[-] Indy@startrek.website 4 points 3 weeks ago

I second many of your points. And, also...

"the purple D"

Had me immediately thinking, "Well, STO vanity shields are canon now, I guess."

[-] Indy@startrek.website 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

How about we carve a Spock or Picard or Mariner or really anyone else who isn't a genocidal dictator? Hmm? Maybe?

No? Perhaps my dream for Star Trek has too much hope for humanity's future? Not enough grit, tears, and flashy booms?

[-] Indy@startrek.website 5 points 2 months ago

Agreed. I would have loved to have that kind of callback to the story.

[-] Indy@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago

That was a lot of fun to watch. Thanks for providing the links to the various segments!

[-] Indy@startrek.website 10 points 3 months ago

Groundhog Day

[-] Indy@startrek.website 4 points 3 months ago

Groundhog Day

[-] Indy@startrek.website 9 points 5 months ago

Hear, hear!!

I realize I'm not adding much value by saying this, but... I still wanted to support this with a comment and not just an upvote.

[-] Indy@startrek.website 7 points 5 months ago

This is beautiful! I love data and I'm delighted you were inspired by my post to gather the data.

Thank you for doing this!

[-] Indy@startrek.website 3 points 5 months ago

I'm not sure. Perhaps "Captain and Crew Test" isn't the right way to look at it either. ST:LD seems to do a good job of not focusing too much on one story or character per episode, so it avoids failure even if every character is "the captain".

There would have to be some way of reworking the criteria to evaluate overall balance (as mentioned elsewhere in this thread) rather than just Captain and Crew, I guess.

Regardless, that's a really good question. Hmmmm

[-] Indy@startrek.website 4 points 5 months ago

I love this! Now you need to do an analysis like this one on Star Trek and the Bechdel-Wallace test!

TOS is already a rough rewatch with some of its acting and portrayals of the future. I can't imagine how tough it would be to rewatch it through that lens. Haha!

I realize you’re not trying to predict quality, just personal enjoyability, but I do wonder how it relates to quality.

I don't mean for this to measure quality. To each their own, as they say. After all, it is just entertainment and I'm free to watch anything else or skip this or that episode. This is all just a fun observation for me, much like a discussion on the finer points of warp theory or Federation economics.

Still, I'm glad it's something that clicked for you too. I figured there would be a number of people whose appreciation of Trek relates to this "test".

[-] Indy@startrek.website 4 points 5 months ago

I like that too. I'm not sure it would counter these "rules".

How would you propose phrasing a rule for that non-Fed criteria?

[-] Indy@startrek.website 4 points 5 months ago

To be fair, I think every series has a lot of episodes that would fail this test, some of which were excellent, like DS9’s “In the Pale Moonlight”, and “Far Beyond the Stars” or TNG’s “The Inner Light”, but if used to assess a series, I think this could be a good metric.

Indeed, "In the Pale Moonlight" is one I thought of which fails as well. I still think it makes a good measure to see how many episodes of a show pass/fail overall. Only to see if it's really about the whole crew or mostly one character. (Arguably, early TNG comes really close to being Star Trek: Wesley while mid/late TNG comes close to Star Trek: Data.)

31
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Indy@startrek.website to c/startrek@startrek.website

You've heard of the "Bechdel-Wallace test" and its potential value to some people in measuring various media in a given context.

I propose a measure we'll call the "Captain and Crew Test"....

I was enduring -- yes, that's the word I'll choose -- an episode of a certain Trek show and found myself thinking that I seem to enjoy Star Trek shows where the captain isn't the center of attention for the continued story, rather the crew as a whole (including the captain as professionally and relatively required) works together on the story of the day or is portrayed in multiple dimensions without the commanding officer present.

So, here's my attempt at codifying this "Captain and Crew Test":

  • The episode/show has to have at least two crew members (i.e. not the captain) essential to the story,
  • who interact with each other without the captain,
  • about the story without specific direction from the captain

I think these "rules" could use some adjustment and addition, but I think you get what I'm proposing/suggesting/inciting.

UPDATE 2024-07-04 04:35:34 UTC: Check out the quick and amazing work by @danielquinn@lemmy.ca to compile a subset of the percentage of lines for each character in a few Star Trek shows.

view more: next ›

Indy

joined 8 months ago