What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Vger23]

SNW sounds interesting, with the episodic format. I think what will really hook me, though, is a "next" Next Generation. Go into the future with an entirely new crew, new ethical problems, push the concept of the Federation and Star Fleet a bit further. Riding around with Pike and Spock still feels like retreading old ground, too much of a safe bet.

Speaking of unpopular opinions (meaning my own)...this is a sentiment I've always completely disagreed with.

For me, a show about a ship going out on weekly missions and exploring / getting into adventures is what it is. Doesn't matter if it's Pike and Spock or some mid-25th century crew. The Trek format isn't really going to change materially just because you set it in the future. Photon Torpedo vs Quantum Torpedo. Phasers and phase pistols. Warp drive, transwarp drive, transphasic slipstream drive or spore drive...it all moves at the speed of plot. Standard Trek-trope crews. There's really no foundational difference. It's all just window dressing. DS9, DSC and PIC are the shows that broke from the mold and experimented with the format. And, besides TOS, it's no coincidence that they are my favorite.

Honestly, I think it's MORE exciting and original to explore established but seldom-seen characters than just do yet another crew on yet another ship. The franchise exhausted that aproach with TNG, VOY and ENT. And TV already has The Orville, which is essentially that exact same format again, anyway.

 

[Anduinel]

killing her off so soon was the issue I had. Her death doesn’t land any kind of punch.

Generally, I think AA Trek has a hard time with the question of "what does this death get you?" The writers come off as almost impatient, like they don't realize that the attachment the characters have to each other is generally worth less than the attachment the audience has to the characters. And certainly, one does follow the other, but only given time. Prime Georgiou, Culbur, Dahj... these are all deaths that could have had more impact if the writers had given the characters more time to breathe.

 

[Muji]

I only liked 3 of the 10 episodes. The rest don't even deserve a second viewing XD

Fair enough. To each their own. I’ve watched a number of them back on several occasions. There’s at least 6 episodes that I really, really like and rewatch fairly regularly.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Really? I was under the impression that the Disco version of Pike was a season-long apology for Lorca hahaha.

But I agree that Mirror Georgiou is a terrible character, which is a pity because I like the actress in her other stuff and thought that Prime Timeline Georgiou was an excellent character.

So dunno if that is a controversial opinion, but Disco's greatest mistake and original sin was killing off Prime Timeline Georgiou. She was the most interesting character in season one.
(And I sincerely hope Mirror Gerogiou will be shipped off to that Section 31 series and we won't have to deal with her on SNW or Disco Season 3

I think DSC has a lot to like about it, including some things that are intrinsically tied to the Discovery (Stamets and Tilly especially), but I've thought from the very beginning that just having a show about the Shenzhou as shown in the pilot would've been a lot more fun and interesting. And it was especially dumb to spend two full episodes trying to get everyone interested in the show by showcasing the Shenzhou status quo only to instantly change everything in the third episode (even just carving those pilot episodes into flashbacks scattered throughout the season probably would've saved a fair amount of disappointment, though I like them a lot as individual episodes so I certainly don't mind that they exist).

My ideal version of the story DSC actually wanted to tell probably would have been to blow up the Shenzhou and let the real Georgiou become captain of Discovery with Lorca at most being the shady first officer (he could replace Landry entirely as a character, since she literally did nothing worthwhile anyway). The two of them together would have made a much more interesting drama of the struggle over the Federation's ideals. Plus, I think the MU stuff would've actually been more interesting with that kind of ongoing personality conflict already in the mix rather than relying entirely on Lorca's ambiguity being chucked away for nothing more than generic evilness. Or failing all of that, I still think it would've been an honest improvement for the story and characterization to actually just end the season with a reset button so that Burnham can truly prevent the Federation from compromising it's ideals instead of going along with a plan to blackmail an entire species using a potentially genocidal bomb as leverage. She could've used things she learned from Voq and the MU klingons to stop the war before it starts, thereby fixing her own mistakes in the process and bringing the whole moral of the story full circle in a way the actual season totally failed to do.

 

[Mudd]

Dahl's death accomplished exactly what it should have. Good writing.

 

[fireproof78]

killing her off so soon was the issue I had. Her death doesn’t land any kind of punch.

I disagree but that's OK. I feel like Georgiou's specter lingers over Burnham for the rest of the season and informs her actions throughout. I feel like the impact is not a punch so much as a ripple effect.

My ideal version of the story DSC actually wanted to tell probably would have been to blow up the Shenzhou and let the real Georgiou become captain of Discovery with Lorca at most being the shady first officer

Hmm...

As much as I would love to see more of Prime Georgiou I am left with Spock's statement of "Having is not so satisfying as wanting."

 

[sljolt]

Speaking of unpopular opinions (meaning my own)...this is a sentiment I've always completely disagreed with.

For me, a show about a ship going out on weekly missions and exploring / getting into adventures is what it is. Doesn't matter if it's Pike and Spock or some mid-25th century crew. The Trek format isn't really going to change materially just because you set it in the future. Photon Torpedo vs Quantum Torpedo. Phasers and phase pistols. Warp drive, transwarp drive, transphasic slipstream drive or spore drive...it all moves at the speed of plot. Standard Trek-trope crews. There's really no foundational difference. It's all just window dressing. DS9, DSC and PIC are the shows that broke from the mold and experimented with the format. And, besides TOS, it's no coincidence that they are my favorite.

Honestly, I think it's MORE exciting and original to explore established but seldom-seen characters than just do yet another crew on yet another ship. The franchise exhausted that aproach with TNG, VOY and ENT. And TV already has The Orville, which is essentially that exact same format again, anyway.

I'm not necessarily talking about having an adventure-of-the-week type format, though that has some advantages. For me the show is primarily about enlightened people tackling ethical dilemmas, and/or interesting scientific problems (the kind that aren't fully explained away by technobabble). What having different characters in a new setting allows you to do is to address these issues from different perspectives. The main difference between DS9 and TNG for me wasn't about seeking new life versus having it come to you on the station, it was about having different characters grapple with new problems in new ways.

The problem with VOY and ENT was actually the bland and unoriginal characters. I can't name many personality traits of Harry Kim or Travis Mayweather. Aside from a bit of gender swapping, the relationship between Archer, T'Pol, and Trip borrows a lot (maybe too much) from Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. Think about the differences between Picard and Sisko, though. That's more than window dressing.

I also disagree that the technology of Trek is fully dependant on the plot. I know some things came out of necessity; I've read that the transporter was down to not wanting boring or expensive shuttlecraft sequences in TOS. But think about how profoundly different a world without the replicator would be, how far that goes toward explaining the post-scarcity society Star Fleet originates from. A later setting could go even further to that, especially with a big budget. I would love to see both Alien and Federation cities in more detail, and get more hints about what their utopia is like.

The Orville almost entirely recycles ideas from TOS and TNG, for me that proves the point that more original ideas are needed. It's possible to be original with old characters, but I think a new and later setting would afford more opportunities to be imaginative.

 

[BillJ]

Star Trek badly, badly, badly needs a down-to-the-studs reimagining.

 

[fireproof78]

Star Trek badly, badly, badly needs a down-to-the-studs reimagining.

Yes, it does. Star Trek needs to stop depending on its past and nostalgia and reboot.

 

[marlboro]

I'm totally against a reboot. What Trek needs is better writers and showrunners. You literally have an entire universe to play with and the current crop of writers can only come up with tepid rehashes and soft reboots.

Oh, and stop dumbing things down. Have some faith in your audience.

 

[fireproof78]

What Trek needs is better writers and showrunners. You literally have an entire universe to play with and the current crop of writers can only come up with tepid rehashes and soft reboots.

That's why I say go all out and reboot. Trek is unwilling to move past its history as evidenced by TWOK themes being recreated in First Contact, Nemesis, ST 09, Into Darkness and Beyond.

Star Trek Discovery and Picard tried newer ideas and tech and were not regarded well. So, yeah, I don't see just exploring the universe as the solution.

 

[BillJ]

You literally have an entire universe to play with...

You really don't, as the only thing CBS seems interested in is selling nostalgia.

 

[fireproof78]

You really don't, as the only thing CBS seems interested in is selling nostalgia.

And it seems the only thing the audience is willing to buy.

 

[BillJ]

And it seems the only thing the audience is willing to buy.

Is it though? We have a small contingent on the internet that screams bloody murder, but I doubt they actually represent any kind of significant part of fandom. The bigger problem is that I don't believe it actually grows the audience. They're catering to an aging and dying fan base.

 

[marlboro]

That's why I say go all out and reboot. Trek is unwilling to move past its history as evidenced by TWOK themes being recreated in First Contact, Nemesis, ST 09, Into Darkness and Beyond.

Star Trek Discovery and Picard tried newer ideas and tech and were not regarded well. So, yeah, I don't see just exploring the universe as the solution.

I think both shows had (have?) a lot of potential. I think Picard would have worked brilliantly as a cerebral study of humanity, mortality, and transhumanism. Imagine Measure of a Man mixed with Ex Machina and Tennyson's Ulysses.

But what did we get? Seven as an 80s action hero. A samurai Romulan. Infodumps. A season long plot that feels somewhat disjointed even though it's only 10 episodes long. Frequently poor direction - why are you shooting scenes featuring an 80 year old Shakespearean actor like he's in a late 90s Tony Scott action vehicle?

 

[fireproof78]

Seven as an 80s action hero.

Because that's never happened in Trek before?

Is it though? We have a small contingent on the internet that screams bloody murder, but I doubt they actually represent any kind of significant part of fandom. The bigger problem is that I don't believe it actually grows the audience. They're catering to an aging and dying fan base.

I am not convinced of that. I think that CBS is trying to identify what the audience wants and fandom keeps showing different things, like more action oriented, more stories before Kirk, darker themes, etc. and when its done then there is immediate pushback and cry for the familiar.

What I am convinced of is that fans are very fickle when it comes to what they want.

 

[BillJ]

I think that CBS is trying to identify what the audience wants...

Which is a fools' errand and the biggest problem with these shows, they aren't made with any kind of vision beyond selling subscriptions. Yes, I know money makes the industry go round, but without a vision, you get the tepid immediately forgettable stuff that we've gotten to this point from CBS.

 

[fireproof78]

Which is a fools' errand and the biggest problem with these shows, they aren't made with any kind of vision beyond selling subscriptions. Yes, I know money makes the industry go round, but without a vision, you get the tepid immediately forgettable stuff that we've gotten to this point from CBS.

While I disagree about the forgettable point I do agree that there is a limited vision at this point in the franchise. I am hoping that Kurtzman is able to be a little more of a directive force behind the scenes.

But, CBS is trying to have its cake and eat it too, keeping up the nostalgia while tentatively trying out something new. I think a reboot would allow them to just cannonball in to the new and damn the history because writers treat it with kids gloves and audience members use past Trek as a stick to beat up new Trek for failing to evoke old Trek.

 

[marlboro]

How would a reboot help exactly? Sure you eliminate the baggage of continuity, but you still have to come up with new ideas, and what you produce will inevitably still be compared to what came before. So have you really gained anything?

Berman and Braga ran out of fresh ideas. The studio just wants popcorn flicks. The All Access guys struggle at basic storytelling. The franchise has unlimited potential - you just need writers with skill and imagination to fulfill that potential.

 

[darrenjl]

The hydro bomb in the Discovery episode Will You Take My Hand? should have been planted secretly on Praxis.