They don't have nearly as many episodes to do that in.
Because why would people care? They'd feel cheated if the payoff was about something small.
Please lower the stakes
- Thread starter urbandk
- Start date
They don't have nearly as many episodes to do that in.
Because why would people care? They'd feel cheated if the payoff was about something small.
Once again, my preference is - very very strongly - that if you do serialized, you have a plan which goes on longer than a season. Babylon 5 was probably the first modern example of this, but many serialized dramas these days (even when not based upon books, which means they have a built-in arc) have a 3-5 year plan which is already sketched out when the series is conceived. You can have very, very large stakes in a series that has an arc which plays out over its whole length, because the stakes are basically only reached once.
Discovery clearly has no master plan - they're just winging it. Of course, the same thing was true for TOS, TNG, VOY, and ENT. In all cases they just made up shit as they went along. Deep Space Nine was the only Trek series which really ever had even a cursory plan which went on longer than a season, and even there things got shuffled around (like delaying the start of the Dominion War for a season when Worf was added to the show).
The problem I have though is Discovery is basically trying to write Enterprise Season 3 over and over again. Heroic lead takes on existential crisis which threatens Earth, overcomes great difficulties, and saves the day. Doing it once is fine, but the climbdown is killer. Doing it multiple times basically drives home the artificiality of the crises, that they're just contrivances by the writers to get us to not lose interest. And as I've said in the past, fundamentally there's no difference between a plot which artificially takes 45 minutes for no good reason and one which takes 14-15 episodes for no good reason. The best option by far is stories which just build organically over time, with the writers elaborating on what is already established.
Discovery clearly has no master plan - they're just winging it. Of course, the same thing was true for TOS, TNG, VOY, and ENT. In all cases they just made up shit as they went along. Deep Space Nine was the only Trek series which really ever had even a cursory plan which went on longer than a season, and even there things got shuffled around (like delaying the start of the Dominion War for a season when Worf was added to the show).
The problem I have though is Discovery is basically trying to write Enterprise Season 3 over and over again. Heroic lead takes on existential crisis which threatens Earth, overcomes great difficulties, and saves the day. Doing it once is fine, but the climbdown is killer. Doing it multiple times basically drives home the artificiality of the crises, that they're just contrivances by the writers to get us to not lose interest. And as I've said in the past, fundamentally there's no difference between a plot which artificially takes 45 minutes for no good reason and one which takes 14-15 episodes for no good reason. The best option by far is stories which just build organically over time, with the writers elaborating on what is already established.
I am loss at words how stupid this stance is. Set up the story and characters properly and people will care, set it badly and you can threaten the all muliverses of past and the future and they still won't. There are countless popular serialised shows where the universe, the planet or indeed even a nation is not at risk.
For all we know, they HAVE had situations like that:
For Example from TNG S1 - "The Neutral Zone" (regarding the gfact as stated in that episode teh Federation had no real contact with the Romulan Empire for 50 years (the 1701-C incident not withstanding of course)
:^^^
My point? For all we know, yes, perhaps the Romulans saved the rest of the Galaxy, but as we don't have any Star Trek series based on the RSE, Romulus or Romulans in general; we'll never see it.
All sorts of things can be done. But they don't have to be done. There isn't one "right way" to tell stories. And if one writer, or producer prefers on way over another, there's nothing wrong with that. There's no reason Discovery has to tell its stories like other Treks told their stories other than to appease a certain group's nostalgia.
Sorry, that's like suggesting there is a best way of writing a series of novels, as if they are just one bigger novel. Which is emphatically not true. I can be quite frustrating for a reader/viewer's who's followed along for years and then finds their show is gradually going in a direction they don't care for because of the 'big plan' and have grit their teeth at the unwanted "payoff".
Last edited:
Starfleet Academy - no hero ships, no epic battles, no saving the universe. Just regular every day life (in a Star Trek setting). Lots and lots of people here have wanted this show for last 20 years.
Worf Chronicles - adventures of everyone's favorite Klingon. Lots of battles and "today IS a good day to die" pew pew pew stuff, but certainly he wouldn't be saving the universe every season.
Section 31 - Spy thriller, assassinations, rogue agents, cover ups, Federation's dark side (not for everyone, but could work)
All those do NOT have to be saving the universe from a new Big Bad every single year.
Last edited:
Yes. No matter what one does someone is going to be disappointed that they aren't getting A SHOW MADE FOR THEM SPECIFICALLY. And instead of trying to make 1 show which attempts to please everyone, CBS is making multiple shows that will suit different temperaments. Its a different approach then trying to make one show to fit all. And that is variety too.
Oh it could work, maybe. But knowing current writers it will be 3 episodes before Starfleet Cadets hijack a top of the line ship and go save the galaxy because no one else listens to them.
I have it saved in a word document so I can just copy and paste it in response to any Star Trek ideas that don't meet with my approval.
I agree that if you are going to have a universe busting plot, it should be the culmination of the series, perhaps built up in one or two episodes per season. The risk of building the show around it is that you run the risk of being cancelled early. Babylon 5 pacing suffered by squeezing everything into season four .
I'd quite like to see more exploration of the seedier regions like the Orion colonies with lower stakes of corruption, kidnapping, slavery, fraud, and theft. They just need to keep a lid on the technology to prevent every story being solved by a transporter .
I'd quite like to see more exploration of the seedier regions like the Orion colonies with lower stakes of corruption, kidnapping, slavery, fraud, and theft. They just need to keep a lid on the technology to prevent every story being solved by a transporter .
I think that would be too similar to the real plot of the upcoming Star Trek animated series on Nickelodeon. Which basically proves your point.
When did we start talking about TOS?
When did we start talking about TOS?
You mean TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT and DSC and the upcoming PIC and S31, and just about every Trek series which will ever be made.
Reminds me of that 2003 thriller movie Phone Booth that had to twist itself into pretzels to get around cell phones.
Basically the same thing every time "there's too much interference!"
I don't think the analogy holds however, because novel series are generally constructed in one of two ways.
One is, of course, construction as one big epic novel, in which case (unless you are George R.R. Martin or something) the books tend to come out in a roughly clockwork fashion every 1-3 years, because you don't want the reader to lose interest in your series.
The other common method is when authors first write a largely self-contained story but later decide to expand it. Good SFnal examples are Ringworld, 2001, The Forever War, The Mote in God's Eye, Gateway, A Fire Upon The Deep, etc. Often the gaps between these can be much longer - over a decade - because each book is telling a new story within the wider universe with some of the same characters, not a continuation of the old story. It also gives the author plenty of time to mull over what a new arc will look like and ensure the sequel will not be a total flop.
Honestly, the book analogy of the Discovery format - where each story is largely self-contained besides the characters, and each one builds to similar epic stakes. Honestly The Expanse novels are probably the closest, in that each has a unique antagonist who is defeated by the end. It works though, because the individual books are all written with nods to different genres (noir, western, spy thriller, ghost story, etc) meaning tonally the books are quite different. Still, they are basically pulphouse level stuff, like Peter Hamilton or Kevin J Anderson. I feel like Star Trek should aim higher than that.
The exact same holds true for shows which have season-long arcs. By that rationale it's best to go back to episodic, since surely some of the episodes will be to your liking.
QUOTE="ITDUDE, post: 12918284, member: 490"]Starfleet Academy - no hero ships, no epic battles, no saving the universe. Just regular every day life (in a Star Trek setting). Lots and lots of people here have wanted this show for last 20 years.
Worf Chronicles - adventures of everyone's favorite Klingon. Lots of battles and "today IS a good day to die" pew pew pew stuff, but certainly he wouldn't be saving the universe every season.
Section 31 - Spy thriller, assassinations, rogue agents, cover ups, Federation's dark side (not for everyone, but could work)
All those do NOT have to be saving the universe from a new Big Bad every single year.[/QUOTE]
My own idea for a Star Trek show is to follow a young Curzon Dax when he gets stationed as a junior diplomat on Qonos. We could see him slowly build up his friendship with Kor, Koloth, and Kang, eventually being instrumental in the Khitomer accords. Plus he's the sort of flawed but likable character (roguish, a bit of a drunk, lecherous towards women, and maybe men if we retcon Trill into being pan) that I think would go over well in the modern era.
There's a lot more variety than you seem to imagine. just like there isn't the choice between discrete episodic and mega-serial multi-season storyline.
Serial series come in two forms, closed and open ended. and it can be successfully done from collections of short serials, which Doctor Who did for decades to longer. Trouble with planning out an epic 5 Season closed plan is that the longer it gets the more things that can accumulate to fuck things up. Game of Thrones ran out of book material. Babylon 5 crammed season 5 into season 4 because renewal was uncertain, and similar fates befell Blakes Seven, Farscape and others. Many other series get cancelled before there big plan is done, leaving viewers disappointed and angry, feeling they've wasted their investment. I know I've felt this way in the past.
Now, is Discovery being a little conservative her, sure. Its launching a network and the showrunners aren't taking huge chances. You want them to aim higher? If anything IMO, that would have increased the likelihood of it crashing and burning and removing Trek from the screen for another decade or forever.
I think what its done is about as far as most legacy fans would be willing to put up with and even full season arcs is hard on them given the bellyaching. Expecting 5 years for a payoff. That's dreamland. In the bold new world of Streaming TV, 5 years is an eternity. Who knows what the streaming landscape is even going to look like in 5 years. Taking an mega story or 30 year old backwards stance right now is kind of silly, IMHO. There is simply too much that's uncertain, but what is certain is that single seasons can be planned and filmed.
Being a Canadian at heart, I'll go with a "let's be audacious, but within reason" stance myself. Less and you're embracing "been there, done that" territory and more you're flirting with crash and burn every renewal season. Why tempt fate at this stage of the game where there's still an industry servicing people wishing this all to be gone period?
Last edited:
"Please lower the stakes"--A very polite Bram Stoker.
Star Trek III Jr.
But anyway, I'm remembering that back in the day when a Starfleet Academy Movie was being discussed, fans dismissed it with the nickname "Star Trek 90210."
Similar threads
