Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
Most fans don't have such a focused idea of what Trek should be instead of what Trek is.
By definitions, fans tend to like a thing the way it is. Yes, even most of the people who will tune in to a Star Trek series.
Which is fine.
Put me down for a Pike series. "Not your elder's Trek" has not been working.
You’re not saying that Star Trek fans don’t also watch series like Twin Peaks, Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul, allowing them to easily observe that Star Trek is nowhere near as inventive by comparison, focusing more on “freshening up the style” than being constructive and unexpected within an established framework, which is what these shows prefer?
No, by definition they’re extremely invested in a thing without the need to toe a company line, which ideally is manifested in highly informed constructive criticism.
No, since they most of all will tune out from more of the same. Fans will continue watching regardless of quality.
Not really, no, but neither would TOS a few years earlier with scenery and characters swapped out.
Last edited:
"Not your elder's Trek" is making money. It's a damn shame.
"Not your elder's Trek" is making money. It's a damn shame.
I’m talking about making a splash at the Emmys, not about making money. What would it take for Star Trek to break out of this “how can we monetize the property” model? Even if it never does, there is nothing to stop fans from thinking in those terms.
Trek shouldn't make money--it should be made to better the show makers and humanity.
(Sounds pretty damn silly now, doesn't it?)
Liking past Trek =/= not wanting Trek to change and evolve with the times. Whether the new directions taken are worthwhile, that's in the eye of the beholder.
(Sounds pretty damn silly now, doesn't it?)
Liking past Trek =/= not wanting Trek to change and evolve with the times. Whether the new directions taken are worthwhile, that's in the eye of the beholder.
Yep.
I like Picard, but it's been decades since Trek on TV was successfully innovative, much less cutting edge.
There's not a shortage of modern science fiction that does what Trek doesn't and can't.
DIS is moving to the far future - to remake the Federation? PIC is dealing with a mystery plot in the Romulan-TNZ. Lower Decks is...a cartoon. S31 is most likely going to be either a James Bond ripoff or a seedy CSI thing.
Pike can take the mantle of 'we're going to this sector, explore, deal with diplomacy, and solve issues that just so happen to be really happening around these days'. I suspect arcs about proxy wars, foreign interference in local affairs (don't balk, the Klingons basically were doing this for the whole of TOS), maybe even a big Sheliak War arc because THAT didn't make it to DIS and it provides both big action and a big question: what does the Federation do to a totally inhuman enemy? These guys aren't carbon based, are xenophobic on a very basic principle, but also incredibly structured. It's still probably just a local sector 'brush war' in the big scheme of things, as it should be, but it could hit really hard. On top of that, there's general zaniness as they just chug along.
Pike can take the mantle of 'we're going to this sector, explore, deal with diplomacy, and solve issues that just so happen to be really happening around these days'. I suspect arcs about proxy wars, foreign interference in local affairs (don't balk, the Klingons basically were doing this for the whole of TOS), maybe even a big Sheliak War arc because THAT didn't make it to DIS and it provides both big action and a big question: what does the Federation do to a totally inhuman enemy? These guys aren't carbon based, are xenophobic on a very basic principle, but also incredibly structured. It's still probably just a local sector 'brush war' in the big scheme of things, as it should be, but it could hit really hard. On top of that, there's general zaniness as they just chug along.
Who said that shows winning Emmys and receiving massive media coverage don’t make money? They just make a great deal of money.
But this thread is in fact about liking past Trek and wanting that it doesn’t change with the times. If the year had been 2264 or 2269 and a recast Kirk had appeared with a recast crew, the topic would be a Kirk show (starting or completing the FYM), one even further away from DSC and closer to TOS.
So whatever anyone makes is great and quality is an illusion? The kinds of shows I mention often have one wonder “Who comes up with this stuff?” when we see the unusual choices made onscreen.
Why couldn’t it? There is no law of physics preventing it, and either way all I’m saying is that fans should merely talk about one approach while CBS takes another, as opposed to this convergence where fans see what CBS does and ask for a spinoff with more of it.
Last edited:
Joke taken way too literally? Check.
This thread is about anticipation for a Pike series. What people want out of a Pike series is going to vary from poster to poster.
That's almost the exact opposite of what I said.
This is a discussion, not an exercise in mind-reading. Your words portrayed me as claiming that Star Trek shouldn’t be made for money, whereas all I said was that it shouldn’t be made for middling money, but rather quality that leads to massive success (and money).
No, it doesn’t: they want a five-year mission with various preferences for characters, nothing weird like the contents of Pike’s illusions on Talos IV. If Kirk had appeared on DSC, it would be a Kirk show.
How can it be almost the exact opposite when you said…
It’s not: either a show is a massive critical and commercial success or it’s one of a thousand series tucked away in streaming menu.
...nothing, because they weren't aimed at you. Joke taken too literally and too personally.
Thank you for telling them what they want.
This is very specifically about what you've been arguing for. My comment wasn't even directed at that.
So you’re backing away from this comment then…
…and really saying that of course nobody in the comments preceding yours meant that money was irrelevant, and we can get back to arguing against this hold-it model of showrunning.
Thank you for claiming they don’t know what they want when they ask for it in public.
How was it not? The thread is about liking past Trek so much one would prefer to stay as close as possible to the most traditional model, that of a five-year mission on the good old Enterprise. In fact there is so little appetite for evolution it seems OK to reuse whatever has been established on DSC and keep going with Pike in 2258.
Exactly.
To cut this short, my comments were generally responding to several recent comments by just about everybody but you. Your ongoing arguments are premised on them being all about you.
No I don't.
If they can be perceived by non-telepaths to be about my comments, say, because they appear immediately after and in the final effect address them like this…
…then obviously I have to respond, regardless of what you intended. If you want to reply to other people’s comments, quote them and make that clear from the start.
So, no FYM spin-off on the Enterprise then?
Uh, wait, that implies the ship and its crew again.
Even if individual fans can imagine an alternative approach (and obviously I can’t speak for everyone), this convergence as a whole is about bringing back the DSC setup — not about exploring Pike’s childhood in Mojave or his final years on Talos IV. If Kirk’s crew had appeared on DSC there would be clamor for a Kirk show: the idea is to develop the obvious thing teased in the DSC S2 finale.
Nitpick all you like, but “Pike show” already has a definite meaning in fan circles, and it’s certainly not as general “a potential series focusing on an undetermined phase in the life of Christopher Pike”.
It doesn't have to be a 5 year mission about Pike. I just want a Pike show. It could be Pike in a war with the Klingons, or Pike dealing with an interplanetary crisis.
That's exactly what it is for me...
Making shows for fan circles instead of audiences is illogical.
