What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Orphalesion]

I would too if I thought they could innovate tech that way, but I don't believe that is possible any more.

That's why I want a reboot.

I dunno they could still innovate tech in some ways. Like updating the warp drive so that we can go to different galaxies (stories set in intergalactic space and what weird things we might find in the darkness between the galaxies would be awesome,imho)
They could also explore more cybernetics and transhumanism.

The rest of the innovations could be small, common sense things, like having PADs that work like modern tablets rather than the clunky one-way things they had in 90s trek and stuff like that.
Honestly I would be fine with mostly the same tech (just updated aesthetics) but more societal and political changes.

But I see what you mean that too powerful technology could kill stories.

Another option would be to show the Federation after a technological decline (though, again that's basically what DISC season 3 will be)

 

[fireproof78]

I dunno they could still innovate tech in some ways. Like updating the warp drive so that we can go to different galaxies (stories set in intergalactic space and what weird things we might find in the darkness between the galaxies would be awesome,imho)
They could also explore more cybernetics and transhumanism.

They tried to tip their toe in to the transhumanism with Picard and there is already argumentation about it, even with robot copies being done before.

The reason I want a reboot is so that you can start from 21st century conception of technology, and provided that optimistic framework that could be helpful right now.

 

[marlboro]

Why limit the stories by having them be centered around Starfleet? The Trek universe is full of interesting characters and races - why not explore them from an alien point of view?

A travelogue hosted by Q. A Mission Impossible style con game/heist show featuring the Think Tank. An adaptation of the IKS Gorkon books. A Trek version of The Americans. There is a lot of different stuff you could do.

 

[Lord Garth]

If they haven't done a complete reboot by now, they're not going to. A complete reboot guarantees a "back to basics" series, and that's not what I'm interested in at this point. It's also why I look forward to SNW but my interest isn't going to be at the same level it is for DSC and PIC.

 

[BillJ]

Which Gene and company introduced.

By the time TNG came around, Gene was no longer the same person he was on TOS.

 

[BillJ]

A travelogue hosted by Q. A Mission Impossible style con game/heist show featuring the Think Tank. An adaptation of the IKS Gorkon books. A Trek version of The Americans. There is a lot of different stuff you could do.

But I already get these things from shows that aren’t Star Trek. When I watch Star Trek I want it to be Star Trek.

 

[Orphalesion]

I do agree that I would like to see more of the Star Trek universe outsider of Starfleet.

I'd still like a show that is centered around life in a civilian colony.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I do agree that I would like to see more of the Star Trek universe outsider of Starfleet.

I'd still like a show that is centered around life in a civilian colony.

Star Trek: No Stars No Trek.

 

[BillJ]

I'd still like a show that is centered around life in a civilian colony.

If I was going to have a civilian space colony show, I'd rather have it without Star Trek's IP being involved. I'd want something new and interesting with a vision.

 

[Vger23]

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).

You unfortunately lost me right here.

I could care less about "enlightened humans" and ethical dilemmas. And frankly, I think Star Trek's prowess on the latter is vastly overrated. It's just basic drama, and most good shows have it. The moral/ethical thing was always best for me when it was buried heavily in an adventure episode to give it some spice and drama (Mostly in TOS style, and a balance that the later series failed to establish properly, making them feel ponderous and preachy when they attempted it).

I watch Star Trek as a fun, colorful action/adventure set in a fantastic future universe. I don't care at all about whether or not Tuvix should have lived.

Probably explains why I don't care what "era" the show is set in. It honestly means nothing to me. Re-do the TOS crew exactly as they were and have adventures in space...or set it in the 96th century with a dolphin captain and a time traveling sentient ice cream cone as the ships councilor. Same stuff as far as I'm concerned. Doesn't bother me at all. People in space doing outer space adventure stuff. Just make it entertaining and have arrowhead badges!

 

[fireproof78]

Why limit the stories by having them be centered around Starfleet? The Trek universe is full of interesting characters and races - why not explore them from an alien point of view?

Because that ignores the human.

 

[Vger23]

Because that ignores the human.

100%

The only thing in Star Trek that turns me off quicker than pseudo intellectual pompous content is an over abundance of aliens trying to be reflective of "the human condition." Here and there, it's ok. Spock, Data, Odo...sure I guess that works.

We have a hard enough time exploring the near infinite diversity of the human race as it is....let's not muddle it even more with a show about the Pakled Mensa Alliance or a whole series about Medusan basketball players.

 

[marlboro]

"Why is this Aesop dude always talking about animals and shit? What's that got to do with people?"

 

[Vger23]

"Why is this Aesop dude always talking about animals and shit? What's that got to do with people?"

I don t like Aesop's Fabkes either.

I'm not saying it has nothing to do with people. I'm just saying I'd rather my shows about people be about .....well...people. Not the Breen Family sit-com show.

I don't really care as much...no matter how clever. The drama of "humanity reflected through alien characters" just doesn't carry the same punch for me. It's thinly diluted, distracting, and far less interesting.


Spock is the exception.

 

[fireproof78]

100%

The only thing in Star Trek that turns me off quicker than pseudo intellectual pompous content is an over abundance of aliens trying to be reflective of "the human condition." Here and there, it's ok. Spock, Data, Odo...sure I guess that works.

We have a hard enough time exploring the near infinite diversity of the human race as it is....let's not muddle it even more with a show about the Pakled Mensa Alliance or a whole series about Medusan basketball players.

To be more specific there is a need to balance elements that allow people to connect with the characters. If the characters are more alien, then the environment needs to be more familiar. To @marlboro 's point regarding Aesop's fables those still play with familiar elements, such as a vineyard, a fox, etc. The animals have human like characteristics, but the environment is highly relatable, even if the characters are a bit unusual.

Conversely, if the environment is more alien then you need an "everyman/woman/person" type character who is very relatable to the audience. Even Tolkien, who was dealing with highly fantastical and strange beings did his best to ground the environment and the characterization in to familiar tropes, i.e. he self-identified as a "hobbit" who liked "good food, a good smoke and good company." The characters have characteristics that can be connected with on a very personal level.

So, if you want to do a show that is more alien then at least one character needs to be grounded in the human-John Crichton in Farscape. Converesely, a more alien ensemble is going to require a more human environment- "Alien Nation."

It's not that it can't be done-but it requires a lot of work to do well.

 

[Lord Garth]

Why limit the stories by having them be centered around Starfleet? The Trek universe is full of interesting characters and races - why not explore them from an alien point of view?

One of the things I like about PIC is that all the main characters are either ex-Starfleet or non-Starfleet. It definitely helps to give the series a different voice.

Of the other series, even DS9 was only part of the way there.

 

[Paul755]

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

I don’t think that’s controversial That’s a damn fine idea.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

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.

I just feel like season 1 is like a fight for the Federation's soul embodied by a fight for Burnham's soul, meaning Burnham is stuck in the middle trying to find her way out of the morally grey area. Lorca is clearly trying to pull her farther in but there just doesn't seem to be any equivalent force going the other way, regardless of Georgiou's lingering presence (or even the occassional moral stand taken by Tilly and Stamets).

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."

I don't disagree with the concept generally, but I don't think it's universally applicable. Sure, this idea wouldn't necessarily have been executed well enough to make me go 'best season ever!' but I feel pretty certain that even if it helped nothing else at all, having the real Georgiou still around would at least have forced the MU arc into a more interesting direction than just a generic coup detat between Lorca and the Emperor. And letting Yeoh play both versions of herself in the same scene would automatically have been more interesting than anything that actually happened in that last MU episode (despite the fact that I don't even like evil Georgiou).

 

[Lord Garth]

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

I don’t think that’s controversial That’s a damn fine idea.

I agree too. And I'm a pretty big fan of Discovery. So there you go.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

I do agree that I would like to see more of the Star Trek universe outsider of Starfleet.

I'd still like a show that is centered around life in a civilian colony.

I would love a Star Trek show without Starfleet, though set solely on a colony might not be the best way to go. Make it a more sprawling story with multiple casts and locations to tell wider stories might work best, so there could be a newly established remote colony that wants to be independent from the politics of the Federation and violence of Starfleet as the backdrop, though these colonists have chosen a bad place to set up a new home, being a largely unexplored sector they don't know what is going on around them and now find themselves on the knifes edge. A ragtag militia (something in the same veins as the Maquis), who thought they'd signed up to frighten off pirates and raiders, now find themselves being called upon to protect them from a looming war. Throw in a research ship trying to unlock some mystery of the region, a person looking for answers as to what happened to a family member that vanished in sector, a smuggler with a heart of gold, a crime boss playing all sides against one another for their own gain, and a spy on a highly classified mission, and then you open up to possibilities for all sorts of stories to be told in the Trek universe but with some very different perspectives and lots of opportunities and directions for things to go in.