What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[1001001]

“Low mileage pit woofies…”

 

[JesterFace]

I kind of see where it's coming from but I think it's odd and unfortunate that some people dismiss television as just lesser than films.

Controversial or not I must say that I think TV series is the better format.

 

[cooleddie74]

TV probably allows writers more creative freedom than film does. The studio system gravitates towards reboots, sequels and guaranteed moneymakers and TV at least takes chances on series that can bomb and have a limited audience.

 

[Farscape One]

I prefer series over movies for a very simple reason.

TV allows for more universe building.

 

[Lord Garth]

I prefer series over movies for a very simple reason.

TV allows for more universe building.

Before 2000, I like movies better than TV. After 2000, it's like they switched places.

 

[eschaton]

I would agree with that, but I did like the first MU episode. It was the rest of them (and everything after them) that was the major problem.

Part of what made the MU suffer is the same thing that made all of Season 1 suffer - it was basically a story of quadrant-spanning implications which was acted by around 15 cast members. When it came to the Mirror Universe, that meant we discovered that by happenstance, everyone who was actually important within universe had a counterpart we already saw onscreen.

Yes, I realize the MU worked that way sometimes in the past. But not with everyone at the same time, and it's different if it's being used for campy throwaway fun.

 

[Commander Troi]

I prefer series over movies for a very simple reason.

TV allows for more universe building.

And character development.

 

[fireproof78]

Part of what made the MU suffer is the same thing that made all of Season 1 suffer - it was basically a story of quadrant-spanning implications which was acted by around 15 cast members. When it came to the Mirror Universe, that meant we discovered that by happenstance, everyone who was actually important within universe had a counterpart we already saw onscreen.

Yes, I realize the MU worked that way sometimes in the past. But not with everyone at the same time, and it's different if it's being used for campy throwaway fun.

That made the MU great.

 

[tesral]

Vanity, vanity all is vanity. People brood about Star Trek too much.

 

[tesral]

And character development.

Which we do not see much of.

 

[Vale]

Before 2000, I like movies better than TV. After 2000, it's like they switched places.

You mean... 2001 changed movies forever?

 

[cooleddie74]

Brooding and complaining built The TrekBBS. If we get rid of them the board will vanish almost overnight.

 

[eschaton]

That made the MU great.

YMMV, but I feel like Discovery was trying to tell a "big" story - like Game of Thrones. Doing it with a tiny cast of characters made it feel small like some sort of stage production, and really hurt my immersion levels overall.

This was not an issue with Seasons 2 or 3 IMHO. They had an appropriate number of guest characters, and some busy background scenes. I never felt like we were watching a dozen people meandering through a mostly empty universe.

 

[fireproof78]

YMMV, but I feel like Discovery was trying to tell a "big" story - like Game of Thrones. Doing it with a tiny cast of characters made it feel small like some sort of stage production, and really hurt my immersion levels overall.

This was not an issue with Seasons 2 or 3 IMHO. They had an appropriate number of guest characters, and some busy background scenes. I never felt like we were watching a dozen people meandering through a mostly empty universe.

Mileage definitely varies, largely because that is the prebuilt in conceit of the Mirror universe.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Brooding and complaining built The TrekBBS. If we get rid of them the board will vanish almost overnight.

Those and the Monday morning quarterbacking

 

[eschaton]

Mileage definitely varies, largely because that is the prebuilt in conceit of the Mirror universe.

Well, yeah, I can understand that. But even going back to the other series:

• TOS's Mirror Mirror didn't have any small-universe implications. There was no real in-universe evidence that the MU Enterprise was any more special than the PU version.
• The DS9 outings had some small-universe syndrome, but more restrained than Discovery. Intendant Kira was a sector leader, which was a high rank, but not the big honcho in the Klingon-Cardassian alliance (more along the lines of Gul Dukat's role during the occupation). We never really find out how high of a rank MU Worf's "Regent" title signifies. Everyone else had lesser roles, showing up inexplicably within the narrative (some head-scratching like Vic Fontiane) but really limited to the local area around Terok Nor.
• On ENT we are placed much closer to the nexus of power for the Terran Empire, but the empire is much smaller at this time, and we're still not quite at its heard. Forrest commands the flagship, but he is not the emperor. And by the end, we see Hoshi declare herself emperor, but we have no idea if this was successful or if she would be stabbed in the back by someone else shortly thereafter (the Terran Empire is based upon Rome in many ways, and the average emperor only lasted eight years, with over half being murdered.

To be clear, I would have been fine with a story which somehow showed that MU Georgiou, Burnham, Lorca, Stamets, Tilly, etc were all important within the narrative of the show. I just think it failed for me because I didn't get the impression that Georgiou actually ruled an empire with tens of billions (at a minimum) of inhabitants. It failed for the same reason the depictions of Ferenginar in DS9 failed - it made it feel like the universe was a small village rather than a big open universe.

Of course, this wasn't just limited to the MU in Season 1. I think it was potentially more damaging that ultimately no Klingons other than T'Kuvma, Kol, L'Rell, or Voq made any difference whatsoever. There were maybe two tops beyond this who even got names.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, yeah, I can understand that. But even going back to the other series:

• TOS's Mirror Mirror didn't have any small-universe implications. There was no real in-universe evidence that the MU Enterprise was any more special than the PU version.
• The DS9 outings had some small-universe syndrome, but more restrained than Discovery. Intendant Kira was a sector leader, which was a high rank, but not the big honcho in the Klingon-Cardassian alliance (more along the lines of Gul Dukat's role during the occupation). We never really find out how high of a rank MU Worf's "Regent" title signifies. Everyone else had lesser roles, showing up inexplicably within the narrative (some head-scratching like Vic Fontiane) but really limited to the local area around Terok Nor.
• On ENT we are placed much closer to the nexus of power for the Terran Empire, but the empire is much smaller at this time, and we're still not quite at its heard. Forrest commands the flagship, but he is not the emperor. And by the end, we see Hoshi declare herself emperor, but we have no idea if this was successful or if she would be stabbed in the back by someone else shortly thereafter (the Terran Empire is based upon Rome in many ways, and the average emperor only lasted eight years, with over half being murdered.

To be clear, I would have been fine with a story which somehow showed that MU Georgiou, Burnham, Lorca, Stamets, Tilly, etc were all important within the narrative of the show. I just think it failed for me because I didn't get the impression that Georgiou actually ruled an empire with tens of billions (at million) of inhabitants. It failed for the same reason the depictions of Ferenginar in DS9 failed - it made it feel like the universe was a small village rather than a big open universe.

Of course, this wasn't just limited to the MU in Season 1. I think it was potentially more damaging that ultimately no Klingons other than T'Kuvma, Kol, L'Rell, or Voq made any difference whatsoever. There were maybe two tops beyond this who even got names.

Yup, the Klingons definitely needed more though I feel that was owed more to the use of the MU in season 1 as anything else.

But, the MU has always been small scale to me. The characters involved are the important ones. The fact that the Enterprise crew stumbles upon the Defiant from the Tholian Web feels very small universe to me, but it still works, as it plays around with power dynamics in universe. But, more than that, the MU in Discovery feels like a real power. Georgiou feels like someone who is trying to control this huge population, but has constant threats, just managed better, keeping the more vicious ones by her side.

Now, I'll owe my own personal enjoyment to the MU comics that I read 20 some odd years ago, and how there was an Excelsior being built, and how Spock and MU Spock's lives reflected each other a lot more than just alternate universe. The mirror universe has a certain conceit that works well for my money because these characters are the ones who have significance to us as the audience. Whether it makes for a realistic world is something rather secondary to me-the realistic world comes from the Prime characters, not their MU versions. How they in turn respond to their MU counterparts gives them more narrative life.

Doubtful that makes much sense. But, that's my view.

 

[shapeshifter]

Brooding and complaining built The TrekBBS. If we get rid of them the board will vanish almost overnight.

Most seem to thrive responding to the brooding complaints but not me, it is so draining. I am more into Trek for the fun, not facts.

Sometimes it draws me back, though. I swore off this thread a hundred pages ago but here I am again.

 

[cooleddie74]

We're all Michael Corleone at some point in our time on this board.

 

[Lord Garth]

You mean... 2001 changed movies forever?

I blame it on HAL.