Tyralak 12,068 Posted April 23, 2010 This episode goes down as one of my favorite TNG episodes and quite possibly some of the best Trek ever. It was powerful, moving, and well written. The idea of a civilization using it's remaining time and resources to preserve something of itself, knowing they couldn't be saved was powerful and thought provoking. This type of story is something that Trek lost in later years, IMHO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalksInDarkness 4 Posted April 23, 2010 Agreed. Definitely one of the best TNG episodes. Especially when you consider the "risks" they took in presenting it; which gives a lot of credit to Patrick Stewart's amazing acting skills, a lesser thespian would not have been able to pull it off. That is why, no other ST series afterward has been able to recapture what TNG did for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khas 12,158 Posted April 23, 2010 Definitely. I remember thinking this was a great episode even back when I first saw it as a rerun in 1996, when I was 5. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted April 25, 2010 Agreed. Definitely one of the best TNG episodes. Especially when you consider the "risks" they took in presenting it; which gives a lot of credit to Patrick Stewart's amazing acting skills, a lesser thespian would not have been able to pull it off. That is why, no other ST series afterward has been able to recapture what TNG did for me. This is very true. It also showed that good Sci-Fi wasn't always about war and conflict. That's something we've lost sight of, unfortunately. I blame Star Wars at least in part. The tendency for the last 15 to 20 years has been that Sci-Fi must always be about war and space battles. I think that's sad. The best Sci-Fi was thought provoking what if scenarios that probed the human spirit. There was a lot of TNG that was like that. Quite a bit of TOS too. Unfortunately, DS9 as good as it was in many respects, fell back on the war crutch too often. Same with Voyager. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted April 25, 2010 Same with Voyager. Actually, Voyager fell back on bad writing and big bewbs, whch both go well together, since the bad writing allows us to ignore what is said in any episode and concentrate on what's important: 7 of 9's lucious body... http://wehaveinternets.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/jeri_ryan-7of9_005.jpg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted April 25, 2010 Tyralak, While Star Wars might get some of the blame, the militarization of Sci-fi happened in the mid-nineties. Watching all three seasons of Seaquest back to back will show exactly when it happened, as NBC treated that show as its own personal marketing bitch. Hard Sci-Fi -> Soft Sci-Fi -> Military Sci-Fi. Stargate is at least as involved, probably more so - as it was actually a successful franchise that did not have an established rabid fanbase. As always, the increase in military sci-fi had occurred earlier in literature, with many Baen books being prime examples. Other examples would be Elizabeth Moon and David Sherman & Dan Cragg. My personal pet theory is that the shift towards "darker," more "military" sci-fi occurred as a reaction to both the environmental disaster and utopian sci-fi sub-genres. TNG was heavily influenced by the Utopians, and that lead to a lot of what I consider the pomposity of the early seasons, not to mention the stupidities of the fourth season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted April 26, 2010 Tyralak, While Star Wars might get some of the blame, the militarization of Sci-fi happened in the mid-nineties. Watching all three seasons of Seaquest back to back will show exactly when it happened, as NBC treated that show as its own personal marketing bitch. Hard Sci-Fi -> Soft Sci-Fi -> Military Sci-Fi. Stargate is at least as involved, probably more so - as it was actually a successful franchise that did not have an established rabid fanbase. As always, the increase in military sci-fi had occurred earlier in literature, with many Baen books being prime examples. Other examples would be Elizabeth Moon and David Sherman & Dan Cragg. My personal pet theory is that the shift towards "darker," more "military" sci-fi occurred as a reaction to both the environmental disaster and utopian sci-fi sub-genres. TNG was heavily influenced by the Utopians, and that lead to a lot of what I consider the pomposity of the early seasons, not to mention the stupidities of the fourth season. No, I agree. It isn't just Star Wars' fault. However, I feel it's lamentable that the trend has moved toward almost exclusively military or military based Sci-Fi. It really limits options for creativity. In fact, I think part of why I like Caprica so much, is because it's not just based around war. Precursors of war for sure, but there's so much more to it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Questor 501 Posted April 26, 2010 No, I agree. It isn't just Star Wars' fault. However, I feel it's lamentable that the trend has moved toward almost exclusively military or military based Sci-Fi. It really limits options for creativity. In fact, I think part of why I like Caprica so much, is because it's not just based around war. Precursors of war for sure, but there's so much more to it. My real regret is less in the movie/tv realm - where outside of doing sci-fi variations of traditional genres like sit-com or soap opera, I don't know how practical a non-action show is - but in the novel and short story areas, where traditional space opera, utopian sci-fi, adventure, and travelogue can really shine. The Inner Light is an incredible TV show, but would only be considered a medium to good novel or short story. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalksInDarkness 4 Posted April 26, 2010 Actually, Voyager fell back on bad writing and big bewbs, whch both go well together, since the bad writing allows us to ignore what is said in any episode and concentrate on what's important: 7 of 9's lucious body... T'Pol > 7-of-9 Don't get me wrong, 7 was hot - but only in a cheesy stripper/porn-actress sort of way IMHO. T'Pol was just smokin' all around - my wife would get mad at me because my jaw would quite literally drop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted April 26, 2010 Can you imagine T'Pol durring Pon Farr? *drools* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted April 26, 2010 Can you imagine T'Pol durring Pon Farr? *drools* Playboy or Hustler - Vulcan edition. lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalksInDarkness 4 Posted April 26, 2010 Damn, did she look good in that form fitting jump-suit or what. That tells you what hardbody she had, the thing covered her completely up to her neck - yet she looked as hot as they get. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted April 26, 2010 I actually love Jolene Blalock's square jaw, and hard facial lines. The only thing I (honestly) don't like as much are her breats which, IMO, are too big for her size. They would have been niver had they been slightly smaller... But, 7 of 9, T'Pol, i'd do both in a second... Or at the same time... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalksInDarkness 4 Posted April 26, 2010 NO, her breasts had to be that big. It was mandated by the Vulcan High Council, due to the fact she was traveling in a primitive craft. They were purely for safety purposes. If there was an impact, they served as airbags; if it there was an emergency water landing, they would suffice as flotation devices. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khas 12,158 Posted April 26, 2010 Can you imagine T'Pol durring Pon Farr? *drools* Pants... getting... tight... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Afishymeadow 534 Posted April 26, 2010 "The Inner Light" is one of sci-fi & fantasy's best hours. Not just one of Star Trek's or TNG in particular. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
