Poll Which era of Star Trek would you rather see continue?

[fireproof78]

Those old shows were so much better to me.

I think the biggest thing for me that it isn't a competition. TNG is not enjoyable for me, but that doesn't make it lesser; just not for me. If it becomes a constant comparison game then the newer stuff will fail because nostalgia makes our brains highlight the good of the past.

So, I'd rather take each show as it comes, not as a comparison. Otherwise, all Trek since TOS is garbage.

 

[publiusr]

Each era has a feel from when and how it was shot. To me, the era with the most potential for conflict was the TWOK-TUC movie era. I might have a Section 31 series in space dock…where the cool blues from STIII would if anything look more like itself with CGI. Starfleet was dangerous then. I might have the USS Relativity wrecked and the movie era sec-ops raid it.

The first episode would seem an innocent pastiche (to use that word) of TOS…and I want it to look dated. Finding actors who have that that 1960’s look is vital. There is one piece of TOS music often used in romantic scenes I would subvert to tell a darker tale at the last. As crewmen are strolling by, the modern character strangles a comely yeoman…her Victrola was playing the music and has been knocked out of alignment.

The tint of the screen changes. Innocence is over.

The 1990 feel is another pallet to defile.

It is as if only the ST III era is real…and as Blade Runner as I could make it. The villain sees the other timelines…maybe spawns a few… and is after a particular goal…and may actually win….

 

[Lord Garth]

Each era has a feel from when and how it was shot. To me, the era with the most potential for conflict was the TWOK-TUC movie era. I might have a Section 31 series in space dock…where the cool blues from STIII would if anything look more like itself with CGI. Starfleet was dangerous then.

True.

I might have the USS Relativity wrecked and the movie era sec-ops raid it.

As rough-and-tumble as the 23rd Century is depicted as, there's still no way they can raid a 29th Century ship.

The first episode would seem an innocent pastiche (to use that word) of TOS…and I want it to look dated. Finding actors who have that that 1960’s look is vital. There is one piece of TOS music often used in romantic scenes I would subvert to tell a darker tale at the last. As crewmen are strolling by, the modern character strangles a comely yeoman…her Victrola was playing the music and has been knocked out of alignment.

The tint of the screen changes. Innocence is over.

Okay.

The 1990 feel is another pallet to defile.

Ummm... ?

It is as if only the ST III era is real…and as Blade Runner as I could make it. The villain sees the other timelines…maybe spawns a few… and is after a particular goal…and may actually win….

I don't think TSFS feels very much like Blade Runner at all. The closest Star Trek gets to Blade Runner is actually Picard. Down to Dahj and Soji realizing they're Star Trek's equivalent of Replicants. When Dahj is wandering in the city in "Remembrance", searching for Picard, and he's on the 2399 version of a TV, that's the most Blade Runner-esque Star Trek has ever felt. I loved it. Mainly because Blade Runner is my favorite movie.

 

[publiusr]

There was the scene with the holo biplanes where Kate’s possessed McCoy was trying to get a ride that gave me that vibe…

 

[F. King Daniel]

I think that’s a bold and rather silly prediction. Don’t you think people in the 80s made similar claims that TOS was timeless and that no one will care about TNG in 20 years time or whatever?

For that matter, could anyone in the late 90s (ie: 20 years ago) have predicted that Voyager would be the Trek series most watched on a subscription service like Netflix?

I remember when TNG was a dead property (let alone Voyager!), and continued on only in novels with no chance of a live action continuation. Never say never.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

How many series debut on Netflix every year, and how many of those fail to make an impact beyond a percentage of subscribers worldwide looking for certain kinds of elements? VGR is hardly better or worse (except it’s older and therefore in SD). Kirk and Picard were on the cover of Time magazine — that’s one way to measure impact. Star Trek must aim to be watched across genres, not just by a fraction of sci-fi fandom.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

"Guitar groups are on their way out, Mr. Epstein" - Dick Rowe

Trying to predict what people will like in the future is and has always been a mug's game.

Also, it's Star Trek. We are still dissecting The Cage nearly sixty years on. Of course people will be talking about Discovery in 20 years time.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

We are still dissecting The Cage nearly sixty years on. Of course people will be talking about Discovery in 20 years time.

“We” are Star Trek fans. DSC’s goal should be for a random person to think of Star Trek and immediately associate it with Michael Burnham, the way they might recall khaleesi or Daenerys in connection with Game of Thrones. Maybe they’ve never even watched DSC and have no plans to, but guess what, it would just be out there and hard to avoid.

 

[Greg Cox]

I remember when TNG was a dead property (let alone Voyager!), and continued on only in novels with no chance of a live action continuation. Never say never.

I confess: After the first Kelvin movie, I was quite confident that we would never see the Prime Universe onscreen again, and frequently stated as much on these very boards.

Shows what I know . . .

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I confess: After the first Kelvin movie, I was quite confident that we would never see the Prime Universe onscreen again, and frequently stated as much on these very boards.

Shows what I know . . .

Never say never.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

We never did see the prime universe of the 2250s as visualized in period style from TOS through ENT, though it’s still an option for a post-Kurtzman revival. The new style essentially started with the Kelvin destruction sequence, which isn’t a careful interpolation between ENT and TOS-R.

 

[Lord Garth]

I was debating whether or not say anything, because I was really biting my tongue, but I have to say something about this.

So, I'd rather take each show as it comes, not as a comparison. Otherwise, all Trek since TOS is garbage.

No. This is not true at all. "The Measure of a Man" is not garbage compared to TOS. "The Best of Both Worlds" is not garbage compared to TOS. "Duet" is not garbage compared to TOS. "In the Pale Moonlight" isn't garbage compared to TOS. The Wrath of Khan isn't garbage compared to TOS. I don't think Discovery is garbage compared to TOS. I don't think Picard is garbage compared to TOS.

You're speaking in absolutes here. I understand saying, "It's not a competition". Okay, fair enough. It doesn't have to be. But "all Trek since TOS is garbage"? This has to be rhetoric and an online argument that's gotten too carried away.

I don't even call the Star Trek series I'm not a fan of "garbage". They're just not to my tastes. I don't say, "I think this sucks and it's complete, total garbage!" very easily.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't even call the Star Trek series I'm not a fan of "garbage". They're just not to my tastes. I don't say, "I think this sucks and it's complete, total garbage!" very easily.

Yes, that was the point.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

“We” are Star Trek fans. DSC’s goal should be for a random person to think of Star Trek and immediately associate it with Michael Burnham, the way they might recall khaleesi or Daenerys in connection with Game of Thrones. Maybe they’ve never even watched DSC and have no plans to, but guess what, it would just be out there and hard to avoid.

I think when people think of Star Trek they immediately associate it with Spock, but that's alright and says nothing that denigrates any other iteration. Maybe people of a certain age think of Picard/Data. I don't think the latest wave of Star Trek (what do we call it? I can't stand the monicker 'Nu-trek' as it is too often used in the pejorative) has crossed into wider culture in a significant way yet sadly. Maybe a show with a potentially more accessible format like Strange New Worlds will do that.

However, taking your "We", we all came to the show at different times. I've been a fan since the early 2000s, some people go back to the 1960s, some people got into it in the past few years through old shows on Netflix or through Discovery. The fact is that for a science fiction fan, Star Trek itself is "out there and hard to avoid". If a person likes science fiction, then at some point they will at least cross paths with Star Trek and I believe that will be true in 20 years because it's survived for so long already in one form or another and, whether folks like it or not, Discovery is now part of that.

My point is still that people will be talking about Discovery in 20 years, because it's part of a much larger monolithic entity. To imagine that people be putting Trek 1966-2005 on a pedestal in 20 years while dismissing Discovery etc. as disposable junk-television is what I took issue with (and I'm aware that it's not you that said that). In 20 years time I'm certain people will come to Star Trek as they do now, through old shows and new and through various means.

 

[oldtrekkie]

I answered pre-2009, I find the post-2009 Kelvin universe to be underwhelming.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think when people think of Star Trek they immediately associate it with Spock, but that's alright and says nothing that denigrates any other iteration. Maybe people of a certain age think of Picard/Data. I don't think the latest wave of Star Trek (what do we call it? I can't stand the monicker 'Nu-trek' as it is too often used in the pejorative) has crossed into wider culture in a significant way yet sadly. Maybe a more show with a potentially more accessible format like Strange New Worlds will do that.

However, taking your "We", we all came to the show at different times. I've been a fan since the early 2000s, some people go back to the 1960s, some people got into it in the past few years through old shows on Netflix or through Discovery. The fact is that for a science fiction fan, Star Trek itself is "out there and hard to avoid". If a person likes science fiction, then at some point they will at least cross paths with Star Trek and I believe that will be true in 20 years because it's survived for so long already in one form or another and, whether folks like it or not, Discovery is now part of that.

My point is still that people will be talking about Discovery in 20 years, because it's part of a much larger monolithic entity. To imagine that people be putting Trek 1966-2005 on a pedestal in 20 years while dismissing Discovery etc. as disposable junk-television is what I took issue with (and I'm aware that it's not you that said that). In 20 years time I'm certain people will come to Star Trek as they do now, through old shows and new and through various means.

What's going to happen is the Star Trek Franchise will continue, and DSC and PIC will be thought of as Star Trek shows in a long list of Star Trek shows, but Discovery will be remembered as the First Series of what will be called "2020s Trek", and Picard will be remembered as the follow-up to TNG. So those two shows will stand out for those reasons alone.

"2020s Trek" might even just be called "20s Trek" because eventually we'll reach a point in this century where most people won't think of "19__" as their default like we do. Or at least like I still do.

 

[The Wormhole]

When you're in a professional work place, you focus on work.

Not always

 

[fireproof78]

Not always

Indeed. It's maybe 60% of my work day.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

What's going to happen is the Star Trek Franchise will continue, and DSC and PIC will be thought of as Star Trek shows in a long list of Star Trek shows, but Discovery will be remembered as the First Series of what will be called "2020s Trek", and Picard will be remembered as the follow-up to TNG. So those two shows will stand out for those reasons alone.

"2020s Trek" might even just be called "20s Trek" because eventually we'll reach a point in this century where most people won't think of "19__" as their default like we do. Or at least like I still do.

And some people will be sad because in 2041 Star Trek the special effects are too good and it makes them dizzy and everyone talks too fast and why is she crying all the time and that’s not a Klingon, that’s a Klingon, Bad writing, trash TV etc. X-producer must go…

Oh and WON’T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CANON?

And it will all be just as tedious, plus way more invasive as by then I expect to have all this kind of online discussion stuff downloaded directly into my neural cortex rather than read it on a smartphone.

 

[Greg Cox]

Oh, absolutely. In 2041, fans who grew up on DISCO or whatever will be lamenting that the new, new, new STAR TREK isn't as good as DISCO and STRANGE NEW WORLDS and SECTION 31 or whatever. And complaining that the new holo-shows aren't 100% consistent with today's shows.

"It's like these idiot writers have never even watched PRODIGY!"