• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What's your favorite decade of Star Trek?

Favorite Decade of Star Trek?

  • 1960s

    Votes: 13 12.6%
  • 1970s

    Votes: 9 8.7%
  • 1980s

    Votes: 10 9.7%
  • 1990s

    Votes: 61 59.2%
  • 2000s

    Votes: 3 2.9%
  • 2010s

    Votes: 7 6.8%

  • Total voters
    103
1990s. There is no question about it. Trek was at its apex. I had a wonderful childhood because of Trek in the 90s. The vast canvas of this universe and the perfect setting of the 24th century. It was a great time to be a Trekkie while being a child.
 
A decade yet to come, since Star Trek must never be about the good old days.
It depends. For me, Star Trek must be about a positive future. It just so happens older shows seem to me to do a better job at portraying that. I don’t know if that’s an accident or a function of vintage.
 
It depends. For me, Star Trek must be about a positive future. It just so happens older shows seem to me to do a better job at portraying that. I don’t know if that’s an accident or a function of vintage.

But that’s a trap since then you‘re stuck with the older iterations portraying their often clunky and dated vision of a positive future while the current shows and their attempts are sidelined. Fans should constantly envision what Star Trek should be doing now and doing better than older Star Trek so they can properly evaluate and critique the current state of the franchise, even if it means watching the best of the competition instead of TOS/TNG “ONE… MORE… TIME!”
 
But that’s a trap since then you‘re stuck with the older iterations portraying their often clunky and dated vision of a positive future while the current shows and their attempts are sidelined.
Well, this is just a “favorites” thread. I’m sure nobody wants the new shows to fail, but we’re still allowed to have our favorites.

Fans should constantly envision what Star Trek should be doing now and doing better than older Star Trek so they can properly evaluate and critique the current state of the franchise, even if it means watching the best of the competition
Sounds like a job. ;)

instead of TOS/TNG “ONE… MORE… TIME!”
I think a big part of the appeal of TOS+TNG is they portray a future you want to live in. We’re exploring the galaxy, and mature, wise, peaceful adults are in charge. I think that’s a big part of why people keep going back to them—they’re comfort television, and they’re inspirational. I think if a new show were to come along and recapture that optimism, I would love it.
 
1990s. There is no question about it. Trek was at its apex. I had a wonderful childhood because of Trek in the 90s. The vast canvas of this universe and the perfect setting of the 24th century. It was a great time to be a Trekkie while being a child.

I definitely agree. Though age groups and differences therein had those "Kirk vs Picard" arguments, of which the only correct answers are "Sisko" or "Ebert". Many found stuff to appreciate from both, but it's amazing the gamut of options and where fan differentiation begins. And to how extreme it can go in any of those directions.

The 1960s had some way-cool stuff. Some of which could only have been done in the 1960s. What worked back then still holds up but a fair bit of it has dated badly. A lot of DS9 hasn't dated at all. Some TNG has but not as much or as badly as I'd expected. TOS was the 23rd century. TNG made the 24th its own, despite a bumpy start and even the earliest episodes with Klingons set a feel that would be honed, even if there's continuity stuff. The season 3 stuff onward was so strong, polished and had depth that "Heart of Glory"'s issues aren't one. The same can ultimately be said for the Borg going from being a species that replaced organic parts with machinery and hops around the galaxy assimilating technology not unlike the Pakleds into something far bigger and creepier. The Queen too, despite continuity bumper cars going on, was strong enough that it's easily forgivable, it's arguably easier to retcon for total consistency, and it opens up more storyline avenues, which doesn't hurt. It's also true that universe creating can lead to small universe syndrome due to continuity constraints or if enough cheats in a new idea are used, yet at the same time to add in a new feature or idea willy nilly more often upends all credibility if it's not done convincingly. It's all based on what the audience expects and that varies, as well as the ideas the makers have and how they execute it. In some cases, the idea might fail but is still worth kudos for trying. It's never simple is it...
 
The 90s, TNG (most of it), DS9 and Voyager, it was a great time to be a fan. That decade defined Star Trek for me.

I also really like Discovery and I'm looking forward to everything that's coming so maybe the 20s will be just as great as the 90s.
 
It would have to be 90s for me. Trek at its most warm, comforting, and familiar. TNG, DS9... shame about the early seasons of VOY, but even that got really good from seasons 4 to 5.
 
I think a big part of the appeal of TOS+TNG is they portray a future you want to live in. We’re exploring the galaxy, and mature, wise, peaceful adults are in charge. I think that’s a big part of why people keep going back to them—they’re comfort television, and they’re inspirational. I think if a new show were to come along and recapture that optimism, I would love it.

VOY had it too. ENT was floundering. DS9 worked hard to keep it while showing more complexity behind the scenes and was the first incarnation to show some contention and even flirting with dystopia. Doesn't mean those items must become the staple in Trek - far from it. It takes raw talent and balance to mix in both ideals and the underlying struggles. Trek doesn't need week after week of Ronald D Mooreisms of corrupt Federation Admirals or, worse, making the Federation out as a big gangster when it's not. That's apocryphal. His stories of intrigue and mayhem worked in part because they were one-offs. Now look at the big screen movie "Insurrection" doesn't hold up (yet Moore's generally did) because it's the same already-done-to-dino-death idea of some admiral being less-than-noble (yawn, it was already been done to stagnatasaurus by 1998), now on the big screen a second time but this time it's not a throwaway joke (made by Data). That's one why there was no Trek movie until 2002.

But in a nutshell, one of Trek's unique themes and an absolute staple of Roddenberry's vision - humanity coming together and working together as grown-ups, even when there's contention. Take that away and Trek becomes even more diluted and generic a name. May as well call it "Pew-Pew Battles in Space With Children Bickering at the Dinner Table", which is about as exciting as foot fungus is.
 
The same can ultimately be said for the Borg going from being a species that replaced organic parts with machinery and hops around the galaxy assimilating technology not unlike the Pakleds into something far bigger and creepier. The Queen too, despite continuity bumper cars going on, was strong enough that it's easily forgivable, it's arguably easier to retcon for total consistency, and it opens up more storyline avenues, which doesn't hurt. It's also true that universe creating can lead to small universe syndrome due to continuity constraints or if enough cheats in a new idea are used, yet at the same time to add in a new feature or idea willy nilly more often upends all credibility if it's not done convincingly. It's all based on what the audience expects and that varies, as well as the ideas the makers have and how they execute it. In some cases, the idea might fail but is still worth kudos for trying. It's never simple is it...

Speaking of the Borg and how they were executed at the very beginning, I have to say that I definetely prefer the pale white ghostly TNG-era Borg over these one-button-clicking, discolight dancing, weak and lousy Borg from VOY.
When I remember watching "QWho" there was such a great tension from the moment when Guinan knew something was wrong. In this episode and the following two parter between the seasons 3 and 4 the Borg were really powerful, relentless, unstoppable and so frightening. Even today I'm more scared than everything when I see the first Borg acting. And I was totally fine with the fact that there was no queen, although they later said that she was there.
I also dig the sets they built for the cube. They were sterile looking and really interesting to look at. I wish they would have had a bigger budget in the TNG days. Concerning VOY Borg sets I would say that darker does not mean more frightening, right?
And yes, I'm okay with how the Borg evolved during TNG. Initially starting as a race of a collective that assimilates and consumes technology from other species and later wiping out and assimilating whole civilizations. That made them even more frightening.
To me it is good and bad they did not overdo the Borg during TNG. I would have liked to see them in their collective state being intact again with a new story involving the Ent-D, assimilating people but on the other hand, the dose they wwre used was perfect if you put it in contrast to VOY.
Well there is still so much potential to the Borg collective. Soon I will read the Destiny cicle.
 
Speaking of the Borg and how they were executed at the very beginning, I have to say that I definetely prefer the pale white ghostly TNG-era Borg over these one-button-clicking, discolight dancing, weak and lousy Borg from VOY.

*snicker*

VOY did take things too far, Unimatrix Zero easily comes to mind...

The TNG versions did have more menace, especially Q-WHO and TBOBW and even I Borg up to a point.

Once STFC introduced the tubules that can start to convert anyone on the fly did they start to suffer. They can assimilate with a magic wand. A few years later Starfleet can fake assimilation with a magic wand and yet it's a cliffhanger we're supposed to be scared by. Borg rot did start before VOY, which is fun since VOY's life got extended because of the Borg and the Borg Queen wasn't even brought into VOY until season 5, suggesting seasons 3 and 4 were almost trying to ditch the idea of a Queenand go back to basics with the Collective...

When I remember watching "QWho" there was such a great tension from the moment when Guinan knew something was wrong. In this episode and the following two parter between the seasons 3 and 4 the Borg were really powerful, relentless, unstoppable and so frightening. Even today I'm more scared than everything when I see the first Borg acting. And I was totally fine with the fact that there was no queen, although they later said that she was there.

Those episodes hold up amazingly well, even with what one would have guessed correctly beforehand or despite what did transpire. The writing and acting are so perfect. And both, especially QWho, sell the danger of a true unknown threat extremely well. No Queen is really needed to tell us about limited three dimensional terms (she's like the Master from Doctor Who or Palpatine from Star Wars, returning with the smallest (if any) explanation. )

Or the Queen could have been a new factor instead of a retconned one; the Borg - despite their size and prowess - needed a central coordinator to prioritize instead of being one big lumpy gestalt. And not a generic drone either, this new model needed free rein. So in a way they did adapt, even though it's not really needed to have done. She is well acted by both, but still the idea of a gestalt as large and scaled as the Borg were formidable on their own and Riker nailed their description in QWho.

The only problem is that every time the Federation conjures up a solution that the Borg need to adapt as well. The Borg rarely did... Granted, "I Borg" took what is actually in concept a novel turn. The outcome was iffy but there was still a sense of threat and menace. Until the plot demanded that characters, who were very resolute before, now change so quickly so fast and in a situation that's atypical if not outright abnormal. How come nobody tried to find the distributed/redundant communications subsystems instead of showing them a signed "Wish you were here" postcard of some annoying image, which wouldn't cause them to go nuts - and only because it wasn't Kirk that signed it... Kirk's reputation after TOS season two is indeed galactic; the very sight of his name causes computers across the galaxy to go haywire. The moment he shows up and utters a syllable is when most of them promptly explode.

I also dig the sets they built for the cube. They were sterile looking and really interesting to look at. I wish they would have had a bigger budget in the TNG days.

And proof that a big big budget isn't always necessary to sell it. They did wonders with what they had and it wasn't even lit with < 10 lumens to hide imperfections. Right down to 5.25" floppy drive covers cleverly repurposed. (By 1985, 3.5" disks were standard and 5.25" units were on their way out, so wherever they got their dumpster o' goodies from they were eminently creative in making them add to the looks of something vastly different and I love it. Even the green monochrome monitors had more presence than the RGB ones (or those circular lightning generation things you'd find at Spencer Gifts) used in the big budget films and later series.)

Concerning VOY Borg sets I would say that darker does not mean more frightening, right?

Total agreement. The green and yellow hues were there to duly sell a sense of sick, but it feels more theatrical than QWHO and TBOBW, which relied more on lighting for shadow detail as well as the mystique and sense of presence -- instead of the Studio 54 lights to complement an overly darkly lit set, which feels artificial and even phony. At the time it looked better than what preceded it but long after then, the "shiny newness" and bias that goes with it wore off.

And yes, I'm okay with how the Borg evolved during TNG. Initially starting as a race of a collective that assimilates and consumes technology from other species and later wiping out and assimilating whole civilizations. That made them even more frightening.

My only real issue with that is that the Borg are clearly more advanced than the Federation and its regular gaggle of adversaries. Save for the cloaking device, of which that could be used only once for dramatic shock horror effect but then the return on it plummets. But I digress, if the Borg are so much more advanced then what's so great about the flagship's technology? Are they going to build a Cube than can separate into lots of itty bitty cubes? I mean, they already have directional phasers. Or never bothered to take what they learned prior to STFC and make numerous phaser arrays or find a way to have multiple beams shot out simultaneously or fast enough, or even to just bring over two ships instead of one to be done with the pesky Federation ships, etc- they only adapt when the plot needs to and they don't because they're not allowed to win in the script. At least each hand phaser allows them half a dozen shots before the Borg adapt to the 1 or 2 shot chance claimed (come on, the Borg's collective beanie would quickly analyze the frequencies and add to them and faster than Geordi changing the shield emitter to change frequencies every time a Borg cube or sphere or diamond or clover or horseshoe arrives). But multiple itty bitty cubes -- that would look more comedic than anything else...

To me it is good and bad they did not overdo the Borg during TNG. I would have liked to see them in their collective state being intact again with a new story involving the Ent-D, assimilating people but on the other hand, the dose they wwre used was perfect if you put it in contrast to VOY.

Yeah, that harks back to "Scorpion" - which IMHO is VOY's best Borg outing. Season 4 had a lot of Borg-themed episodes, which worked, but as far as actual Borg-are-the-baddies episodes, "Dark Frontier" might be their last best outing and even then part of me still prefers "Scorpion", warts and all.

Well there is still so much potential to the Borg collective. Soon I will read the Destiny cicle.

There still is but how to flesh it out, so to speak, without it coming across as hollow, superficial, empty, done redux to death, etc... Maybe PIC will succeed in this. It's way too early in the show's run though.
 
Eveything was better in the nineties. That’s why generation x are the second best generation of all time.
 
It depends. For me, Star Trek must be about a positive future. It just so happens older shows seem to me to do a better job at portraying that. I don’t know if that’s an accident or a function of vintage.

And one reason why the occasional episode involving "the evil admiral trope"(tm) worked is because it was an exception and not what felt like every minute of every episode. Nothing vintage about it at all, some concepts are timeless.
 
And one reason why the occasional episode involving "the evil admiral trope"(tm) worked is because it was an exception and not what felt like every minute of every episode. Nothing vintage about it at all, some concepts are timeless.
This post so dripped in nostalgia and rose-tinted glasses it hurts.

Cornwell --> Not an evil Admiral.
Clancy --> Love her or hate her, she's not an evil Admiral.

Who else have we seen for Admirals in DSC or PIC? That guy in "The Vulcan Hello". He's not evil either.

The only evil Admiral
Isn't even an Admiral but a Commodore, and that's all I'll say due to spoiler policy about Picard.
 
I have to say 90’s because that’s when I discovered Trek. I live in the UK and TNG season one began airing Autumn 1990. I was 11 and once I fell in love with it, Trek became a constant presence as I was growing up —and a source of great comfort and solace. An introvert, I never felt like I particularly fitted into my environment and even as a kid there were so many things about society and the culture around me that I found fucked up. Trek gave me hope because it offered a vision of a better world than the one we’re living in; with, frankly, better people in it.
 
I grew up in the 1990s, so ‘90s Trek for me. The '90s seems to be better at everything though.

As for second place, ‘00s Trek. ENT mid S3-S4 & ST ’09 were wonderful.

Third place is ‘20s Trek because PIC. Yes, I know the decade just started, but that’s how I lean right now.
 
90's. Lots of new Trek, which I personally liked more than DISCO, a TOS movie, and generally a time when the world felt more optimistic!

Stay off social media. Your outlook will greatly improve.

I'll pick the 90's too since it had DS9 and the later years of TNG. Also was the time of Babylon 5 so was a great time for Sci-Fi in general.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top