Spoilers For the Ship is Hollow...

[Jaster]

You forget how much canon already exists in Star Trek as opposed to shows like Doctor Who that sold a fantasy concept - with a lot more dignity , maturity, and respect toward its audience as well as doing a better job at making it feel (plausible and possible) in tone. That might have something to do with it, no? Yes? Maybe? But most audiences can't handle the 1963 episodes for a multitude of reasons, particularly not understanding third person perspective, among other things... but let's get back to a series I now name "Schlock Trek" because that's all it seems to be nowadays (along with Doctor Who ever since we got such award-winning dialogue such as "wibbly wobbly timey wimey humay wumany" as if the only audience desires were the under-5's, but I digressed again):

And considering what (was passed as dialogue) was put out to explain why the prequel had the fancy holographic communications devices but they chose to use viewscreens instead since every other show that chronologically happens afterward (up to a one-off episode in DS9) ignores holographic communications devices, what will be the excuse for going from Gary Gnu's great space turbolift coaster back to bog standard tubes?

My comments were somewhat tongue in cheek and fun. I’m not a fan of the depiction of the rollercoaster either. But for me it is a minor point TBH.

 

[Qonundrum]

My comments were somewhat tongue in cheek and fun. I’m not a fan of the depiction of the rollercoaster either. But for me it is a minor point TBH.

My apologies on that, I will admit I get high strung at times - given how I've seen sci-fi evolve or even devolve over the last two decades or so. So much sci-fi nowadays does this sort of "we think this is epic" with exaggerated, over-the-top effects, while being fourth wall-breaking in other aspects, while at the same time having the most unsubstantial and half-baked storylines that, not only make the wall-breaking self-awareness somewhat inconsequential, but also considering how much in sci-fi had otherwise improved and otherwise evolved since the 1950s, shouldn't even begin to make such rudimentary plot gaffes. Especially if modern day real-life Earth is involved, where our laws of physics cannot be ignored or disbelief suspended...

Going back to Doctor Who, where in 1963 they actually thought about checking for atmospheric conditions before going outside (and by Terry Nation, who took the most creative liberties with then-known laws of physics) but in 2017 they just write characters wandering around a planet before taking checks. That's not exactly an award-winning moment, even if the same story had worthwhile scenes... it's amazing what scriptwriters can drop the ball on, it happens for many reasons (like a time crunch), but such a thing is so mundane yet necessary to really get rock-solid. Nor did I get the impression the captain was particularly dumb, unless that was the point to actually show?!

As for effects, it got outlandish around 2009 with the half-baked yet fully-appalling "reimagining" of "V" that decided replacing mammoth, foreboding-looking ship interiors with kiddie fantasyland fountains as part of ship interiors and the biggest exterior display screens to broadcast... Maybe it's just me, but it makes campy Batman '66 look like legitimate, austere death-laden drama by comparison. And it is just me, I sometimes cling to this stuff too seriously.