• 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!

News Kurtzman: Starfleet Academy Series On The Way

If so this is why most fiction fails to work for me any more. Most of the people now are just completely and totally unhealthy and no I can't turn a blind eye to it.
But isn't that how it's always been? Character conflict usually comes from this type of stuff. Even when your not talking about the kind of super edgy stuff that came around when the Golden Age of tv happened and you started to see the Tony Soprano and Dexters and so forth it's always kind of been their. Kirk's love for the Enterprise keeps him from finding love and happiness outside of Starfleet and Spock is conflicted between his human and Vulcan half. Odo didn't know where he came from for along time and when he did they were bad guys and he for a long time would never talk about his feelings or Torres hated her Klingon half and so forth.
 
But isn't that how it's always been? Character conflict usually comes from this type of stuff. Even when your not talking about the kind of super edgy stuff that came around when the Golden Age of tv happened and you started to see the Tony Soprano and Dexters and so forth it's always kind of been their. Kirk's love for the Enterprise keeps him from finding love and happiness outside of Starfleet and Spock is conflicted between his human and Vulcan half. Odo didn't know where he came from for along time and when he did they were bad guys and he for a long time would never talk about his feelings or Torres hated her Klingon half and so forth.
And? A lot of it fails for me. Star Trek is no exception.
 
I tried the first episode a few years ago and didn't like it but it's a show I want to try again. From what I understand it's set in the 80's but they don't say which year so they can sort of cover lots of elements from the 80s. I totally dig 80s and 90s nostalgia since I was a kid then teen and early 20s year old back then.
 
I tried the first episode a few years ago and didn't like it but it's a show I want to try again. From what I understand it's set in the 80's but they don't say which year so they can sort of cover lots of elements from the 80s. I totally dig 80s and 90s nostalgia since I was a kid then teen and early 20s year old back then.
It's a pretty standard sitcom but at least acknowledges how messed up the family dynamic can be. Not perfect but there is an awareness that many shows ignore that these characters are unhealthy.
 
If so this is why most fiction fails to work for me any more. Most of the people now are just completely and totally unhealthy and no I can't turn a blind eye to it.
Yeah, I can't say that appeals to me.

I've watched a lot of TV shows with dysfunctional characters and it's definitely been all the rage for the last 29 years - Sopranos, Dexter, 24, House, Battlestar Galactica, Breaking Bad, etc etc.

Trek always gave me some respite from that; I needed to tune in and see people who had become the best versions of themselves. Regularly challenged and ever-vigilant in trying to stay good, but balanced and fundamentally good regardless.

There's room for all three in my view: deeply flawed characters; deeply flawed characters trying to do better (which I see as Kurtztrek); unflawed characters trying to stay that way (Bermantrek). I just miss the latter, because it was something fairly unique to TV that Star Trek brought for a long time.
 
Yeah, I can't say that appeals to me.

I've watched a lot of TV shows with dysfunctional characters and it's definitely been all the rage for the last 29 years - Sopranos, Dexter, 24, House, Battlestar Galactica, Breaking Bad, etc etc.

Trek always gave me some respite from that; I needed to tune in and see people who had become the best versions of themselves. Regularly challenged and ever-vigilant in trying to stay good, but balanced and fundamentally good regardless.

There's room for all three in my view: deeply flawed characters; deeply flawed characters trying to do better (which I see as Kurtztrek); unflawed characters trying to stay that way (Bermantrek). I just miss the latter, because it was something fairly unique to TV that Star Trek brought for a long time.

So first and foremost - each to their own. Jesus H Christ this is a tv show/series so it is an entirely impossible mission to create a definitive "it should be" and is a subjective matter rather than "all fans must feel x about it".

I would contest that Bermantrek showed unflawed characters though - a few easy examples are Picard in "The Neutral Zone" losing his temper and kicking off over them reviving the humans they found from 20th c, Riker's dick getting them in trouble due to Minuet managing to distract him enough in the Binar incident to allow it to go on, Kira had a permanent temper on and loved to shout at everyone and anyone, we easiy got three seasons (if not slightly more) of Dr Creepy/Horny Bashir.

It feels like the Klingons were actually more in touch with their emotions (in terms of expressing them more easily) but their answer was also to break stuff so what do I know.

It feels to me that the change has not been the frequency of expression but the method - Bermantrek leaned towards more of a stage acting "tell the audience" but avoid more subtle expressions so it felt almost clinical. There wasn't crying because the acting style was suited to a medium were small expressions like a tear may not be noticed.

I think one thing to bear in mind with Disco and Pic is that the 10 episodes or so per season are occurring over a much shorter time frame than what we are used to seeing from Bermantrek meaning that we see the fallout from what has happened previously, how it builds up and gets let loose by a character whereas in the olden days we may see a character a bit sad at the episode's end but they then have a month inuniverse to deal with the issues before the next episode comes along so they seem like they are back up and running at full capacity.

Could we also argue, on the TNG side, that the appointment of a ship's counsellor was another factor in the ability of the crew to bounce back as they have a proper provision for mental health whereas TOS (and Disco) era crews didn't always have one?
 
Even though I think "everyone cries too much on Disco" is an overused complaint, I will agree the show does indulge in the emotionalism a bit too often. The season 2 finale, for example could have been a fraction of the running time it took up if they cut back on so many tearful good-byes and monologues and just got on with the damn plot. And don't even get me started on the silliness of everyone getting tearful over Georgiou's departure in the third season. It's been suggested, and I'm inclined to agree that scene was more about the writers and cast saying good-bye to Michelle Yeoh, and that's fine, she was obviously well liked on set. But unfortunately, in universe, it makes no sense for everyone to suddenly feel sad and mourn the loss of "Cannibal Space Hitler" who had been insulting and publicly humiliating everyone when she wasn't threatening to have them killed and or eaten.
 
I've gotta be honest (and I stopped watching after the first DSC ep of Season 3) - I much prefer the original Georgiou. I was gutted she got killed off; Michelle Yeoh slayed in that role. Jason Isaacs was phenomenal too. The first half of the first season in particular was really bloody good, but given all the shenanigans in the writers room I suspect it was born of different creative minds.
 
I've gotta be honest (and I stopped watching after the first DSC ep of Season 3) - I much prefer the original Georgiou. I was gutted she got killed off; Michelle Yeoh slayed in that role. Jason Isaacs was phenomenal too. The first half of the first season in particular was really bloody good, but given all the shenanigans in the writers room I suspect it was born of different creative minds.
I prefer the original Georgiou and would have loved Prime Lorca. But, I'll take what we get because it is incredibly dynamic characters. "Terra Firma" two parter in Season 3 was phenomenal character work and Yeoh did an excellent job. I'm sure Prime Georgiou could have a similar moment but it was worth it for that episode, in my opinion.

And, yeah, DSC Season 1 would have been a much different animal had the BTS nonsense not pretty much upended the writer's room.
 
Mirror Georgiou would have worked better if they didn't try and turn her into a mother figure for Burnham and also didn't try and redeem her. She could have been a Dukat like character your stuck with and you can't trust but you need her help so your kind of stuck with her.
 
I'll never understand the concept of less emotion = more evolved. I guess that means the motto of Starfleet is stiff upper lip.

It's not less emotion, it's control over the expression, so it doesn't control you. That's what stuff upper lip means.

For example, courage isn't the absence of fear, it's the control of fear. We don't want our Starfleet heros to be a bunch of cowards just so they can be more emotionally open. I'm sure you can make similar connections with other emotions as well.
 
It's not less emotion, it's control over the expression, so it doesn't control you. That's what stuff upper lip means.

For example, courage isn't the absence of fear, it's the control of fear. We don't want our Starfleet heros to be a bunch of cowards just so they can be more emotionally open. I'm sure you can make similar connections with other emotions as well.
Feels more like "suck it up and deal with it" than anything else, or suppressing those emotions and don't deal with them because it makes the audience uncomfortable.. I don't see anyone being a coward so that's a strange departure from what I saying.:shrug:
 
I don't see anyone being a coward so that's a strange departure from what I saying.

I used the fear-courage example because it's a well known saying, that many are familiar with, and I didn't have time to puzzle out the corollaries.
 
I used the fear-courage example because it's a well known saying, that many are familiar with, and I didn't have time to puzzle out the corollaries.
I think the biggest difference for me is simply that much of the time the attitude comes across as "don't feel" when it comes to heroic characters. That might be a broad assumption, and certainly not what is always presented. I think that there is a balance to be struck between the two approaches, but the Discovery approach is one that I think is far more honest than the "Well, that sucks. Move along." that could come across in the Berman era.
 
I think the biggest difference for me is simply that much of the time the attitude comes across as "don't feel" when it comes to heroic characters. That might be a broad assumption, and certainly not what is always presented. I think that there is a balance to be struck between the two approaches, but the Discovery approach is one that I think is far more honest than the "Well, that sucks. Move along." that could come across in the Berman era.

Yes, this. For example, I'm glad that Picard *still* shows signs of trauma from being a Borg in Picard. Back in TNG, it seemed like he just needed to fight with his brother and then everything was fine. From the study of trauma in the 30+ years since, we know that isn't how it works.
 
They did often ignore his trauma with the Borg but it can be seen some like when Admiral Satie uses it to imply he was a traitor and I Borg especially or even in the Ds9 pilot when Sisko yells at him and naturally First Contact.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top