From what I heard his planned second season would have taken place in the largely undefined period between the TOS and TNG eras.
Happy with Star Trek we have, need more?
- Thread starter JesterFace
- Start date
From what I heard his planned second season would have taken place in the largely undefined period between the TOS and TNG eras.
I loved TNG as a kid. As an adult, it's my least favourite Trek series. Discovery is the greatest thing to happen to Star Trek since DS9 and it's led to a new era of Prime universe Trek, something that i honestly thought would never happen. So yeah, bring on more.
I'm not happy with some of the storytelling, but this is the most Trek we've had coming on TV ever. I'm behind on TV and movies as it is, I don't know if I could handle more than the...7 current shows? 8? Is Section 31 still coming? Plus the stuff I watch on Youtube (Clear Skies, Blood of the Void, Star Trek Online playthroughs, Trek fan films, Trek reactions...), the comics I get as IDW comes out with them, the backlog of novels I really must get back to some day...
So, in terms of quality: yes and no (love Lower Decks and Short Treks, season 3 has me keeping hope alive for Discovery, really hoping season 2 of Picard isn't as depressing as a funeral march, cautiously optimistic for Strange New Worlds and Prodigy, dreading Section 31, Ready Room...is inoffensive background noise), in terms of quantity, my cup runneth over.
So, in terms of quality: yes and no (love Lower Decks and Short Treks, season 3 has me keeping hope alive for Discovery, really hoping season 2 of Picard isn't as depressing as a funeral march, cautiously optimistic for Strange New Worlds and Prodigy, dreading Section 31, Ready Room...is inoffensive background noise), in terms of quantity, my cup runneth over.
I'm not sure this is actually the most we've had, at least in terms of hours of new Trek TV per year. For a few years we had two series on the go with each producing 26 episodes per season. Since Discovery premiered in 2017, we've had 52 full length Star Trek episodes plus twenty shorter things: ten Short Treks and ten Lower Decks. In four years we've had something comparable to maybe a year and a half when TNG and DS9 or DS9 and Voyager were both running.
So we're really not being inundated with new Trek, and my cup hath room for more.
So we're really not being inundated with new Trek, and my cup hath room for more.
There's always room for more. I don't have to watch it all.
That's more a change in how television is produced than anything else. 26 episode seasons are a thing of the past, sadly*.
*or is it sadly when we had episodes like "Take Me Out to the Holosuite" and other "out of ideas" silliness.
They were more or less a thing of the past during the 90s. By mid-90s, the Star Treks were the only shows still doing 26 episodes per season, most shows only did 22-24.
No, I'm not happy with Star Trek. What drew me to the franchise 25 or so years ago simply doesn't exist in any of the present formats. The writing is vacuous, lazy and has no depth. Storylines are boring, uninspired and don't engage. The choice of showrunner for Picard and SNW inspires no confidence either.
However, it would appear that enough viewers think the converse, hence the ramp up in new series being produced.
I don't want Trek to be as it was. The television landscape has changed tremendously over the last 20 years. I want Trek to go toe-to-toe with the stuff that's good now.
Personally, I think if they overhauled the creative side of things, took off the bubble wrap and set the franchise in a direction that would please the likes of me (and many other disenchanted with the whole thing), a lot of you who do like what's presently on offer would probably still be happy.
However, it would appear that enough viewers think the converse, hence the ramp up in new series being produced.
I don't want Trek to be as it was. The television landscape has changed tremendously over the last 20 years. I want Trek to go toe-to-toe with the stuff that's good now.
Personally, I think if they overhauled the creative side of things, took off the bubble wrap and set the franchise in a direction that would please the likes of me (and many other disenchanted with the whole thing), a lot of you who do like what's presently on offer would probably still be happy.
I am generally happy with the Trek we have, though I thought there was a decline in quality in S3 of Discovery and they seem to have a bad habit of underwhelming ends to story arcs (though admittedly that's something Trek has long struggled with). I prefer Disco and Picard to any Trek series other than DS9, and perhaps TOS.
As to more, I'd love another film - ideally Kelvin as that's such a good cast. I think there are enough shows in the works for now.
As to more, I'd love another film - ideally Kelvin as that's such a good cast. I think there are enough shows in the works for now.
But enough of my ranting about a few seasons of TNG, Voyager, and Enterprise...
It wouldn't bother me if they stopped cranking this stuff out. It's like asking if we have enough episodes of The Simpsons.
Trek now primarily serves CBS in the same way that Big Macs serve the McDonalds corporation. There's damn little about it that's other than disposable and empty, but it satisfies the uncritical appetite for the familiar that's kept some fans coming back for decades.
Saying, "oh, this is pretty much as it always was" is a dishonest and lazy, if popular, line of defense for something that ought to be consumed, if it is consumed, with a clear understanding of what it is. I eat at MickeyD's sometimes. It's just never a special occasion.
OTOH, if Trek did go away I'd always take an active interest in any announcement of a new project. There's always promise in a blank canvas.
Trek now primarily serves CBS in the same way that Big Macs serve the McDonalds corporation. There's damn little about it that's other than disposable and empty, but it satisfies the uncritical appetite for the familiar that's kept some fans coming back for decades.
Saying, "oh, this is pretty much as it always was" is a dishonest and lazy, if popular, line of defense for something that ought to be consumed, if it is consumed, with a clear understanding of what it is. I eat at MickeyD's sometimes. It's just never a special occasion.
OTOH, if Trek did go away I'd always take an active interest in any announcement of a new project. There's always promise in a blank canvas.
Probably so. But that's not what Trek is about. Challenging new frontiers and being on the cutting edge is no longer the goal. The goal is to keep subscriptions without offending too many.
Any time something brave or new gets brought up there is the immediate call for Klingons, Q and all the familiar touchstones. Sad but true.
Star Trek Into Darkness: HOW DARE YOU BRING BACK KHAN IT'S SACRILEGE DO SOMETHING ORIGINAL. Endless butthurt and a half-billion dollars later the biggest money Trek movie of all time.
Star Trek Beyond: Does an original villain, not enough people go see it to deliver further movies.
This is why studios should never listen to fans.
Alternatively, they could build off of the Short Treks “Ephraim and Dot” and “The Girl Who Made The Stars” and do a CGI anthology series. That way, they could revisit any time period desired, and bring back actors as needed without worrying about how they’d aged, even explore some points within the runs of the original serieses. Or, in circumstances like, for instance, McCoy, Scotty, Rand, Spock (Ambassador, anyway), Nog, or Odo, where the actors have passed, they might be able to get by with soundalikes, instead of doing something that might feel like “replacing” them.
Less is more when it comes to Star Trek. What CBS should do is wind down the Kurtzmanverse, then plan for shorter productions where talented and experienced writers/showrunners would pitch ideas and just be allowed to make them like HBO films or limited series, without Berman-like supervision, special hype or too many tie-ins. Some of those projects might be given more seasons and succeed beyond anyone’s wildest dreams, others would remain interesting one-off pieces, but they would all be unique visions by individuals, who would be allowed to take risks with the IP like it wasn’t actually Star Trek, but rather a framework more along the lines of The Twilight Zone.
More is more, in my opinion. Some will work, and some won't. But, Star Trek is what I want to see more off, not less.
Yeah, if anything, what I’m seeing from this era of Trek is that this is trying to explore how versatile Trek can be, in throwing various types of Trek out there, seeing how well the concepts land.
And, I mean, they’re being successful in certain ways, considering that they’re being renewed and greenlit all the same, even if it doesn’t work for everyone.
And, I mean, they’re being successful in certain ways, considering that they’re being renewed and greenlit all the same, even if it doesn’t work for everyone.
Since the franchise is currently performing up to CBS Paramount's expectations (considering they are expanding it), why should they do this....exactly?
