you watch any period drama, I always note, all the cars, bikes are immaculate and shiny and new, as if they've just been hired somewhere, but reflect, in real life there would have been older vehicles from previous generations, rusty dirty and knackered, still driving around. Clive James once commented, the hack writer has a 17th Century shepherd immaculately kitted out in absolutely authentic dung caked dress, blithely saying, "no way".
Stranger Things is a great example (and I love the show). ANY kid who swore around his parents the way those kids did would have been beaten senseless. 80's kids swore around each other, but knew from hard won experience to keep their mouths shut when adults were around.
It's not a very popular opinion, but this has always been my problem with "That '70s Show". It's always felt like a late '90s/early '00s take on how the '70s went down. "The Wedding Singer", same thing, trying to target the '80s, but it didn't feel anything like the '80s; and it was only +8 years in the rearview mirror by that point! These shows go for the obvious pop culture articles/references, but they never capture that same feeling; and they ALWAYS get the timeline of when things came out wrong.
Years ago I attended a convention where one of the guests was Mark Shepherd. What he said which has remained with me since is how back in the day with sci fi shows the focal point could never be on the special effects. There wasn't the budget. Instead the focus was on character and writing, which is why these shows are still beloved today. He emphasized the importance to keep those two things as the focal point even as these shows gained popularity and therefore money. Brilliant special effects lose their glamor in time, yet good characters and story will always remain relatable.
Compare Tom Baker era Doctor Who to the modern Doctor Who. Classic Doctor Who had cheap effects and costumes -- so it was focused on the people and their stories.
Back when video rental stores were still a thing, there was a simple rule for choosing sci-fi or fantasy films from the shelves. If the blurb on the back of the box started out with "Fantastic special effects highlight this story of...", just stop reading and put the box back on the shelf and move on.
@@CptDunsel Not exactly. I'm talking about things like matte painting composites that are so realistic that the average viewer just thinks they are looking at a true long shot. Or like the scenes from Forest Gump where Gary Sinese's legs are removed, and the combination of his acting and the excellent special effects leaves the audience believing what they are seeing despite knowing the actor still has his legs.
To be honest with you Star Wars is a symbol of The Hero’s Journey. Luke Skywalker finding out that his father was the most evil person in the Galaxy and doing everything to bring him to the light side of the force. Which is something Hollywood doesn’t appreciate. Lol
Let's Go Brandon, could apply to Darth Vader, because he too is a powerful broken corrupted fool of the Dark side. (So close to our Stolen Elected Commander in Corruption) Except in the movie we know Darth Vader represented established corrupted law and order of the Right while the Princess was the small oppressed Royalty progressives symbolically on the side of good, but with little power. Luke also represented the youthful coming of age hero that was once fodder for a generation or two in this country before Woke broke reality.
George Lucas got that from Joseph Campbell. J.J Abrams went to Sarah Lawrence College. How could he be expected to know anything about Joseph Campbell?
One common piece of BS you see repeated ad nauseam is "Star Trek was always woke." This is baloney. One of the best examples of how this is baloney is the episode Let This Be Your Last Battlefield, an episode squarely and heavily on the nose about race relations. The episode's messages couldn't be clearer: 1) race hatred based on color is idiotic, as exemplified by the fact that Biel and Loki's peoples hate each other because one group is black on the left and white on the right, and the other is black on the right and white on the left. The difference is so void of real substance that it brilliantly encapsulates the rank stupidity of race hatred, and 2) race hatred is self-defeating and destructive of everything for everyone, with this message encapsulated in the complete destruction of Sheron, leading to the obvious message, 3) a color blind society like what is shown in the Federation and the Enterprise crew is the way to go. WOKE is entirely different. Woke is obsessed with race, sees race in every little thing, and definitely is hyper-race conscious and, most importantly, is 100% committed to blatant racism against one race. A message of the desirability of a color-blind society is completely unacceptable to the woke. So, NO, Star Trek was NOT always woke, not even remotely.
Traditional lead characters were aspirational. They were written as something to aspire to. If they have flaws, they grow and surpass them. Modern lead characters are written as relatable. Humans full of flaws that they never overcome and that they never grow because they can never take responsibility and instead blame everything on externalities.
Insightful response. It is possible to be both. For instance, the movie "The Accountant" features a character that achieves difficult things; and is relatable to anyone with similar introverted tendencies, and aspirational in that he achieves excellence.
Not all the characters are written to be relatable and flawed. Rey, for example, had neither flaws nor challenges -- she picked up a light saber and was able to fight a Jedi-trained Kylo Ren to a draw.
@@rcrawford42 "Not all the characters are written to be relatable and flawed." Imagine Superman that is not weakened by Kryptonite nor turned evil by Green Kryptonite. Just good, honorable, smart, powerful and incorruptible. Hmm, a bit like Gandalf. Not "all knowing" but essentially incorruptible. "What matters is what you do with the time you have been given."
@@thomasmaughan4798 Gandalf is a special case, but his peers show how he could have failed -- the blue wizards lost to history, Radagast focusing on animals over the sentient races, and of course Saruman...
This is one reason John Wick is so beloved and was such a breath of fresh air. Absolute classic... "Who did this to my son!?" "John Wick", "Oh" cut scene. Paragraphs of subtext in a simple "Oh."
@@takatamiyagawa5688 Exactly! As Said in the video, you leave it to a good actor to give the single word all the gravitas it needs with tone, facial expression and body language.
"isn't a group less interested in history of any kind" That's because they're literally proud of being ignorant, and self-interested... It's what happens to a civilization when shame doesn't exist anymore.
It's an universal law-- intolerance is the first sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Well, I think somebody must have been ashamed of our socioeconomic history and the history of our entertainment industry in order for them not to have it taught to them in the first place.
@@donovanmedieval Ah, no... That’s what totalitarians do as a matter of course and it sure as hell isn't for the benefit of those they are deliberately leading into the dark. Nice try, comrade.
@@donovanmedieval That somebody was lazy and ignorant, at best - and a self-interested, hateful, short-sighted, book-burner - at the worst. If that was a conscious decision, to not TEACH relevant history - they weren't fighting some shameful deed, so much as throwing a vindictive tantrum. "who are you, who do not know your own history" "those who refuse to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it" We pay for public schools for a reason.
First time I've seen any of your video's and I'm a fan already. Got to respect your unvarnished opinions and no B.S. approach. Your take appeals greatly to the over 50 set that has seen art, in all its facets, decay into a mirror image of today's self-indulgent culture. Subscribed.
When I look at all the newer Trek franchises, I find myself scratching my head about a future where leaders lack a quick decision making ability, the ability to gain consensus, and the capacity to focus on the crisis to the exclusion of truly personal concerns. You would not pick senior officers in any era whose first thought in a crisis is their feelings. They don't come across as being able to work in challenging situations with a bunch of high intensity colleagues. And I agree that the dialogue is inefficient in expressing thoughts and leads to long scenes that do little to advance the story. Even in a high pressure corporate environment we don't waste time when there's a critical issue at hand. How do people stuck in a space ship that nearly always has failing power conduits have the time to fixate on their personal crises when they are trying to stop the ship from blowing up or venting atmosphere? It's about as absurd as the lack of AI command and control tools on the bridge or that they never raise shields prior to coming out of warp and have to rely on manual firing targeting commands. They need a rethink.
I don’t think that was Disney being afraid of a cavalier ladies man being reacted to poorly by modern audiences though, and more because Abrams has no creativity and erased everyone’s character development from the previous movie, Han is still a space criminal in TFA for the same reason, Leia apparently had no Jedi training in that movie despite Episode 6 implying that it was really important that she get that right away
So true. It gave permission for Kylo to run him through because he was a bad dad. Who was at the pitch meeting when they came up with the idea, "Okay, we're not going to let Luke, Leia and Han get together AND we're going to kill off Han so we will NEVER see it happen. How do you like that?"
The 2 minutes hate on William Shatner's character "James Tiberius Kirk" was led by famous mysandronist and "Voyager Captain Janeway" actress who had the fucking affront to describe it as "mysoginistic". Shatner's the gold thread, he's the reason it all worked and it's the reason Galaxy Quest is so popular! "Never Give Up! Never Surrender!"
Voyager was/remains spacejunk - Janeway easily had the most irritating voice ever (plus the character was almost as irritating as Babylon 5s Bester [the most punchable little shit in the Galaxy - shoutout to Walter for doing such a fantastic job]. Plus Voyage was both 2-dimensional and skinpeelingly boring.
I grew up in the 1990s, and don't mind admitting that WIlliam Shatner's Captain James Tiberius Kirk was the biggest role model I had in film and TV. His assertiveness, professionalism, charisma, style and swagger, loyalty to his friends and colleagues, unwavering sense of morality, leadership, and yes his way with the ladies, all of these are traits I've taken from him and applied through my life and well into adulthood. I'm approaching my 39th birthday, and some of my friends asked me how I felt about it. "William Shatner was 39 when Star Trek went off the air, and he went into space at the age of 91 last year". He's an inspiration to me even today.
Me being a geriatric millennial, the last generation not to grow up online, and my mother being a die hard star trek tos fan, I've always admired captain kirk, the bill Shatner one that is. His confidence, leadership and willingness to take matters into his own hands above his own wellness and career to stand up for his friends and what he thought was right. Great role model in my opinion. Hence..... To boldly go!
These “millennial” so called “Writers” HAVE NO LIFE EXPERIENCE they do not understand classic themes such as the hero’s journey or mythology as a whole. These classic stories stand the test time introducing morals as simple as right and wrong good or bad. they (millennial writers) simply slap together a lazy political synopsis and either race swap or alter the sexual orientation and/or identity of ALREADY established characters instead of creating their own. With the lack of a moral (lack of morals in general) understanding of how the real world works (lack of real world life experience), education but most importantly imagination an endless reboot of a self fulfilling representation is to be expected in modern entertainment. Keep up the great work and thanks for your insight.
i fear it is worse, they want to "reamigane" everything fitting to there idea how the world should look and work. The experience they are missing is that certain rules apply and you ain;t changing that.
I am going to take it one step further. They lack talent in general because many were diversity hires. Diversity is all well and good. But when it becomes your primary focus, you will invariably encounter situations where a larger portion of your talent pool is sub par. That isn't a dis on any culture or race. It is simple mathematics. If you have 100 of one particular race or gender and 50 of another race or gender, but you are told you have to maintain equality with the 100 spots you need to fill, you will hire 50 of the 100 of one race/gender and ALL 50 of the other race/gender. But due to the fact that you have a surplus in the one, you can invariably be more selective. The end result is you have literally fostered a situation where the one race/gender will now have to compensate for the inadequacy in the other race/gender just by virtue of the face that you couldn't be selective with the latter. It isn't being mean. It's math.
@@Diomedes01 I think it's worse than that. As soon as they take their eyes off the ball and start to focus on shallow surface traits like sex, sexuality and skin colour rather than raw talent they probably lose the ability to recognise talent in 'non-diverse' writers as well.
Love this series, never stop making it. It's key to see how things work on the inside rather than purely "thing I don't like BAD." As you've noted, lots of crap succeeds and gems fail. It's important to understand why.
@@fredhughes4115 Vulcan was such a racist and sexist planet. Imagine allowing two men too fight over a woman and imagine her rejecting Spock cause he's a half human loser. LOL. ( Such a romantic scene. )
OMG I love your discussion of subtext. Thank you! That pinpoints exactly the reason for so much of the disgust people feel at modern attempts at storytelling. Not enough magic of the unspoken; too much telling; too much blatant, gory, spattering of emotion instead of the beauty of silent space. That space that allows the audience to do the very fulfilling work of intuiting and coming to an understanding on their own. We are a storytelling species that worships good telling. Without it we are left with big holes in our spirits. I can read a book, but sometimes I like my stories visual and audible. I miss delight. It's such a rare feeling in this arid desert.
Thank you for this.....I've been trying to put my finger on what has happen to Hollywood in the past 10-20 years and you have found it.....THANK YOU again....
Perfectly stated and 100% on the nose. So grateful I grew up in the Kirk era. Even TNG bored me with its 80s-style self-doubt and endless talk of ethics over taking action and dealing with the consequences later as Kirk did. It took 4 seasons to get out of that mode while The Orville got it right from the get-go.
The point was, humanity evolved beyond knee-jerk gunboat diplomacy, and was trying to apply more foresight and diplomacy to prevent destructive wars, while at the same time, having a sliding scale of violence to apply should the need arise.
Wrong about TNG, I think. That series raised the moral standard of humans through stories that demanded ethical and moral decisions beyond Captain Kirk. See the episode when Picard goes home to see his brother and crosses a line when he visits violence upon his brother. A superb uplift to moral decision choices. Picard and crew are working in a larger universe than Kirk's. The moral evolution in TNG's world is evident.
@@janettucker3196 - It's a matter of personal style (TNG producers had contempt for TOS and didn't watch the episodes) and taste. TOS was always interesting and exciting while watching TNG I found myself yelling "Get on with it" at the screen for most episodes. Too much tea drinking and dour introspection instead of fun action-adventure.
Absolutely spot on! At the risk of dropping a shameless plug, these are similar thoughts I have expressed on my own channel, the complete loss of subtext, loss of the first rule of screenwriting, "Show, don't tell." But I'm one of the old farts who still mostly watches network television, and still remembers when even network television didn't suck--because these tightly written 45-minute complete stories, with well structured "beginning-middle-end," were written by masters of subtle persuasion. How far we have fallen.
"Show, don't tell" At times, narration helps. The example I think of is the first Dune movie that starts out with narration to set the stage. For that matter, "Rango" sets the stage. Every episode of Mission Impossible started with a stage-setting narration, the mission itself, and if you missed that part, you had no idea what the rest of the show was doing.
Been a struggling filmmaker/producer for years and all I can say is that I miss the days when you had to prove your worth. Nowadays, its damn near impossible to cut through the glut of absolute crap out there.
"Sometimes what a character doesn't say is more important than what he does say." Perfect example is from "John Wick" when Viggo calls John and John doesn't say one word. His silence, and already knowing what kind of man he is from Viggo's conversation with his son, really brings home the rage John Wick is feeling and the menace he is projecting. No way would it have worked if John Wick started screaming how he was going to kill Viggo's son.
I remember growing up and sneaking out of bed to watch Original Star Trek reruns on late night tv while my parents were sleeping and I think I took a lot of life lessons from Kirk, Spock and McCoy. The importance of friendship, duty, loyalty and learning the open, democratic(and diverse ahead of it's time) and free thinking Federation was better than the violent and authoritarian Klingons and Romulans. Kirk was bold and decisive and very much the Horatio Hornblower of the 23rd Century which is why Master and Commander with Russell Crowe and Paul Bettany reminded me so much of Star Trek. You are also dead on on why writer that do Star Trek fail. First they don't care about the lore of Star Trek. It is like watching kids using your action figures and playing with them all wrong. Second they have no grounding or knowledge of any genre literature whether it is science fiction or classical literature. It seems all they know is what they read in their political science and sociology class while getting their Bachelor of Arts degree. Funny part is that many modern authoritarian regimes the governments hijack the arts to create propaganda hidden as entertainment and almost universally everyone in those countries outside the diehard fanatics find it unwatchable or boring. One interesting exception was the Italian movie makers of the unauthorized film version of Ayn Rand's "We the Living" during WW2 got by Mussolini's censors by saying they were making an anti Communist film until the film came out and was widely popular as it was anti any kind of authority. Once the government figured out they had been bamboozled and people like it they promptly canceled any showing of it. Today we would just put a disclaimer on it that it might trigger emotions of personal freedoms and thinking for yourself.
I'm glad to hear another perspective on woke culture. I hate seeing what they're doing to my favorite characters or characters in general. They have such a toxic outlook on life, but you can't reason with them because they're so defensive they cry oppression, racism, sexism, if you dare question them. It's like a politician in the form of an emotionally unstable child. They'll scream if they don't get their way, and so they're just guilting people into giving them what they want, no matter how bad it is for everyone or simply isn't necessary. They think toxic masculinity is a problem? Society seems to be suffering from (toxic femininity) the overprotective mother mentality more than anything... They aren't letting people face hardship and grow. They're trying to make society a better place by suppressing all negative outside influence, instead of strengthening the individual to be capable of dealing with society as it is. Dictating other's lives instead of their own.
It depends on which part of our extremely diverse society you are looking at. I think you could make a case for our mostly black inner cities having a culture of toxic masculinity. They are violent with the leading cause of death for young black males being murdered by other young black males. I read about a black man in a bar who was shoved, got into it with another black man, and was asked to leave. He came back with a gun and started shooting people. That is how unwilling he was to allow his masculinity to be questioned. If you live anywhere near one of these areas, which I used to, it is frightening how how easily violence erupts in these areas. It would be in the news all the time, and that was probably the tip of the iceberg. I suspect this is also the reason hate crimes against black transgender women are almost always in these areas. Domestic violence is the leading cause of death for young black women aged 15 to 35 in America. Toxic masculinity is also expressed in sex for it's own sake and the sexual conquest of a woman being the objective. Family is unimportant, and the majority of black kids in those areas have no father in their life, as he is on to the next conquest. My brother worked at a parish in inner city Baltimore while preparing for the priesthood, said the area was known as the worst part of the city. He said there were so many girls who were molested by predatory older males, some of them related to the victim. That is another, less talked about, aspect of abandoning your children: the emotional abandonment of objectifying them and molesting them. A whole subculture is in deep trouble, and all the talking points "woke" people make about toxic masculinity are the reason. The irony for me is that woke people hardly ever address this, because in their world view black men are always the victims of oppression and systemic racism, which creates a conflict. How can the oppressed be the oppressor?
@@krisaaron8180 It depends, indeed. I don't like the term toxic masculinity because it has become misleading, effectively making people think that there's only an issue with men's behavior, and solely because they're male. As if women aren't capable of being equally bad. Although, to be fair the term being misused is the fault of those that have no regard for the arguments behind the term. Creating a false perception that the problem is less than what it actually is and that there's no problem with men specifically, which when you consider most men are responsible for sexual crimes because men specifically care more about sex in a positive and negative way. Yeah, I'd say that's a problem related to males specifically that should be addressed legally, and culturally. Oh yes, the villain mentality. Justifying the actions of those that have been wronged (victims), no matter how terrible their behavior becomes. The woke need perspective, they pretend to champion progressive views, but what they're pushing is very regressive. Their portrayals of women is just the "toxic masculinity" they accuse male characters of, while their portrayal of men has become a fantasy, making them submissive. It's not just that they want better representation of female characters, they often do not want attractive female characters at all. Dictating how women can and can't be seen. Which is what conservatives used to do, for the same reason, because of how men would see them. They couldn't get husbands if they were considered sluts. Now women aren't being allowed to be admired for their sex appeal by men. It's interesting how the pressure to correct "the male gaze" has always been the responsibility of women. So while the Woke continue to profit off some real issues, twisted into nonsense, women continue to get the short end of the stick, and communities that are suffering through more serious issues aren't being given the attention they need.
And This is WHY over the past 2 years, people under 40, on the whole could NOT handle a world wide health crisis like Covid19 spreading all over the world rather quickly! (For reasons I won't go into here!) A gen+ of relative prosperity, has lead to no resilience, or ability to cope with some hardships, which are inevitable from time to time! It happens to every1 at some stage! When things go PEAR shaped, NO1 knows HOW to cope with a bit of adversity! ASK a modern Ukrainian how it's going atm! (Gritting their teeth and getting ON with it, just LIKE my mother's gen did when the NAZIS invaded them and dragged them away to be slave labour! (Or worse! )) Todays flakes would be curled up in foetal positions crying, instead of trying to FIX things!
I am a millennial with a history degree and have always truly loved history but don’t work in the field or anywhere to directly apply anything I’ve learned from it. This video is so spot on. It’s true that fellow millennials are interested in history - most of which are interested outside of the academic setting. However, there just isn’t nearly enough of them who care…some “history” used to be considered “basic knowledge” but it really isn’t any more with my generation and especially the next one. My biggest pet peeve of it all is when others rewrite history without any baseline knowledge of the subject in the first place! I think that there is just an extreme lack of respect for those who came before us and paved the way, and now that everyone is “woke”, they see everything through this weird lens and try to outdo each other in all the little filters of that lens…this created a society where everyone wants to poke holes in the “ideas of the past” and people truly believe that they can do it better because “they know better.” Everyone seems to be an expert on everything now from foreign policy to separation of powers in government when in fact they actually know nothing! It is so bizarre and not what I expected at all I could go on and on about this though…about the sources people use, the arguments they make, etc. This spills into everything: government, corporations, and of course movies and tv…We desperately need a renaissance!
Shatner’s Kirk was written far more rounded than merely an “alpha male”, as were all the original characters, and with humour and personality. My older sister is a huge fan of the original cast with Spock her favourite, as he seemingly was for lots of women. I never even knew original Kirk was disliked by certain “millennials”. I’m not really interested in such passing zeitgeist populism 😃 Nor do I take much interest in TV anymore, I don’t sub to streaming services, nor watch many films anymore - I’m only interested in innovation or fiction that has something to say, but mostly that’s extremely well-written
Star Trek was conceived of and written by people who had survived World War II. They experienced the hard decisions and trade-offs that societies and people had to make to achieve their goals and survive. They also had a sense of big picture of human history. Where we came from, where we are, and what we aspire to become. Today's generation of writers have known nothing but peace, prosperity, and luxury. It shouldn't come as a surprise that their stories reflect their experiences.
@@00bikeboy it was certainly an optimistic vision of the future, a vision of humanity living in harmony, way ahead of its time for the 1960s, especially considering how socially tumultuous that decade was in the US. Yet strangely, Star Trek Discovery, of which I only watched series one 5 years ago, written by people, as you state, with no direct experience of a world war, was the darkest, most insolent, pessimistic, F-word laden iteration ever made. Make of that what you will
TOS Kirk is misattributed as being a horn dog. I think people confuse him with Riker from TNG. He was pretty restrained when it came to use his high charisma score on the ladies, only doing so to gain an advantage on the mission. (Or suffers amnesia in one episode and defaults to husband mode) He’s also misremembered for being careless with the redshirts. He was always pissed when one of his crew died.
A movie you should remember is Rodney Dangerfields back to school. Two of the characters being professors, one giving Rodney a lecture on how "Business" is actually run, and the other being frightenly scary in that Kurt Vonnegut has no idea what Kurt Vonnegut actually was about. Perfectly describes to me our new generation.
I remember that scene. The professor lectures on how "business" is actually run, Rodney laughs and tells them how it really is and the students are suddenly taking notes on what he is saying because he was a successful businessman. He was telling them how the "real" world worked.
I love how Dangerfield's character hires the real Kurt Vonnegut to help him write a term paper about Kurt Vonnegut...and then the professor later tells Dangerfield that he was completely wrong about Kurt Vonnegut. And yes, the economics professor dismissed real-world government and union corruption's impact on business.
I remember the first time I actually watched the original Star Trek episodes. I was pleasantly surprised by a lot, including how pissed Kirk would got (generally) when his crew were killed, it was like he actually cared about his crew.
I love this so much. It is galling as an independent author to watch these milkshake-swilling kids fresh out of college gleefully destroy the characters and franchises I've loved my whole life; the escapism that got me through so many hard times that these new "writers" have obviously never experienced.
"I'm saying different instead of worse because worse can be fixed. Different is here to stay." A professional liar deciding to tell the truth is literary genius. Love it.
One of the reason sitcoms exist. In Situational Comedy. it is as much about the characters as it is the situation. Whats funny is knowing that Jack Benny is notoriously cheap and would struggle with should he just deal with some situation or pay a small sum of money to make the problem go away. Lucy being told she can't have a new mink coat and then coming up with some crazy plan to convince Ricky that she should have one, or worse yet buying the coat and thing trying to keep Ricky from finding out. The same situation can be presented in "I Love Lucy" or "Barney Miller" or "Friends" and not be boring because how it plays out and what is funny is based on how the characters respond.
To me it seems that media has always mostly sucked, it's just that the form of suck has changed. I wholeheartedly agree on the laziness no subtext in modern writing angle. Modern media has thrown subtext and characterization out the window in exchange for big moments of spastic emotional outbursts. Even the overcorrection toward liberal ideas is superficial. They value style before substance. Whereas in the past writing was typically bad because it was boring, repressive, repetitive, overly formulaic, or the writing just assumed the audience was too stupid to understand anything. Every generation has their version of "safe".
It is dialogue that drives a movie not the flash bang massive scenes. Look at LOTR. In those scenes where battles are immanent characters are given speeches to give weight to what is to follow. That is. to my way of thinking a better way than letting the visual carry the message. If a character does not speak then he is incidental.
From your comment I doubt you've seen many movies made before the 1970s. The B movies from the 40's and 50's are WAY better written than today's top of the line "blockbusters." I think because they don't have a message to preach. They just tell good stories.
I always wondered why Shatner and Nimoy couldn't understand why Star Trek was so important to so many. Then it hit me... Shatner didn't have a "Captain Kirk" when he was about 12 years old. He couldn't understand how powerfully formative that character and world was to young boys. Kirk was a shining example of masculine competence and courage winning the day. A power fantasy? Yes. But more than that. A call to adventure that our cultures have created from the beginning of time to coerce the dangerous force of a young male towards what's right and beneficial to society. I don't think Rodenberry and the writers consciously were observing a formula. The didn't have to. It's hardwired into our psyches. I wanted to be Kirk. Not a kid on some other television show. I wanted to be the hyper competent man that had earned his spot at the top of that shipborne hierarchy. The terrible power of that ship and the crew aboard was his to use to solve problems and defeat the enemies of civilization. And he couldn't misuse it. He was bound by the rules of the military and society yet had infinite options to get the job done. How could a young boy not want to be Captain Kirk? Why many girls loved the show is another story. That's for them to investigate. We can guess though.
@@sherril.562 Heh heh. You can imagine why I would avoid speaking for the ladies. But I think that's what I would assume. Captain Kirk as a possible mate must have been very appealing.
Sorry, you're wrong. He had a legion of men as role models. John Wayne, Gregory Peck, James Stewart, Clark Gable, Humphrey Bogart, James Cagney, Marlon Brando...do I need to go on? There are many, many more.
@@RodFleming-World Obviously, I disagree. I'm talking about the character of Captain Kirk. You named a bunch of actors. I'm just saying it was a unique amalgam character, situation and theme. If you disagree that's fine. You don't need to be a prick about it.
Smart commentary, as always. Star Trek used to be a mirror tilted slightly forward to a better future. Now, it just a glaring reflection of how bitter we will, probably, always be.
So much truth you just dropped. I shudder to think what they will do with Kirk in the STD cesspool. I really don't know where the lack of interest in history and there smug attitudes towards the properties they claim to be fans of come from.
Sturgeon's Law: "Ninety percent of everything is crud." And that was actually a defense of science fiction, which was being criticized for containing so many crappy stories.
The writing style you mentioned is similar to one used for animation long ago We'd write the story beats, then layer in dialogue, etc. This allowed us to sort out the logical progression.
Paul, you nailed it. We pine for the days of our alpha male heroes of old, such as Mr. Canoehead and Todd Booster. And our choice of modern day villain is even more anemic when contrasted with the classics, cue the Ultra-Mind and Moo-Moo Bunny Lips. Music has changed too, with the sidelining of one's attraction to tall gals, our need for clean gas station washrooms, and the commuter's bus ride (sitting near Chad in the back with the radio).
Coming off a gig onstage at a jazz club in the early 90s, I spoke with another musician just about to go on. He said to me, "It ain't about the notes you play, it's about the notes you don't play." So very true!
Oh my gosh, you have dissected it so correctly! I am so damned worried for this franchise that I love so much! I really hope this woke activism (which operates a lot like the Borg ironically) will die a sudden death very soon!
I definitely agree with all of this. This all has led to the downfall of film and television to the low quality that most of them possess now. You described it accurately. What we love about film and television is what most of them hate. I prefer most older films and television since they had better stories, characters, writing, etc.
The genius of James Tiberius Kirk is that he is shown (not told) to understand the virtue of command. Today’s media barely even touches the concept, and when it does, it is framed as ham-fisted “boss” dictating to others. But Kirk was shown to well understand that different people required different motivations. What worked on Yeoman Rand (show strength, control of the situation) didn’t work for Bones. I love ToS because of this. It wasn’t a show about exploring space while dealing with the human mind. It was a show about exploring the human mind, while dealing with space.
The idea of writing the subtext first is interesting. It is creating the context for the scene that the actors create in their performance, but is absent from the specific dialogue. This was the standard, but now isn't? It seems like something a talented screenwriter would do as second nature.
I’d also add that the diversity I see isn’t even inclusive and you absolutely have to have that in order to truly be diverse. If you don’t it’s just pandering which is really what I see. These writers, directors, producers etc. are just pandering to the idea of diversity. It’s not real. It’s an image thing. And it really shows in their work.
So true what you said about subtext. It's an easy way to decide if a show is worth your time and can be determined pretty quickly. It's a reason I couldn't make it through Lovecraft Country. While it's in a genre I love and want to root for it, the characters feelings and motivations we're very obvious and blunt. The monsters were literal, not metaphorical, and mundane rather than cosmic.
I have often wondered how we lost subtle and the allowance to wrestle with a theme as the audience. It does seem that things really have to be overt, "and in you face,". One of my favourite series was Babylon 5, and it had lots of implied things, not stated on the surface. Hints, that you wished would be pursued, but often were left alone, as a tease. IS Bester a good guy or a bad guy? Was Garabaldi and Lando Molari friends or enemies? Maybe Both? And G'kar and Lando going from hating each other to allies was beautiful and subtly done but the tension was still there. So many other things were hinted at here and there, and left to tease. Same with Star Trek DS9... so much subtle subtext. Favourite character on that show was Quark. I movies, Master and Commander was a great piece of work. Again, lots of grey and little black and white. Will there ever be a time when the audience will be allowed to wrestle with a TV show or movie again I wonder. I wonder if some of it is that if something is left grey than you cant tell if its 'on your side' or not. I don't think Narcissism likes grey and it seems that people like to have things be about them now. Not sure I could write for today's audience. I miss the Space 1999 season 1 sci-fi subject matter and all the subtle it brought, with no solid conclusion either way. A topic could be both good and bad at the same time.
One of my favorite unstated items was the reality of the Vorlons and Shadows. It was so delicious and infuriating that we knew the Vorlons were good, but often blocked what we and the characters in the show wanted to get done while the Shadows were clearly evil and would be helpful. Part of how that worked out is that the Vorlons were like parents, watching out for our best interests. No you can't have 10 of your friends come over and have a kegger party when you graduate from high school. Whereas the Shadows wanted to stir things up and cause problems they could later capitalize on. The would be more than willing to host the party and even provide the beer. Then the police are called, your dad decides to punish you and sells the car he got you as a graduation present, which your neighbor then buys for $500 plus the cost of the 2 kegs of beer.
@@BreetaiZentradi well put. the Vorlons and Shadows using the lesser races to do all their bidding and the fallout of that landing on all the lesser races. So amazing. So many things from that show are relevant to today too. "arrogance and stupidity in one package, how efficient" and to miss quote, "the quiet ones, are the ones that change the universe..." Mr Morden "what do you want?" A simple question.
@@maarkaus48 I despair for the Babylon 5 reboot. JMS is a great writer and producer. However studios want to be up for Emmy's and Oscar's and the only way to do that now is to be so full of duh-versity at every level that you put out teh subpar product.
@@BreetaiZentradi I honestly forgot it was being rebooted. I really have given up on newer shows. Maybe I am just getting old. I do wish JMS the best with it. IF he is actually producing, it might be okay. If others are producing and he is just around as a consultant... who knows.
Fuck, I didn't know they were going to reboot B5. I was secretly hoping our favorite series was just obscure enough ther wokesters were unaware of it. Artoo, we're doomed.
Shatner's performance in Wrath of Khan, as he grieves for Spock, and when he gives the eulogy, fucking broke me. He doesn't shed a single tear. And it's so much more powerful as opposed to him ugly-crying.
Absolutely love this video. When I write I am always mindful not to have the dialogue regurgitate the subtext, and just verbalize what the audience can already see on the screen or figure out for themselves, but to hear you articulate it in such a clear way was still super helpful. I'm so happy I subscribed to your channel, please keep the writing tips coming.
i agree with you, today writers seem to have to add details that really are not needed for the story. An example is Sherlock Holmes. It seems everyone wants them to be gay. 2 men living alone together, they must be gay. Yet I have lived alone with men and we were not gay. Looking at the Holmes stories, Sherlock's sexuality was just not needed for the story, thus it was not included in the stories. Same goes for other stories written over the centuries... if you have a crime drama, war drama, sci fi, fantasy, to tell the story you mostly don't need to include such things like their sexuality. Of course this isn't just about sexuality. Think of the Caine Mutiny, they added a stupid out of place love story to the plot that did not work and actually took away from a near perfect movie. Now in the case of the Caine Mutiny and other such "male" movies, the writers/producer think they needed to add the romance for the wives watching with their husbands, which I think is BS. Women are smarter then that. So you get a movie like Dam busters with Richard Todd without the romance added, which was likely the best movie on the topic you could have. Versus Caine Mutiny, which had a horrible romance added which took away from it... Now of course we can expand to many of the newer TV and movies where the writers has added nonsense to a story line, that did not need it. Just plain bad writing!!
I'm a millennial who can't watch movies anymore and only one comes around in a blue moon that entertains me. My standards aren't super high, it's just writing gets worse and worse all the time, making most movies a headache to sit through. I agree with your assessment as per the end of the video. They can't stand masculine male characters, but not cause they hate them, but because they don't understand them. They have been trapped in their woke bubbles and echo chambers so long they have forgotten what leaders are like, what makes masculine men good, how to convey emotion without dialogue.
Paul, I was channel cruising and found you by accident. Love listening to your off the wall descriptions. "Pronoun Paedophiles" - almost fell off my chair. Thanks for the laughs and the wisdom (now keep it up).
You have summed everything up, perfectly. We now live in an age when wit, charm and fun are dead. Why provide the essence of a character in a couple of minutes while moving the plot forward, when you can beat the same dead horse over and over again across 6 episodes? Watching actors giving interviews, they always go on about character development and having the time to explore the character. I'm not sure if actors really believe this bullshit, or if they are much better actors than I thought and just say this to keep getting hired.
you wonder what the writing rooms are like at Disney and Skywalker when "everyone" (on line at least) hates what they do. Those movies still made enough money to contiue the nonsense, but it didn't break records in repeat viewers or streaming rentals.
Well Kathy Kennedy reputedly operates a six strong ‘writing room’ at Lucasfilm, four of them being women most of whom have _very_ lean resumes and none (that I can recall at least) with any previous credits for writing science fantasy… That they were still appointed to these positions of undeniable influence despite their obvious unsuitability is a sobering indictment of modern Hollywood and its ruinous new found priorities. Talent just isn’t as prized as it once was thus it’s little wonder so much crap is being spewed out.
Love watching stuff like this with people who know what they are talking about. I watch quite a lot of films and often im just left thinking there is something wrong. But i can never put my finger on it. Stuff like this makes me feel better in that there is something wrong and explains why :) awesome.
I think I was born in the wrong generation. Millennial here (unfortunately) Kirk, Picard, Sisko, & Luke Skywalker are, to a name a few, some my favorite male characters. They were so well written and inspired self improvement. Star Trek, more specifically, inspired me to a better person through their characters. If I were to speculate on the “problem” today, post modernism has poisoned the minds of people and created contempt for our western canon/culture. Literary canon shaped us as individuals in society for generations, when you cut that off from humanity, not giving them a way to learn to improve, it generates a society that is completely rudderless.
True. Hollywood today wouldnt allow a character like Walt in Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino. Or even Tony Stark in Marvel's Iron Man (not coincidentally his character was killed).
No, please. Dissect The Force Awakens. Better yet, dissect the entire Sequel Trilogy, or perhaps give an insight into what's likely gone on behind closed doors at Lucasfilm over the last 8 years or so.
1:56 Yes, I know because I'm one. I enjoy anime but I also liked sitcoms like Home Improvement, Big Bang Theory, Young Sheldon, That 70s Show, and Mike and Molly. Problem is most sitcoms have just gotten worse in recent memory.
It’s because he is a strong male role model. I would have to agree that subtext has been stripped out of most films. Where lines are literally what characters just did or actually feel.
1) The UA-cam algorithm suggested your video and I saw it was only 9+ minutes so I watched. 2) I enjoyed your presentation. 3) Other than being a viewer I have zero experience with media, but 4) when I view producers, directors, production tech staff, or rarely actors I am impressed with their knowledge, instinct, and insight into society. 5) Thanks for sharing your experiences. 6) Best wishes.
What a great video! Im so happy I found this. I have been completely disheartened and demoralized by this inundation of effete, feminist, woke, spineless, male-apologetic, anemic entertainment. Everything you described here so well! Hollywood ignoring every rule of good story telling, character developement and objective reality itsself..... KIRK FUCKING RULES!!!!! Bring that back!!! PLEASE!!!!
Spot on! I was so excited about the latest Trek series, but once I realized the pervasive wokeness, I cut the cord, sigh. Still hoping for a proper Trek in the future.
Roddenberry was a veteran with 89 combat missions; the Enterprise crew were professionals who respected the chain of command. The modern Trek writers have watched every season of Grey's Anatomy; they believe Star Fleet's best and brightest would behave like teenagers on a field trip.
"they believe Star Fleet's best and brightest would behave like teenagers on a field trip."
This is PRECISELY why I did NOT like the JJ Abrams Star Trek movies!
James Doohan losing a finger at the D-Day invasion as part of the Canadian Army.
These were men’s men.
*Spelling corrected - autocorrect thought it knew English better than I
@@AvengerII Abrams and Alex Kurtzman are in an insane competition to see which can produce the worse product - and they have both "won".
What a great summary of the diversion in mindset to modern TV writers. I'm going to quote you in a future article in a niche online publication Joe Stoffa.
My problem with modern Trek isn't necessarily the disappearance of masculinity (though the emasculation of most male characters is a problem, I'd agree)...it's twofold: (1) the writers seem to have forgotten how to write episodes with moral ambiguity, and (2) They seem obsessed with tearing down iconic characters.
When you watch episodes of Star Trek from the '80s and '90s, they still presented two sides. You could see the evil characters' motivations. Even if the episode eventually picked aside and Captain Picard or Captain Sisko explained why at the end (more Picard than Sisko, since Sisko was more willing to exist in the grey areas), You as a viewer were still given The full picture of the issue being explored in the episode. Now, that seems to have disappeared. Now we have "This is bad, 100% bad and shame on anyone who thinks this way and we must triumph. Throw in a few men looking like buffoons while the women solve all the problems, and that's your episode.
Second, look what they're doing to Captain Picard in the new show. When this show was announced, over and over again they said that it was happening because his positivity was needed in today's world. But where is the positivity in the show? The first season was all about tearing him down. Tearing down this mythical Starfleet character. More often than not, you had women shouting at him or belittling him or telling him that he didn't understand something or other because he was a man, or that he was out of touch. "Lol, what do you know old man?" was the gist of 90% of the conversations. He wasn't allowed to be positive. Instead, we as a viewer were treated to his entire worldview being torn down along with him. We see him question himself repeatedly. That never would have happened before. And then at the end of course, they literally remake him as something new.
I know that the video posits that it's millennials that do this, but at least in season one of Picard, the showrunner was not a millennial. The director of several the episodes was, but the writers were not. And yet they still felt this was a good idea. That's why I am thankful for UA-cam channels that show old Trek and new Trek side by side to show everyone the difference. How horrible it's gotten.
When Kirk shows up, your odds of surviving any given threat double. When Michael Burnham shows up, your odds of getting out of a scene without talking about your feelings get cut in half.
True. That made me laugh, thanks Michael!
LOL good one
Also non primary characters odds of survival diminish.
*unless you're a Redshirt ))
-"My God Bones... what have I done?"
-"What you had to do. What you always do: Turn death into a fighting chance to live..."
As a sane millennial who absolutely disagrees with my peers in Hollywood, I can confirm you are 100% correct.
Same
Same
As a sane gen z i can confirm he is correct.
Same.
Q: How many of your woke Millennial screenwriter peers in Hollywood have a divorced, absent and/or abusive father?
Is it....
A. All of them.
B. All of them.
C. All of them.
or
D. So nearly all of them that you might as well say, "ALL OF THEM!!"
William Shatner is a flawed individual like us all, but his portrayal of Captain Kirk is legendary and can never be topped or replaced. He IS Captain Kirk.
The part about subtext is spot on - thank you for describing that. I saw a audience review of Dune that said there was no emotion, which confused me because I thought the actors portrayed the pain & horror of the situation. Then it struck me the actors weren't shrieking, rending their clothing and yelling the plot. They subtly conveyed deep stress & emotion the way strong, trained men & women with massive responsibilities might do in a crisis, which made it that much more powerful for me.
Too subtle for the moron brigade it would appear.
Excellent observation. The kiddies that are being conditioned by (dis) educators today can’t figure anything out with it being spoon fed…
The Critical Drinker made a video on that subject. “Why Modern Movies Suck- They’re written by children”
You described perfectly the problem with modern writing. I think this is highlighted by the manner to which novels always seem to produce the most believable characters in TV or film. Can you imagine the last 2 seasons of Game of thrones being as universally disliked as they are, had the writers not been given the opportunity to make it up the last missing books.
A great example of the use of subtext in the original Star Trek is in the Season 2 episode Amok Time.
Subtext: Vulcans were once such an emotional people they almost wiped themselves out in nuclear wars. It took hundreds of years before the philosophy of Surak, who taught pacifism and logic based on suppression of all strong emotions, was adopted and brought widespread peace to their society. Modern Vulcan view those who show emotions in public the way Bible thumpers view Satan worshippers.
Chief among these strong emotions was a monstrous libido, which even the Surak philosophy cannot wholly suppress, and attempts to do so can last only seven years before driving Vulcans into a killing frenzy. Spock, science officer aboard the Enterprise, hoped that he would be spared the embarrassment of this _pon farr_ state, but the symptoms are growing too pronounced to ignore. Because the fugue state is so shameful, no one outside Vulcan is even aware of its existence. All Captain Kirk knows is that Spock’s behavior is becoming increasingly erratic.
Text: Captain, I respectfully request shore leave on my home planet.
Well, Spock, I’m afraid that won’t be possible anytime soon. We’ve been ordered to the Altair system, to show the flag during the peace negotiations. But the shore leave facilities at Altair are perfectly fine, so you can-
No, Captain, it must be on Vulcan! No other planet is possible!
Spock! Is there something wrong?
I have made my request! All I require of you is an answer, yes or no!
The explication of this into J. J. Abrams-whining is left as an exercise for the student.
Kirk was a take charge man. He was brash, confident, sexually assertive, loyal to his crew and even more to his friends. He would walk through fire to save his friends at the cost of his career as seen in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. He was a brilliant tactician. As McCoy said in that film when Kirk doubts his actions and asks what he has done, Bones replied:
" You did what you had to do...what you always do... turn death into a fighting chance to live. "
Then there is the character, the sharp mind, the ease of masculinity, the swagger. A lot of young boys when I was growing up wanted to be as confident as James Tiberius Kirk.
Or as smart, calm and logical as Spock, the other casualty of "wokeness". F*** Jar Jar Abrams
Captain Kirk was a ladies man. He didn't abuse women. They liked him. Often it was the women who were "sexually assertive" and made the first move on the original Star Trek. Watch some of the old shows and see.
@@hellojimperry I concur...
@@robinlillian9471 When a woman wants a certain kind of man, that's it. Never underestimate a woman who has a plan to get a man.
and the woke HATE THAT
I think you hit the nail on the head with Kirk. Whatever situation he was in, he used his unwavering moral compass to make a firm decision. Right or wrong, he would accept responsibility. That's a leader. Mark Hamill did the best he could with Luke, but even he admitted that Luke wouldn't say or act like that.
There was even the episode were he broke the Prime Directive to arm the one side of the war on the low tech planet to protect them from the side sponsored by the Klingons.
@@Flackon Nazis might think that. But a lot of regular, unassuming, non-Nazi people would disagree that this is where Luke's dramatic arc was headed at all, especially as many had already seen the arc play out in a different way in the old novels and that was also solid.
@@Flackon "Nazis shit on Last Jedi (because of breaking with expectations)"". "People who don't like Last Jedi are Nazis" that's what you're saying since you're not differentiating.At least if people complain about the whole "Subverting expectations for the sake of subverting expectations" even when it makes for a poorer story. Piss off.
Last Jedi is a confused mess with no actual coherence. And HELL TO THE FUCK NO it's NOT the most natural way possible. You say that the person who thought that Darth Vader could be saved EVEN JUST CONTEMPLATING his NEPHEW could fall to the dark side AND THEREFORE HE SHOULD MURDER HIM is the "most natural possible way"?
Nazi is a very heavy word. Nazi dehumanize their opponent so that they could do terrible things to other fellow humans and even to their own civilian people who are questioning their actions. And they take pride in what they did since they believe they are superior. But it only feeds to grand delusion of the group. I think it is also the same to the imperial japanese back then when the samurai lost in their civil war, the samurai families sent their children to military school since they could no longer enjoy their samurai previleges. The nostalgia and desire get back in power spreads and fester among the military ranks. Even before WW2 started they have a democratic process. But it was useless since the military won't listen and intimidate opposition through assassination. The politicians cower to the military might They couldn't control. They invade and exploit resources from other nations to feed their military. And aim to unify Asia under their version banner of holy crusade of expansion.
You have to ask yourself who currently has large amount of concentration camps and detain people simply because of their ethnicity and religion for brainwashing cultural assimilation. Imprison and intimidate dissent with forced live confession in national tv because of a "wrong think crime". I think those are the modern version of Nazi.
@@smartalec2001 If you disagree that it follows from his character, it just means you haven't been paying attention. There's nothing wrong with the way Luke was handled in TLJ
Actually in 80 or so episodes of Star Trek, Kirk "womanized" a hand full of times. Also, the majority of those times were about manipulating the antagonists ("Cat's Paw," "Blink of an Eye) or a situation ("The Gamesters of Triskelion," "By Any Other Name"). There were episodes in which he was controlled by others such as "Dagger of the Mind," Elaan of Troyius," or the episode with the famous kiss, "Plato's Stepchildren." He lost his memory in "The Paradise Syndrome" but had a loving relationship. He was a jerk in "The Conscience of the King" but his motivation was understandable. Most of Kirk's encounters with woman were professional or about relationships (past ones), "Shore Leave," "Court Martial," and falling in love, "City on the Edge of Forever," "Requiem for Methuselah."The false cliche arose about Kirk over time by focusing in on episodes such as "The Gamesters of Triskelion" and ignoring the bulk of episodes where no kind of relationship with women took place other than as crewmen etc. and the others mentioned.
Glad someone else caught this! The "ladies man" Kirk is more of a fan joke that's evolved into an accepted truth that doesn't actually mesh with the facts of the series.
Well said. And spot on. This is yet another example of wokesters trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. They did the same thing with James Bond, with the recent director even going so far as saying that Bond was guilty of sexual assault. Yet when one understands the context, Bond was a spy. And he was trained to use whatever means necessary to achieve his objective and to protect his life. It is literally in the 'license to kill' label.
Exactly. Another example would be his assumed overuse of the phrase "Beam me up, Scotty," when, in fact, he never said it even once.
Thank you. I came here to say this but you said it better than I could have done.
I'd also add that his reputation for breaking the rules is also undeserved. He was meticulous in following regulation except in situations where he had to make a moral judgement which is understandable when one remembers that the Enterprise is on a 5 year mission in deep space. People always have to remember that it's 'Hornblower in space' and that, as was the case in the Age of Sail, the captain of a ship far from home is god. He *is* Starfleet and he must make the calls as best he can with his first concern always to be the safety and welfare of his crew.
@@chrislyne377 However....I would say that breaking the rules under reasonable circumstances, under a moral judgment, etc does seem realistic to still get a reputation for it by bureaucracy, so perhaps that is still somewhat fitting nonetheless!
It feels good to having someone push back against this insanity. Please continue giving the rest of us a voice! Thank you!
Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock were role models for many, myself included, as I was 14 when the show began. What they portrayed was that intellect and morality were peas in the same pod. Thanks for your perspectives.
I'm an engineer. Do know how many engineers list Scotty as at least one influence for their career choice? (For me also my dad, and Apollo XI)
Anyone else remember those long-lost days when you just watched the performance and didn't know (certainly didn't care about) the actor's personal opinions on any particular political party or their stance on problematic social issues? I miss those times.
Social media has a lot to answer for too, giving everyone a platform to spout their nonsense
@@GedH-316 It goes back further than the 2000's, but social media multiplied the stupidity. I don't know if Jane Fonda was the first "activist" celebrity, but she was the first to be really fucking annoying (and possibly treasonous) about it.
Way to tell everyone you've never watched Star Trek without saying you've never watched Star Trek.
Hay if we did we wouldn't watch anything
Since most Hollywood are . Well peddo
It's actually very rare for me to know those things. Of course, I don't get on twitter and I stay away from tabloids. So most of the things that celebrities say misses me.
What I miss most about older movies...characters are allowed to be characters. Doesn't matter if the actor is male, female, black, white, gay straight, that shit never mattered. But now, pretty much every movie acts like that that kind of thing is the most important aspect in the world and bend over backwards to draw attention to it.
DIVERSITY CASTING AND GENDER SWAPPING.
Bend over which way?
It's sad to see this message being handed to us that we can only relate to those who look like us. Representation is important yet there is a difference from that and tokenization.
Write a good character and almost anyone can relate to them. Write a character solely to mark off a box and you get nothing.
Patrick McGoohan, The Prisoner, nice touch at the end with salute. Be seeing you 07.
@@stephw1702 exactly. I grew up in the 90s and guess what. I absolutely related to Mulan despite the fact that I'm a white dude because she was a well written character.
If I can offer a non-US perspective (I live in Southeast Asia). As Western shows and movies become ever more woke and politicized I can see Western cultural influences fading in real-time as Korean, Japanese and Thai content start grabbing people's attention over here. Hell, from what I've seen, even Western audiences are turning to the East for more compelling content.
The irony is that a movie like Train to Busan offers a lot of criticism about Korean society, politics and social justice and yet it doesn't hit seem to hit you on the head with its message like so many of the standout examples of wokeness does. Probably because the creators dont hate the characters they create and can still write realistic characters with realistic motivations.
edit: agree with everything you said by the way. Always very interesting to hear your thoughts.
I have an inkling as to which south east asian country ur from.
The West is being consumed with self-hate, specifically anything of "white identity". I quote that because among woke circles, they like to tout that there is no such thing as "whiteness", that it's a made up term by racists or whatever. Yet, when it comes time to attack or criticize anything remotely of western and European identity, suddenly that "whiteness" exists and is a monolithic identity for all white people.
I just hate all this woke crap. I've never watched anything Asian-made that consisted of entirely Asian actors, culture, and history, and thought to myself "I can't get into this, there are just too many Asians in this, it needs more white people in it for diversity". Yet that's exactly what they do here, take Lord of the Rings for example. White = bad. Diversity is their new religion and whiteness = their original sin.
I actually love of lot of costume drama histories coming out of Asia, lately. When I had more money I'd search for titles and find out something about them, usually a trailer. Truly enjoy them. Sometimes the culture and motivations confuse me, but the story telling was always deep..characters, interesting. I like the 'soft magic' of the taoist concept of the Chi and the Tao.
@@AngryToasterOven The contradictions in their arguments are incredible. My only explanation is that at some point during their sociology courses they get taken to a room where someone spends an afternoon randomly applying patch cables to their brains.
@@AngryToasterOven I just finished All of Us Are Dead, a Korean zombie series, and before that another Korean series called Signal a supernatural tinged crime drama, and never once did I think, "Oh I can't watch this since there's no white people in it." Or "I hate this because there's no one in it who looks EXACTLY like me." Yes some of it did make me squirm a bit but I never hated it, it was just a different country with different cultures and traditions to my own. That was what made it so compelling.
Captain Kirk was like Horatio Hornblower a problem solver who could pull order out of chaos and would week after week.
I definitely agree that modern entertainment lacks a lot of subtext. Listening to you discuss how people used to outline their stories with subtext resonated with me because that's how I instinctually outline my stories. Even if I never explicitly explore any of it in the final product, it helps me to keep things consistent, but still multi-dimensional.
I'm also tired of all the self- righteous woke BS that's permeating Hollywood. There's a time and place for everything. The way they portrayed Captain Kirk and the crew in the new Star Trek wasn't great.
William Shatner said his model for Captain Kirk was Alexander the Great, an heroic leader who fought alongside his own troops and was nearly killed in battle a few times. Alexander was histrionic, dramatic, but ultimately a bold, fearless, and highly intelligent leader.
I never liked Picard. He's a gray, dreary bureaucrat. Give me the swashbuckling Kirk any day of the week.
They are vastly different takes on command. I like both. It would have been a terrible mistake for Stewart to simply imitate Shatner's Kirk. Of course, the best take on command ( IMO) in the Trek canon is still Avery Brooks delivery as Capt. Benjamin Sisko.
@@frederickrose3967 Patrick Stewart as a person is a funny, charming man. Patrick Stewart as an actor shows his Shakespearean stage experience: he's stiff on the screen. The guy's a stage actor. Avery Brooks was awesome. Loved him as "Hawk" in the "Spenser" tv show.
How old are you Daniel? You sound like you are older than me and I am over 60.
I always assumed Kirk was like JFK, but a captain of a battle cruiser instead of a PT boat.
Like JFK, Kirk would f*ck anything in a dress.
90s Piccard was great. 2020s Piccard sucks.
When I was a teenager, Captain Kirk was my HERO! From the second he walked onto the bridge of the Enterprise, he was completely in charge. And just about every week, he "had" a different beautiful gal. I could have cared less about his overacting. He's still a hero. I want to fly into space when I'm 90! I watched the last season of Trek in Vietnam, whenever I was in camp. We ALL felt the same about him! We wanted to BE Kirk!
I wanted to marry Kirk and I was only 8 when I first laid my eyes on him. I looked for someone who was brave, funny and a real man like him but sadly I never found anyone that could match him so I never married anyone. I still think Kirk was the best guy ever:)
No. You couldn't be more wrong.
I'm a millenial myself. Grew up around the prequel trilogy (8 when my dad took me to see The Phantom Menace in theaters) so I could never truly hate them since they hold a special place in my heart. They turned me on to an entire world of science fiction that's been living under my nose apparently. But I'm fully checked out of all these franchises now. They've just been ruined for me. There's no longer any interest in telling great stories and writing interesting characters. My dad and I will always have the old movies and TV series and I'll keep on re-buying those with no remorse. There are people my age who feel the same. Appreciated you clarifying that in the video. If I ever have kids I'll just show them the classics.
Thanks for your comment.
Thank YOU sir for the insightful videos. Please keep up the good work.
Same with me brother, my kids haven't seen any of the remakes. Mulan, Ghostbusters etc. Well....we did watch the newest Ghostbusters with the child cast and enjoyed it. But not that piffle that came out b4 it.
I love the prequels primarily because of the memes tbh.
If you wish to see good writing try some of the recent anime classics. The sky Crawlers is a classic example of less dialog can mean more story. Ergo Proxy is a TV-series example of this, both are sci-fi and rather good.
Pronoun pedophiles, wow. So correct. And you were right about everything else. I like your sense of humor too. Thanks for putting 20 years of existential angst into less than ten minutes of brilliant commentary. They hate Kirk, and they hate all guys that looked up to him, as I did, and do. Thank you again.
The next letter in the Rainbow Coalition is P.
We all know it.
@@TheControlBlue 100%. And today they got a pedophile enabler on the Supreme Court.
@@marcwright4790 truly a Dire day for the Republic...
@@TheControlBlue Re: "the next letter"
Damned straight. No pun intended.
@@TheControlBlue That is completely off base.
I had never heard of “sub-text” before, but that sounds like a really good idea to develop a plot, while avoiding “writers’ block’.
Kirk was undoubtedly a leader. He was cocky, arrogant, occasionally obnoxious, impatient, humane, moral. He made mistakes and sometimes they were very serious. But he was still a hero and he was compelling in the stories. Captain Kirk was not a message, a token or a "lesson".
Star Trek had its share of moral lessons, but they didn't hit you over the head with it.
In the current culture your leaders have to be nice, polite, soft spoken and respectful - a good economy, border security and a strong influence on international affairs are secondary.
Star Trek has been pretty bang on the nose with its moralizing from time to time.
Nowhere was that more perfectly illustrated than in "The Enemy Within", a brilliant episode that occurred so early in the series. And a pretty bold statement to say some of those "negative" qualities are what made him a great leader.
Good point. I believe the subtle messages are more effective than the beat the audience over the head with it message.
@@Lakrimoz You kidding? The sort of people behind this stuff don't even want borders.
As a millennial I stan Kirk. He was confident and steadfast in his decisions and if he fucked up he owned it. He respected his peers and earned respect back. His sexual conquests while aggressive was with consent. The ladies loved him because he was assertive , confident and strong accepting his humanity and he in return always honored his debt be it emotional or financial. Kirk never used sleezy tactics to get what he wanted from good people and he gave anyone with a brain agency and let them do their own thing to further the success of the mission regardless of gender or identity. Heck even in modern interpretations writers can not simply deny that Kirk is awesome enough that he motivates his best friend who is from a species of unfeeling logical beings to throw down with him. Spock loves Kirk and vise versa and does what he can so his best friend accomplishes his goals which benefit everyone. He doesn't try to change him or guide him. Spock trusts Kirk and has faith in him as a person. A Vulcan has faith in a man a flawed one at that but a man all the same.
Indeed :)
Well said
I agree but i love Picard & have a passing affection for kirk
@All Prophit Keep in mind that Kirk barely budged with the ladies in Season 1. I think it was something like 3 women he was involved with. 1 was an old flame, 1 was the insane daughter of a mass murderer he was leading on, and 1 he fell in love with. Kirk was hardly the ladies man of legend---at least, through the first season.
You are right. Too much wussology. I also can’t stand Star Trek “ Discovery” to me it’s not cannon. Call me old fashioned. But, like my dad would often say, “ The good and great movies, the ones that would grab your attention didn’t need cuss words or use sex to sell the story line. The story line was just good.” He’s correct. 👍🏼🇺🇸
Yes, so true, you know great writing, when you can have a scene were almost nothing is happening, but you can't pull your eyes away from the screen. That is good writing.
My favorite character of the reboot was Karl Urban's 'Bones'. I was apprehensive based on the fact I thought 'Bones' required a more nuance than he'd been asked to do before but I think he nailed the balance & probably exceeded the quality of the script he was given. I also liked the line about his nickname since it's been donkey's years since doctors were nicknamed "Sawbones".
Urban was the only one who actually seemed to know the character he was playing. Everyone else was playing a generic "type".
@@stevenscott2136 Probably also one of the few there who was also a fan of the original series.
I absolutely LOVE your perspectives.
I used to be a TV and movie freak.
I cant watch these train wrecks.
Every single franchise has been devastated by new world order monsters. 👹
I've noticed the Hollywood version of the 1980's isn't like anything I experienced in the 1980's. Today's writers never lived through it so all their knowledge of the 80's is from movies and TV. The real 80's were filled with things from the past... Hollywood 80's only has objects made in the 80's. At the end of every college year each class spits out 30 brand new qualified writers. Being a writer is now like going to college to learn how to calculate someone's taxes. Just because you have a certificate to write it doesn't mean you can actually write.
I can always date a book by the way they have characters interact. They have an execrable tendency to think everyone talks the way they talk, regardless of time-period
in the eighties I thought the eighties marketing was awful. Hollywood thinks that's what defined the decade.
It's the nature of the beast, and is the same in (almost everything). When you watch any period drama, I always note, all the cars, bikes are immaculate and shiny and new, as if they've just been hired somewhere, but reflect, in real life there would have been older vehicles from previous generations, rusty dirty and knackered, still driving around.
Clive James once commented, the hack writer has a 17th Century shepherd immaculately kitted out in absolutely authentic dung caked dress, blithely saying, "no way".
Stranger Things is a great example (and I love the show). ANY kid who swore around his parents the way those kids did would have been beaten senseless. 80's kids swore around each other, but knew from hard won experience to keep their mouths shut when adults were around.
It's not a very popular opinion, but this has always been my problem with "That '70s Show". It's always felt like a late '90s/early '00s take on how the '70s went down. "The Wedding Singer", same thing, trying to target the '80s, but it didn't feel anything like the '80s; and it was only +8 years in the rearview mirror by that point! These shows go for the obvious pop culture articles/references, but they never capture that same feeling; and they ALWAYS get the timeline of when things came out wrong.
Years ago I attended a convention where one of the guests was Mark Shepherd. What he said which has remained with me since is how back in the day with sci fi shows the focal point could never be on the special effects. There wasn't the budget. Instead the focus was on character and writing, which is why these shows are still beloved today. He emphasized the importance to keep those two things as the focal point even as these shows gained popularity and therefore money.
Brilliant special effects lose their glamor in time, yet good characters and story will always remain relatable.
Compare Tom Baker era Doctor Who to the modern Doctor Who. Classic Doctor Who had cheap effects and costumes -- so it was focused on the people and their stories.
As I've often heard it said, the best visual effects are the ones where the audience doesn't notice that that are, indeed, visual effects.
@@lastguyminn2324 You mean like the visual effects in radio?
Back when video rental stores were still a thing, there was a simple rule for choosing sci-fi or fantasy films from the shelves. If the blurb on the back of the box started out with "Fantastic special effects highlight this story of...", just stop reading and put the box back on the shelf and move on.
@@CptDunsel
Not exactly. I'm talking about things like matte painting composites that are so realistic that the average viewer just thinks they are looking at a true long shot. Or like the scenes from Forest Gump where Gary Sinese's legs are removed, and the combination of his acting and the excellent special effects leaves the audience believing what they are seeing despite knowing the actor still has his legs.
To be honest with you Star Wars is a symbol of The Hero’s Journey. Luke Skywalker finding out that his father was the most evil person in the Galaxy and doing everything to bring him to the light side of the force. Which is something Hollywood doesn’t appreciate. Lol
What? Darth Vader was on the side of law and order. Long live the Empire.
@@user-pg3pe4gx4p Flush the empire😄
Let's Go Brandon, could apply to Darth Vader, because he too is a powerful broken corrupted fool of the Dark side. (So close to our Stolen Elected Commander in Corruption) Except in the movie we know Darth Vader represented established corrupted law and order of the Right while the Princess was the small oppressed Royalty progressives symbolically on the side of good, but with little power. Luke also represented the youthful coming of age hero that was once fodder for a generation or two in this country before Woke broke reality.
@@dilbertjunkmail Brandon is a joke. Darth Vader wasn't.
George Lucas got that from Joseph Campbell. J.J Abrams went to Sarah Lawrence College. How could he be expected to know anything about Joseph Campbell?
One common piece of BS you see repeated ad nauseam is "Star Trek was always woke." This is baloney. One of the best examples of how this is baloney is the episode Let This Be Your Last Battlefield, an episode squarely and heavily on the nose about race relations. The episode's messages couldn't be clearer: 1) race hatred based on color is idiotic, as exemplified by the fact that Biel and Loki's peoples hate each other because one group is black on the left and white on the right, and the other is black on the right and white on the left. The difference is so void of real substance that it brilliantly encapsulates the rank stupidity of race hatred, and 2) race hatred is self-defeating and destructive of everything for everyone, with this message encapsulated in the complete destruction of Sheron, leading to the obvious message, 3) a color blind society like what is shown in the Federation and the Enterprise crew is the way to go.
WOKE is entirely different. Woke is obsessed with race, sees race in every little thing, and definitely is hyper-race conscious and, most importantly, is 100% committed to blatant racism against one race. A message of the desirability of a color-blind society is completely unacceptable to the woke.
So, NO, Star Trek was NOT always woke, not even remotely.
Thank you for writing that! You are spot on!!!
a master class in screen writing that is better than anything i have seen before in less than 3 minutes.
Traditional lead characters were aspirational. They were written as something to aspire to. If they have flaws, they grow and surpass them.
Modern lead characters are written as relatable. Humans full of flaws that they never overcome and that they never grow because they can never take responsibility and instead blame everything on externalities.
Insightful response. It is possible to be both. For instance, the movie "The Accountant" features a character that achieves difficult things; and is relatable to anyone with similar introverted tendencies, and aspirational in that he achieves excellence.
Not all the characters are written to be relatable and flawed. Rey, for example, had neither flaws nor challenges -- she picked up a light saber and was able to fight a Jedi-trained Kylo Ren to a draw.
@@rcrawford42 "Not all the characters are written to be relatable and flawed."
Imagine Superman that is not weakened by Kryptonite nor turned evil by Green Kryptonite.
Just good, honorable, smart, powerful and incorruptible.
Hmm, a bit like Gandalf. Not "all knowing" but essentially incorruptible. "What matters is what you do with the time you have been given."
@@thomasmaughan4798 Gandalf is a special case, but his peers show how he could have failed -- the blue wizards lost to history, Radagast focusing on animals over the sentient races, and of course Saruman...
This is one reason John Wick is so beloved and was such a breath of fresh air. Absolute classic... "Who did this to my son!?" "John Wick", "Oh" cut scene. Paragraphs of subtext in a simple "Oh."
"I heard you struck my son."
"Yes sir I did."
"-and may I ask why?"
"Yeah, well, 'cause he stole John Wick's car sir, and uh, killed his dog."
"Oh..."
@@takatamiyagawa5688 Exactly! As Said in the video, you leave it to a good actor to give the single word all the gravitas it needs with tone, facial expression and body language.
Yes, that is absolutely my favorite part of John Wick: A single word; "oh." It explains everything that follows.
Excellent example!
"isn't a group less interested in history of any kind"
That's because they're literally proud of being ignorant, and self-interested...
It's what happens to a civilization when shame doesn't exist anymore.
It's an universal law-- intolerance is the first sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility.
Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
As an historian, I would blame government/ the ultra rich with removing both history and critical thinking from our curriculum.
Well, I think somebody must have been ashamed of our socioeconomic history and the history of our entertainment industry in order for them not to have it taught to them in the first place.
@@donovanmedieval Ah, no... That’s what totalitarians do as a matter of course and it sure as hell isn't for the benefit of those they are deliberately leading into the dark. Nice try, comrade.
@@donovanmedieval That somebody was lazy and ignorant, at best - and a self-interested, hateful, short-sighted, book-burner - at the worst.
If that was a conscious decision, to not TEACH relevant history - they weren't fighting some shameful deed, so much as throwing a vindictive tantrum.
"who are you, who do not know your own history"
"those who refuse to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it"
We pay for public schools for a reason.
First time I've seen any of your video's and I'm a fan already. Got to respect your unvarnished opinions and no B.S. approach. Your take appeals greatly to the over 50 set that has seen art, in all its facets, decay into a mirror image of today's self-indulgent culture. Subscribed.
When I look at all the newer Trek franchises, I find myself scratching my head about a future where leaders lack a quick decision making ability, the ability to gain consensus, and the capacity to focus on the crisis to the exclusion of truly personal concerns. You would not pick senior officers in any era whose first thought in a crisis is their feelings. They don't come across as being able to work in challenging situations with a bunch of high intensity colleagues. And I agree that the dialogue is inefficient in expressing thoughts and leads to long scenes that do little to advance the story. Even in a high pressure corporate environment we don't waste time when there's a critical issue at hand. How do people stuck in a space ship that nearly always has failing power conduits have the time to fixate on their personal crises when they are trying to stop the ship from blowing up or venting atmosphere? It's about as absurd as the lack of AI command and control tools on the bridge or that they never raise shields prior to coming out of warp and have to rely on manual firing targeting commands. They need a rethink.
Add Han Solo. They turned him into a drunk dead beat dad.
I don’t think that was Disney being afraid of a cavalier ladies man being reacted to poorly by modern audiences though, and more because Abrams has no creativity and erased everyone’s character development from the previous movie, Han is still a space criminal in TFA for the same reason, Leia apparently had no Jedi training in that movie despite Episode 6 implying that it was really important that she get that right away
So true. It gave permission for Kylo to run him through because he was a bad dad. Who was at the pitch meeting when they came up with the idea, "Okay, we're not going to let Luke, Leia and Han get together AND we're going to kill off Han so we will NEVER see it happen. How do you like that?"
the fucking hubris of someone that's tasked with adapting the works of Tolkien, or Robert Jordan to a TV show going "well I can do a better job".
Or Frank Herbert🤣
That there is the crux of bad entertainment, they live in echo boxes and believe it.
The 2 minutes hate on William Shatner's character "James Tiberius Kirk" was led by famous mysandronist and "Voyager Captain Janeway" actress who had the fucking affront to describe it as "mysoginistic". Shatner's the gold thread, he's the reason it all worked and it's the reason Galaxy Quest is so popular! "Never Give Up! Never Surrender!"
Don't forget Takei cashing in on how _trendy_ his preferences are these days...
Voyager was/remains spacejunk - Janeway easily had the most irritating voice ever (plus the character was almost as irritating as Babylon 5s Bester [the most punchable little shit in the Galaxy - shoutout to Walter for doing such a fantastic job]. Plus Voyage was both 2-dimensional and skinpeelingly boring.
I grew up in the 1990s, and don't mind admitting that WIlliam Shatner's Captain James Tiberius Kirk was the biggest role model I had in film and TV. His assertiveness, professionalism, charisma, style and swagger, loyalty to his friends and colleagues, unwavering sense of morality, leadership, and yes his way with the ladies, all of these are traits I've taken from him and applied through my life and well into adulthood. I'm approaching my 39th birthday, and some of my friends asked me how I felt about it. "William Shatner was 39 when Star Trek went off the air, and he went into space at the age of 91 last year". He's an inspiration to me even today.
Me being a geriatric millennial, the last generation not to grow up online, and my mother being a die hard star trek tos fan, I've always admired captain kirk, the bill Shatner one that is. His confidence, leadership and willingness to take matters into his own hands above his own wellness and career to stand up for his friends and what he thought was right. Great role model in my opinion. Hence..... To boldly go!
These “millennial” so called “Writers” HAVE NO LIFE EXPERIENCE they do not understand classic themes such as the hero’s journey or mythology as a whole. These classic stories stand the test time introducing morals as simple as right and wrong good or bad. they (millennial writers) simply slap together a lazy political synopsis and either race swap or alter the sexual orientation and/or identity of ALREADY established characters instead of creating their own. With the lack of a moral (lack of morals in general) understanding of how the real world works (lack of real world life experience), education but most importantly imagination an endless reboot of a self fulfilling representation is to be expected in modern entertainment. Keep up the great work and thanks for your insight.
i fear it is worse, they want to "reamigane" everything fitting to there idea how the world should look and work. The experience they are missing is that certain rules apply and you ain;t changing that.
They all watched the movie and never read the book.
They're basicly writing bad fanfiction with a big budget behind them.
I am going to take it one step further. They lack talent in general because many were diversity hires. Diversity is all well and good. But when it becomes your primary focus, you will invariably encounter situations where a larger portion of your talent pool is sub par. That isn't a dis on any culture or race. It is simple mathematics. If you have 100 of one particular race or gender and 50 of another race or gender, but you are told you have to maintain equality with the 100 spots you need to fill, you will hire 50 of the 100 of one race/gender and ALL 50 of the other race/gender. But due to the fact that you have a surplus in the one, you can invariably be more selective. The end result is you have literally fostered a situation where the one race/gender will now have to compensate for the inadequacy in the other race/gender just by virtue of the face that you couldn't be selective with the latter. It isn't being mean. It's math.
@@Diomedes01 I think it's worse than that. As soon as they take their eyes off the ball and start to focus on shallow surface traits like sex, sexuality and skin colour rather than raw talent they probably lose the ability to recognise talent in 'non-diverse' writers as well.
Love this series, never stop making it.
It's key to see how things work on the inside rather than purely "thing I don't like BAD." As you've noted, lots of crap succeeds and gems fail. It's important to understand why.
This was so good.
And I love how no one ever asked Spock about gender or marriage on Vulcan. They just all accepted that Vulcan could be Unwoke.
Amok Time
@@fredhughes4115 Vulcan was such a racist and sexist planet. Imagine allowing two men too fight over a woman and imagine her rejecting Spock cause he's a half human loser. LOL. ( Such a romantic scene. )
"Do you know what you just did?"
"He knows, doctor. He knows."
OMG I love your discussion of subtext. Thank you! That pinpoints exactly the reason for so much of the disgust people feel at modern attempts at storytelling. Not enough magic of the unspoken; too much telling; too much blatant, gory, spattering of emotion instead of the beauty of silent space. That space that allows the audience to do the very fulfilling work of intuiting and coming to an understanding on their own. We are a storytelling species that worships good telling. Without it we are left with big holes in our spirits. I can read a book, but sometimes I like my stories visual and audible. I miss delight. It's such a rare feeling in this arid desert.
Thank you for this.....I've been trying to put my finger on what has happen to Hollywood in the past 10-20 years and you have found it.....THANK YOU again....
Perfectly stated and 100% on the nose. So grateful I grew up in the Kirk era. Even TNG bored me with its 80s-style self-doubt and endless talk of ethics over taking action and dealing with the consequences later as Kirk did. It took 4 seasons to get out of that mode while The Orville got it right from the get-go.
The point was, humanity evolved beyond knee-jerk gunboat diplomacy, and was trying to apply more foresight and diplomacy to prevent destructive wars, while at the same time, having a sliding scale of violence to apply should the need arise.
On re-watch I found TNG to be very dystopian. I can't imagine the effort they must have put into making jazz boring enough for Ryker.
Wrong about TNG, I think. That series raised the moral standard of humans through stories that demanded ethical and moral decisions beyond Captain Kirk. See the episode when Picard goes home to see his brother and crosses a line when he visits violence upon his brother. A superb uplift to moral decision choices. Picard and crew are working in a larger universe than Kirk's. The moral evolution in TNG's world is evident.
@@janettucker3196 - It's a matter of personal style (TNG producers had contempt for TOS and didn't watch the episodes) and taste. TOS was always interesting and exciting while watching TNG I found myself yelling "Get on with it" at the screen for most episodes. Too much tea drinking and dour introspection instead of fun action-adventure.
Absolutely spot on! At the risk of dropping a shameless plug, these are similar thoughts I have expressed on my own channel, the complete loss of subtext, loss of the first rule of screenwriting, "Show, don't tell." But I'm one of the old farts who still mostly watches network television, and still remembers when even network television didn't suck--because these tightly written 45-minute complete stories, with well structured "beginning-middle-end," were written by masters of subtle persuasion. How far we have fallen.
"Show, don't tell"
At times, narration helps. The example I think of is the first Dune movie that starts out with narration to set the stage. For that matter, "Rango" sets the stage. Every episode of Mission Impossible started with a stage-setting narration, the mission itself, and if you missed that part, you had no idea what the rest of the show was doing.
Been a struggling filmmaker/producer for years and all I can say is that I miss the days when you had to prove your worth. Nowadays, its damn near impossible to cut through the glut of absolute crap out there.
"Sometimes what a character doesn't say is more important than what he does say."
Perfect example is from "John Wick" when Viggo calls John and John doesn't say one word. His silence, and already knowing what kind of man he is from Viggo's conversation with his son, really brings home the rage John Wick is feeling and the menace he is projecting. No way would it have worked if John Wick started screaming how he was going to kill Viggo's son.
I remember growing up and sneaking out of bed to watch Original Star Trek reruns on late night tv while my parents were sleeping and I think I took a lot of life lessons from Kirk, Spock and McCoy. The importance of friendship, duty, loyalty and learning the open, democratic(and diverse ahead of it's time) and free thinking Federation was better than the violent and authoritarian Klingons and Romulans. Kirk was bold and decisive and very much the Horatio Hornblower of the 23rd Century which is why Master and Commander with Russell Crowe and Paul Bettany reminded me so much of Star Trek.
You are also dead on on why writer that do Star Trek fail. First they don't care about the lore of Star Trek. It is like watching kids using your action figures and playing with them all wrong. Second they have no grounding or knowledge of any genre literature whether it is science fiction or classical literature. It seems all they know is what they read in their political science and sociology class while getting their Bachelor of Arts degree. Funny part is that many modern authoritarian regimes the governments hijack the arts to create propaganda hidden as entertainment and almost universally everyone in those countries outside the diehard fanatics find it unwatchable or boring. One interesting exception was the Italian movie makers of the unauthorized film version of Ayn Rand's "We the Living" during WW2 got by Mussolini's censors by saying they were making an anti Communist film until the film came out and was widely popular as it was anti any kind of authority. Once the government figured out they had been bamboozled and people like it they promptly canceled any showing of it. Today we would just put a disclaimer on it that it might trigger emotions of personal freedoms and thinking for yourself.
Wow Ray, good comment and heartfelt, thanks. Keep it up.
I'm glad to hear another perspective on woke culture.
I hate seeing what they're doing to my favorite characters or characters in general. They have such a toxic outlook on life, but you can't reason with them because they're so defensive they cry oppression, racism, sexism, if you dare question them. It's like a politician in the form of an emotionally unstable child. They'll scream if they don't get their way, and so they're just guilting people into giving them what they want, no matter how bad it is for everyone or simply isn't necessary.
They think toxic masculinity is a problem? Society seems to be suffering from (toxic femininity) the overprotective mother mentality more than anything... They aren't letting people face hardship and grow. They're trying to make society a better place by suppressing all negative outside influence, instead of strengthening the individual to be capable of dealing with society as it is. Dictating other's lives instead of their own.
Which reminds me, Demolition Man took on a whole new life. Though what could the 3 🌊 🐚 stand in for?
It depends on which part of our extremely diverse society you are looking at. I think you could make a case for our mostly black inner cities having a culture of toxic masculinity. They are violent with the leading cause of death for young black males being murdered by other young black males. I read about a black man in a bar who was shoved, got into it with another black man, and was asked to leave. He came back with a gun and started shooting people. That is how unwilling he was to allow his masculinity to be questioned. If you live anywhere near one of these areas, which I used to, it is frightening how how easily violence erupts in these areas. It would be in the news all the time, and that was probably the tip of the iceberg. I suspect this is also the reason hate crimes against black transgender women are almost always in these areas. Domestic violence is the leading cause of death for young black women aged 15 to 35 in America. Toxic masculinity is also expressed in sex for it's own sake and the sexual conquest of a woman being the objective. Family is unimportant, and the majority of black kids in those areas have no father in their life, as he is on to the next conquest. My brother worked at a parish in inner city Baltimore while preparing for the priesthood, said the area was known as the worst part of the city. He said there were so many girls who were molested by predatory older males, some of them related to the victim. That is another, less talked about, aspect of abandoning your children: the emotional abandonment of objectifying them and molesting them. A whole subculture is in deep trouble, and all the talking points "woke" people make about toxic masculinity are the reason. The irony for me is that woke people hardly ever address this, because in their world view black men are always the victims of oppression and systemic racism, which creates a conflict. How can the oppressed be the oppressor?
@@krisaaron8180 It depends, indeed. I don't like the term toxic masculinity because it has become misleading, effectively making people think that there's only an issue with men's behavior, and solely because they're male. As if women aren't capable of being equally bad. Although, to be fair the term being misused is the fault of those that have no regard for the arguments behind the term. Creating a false perception that the problem is less than what it actually is and that there's no problem with men specifically, which when you consider most men are responsible for sexual crimes because men specifically care more about sex in a positive and negative way. Yeah, I'd say that's a problem related to males specifically that should be addressed legally, and culturally.
Oh yes, the villain mentality. Justifying the actions of those that have been wronged (victims), no matter how terrible their behavior becomes. The woke need perspective, they pretend to champion progressive views, but what they're pushing is very regressive. Their portrayals of women is just the "toxic masculinity" they accuse male characters of, while their portrayal of men has become a fantasy, making them submissive. It's not just that they want better representation of female characters, they often do not want attractive female characters at all. Dictating how women can and can't be seen. Which is what conservatives used to do, for the same reason, because of how men would see them. They couldn't get husbands if they were considered sluts. Now women aren't being allowed to be admired for their sex appeal by men.
It's interesting how the pressure to correct "the male gaze" has always been the responsibility of women. So while the Woke continue to profit off some real issues, twisted into nonsense, women continue to get the short end of the stick, and communities that are suffering through more serious issues aren't being given the attention they need.
And This is WHY over the past 2 years, people under 40, on the whole could NOT handle a world wide health crisis like Covid19 spreading all over the world rather quickly! (For reasons I won't go into here!)
A gen+ of relative prosperity, has lead to no resilience, or ability to cope with some hardships, which are inevitable from time to time! It happens to every1 at some stage!
When things go PEAR shaped, NO1 knows HOW to cope with a bit of adversity!
ASK a modern Ukrainian how it's going atm! (Gritting their teeth and getting ON with it, just LIKE my mother's gen did when the NAZIS invaded them and dragged them away to be slave labour! (Or worse! ))
Todays flakes would be curled up in foetal positions crying, instead of trying to FIX things!
@@BeNice108 The people they claim to 'care' about or 'advocate' for, are just 'useful idiots'!
I am a millennial with a history degree and have always truly loved history but don’t work in the field or anywhere to directly apply anything I’ve learned from it. This video is so spot on. It’s true that fellow millennials are interested in history - most of which are interested outside of the academic setting. However, there just isn’t nearly enough of them who care…some “history” used to be considered “basic knowledge” but it really isn’t any more with my generation and especially the next one.
My biggest pet peeve of it all is when others rewrite history without any baseline knowledge of the subject in the first place! I think that there is just an extreme lack of respect for those who came before us and paved the way, and now that everyone is “woke”, they see everything through this weird lens and try to outdo each other in all the little filters of that lens…this created a society where everyone wants to poke holes in the “ideas of the past” and people truly believe that they can do it better because “they know better.” Everyone seems to be an expert on everything now from foreign policy to separation of powers in government when in fact they actually know nothing! It is so bizarre and not what I expected at all
I could go on and on about this though…about the sources people use, the arguments they make, etc. This spills into everything: government, corporations, and of course movies and tv…We desperately need a renaissance!
"Most stuff out there is crap and getting crappier.." Such a true statement.
Kirk was the epitome of everything a man should be.
To ease your worry, there are a lot of Millenials that are interested in history of all kinds. Shame non of them get to write for film and tv.
I have no doubt. My daughter is a Mill and she is a history buff, package designer and kick boxer. And she loves Kurt Vonnegut. It's all I need.
The few millennials interested in history are not enough to compensate for the ignorance of the mass of millennials.
Shatner’s Kirk was written far more rounded than merely an “alpha male”, as were all the original characters, and with humour and personality. My older sister is a huge fan of the original cast with Spock her favourite, as he seemingly was for lots of women. I never even knew original Kirk was disliked by certain “millennials”. I’m not really interested in such passing zeitgeist populism 😃 Nor do I take much interest in TV anymore, I don’t sub to streaming services, nor watch many films anymore - I’m only interested in innovation or fiction that has something to say, but mostly that’s extremely well-written
Star Trek was conceived of and written by people who had survived World War II. They experienced the hard decisions and trade-offs that societies and people had to make to achieve their goals and survive. They also had a sense of big picture of human history. Where we came from, where we are, and what we aspire to become. Today's generation of writers have known nothing but peace, prosperity, and luxury. It shouldn't come as a surprise that their stories reflect their experiences.
@@00bikeboy it was certainly an optimistic vision of the future, a vision of humanity living in harmony, way ahead of its time for the 1960s, especially considering how socially tumultuous that decade was in the US.
Yet strangely, Star Trek Discovery, of which I only watched series one 5 years ago, written by people, as you state, with no direct experience of a world war, was the darkest, most insolent, pessimistic, F-word laden iteration ever made. Make of that what you will
TOS Kirk is misattributed as being a horn dog. I think people confuse him with Riker from TNG. He was pretty restrained when it came to use his high charisma score on the ladies, only doing so to gain an advantage on the mission. (Or suffers amnesia in one episode and defaults to husband mode) He’s also misremembered for being careless with the redshirts. He was always pissed when one of his crew died.
He was certainly more rounded by the time the movies came along, that's why he needed a girdle!
Haw haw
@@ffsireallydontcare You scallywag, you! 😃
A movie you should remember is Rodney Dangerfields back to school. Two of the characters being professors, one giving Rodney a lecture on how "Business" is actually run, and the other being frightenly scary in that Kurt Vonnegut has no idea what Kurt Vonnegut actually was about. Perfectly describes to me our new generation.
I'll throw this out there, given how todays jeune ecole likes to change things up, how would they shoot blazing saddles
I remember that scene. The professor lectures on how "business" is actually run, Rodney laughs and tells them how it really is and the students are suddenly taking notes on what he is saying because he was a successful businessman. He was telling them how the "real" world worked.
I love how Dangerfield's character hires the real Kurt Vonnegut to help him write a term paper about Kurt Vonnegut...and then the professor later tells Dangerfield that he was completely wrong about Kurt Vonnegut. And yes, the economics professor dismissed real-world government and union corruption's impact on business.
I remember the first time I actually watched the original Star Trek episodes.
I was pleasantly surprised by a lot, including how pissed Kirk would got (generally) when his crew were killed, it was like he actually cared about his crew.
I love this so much. It is galling as an independent author to watch these milkshake-swilling kids fresh out of college gleefully destroy the characters and franchises I've loved my whole life; the escapism that got me through so many hard times that these new "writers" have obviously never experienced.
"I'm saying different instead of worse because worse can be fixed. Different is here to stay." A professional liar deciding to tell the truth is literary genius. Love it.
One of the reason sitcoms exist. In Situational Comedy. it is as much about the characters as it is the situation. Whats funny is knowing that Jack Benny is notoriously cheap and would struggle with should he just deal with some situation or pay a small sum of money to make the problem go away. Lucy being told she can't have a new mink coat and then coming up with some crazy plan to convince Ricky that she should have one, or worse yet buying the coat and thing trying to keep Ricky from finding out. The same situation can be presented in "I Love Lucy" or "Barney Miller" or "Friends" and not be boring because how it plays out and what is funny is based on how the characters respond.
To me it seems that media has always mostly sucked, it's just that the form of suck has changed. I wholeheartedly agree on the laziness no subtext in modern writing angle. Modern media has thrown subtext and characterization out the window in exchange for big moments of spastic emotional outbursts. Even the overcorrection toward liberal ideas is superficial. They value style before substance. Whereas in the past writing was typically bad because it was boring, repressive, repetitive, overly formulaic, or the writing just assumed the audience was too stupid to understand anything. Every generation has their version of "safe".
It is dialogue that drives a movie not the flash bang massive scenes. Look at LOTR. In those scenes where battles are immanent characters are given speeches to give weight to what is to follow. That is. to my way of thinking a better way than letting the visual carry the message. If a character does not speak then he is incidental.
Yeah.But new generations still enjoy those old media products instead nowadays not even wokes like their woke products.
From your comment I doubt you've seen many movies made before the 1970s. The B movies from the 40's and 50's are WAY better written than today's top of the line "blockbusters." I think because they don't have a message to preach. They just tell good stories.
i agree with you.@@mikebrines5708
@@mikebrines5708 perhaps chato could do a show on our feelings about old movies
I always wondered why Shatner and Nimoy couldn't understand why Star Trek was so important to so many. Then it hit me... Shatner didn't have a "Captain Kirk" when he was about 12 years old. He couldn't understand how powerfully formative that character and world was to young boys. Kirk was a shining example of masculine competence and courage winning the day. A power fantasy? Yes. But more than that. A call to adventure that our cultures have created from the beginning of time to coerce the dangerous force of a young male towards what's right and beneficial to society. I don't think Rodenberry and the writers consciously were observing a formula. The didn't have to. It's hardwired into our psyches. I wanted to be Kirk. Not a kid on some other television show. I wanted to be the hyper competent man that had earned his spot at the top of that shipborne hierarchy. The terrible power of that ship and the crew aboard was his to use to solve problems and defeat the enemies of civilization. And he couldn't misuse it. He was bound by the rules of the military and society yet had infinite options to get the job done. How could a young boy not want to be Captain Kirk? Why many girls loved the show is another story. That's for them to investigate. We can guess though.
@@sherril.562 Heh heh. You can imagine why I would avoid speaking for the ladies. But I think that's what I would assume. Captain Kirk as a possible mate must have been very appealing.
Sorry, you're wrong. He had a legion of men as role models. John Wayne, Gregory Peck, James Stewart, Clark Gable, Humphrey Bogart, James Cagney, Marlon Brando...do I need to go on? There are many, many more.
@@RodFleming-World Obviously, I disagree. I'm talking about the character of Captain Kirk. You named a bunch of actors. I'm just saying it was a unique amalgam character, situation and theme. If you disagree that's fine. You don't need to be a prick about it.
@@thanksfernuthin look in a mirror.
Spock was my favorite as a young girl. When I read the book wrath of khan, I wept when Spock died. At that time I was a grown woman.
Smart commentary, as always. Star Trek used to be a mirror tilted slightly forward to a better future. Now, it just a glaring reflection of how bitter we will, probably, always be.
So much truth you just dropped. I shudder to think what they will do with Kirk in the STD cesspool. I really don't know where the lack of interest in history and there smug attitudes towards the properties they claim to be fans of come from.
Not to put too fine a point on it: it came from our educational system. Garbage in; garbage out.
Sturgeon's Law: "Ninety percent of everything is crud." And that was actually a defense of science fiction, which was being criticized for containing so many crappy stories.
The writing style you mentioned is similar to one used for animation long ago
We'd write the story beats, then layer in dialogue, etc. This allowed us to sort out the logical progression.
the same used in screenwriting for a century
Paul, you nailed it. We pine for the days of our alpha male heroes of old, such as Mr. Canoehead and Todd Booster. And our choice of modern day villain is even more anemic when contrasted with the classics, cue the Ultra-Mind and Moo-Moo Bunny Lips. Music has changed too, with the sidelining of one's attraction to tall gals, our need for clean gas station washrooms, and the commuter's bus ride (sitting near Chad in the back with the radio).
Coming off a gig onstage at a jazz club in the early 90s, I spoke with another musician just about to go on. He said to me, "It ain't about the notes you play, it's about the notes you don't play." So very true!
Oh my gosh, you have dissected it so correctly! I am so damned worried for this franchise that I love so much! I really hope this woke activism (which operates a lot like the Borg ironically) will die a sudden death very soon!
I definitely agree with all of this. This all has led to the downfall of film and television to the low quality that most of them possess now. You described it accurately. What we love about film and television is what most of them hate. I prefer most older films and television since they had better stories, characters, writing, etc.
I think the exploration of masculinity is fine in general. Grown men can weep. But lazy writing is lazy writing.
The genius of James Tiberius Kirk is that he is shown (not told) to understand the virtue of command. Today’s media barely even touches the concept, and when it does, it is framed as ham-fisted “boss” dictating to others. But Kirk was shown to well understand that different people required different motivations. What worked on Yeoman Rand (show strength, control of the situation) didn’t work for Bones.
I love ToS because of this. It wasn’t a show about exploring space while dealing with the human mind. It was a show about exploring the human mind, while dealing with space.
The idea of writing the subtext first is interesting. It is creating the context for the scene that the actors create in their performance, but is absent from the specific dialogue. This was the standard, but now isn't? It seems like something a talented screenwriter would do as second nature.
It's a ton more more. No one wants to put that work in and the executives don't want to read it.
I’d also add that the diversity I see isn’t even inclusive and you absolutely have to have that in order to truly be diverse. If you don’t it’s just pandering which is really what I see. These writers, directors, producers etc. are just pandering to the idea of diversity. It’s not real. It’s an image thing. And it really shows in their work.
So true what you said about subtext. It's an easy way to decide if a show is worth your time and can be determined pretty quickly. It's a reason I couldn't make it through Lovecraft Country. While it's in a genre I love and want to root for it, the characters feelings and motivations we're very obvious and blunt. The monsters were literal, not metaphorical, and mundane rather than cosmic.
I couldn't deal with Lovecraft Country because the writing was very lazy. And that seems to be a trend for a lot of geek culture shows.
You are 1000% right. Thanks for wording it correctly. We all need to see it in many different ways, because what is happening is just way too insane.
Never heard of the subtext technique of writing. Makes a lot of sense.
I have often wondered how we lost subtle and the allowance to wrestle with a theme as the audience. It does seem that things really have to be overt, "and in you face,". One of my favourite series was Babylon 5, and it had lots of implied things, not stated on the surface. Hints, that you wished would be pursued, but often were left alone, as a tease.
IS Bester a good guy or a bad guy? Was Garabaldi and Lando Molari friends or enemies? Maybe Both?
And G'kar and Lando going from hating each other to allies was beautiful and subtly done but the tension was still there.
So many other things were hinted at here and there, and left to tease.
Same with Star Trek DS9... so much subtle subtext. Favourite character on that show was Quark.
I movies, Master and Commander was a great piece of work. Again, lots of grey and little black and white.
Will there ever be a time when the audience will be allowed to wrestle with a TV show or movie again I wonder.
I wonder if some of it is that if something is left grey than you cant tell if its 'on your side' or not.
I don't think Narcissism likes grey and it seems that people like to have things be about them now.
Not sure I could write for today's audience. I miss the Space 1999 season 1 sci-fi subject matter and all the subtle it brought, with no solid conclusion either way. A topic could be both good and bad at the same time.
One of my favorite unstated items was the reality of the Vorlons and Shadows. It was so delicious and infuriating that we knew the Vorlons were good, but often blocked what we and the characters in the show wanted to get done while the Shadows were clearly evil and would be helpful. Part of how that worked out is that the Vorlons were like parents, watching out for our best interests. No you can't have 10 of your friends come over and have a kegger party when you graduate from high school. Whereas the Shadows wanted to stir things up and cause problems they could later capitalize on. The would be more than willing to host the party and even provide the beer. Then the police are called, your dad decides to punish you and sells the car he got you as a graduation present, which your neighbor then buys for $500 plus the cost of the 2 kegs of beer.
@@BreetaiZentradi well put. the Vorlons and Shadows using the lesser races to do all their bidding and the fallout of that landing on all the lesser races. So amazing.
So many things from that show are relevant to today too.
"arrogance and stupidity in one package, how efficient"
and to miss quote, "the quiet ones, are the ones that change the universe..."
Mr Morden "what do you want?"
A simple question.
@@maarkaus48 I despair for the Babylon 5 reboot. JMS is a great writer and producer. However studios want to be up for Emmy's and Oscar's and the only way to do that now is to be so full of duh-versity at every level that you put out teh subpar product.
@@BreetaiZentradi I honestly forgot it was being rebooted. I really have given up on newer shows.
Maybe I am just getting old.
I do wish JMS the best with it. IF he is actually producing, it might be okay. If others are producing and he is just around as a consultant... who knows.
Fuck, I didn't know they were going to reboot B5. I was secretly hoping our favorite series was just obscure enough ther wokesters were unaware of it. Artoo, we're doomed.
Shatner’s Kirk is the BEST Kirk. His mission, his crew, his ship, himself in that order every episode.
I'm glad I found this channel. I can get some scriptwriting lessons included with some interesting content. Awesome two-fer.
Shatner's performance in Wrath of Khan, as he grieves for Spock, and when he gives the eulogy, fucking broke me. He doesn't shed a single tear. And it's so much more powerful as opposed to him ugly-crying.
Absolutely love this video. When I write I am always mindful not to have the dialogue regurgitate the subtext, and just verbalize what the audience can already see on the screen or figure out for themselves, but to hear you articulate it in such a clear way was still super helpful. I'm so happy I subscribed to your channel, please keep the writing tips coming.
i agree with you, today writers seem to have to add details that really are not needed for the story. An example is Sherlock Holmes. It seems everyone wants them to be gay. 2 men living alone together, they must be gay. Yet I have lived alone with men and we were not gay. Looking at the Holmes stories, Sherlock's sexuality was just not needed for the story, thus it was not included in the stories. Same goes for other stories written over the centuries... if you have a crime drama, war drama, sci fi, fantasy, to tell the story you mostly don't need to include such things like their sexuality. Of course this isn't just about sexuality. Think of the Caine Mutiny, they added a stupid out of place love story to the plot that did not work and actually took away from a near perfect movie. Now in the case of the Caine Mutiny and other such "male" movies, the writers/producer think they needed to add the romance for the wives watching with their husbands, which I think is BS. Women are smarter then that. So you get a movie like Dam busters with Richard Todd without the romance added, which was likely the best movie on the topic you could have. Versus Caine Mutiny, which had a horrible romance added which took away from it... Now of course we can expand to many of the newer TV and movies where the writers has added nonsense to a story line, that did not need it. Just plain bad writing!!
I'm a millennial who can't watch movies anymore and only one comes around in a blue moon that entertains me. My standards aren't super high, it's just writing gets worse and worse all the time, making most movies a headache to sit through.
I agree with your assessment as per the end of the video. They can't stand masculine male characters, but not cause they hate them, but because they don't understand them. They have been trapped in their woke bubbles and echo chambers so long they have forgotten what leaders are like, what makes masculine men good, how to convey emotion without dialogue.
Paul, I was channel cruising and found you by accident. Love listening to your off the wall descriptions. "Pronoun Paedophiles" - almost fell off my chair. Thanks for the laughs and the wisdom (now keep it up).
Simply outstanding and you are sot-on right. Also, James T. Kirk is MY captain.
You have summed everything up, perfectly. We now live in an age when wit, charm and fun are dead. Why provide the essence of a character in a couple of minutes while moving the plot forward, when you can beat the same dead horse over and over again across 6 episodes? Watching actors giving interviews, they always go on about character development and having the time to explore the character. I'm not sure if actors really believe this bullshit, or if they are much better actors than I thought and just say this to keep getting hired.
you wonder what the writing rooms are like at Disney and Skywalker when "everyone" (on line at least) hates what they do. Those movies still made enough money to contiue the nonsense, but it didn't break records in repeat viewers or streaming rentals.
They were so expensive to make, I'm not entirely sure they made their money back, except for the first one.
Well Kathy Kennedy reputedly operates a six strong ‘writing room’ at Lucasfilm, four of them being women most of whom have _very_ lean resumes and none (that I can recall at least) with any previous credits for writing science fantasy…
That they were still appointed to these positions of undeniable influence despite their obvious unsuitability is a sobering indictment of modern Hollywood and its ruinous new found priorities. Talent just isn’t as prized as it once was thus it’s little wonder so much crap is being spewed out.
@@makara80 Interesting.
Love watching stuff like this with people who know what they are talking about. I watch quite a lot of films and often im just left thinking there is something wrong. But i can never put my finger on it. Stuff like this makes me feel better in that there is something wrong and explains why :) awesome.
I think I was born in the wrong generation. Millennial here (unfortunately) Kirk, Picard, Sisko, & Luke Skywalker are, to a name a few, some my favorite male characters. They were so well written and inspired self improvement. Star Trek, more specifically, inspired me to a better person through their characters. If I were to speculate on the “problem” today, post modernism has poisoned the minds of people and created contempt for our western canon/culture. Literary canon shaped us as individuals in society for generations, when you cut that off from humanity, not giving them a way to learn to improve, it generates a society that is completely rudderless.
True. Hollywood today wouldnt allow a character like Walt in Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino. Or even Tony Stark in Marvel's Iron Man (not coincidentally his character was killed).
Thank you, UA-cam algorithm for throwing me this nugget of gold. Even the comments are classy.
Wow, thank you!
No, please. Dissect The Force Awakens. Better yet, dissect the entire Sequel Trilogy, or perhaps give an insight into what's likely gone on behind closed doors at Lucasfilm over the last 8 years or so.
1:56 Yes, I know because I'm one. I enjoy anime but I also liked sitcoms like Home Improvement, Big Bang Theory, Young Sheldon, That 70s Show, and Mike and Molly. Problem is most sitcoms have just gotten worse in recent memory.
You liked Big Bang theory? You don’t
It’s because he is a strong male role model.
I would have to agree that subtext has been stripped out of most films.
Where lines are literally what characters just did or actually feel.
The bit about "subtexts" at the end was a true revelation for me.
Thanks formernetworkexecutive!
And you are right.
With everything.
1) The UA-cam algorithm suggested your video and I saw it was only 9+ minutes so I watched.
2) I enjoyed your presentation.
3) Other than being a viewer I have zero experience with media, but
4) when I view producers, directors, production tech staff, or rarely actors I am impressed with their knowledge, instinct, and insight into society.
5) Thanks for sharing your experiences.
6) Best wishes.
What a great video! Im so happy I found this. I have been completely disheartened and demoralized by this inundation of effete, feminist, woke, spineless, male-apologetic, anemic entertainment. Everything you described here so well! Hollywood ignoring every rule of good story telling, character developement and objective reality itsself..... KIRK FUCKING RULES!!!!! Bring that back!!! PLEASE!!!!
Spot on! I was so excited about the latest Trek series, but once I realized the pervasive wokeness, I cut the cord, sigh. Still hoping for a proper Trek in the future.
The Orville is proper trek... or at least the closest thing we'll get for a while.
@@Matt-dk3wl Thank you, I will check it out!
Is Strange New Worlds going to be any good?