Why is Star Trek not that popular in younger people?
- Thread starter YoungCadet
- Start date
- Status
Awareness is one thing: I do my best to be aware of both current and historical pop culture because I think that informs my view of society a little bit more completely.
Star Trek is something I want my daughters to be aware of, even if they don't enjoy it. Awareness allows them to make choices about pop culture that they might not otherwise make.
One thing I noticed over the past few years (and well after college): in HS in the 90s, I thought I was the only one who watched Star Trek. But lately I've been learning that more and more of my peers watched Star Trek back then, but they just didn't admit it.
I mean, even if I go to non-Trek boards like pop culture and fashion blogs, if the topic is about, say, Orange is the New Black, the conversation will inevitably steer towards Kate Mulgrew's performance as Captain Janeway, even in Season 3. And the only way that happens is if the people on these sites watched Voyager.
There's something about being an adult and not caring about reputation that just feels so liberating. Even moreso when you find people you can connect with and who also share a love of 90s Trek.
I mean, even if I go to non-Trek boards like pop culture and fashion blogs, if the topic is about, say, Orange is the New Black, the conversation will inevitably steer towards Kate Mulgrew's performance as Captain Janeway, even in Season 3. And the only way that happens is if the people on these sites watched Voyager.
There's something about being an adult and not caring about reputation that just feels so liberating. Even moreso when you find people you can connect with and who also share a love of 90s Trek.
It's easy to forget sometimes how fast time goes by and how quickly things can recede into the past.
I was speaking about superheros at a children's library today and one of the kids was genuinely amazed to find out that that there had been a DAREDEVIL movie. "I've never heard of this before."
He was twelve. The movie came out in 2003.
Do the math.
I was speaking about superheros at a children's library today and one of the kids was genuinely amazed to find out that that there had been a DAREDEVIL movie. "I've never heard of this before."
He was twelve. The movie came out in 2003.
Do the math.
Wait, there was a Daredevil movie? I remember a movie where Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner's first date resulted in a playground sparring match, but now they're getting a divorce
So you want a culture that has no roots? No continuity from one generation to another? Where everything is "the now", with no sense of enduring traits that are carried forward?
Sounds like a pretty poor culture to me.
Nuts. I thought they had something worth fight for there...
Wait, there was a Daredevil movie? I remember a movie where Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner's first date resulted in a playground sparring match, but now they're getting a divorce
Young people love the shoot'em up movies with sexual situations with full frontal nudity that is current and in the present. They also like the drama of reality shows of loud rich women with big boobs and nice clothes. They yell, scream, and cuss. Sometimes the have a wine or champagne throwing contest. Star Trek is none of that because they try to keep it a family show. I heard that one from Andrew Robinson on an interview when they were talking about Garak's sexuality.
In addition to my previous post calling into question the veracity of the inherent claim that formed the question, I am compelled to post this extract from an article I just found on ScreenRant.com:
http://screenrant.com/star-trek-william-shatner-comic-con-2015/
ScreenRant.com said:
Star Trek isn't sexy. Not a lot of action. The storytelling is mediocre at best. Characters are mostly forgettable. Set design is bland and claustrophobic. Costume and prop designs are a joke. Dialogue is mostly terrible.
Come to think of it, why is Star Trek popular for any demographic?
Come to think of it, why is Star Trek popular for any demographic?
That was not called for, SOS. Once Enterprise got going it was quite good.
This was meant entirely in jest. I even like NuTrek to some degree... though I notice you don't seem to be defending that...
YoungCadet!
Im the same as you(just havent seen as much) non of the people in my school seem to like it either and im under 20 aswell.
Im the same as you(just havent seen as much) non of the people in my school seem to like it either and im under 20 aswell.
I call "bull". If Trek is currently so "popular and enduring", where is the new TV shows? Where are the tons of tie-in merch?
I'm a huge Trek fan, but even I have to admit that the franchie's popularity is on the wane, if not spent.
You want to see a "popular and enduring" franchise. Say it with me folks: Star Wars. Multiple new movies in development. Lots and lots of tie-in merch. New (cable) TV series (Rebels) and another one in development..
What does Trek have? One troubled movie that had to last-minute replace not just the director but the SCRIPT. (Not to mention the new creative team touting as being "less Star Trekk-y" as a selling point.) No new TV. Very little tie-in merch.
And the 50th Anniversary is next year with NO apparent plans for anything special to celebrate.
Space? or something.
Well, you need something to tie the merch in to begin with. No movie this year = no tie-in merch.
But I'd argue that Trek's popularity doesn't need to be so blatant, either. We'll have the TV sets and movies and books and all, but really much of Trek's popularity is reflected in cultural influence. Think of all the scientists, engineers, healers, etc. who were inspired by Trek to begin with; the concepts, catchphrases, and inventions that are here because of Trek; the continuous references from other fiction that tie back to Trek because that's what their creators love.
And to me that's a strength of Trek. Sure, having merchandise to buy is fine, but Trek is durable enough to hold out and still have people tuning in. Think of smaller franchises that have their own following with only a fraction of output Trek has, and they endure. Trek has that in spades. CSI has TV shows, merchandise, and an audience, but it is rarely, if ever, considered in the same league as Trek in terms of influence on the zeitgeist. So what about Star Wars? That was engineered almost from the start to be about merchandising (Lucas practically invented toy rights for filmmakers!). While Trek was made to make money, it was primarily through TV and through an audience, not supply-and-demand economics. Star Wars and Star Trek are their own creatures; there's no need to feel envious about Star Wars at all.
I find most people have trouble connecting with entertainment from outside their era until later when they're thoroughly explored and gotten a little bored of the entertainment geared to their era.
Interesting perspective. Don't they? I've been a Trek fan since I was a kid, notwithstanding that it was off the air before I was born. I got hooked when it was running in afternoon syndication. For that matter, that's how I became familiar with any number of other shows from the '50s, '60s, and '70s that were before my time.
Of course, I was a kid before the internet, and indeed before modern home electronics (DVDs, DVRs, Blu-Ray, etc.). No question, having decades worth of TV, movies, and music easily—indeed instantly—available, has revolutionized the entertainment industry, and been a boon for fans of all kinds of material.
But is it possible that having everything available has meant (at least for some people) that nothing is interesting? It's all out there, but it's all just old boring stuff? That possibility honestly hadn't occurred to me. But then that's never how I've thought ("newer is better"), either as a kid or an adult.
Exactly so. Fannish explanations that blame the audience are non-starters.
The truth is that when Star Trek was rebooted as TNG in 1987 the production values improved but the style of storytelling and characterization hewed very closely to the 1960s original. The one nod to twenty years of TV evolution, the introduction of a "B story" in most episodes, was clumsily handled at best.
Yet the show was so successful that it became the template for three further series, none of which updated the style and pace nearly enough to keep up with other contemporary popular entertainment.
The result is a property that's fallen completely out of touch with the tastes and expectations of the modern audience.
I question whether anyone really has a finger on "the tastes and expectations of the modern audience."
If anyone had said a few years ago that a multi-year TV adaptation of a multi-volume fantasy epic that mixes medieval politics with dragons and has a dwarf as a central character would be a favorite of both fans and critics, you'd have thought they were crazy. But, Game of Thrones.
If anyone had said a few years ago that a big-budget, live-action film adaptation of a traditional comic-book super-hero team would be a "four-quadrant" hit and one of the highest grossing films of all time, you'd have thought they were crazy. But, The Avengers.
And just to mix it up a bit... if anyone had said a few years ago that one TV series about a high-school teacher turned meth-cooking crime boss, and another one that was a period piece about sexist, ennui-laden advertising men from the '60s, would both be award-winning hits and turn AMC into a credible network, you'd have thought they were crazy. But, Breaking Bad and Mad Men.
Note that all those success stories have very, very different content, tone, and storytelling styles. Yet they've all been hugely successful in their own right.
Are aspects of Star Trek dated? Sure, but that's true of just about anything from decades past, in one sense or another. Only the most narrow-minded of audiences think that means "not as good as what's trendy now." (And frankly the 2009 and 2013 Trek movies were, if anything, throwbacks to less sophisticated storytelling, in every sense except special effects.)
No one really knows what audiences will like (including the audiences themselves) until they discover it, after which it seems inevitable and everyone tries to claim credit. But all it really demonstrates is that people have wide-ranging and unpredictable tastes. Trek has a lot to offer on many levels, and it's been widely popular before, and I have little doubt that it will be again if and when some genuinely creative folks are given a shot at it.
- Status
Similar threads
