...but how does that even work? The universe presented in TOS is dramatically different form the one in TNG/DS9.... like, I know I say that a lot, but they went to the edge of the galaxy in TOS, that would not be possible in TNG/DS9...
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
...but how does that even work? The universe presented in TOS is dramatically different form the one in TNG/DS9.... like, I know I say that a lot, but they went to the edge of the galaxy in TOS, that would not be possible in TNG/DS9...
"Discovery changed the look of the TOS Era! It doesn't respect Canon!" That's when they suddenly love TOS.
Ahhh okay, that's what you mean, understood.
I think the vast majority of continuity puritans were raised on the Okuda Chronology, Technical Manual and Encyclopedia books, and took the various speculations within as gospel - even though the books has a disclaimer at the start.
Isn't that called gatekeeping? That some fans want a show or media to stay the same, the way they always enjoyed it and not change, grow or evolve.
I've always liked the thought that they aren't too different, and thats what made the whole switch work - that an overly dark and tormented Prime Universe character, isn't much worse than a "not quite so bad" Mirror inhabitant.
I hate what they did with that storyline. Even with the MU, it could have been great. Lorca should have convinced them that he was trying to bring Federation reforms to the Empire, that he was an "extremist" by MU standards, in that he wanted peace and prosperity. The big dilemma should have come down to the choice between her current Captain, Mirror Universe idealist, and the specter of her former Captain, vicious tyrant. The show should have ended with them installing Lorca in the seat of power, congratulating themselves for their success in propagating Federation values..... then have a teaser/coda, where Lorca unveils his secret, the Tantalus device, and vaporizes one of his true-believer acolytes, showing that he is not actually for any sort of reform, and teasing the TOS future episode with said device.
I think gatekeeping is more about telling other people, especially newer fans, that their way of enjoying the franchise is not valid because it doesn't conform to the gatekeepers' narrow notions.
Kor
There's been a lot of gatekeeping with every 21st century Trek series and from some pretty obnoxious corners of the fandom, but that's fandom in-general these days. You love something, they think it's dog poop and will then tell you why you aren't much better than dog poop for loving what you love.
Yeah, what I'm saying applies to TOS, VOY, ENT, DSC, PIC, and LD equally.
It's ugly. The more you really think about it, the uglier it is.
It's ugly. The more you really think about it, the uglier it is.
DSC is my least-favorite Trek series except for TAS. But if someone loves it dearly and it's their favorite more power to them. They're fellow Trekkies who share the same fictional universe I do. I'll argue continuity and details all day long but not a fan's love for their preferred shows or films.
nah
It's quite an experience to be told I'm not a real/true Trek fan when it's been a big part of my life for 30 years, to the extent that I have pretty much a whole room dedicated to it.
The follow up, on the rare occasions I engage to that effect, tends to be that I must not understand what was special about Trek, and/or that I just have low standards when it comes to Trek. On those respectively, I've written essays on the meaning of Trek to me, and find quite a few episodes and films unwatchable (I still vividly recall wanting to be swallowed by my cinema seat during Insurrection).
"You love ENT? Wow, your tastes suck."
"Thank you. Seeing your family your spouse clearly doesn't want to."
"Thank you. Seeing your family your spouse clearly doesn't want to."
You messed up both sentences.
Poppycock. It's painting with too broad a brush to try to lump all criticism together as if criticism is only begotten by preexisting criticism.
There's plenty to criticize DISCO for that has nothing to do with any of the Internet rants that either prejudged the show before its debut, or that were based on prejudice, or both. Neither PIC nor LDS are immune from criticism, and no doubt SNW and PROD will be found wanting in certain ways.
TNG started off bad, and the toxic atmosphere behind the scenes negatively impacted the writing. The show didn't find its groove until the third season, when Roddenberry was no longer at the helm, and the show was successful in that groove at least through the end of season five. It was in this period when Star Trek arguably reached its peak popularity ever on television. Many criticisms of TNG's early episodes are simply inapplicable to the later seasons, just as, for example, criticisms of getting stale and repetitive don't apply until the later seasons.
Yes, there was some negative reaction to cast and setting, and also to Sisko's rank even before the show got going. But one thing about DS9 that sets it apart from TNG is that DS9's ratings steadily declined over its run, just as the ratings of the other two subsequent pre-streaming era (aka "Berman era") spin offs did. Audience declined, people were not engaged. This cannot be explained by the premise that there was prejudice against the show. People who had been watching the show, in many cases for years, stopped watching it, and that kept happening as long as the show was running. Implicitly, the people who stopped watching had criticisms of DS9 that were based on actually having watched the show, things about the show that made it less attractive than whatever else they decided to with their time instead of watching DS9.
The premise that negative criticism is just a result of the well having been "poisoned" by other negative criticism is bunk. That's as true today as it's always been.
It is likewise too broad a brush to lump together all criticism of the shows as formed in a good faith and open minded approach. There's plenty of basis to criticise each Trek series and film, so I have no doubt that some of it is legitimate. However, the aggression and bad faith expression of much of it in recent times - both before and during the series - is striking.
I went through IMDb reviews of Disco S3E4 soon after it aired because I was surprised at its low rating - a third of them were openly bigoted, and several had plainly not even watched the episode. Goodness knows how many others veiled their true feelings.
Past series also did not have the element of YouTubers generating money through negativity, which is a key part of the negative side of fandom these days. That amplifies and spreads negative views of the series even among those who do not watch them, as they are presented with only a biased perspective of them.
To present just one example:
Online reviewer shares a screenshot from Lower Decks to demonstrate how Trek is no longer "smart".
One person replies that:
It's a terrible cartoon that spits in the face of Gene Roddenberry and fans of Star Trek.
CBS/Paramount have ruined Star Trek.
Discovery, Picard, and Lower Decks exist solely to disrespect fans of Star Trek.
Follow the thread down, and he's watched one episode of it, and a handful of the other two shows. A person replying to him agrees with those sentiments, having not watched any of them.
That's the echo chamber in action.
Last edited:
I generally follow along with what you are saying but I think one thing missing from your analysis of it is a commentary on the change in viewing habits and the expanding world of TV in the 90s that saw a rapid dilution of viewing audiences.
Coupled also with the wider availability or recording devices allowing people to watch at their leisure (anyone from the UK here remember using the codes in the Radiotimes to programe the VCR and also setting it for long play to get extra recording time on the video when going o holiday?).
The early to mid 90s was an era where time slots were dominated by certain shows and the likes of Seinfeld would have a finale that will never be matched - hell other channels simply didn't run anything against it in some cases - but the back end of the 90s saw a rapid change in viewer habits away from those enjoyed by 80s and early 90s Trek which significantly reduced the reported viewing figures.
Similar threads
- Locked
