What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Farscape One]

I think if a few more men were shown as frightened or weak in a fight, we wouldn't be using those examples because both genders can have those traits.

As far as what Janice Lester said, she might have a point, but not in the way people keep thinking. I've always looked at that line as they were already married to the job, which is pretty much spot on. Except Sisko, no other STAR TREK lead captain has been married. We've only seen a couple examples of married Starfleet captains... LaForge's mom, Jellico (this is more implied, since he mentions his son), and Riker in NEMESIS, and that scenario was really just finishing that storyline.

I know TOS has also been referred to as being more about women being eye candy than men. I would probably agree with that, but that's been going on since tv began. One thing that ENTERPRISE was great at was being pretty equal in terms of eye candy for men and women. They ramped up the sex drive, but at least they were more willing to be equal about it. (Though to be fair, shirtless Kirk has made an appearance quite often in seasons 1 and 2.)

While TOS probably has aged the worst of all the shows, I have never had a problem watching any episode and view them all without the judgments of the current era. I'm able to fully enjoy my shows because I can separate the era a show is produced and the current views of the world.

 

[Whizkid]

I think if a few more men were shown as frightened or weak in a fight, we wouldn't be using those examples because both genders can have those traits.

As far as what Janice Lester said, she might have a point, but not in the way people keep thinking. I've always looked at that line as they were already married to the job, which is pretty much spot on. Except Sisko, no other STAR TREK lead captain has been married. We've only seen a couple examples of married Starfleet captains... LaForge's mom, Jellico (this is more implied, since he mentions his son), and Riker in NEMESIS, and that scenario was really just finishing that storyline.

I know TOS has also been referred to as being more about women being eye candy than men. I would probably agree with that, but that's been going on since tv began. One thing that ENTERPRISE was great at was being pretty equal in terms of eye candy for men and women. They ramped up the sex drive, but at least they were more willing to be equal about it. (Though to be fair, shirtless Kirk has made an appearance quite often in seasons 1 and 2.)

While TOS probably has aged the worst of all the shows, I have never had a problem watching any episode and view them all without

I think if a few more men were shown as frightened or weak in a fight, we wouldn't be using those examples because both genders can have those traits.

As far as what Janice Lester said, she might have a point, but not in the way people keep thinking. I've always looked at that line as they were already married to the job, which is pretty much spot on. Except Sisko, no other STAR TREK lead captain has been married. We've only seen a couple examples of married Starfleet captains... LaForge's mom, Jellico (this is more implied, since he mentions his son), and Riker in NEMESIS, and that scenario was really just finishing that storyline.

I know TOS has also been referred to as being more about women being eye candy than men. I would probably agree with that, but that's been going on since tv began. One thing that ENTERPRISE was great at was being pretty equal in terms of eye candy for men and women. They ramped up the sex drive, but at least they were more willing to be equal about it. (Though to be fair, shirtless Kirk has made an appearance quite often in seasons 1 and 2.)

While TOS probably has aged the worst of all the shows, I have never had a problem watching any episode and view them all without the judgments of the current era. I'm able to fully enjoy my shows because I can separate the era a show is produced and the current views of the world.

the judgments of the current era. I'm able to fully enjoy my shows because I can separate the era a show is produced and the current views of the world.

Thanks @Farscape

 

[Whizkid]

Thanks @Farscape

Thanks. I was trying to say that, you said it far better.

 

[Lord Garth]

like what. “Mad Men era” seems like such a generic term.

Mad Men is a TV series that depicts a New York Advertising Agency in the 1960s and focuses on a womanizing ad man, Don Draper, but also depicts the sexism that women had to endure in general and the general attitudes of men during the era, not just Don Draper.

As far as the examples, @Grendelsbayne beat me to the punch.

I like TOS in spite of those things, not because of them, because I find that there are other qualities to like about the show. It did a lot right, especially in race relations, but not so much when it came to gender.

They absolutely did. Just like they knew in Victorian times that smoking caused cancer, decades before the height of its popularity and ubiquity.

Respectfully, I'd prefer that a Baby Boomer weigh in on this. I think if something's the norm, then the average person won't think to question it, because the average person just goes with the flow and thinks however they were raised to think. I'm sorry to say this but most people are sheep, most people are followers. It takes someone who rejects conventional thinking to challenge that and it takes leaders to get the followers to change their tune and think differently.

Without having lived in that time, I can only go by what I see, and what I see doesn't paint a pretty picture.

Attitudes were changing during the '60s and '70s, but the generation who was changing largely wasn't the generation who was writing TOS. At best, you get writers who were trying to figure out what was going on with the youth and botching it up with stuff like giving Chekov a bad Monkees wig (until they let Walter Keonig have his own hairstyle) and things like "The Way to Eden".

 

[XCV330]

That's fair -- mileage will vary here. I just feel like "Luna" sounds like a place but "the Moon" sounds like a thing.

It is a thing. And a place. People talk about going into space but that's neither a place nor a thing. It's a space between things that are also places. But it still works. Earth has one moon, not counting the occasional Earth Trojan. If you say "hey the moon is really bright tonight" no one is going to accidentally think you mean 2020XL5. If they do, call the authorities, they may be aliens about to probe your cavity.

If we had two moons, like Mars, or a shitload of moons, like the gas giants, it might be different. Even if we hopefully become a spacefaring civilization, we will still be Earth-centric for centuries, if not longer, barring some miracle of FTL travel.

In the sense of Star Trek, though, I can see people referring to it as a more specific name just because it has been terraformed, has a population of its own that would want to differentiate, and plus there are just so many moons visited and lived on, by various species.

 

[Kor]

like what. “Mad Men era” seems like such a generic term.

As in Mad Men, the critically acclaimed AMC television series that ran from 2007 to 2015 and depicts the progression of the 1960s decade, warts and all, no punches pulled with the sexism of the era. The TV show is why the term "Mad Men era" is used for that period.

Kor

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I think if a few more men were shown as frightened or weak in a fight, we wouldn't be using those examples because both genders can have those traits.

As far as what Janice Lester said, she might have a point, but not in the way people keep thinking. I've always looked at that line as they were already married to the job, which is pretty much spot on. Except Sisko, no other STAR TREK lead captain has been married. We've only seen a couple examples of married Starfleet captains... LaForge's mom, Jellico (this is more implied, since he mentions his son), and Riker in NEMESIS, and that scenario was really just finishing that storyline.

I know TOS has also been referred to as being more about women being eye candy than men. I would probably agree with that, but that's been going on since tv began. One thing that ENTERPRISE was great at was being pretty equal in terms of eye candy for men and women. They ramped up the sex drive, but at least they were more willing to be equal about it. (Though to be fair, shirtless Kirk has made an appearance quite often in seasons 1 and 2.)

While TOS probably has aged the worst of all the shows, I have never had a problem watching any episode and view them all without the judgments of the current era. I'm able to fully enjoy my shows because I can separate the era a show is produced and the current views of the world.

I've always thought Turnabout Intruder was just terribly written in addition to being sexist. The line doesn't even make sense in relation to the rest of the series, which included lots of female officers and at least one woman as first officer on the Enterprise, ten years before Turnabout Intruder. But the line was written and while you can reinterpret it however you like to try to make it less dumb, I don't believe for a second it was intended that way. It was one more example of a particular strain of bullshit that reappeared periodically throughout the show, even though other episodes sometimes treated women much better than that.

As for the fighting prowess, it most definitely could have been more equalized by having men act the same more but since they're all supposed to be trained professionals, I'm not sure why you wouldn't equalize it by having no one act like that unless, for a rare character here or there, there's a very particular character based reason why they would.

In any case, TOS is still my number 2 Trek series. There's a ton there to enjoy. But the treatment of female characters sadly just isn't part of that, except in a very few specific cases.

 

[Lord Garth]

So it doesn't sound like I'm just dumping on TOS: the Berman Era doesn't have a stellar track-record with women either, just not to the same degree. The casts were disproportionately male, there's the way a lot of the women were costumed, how Troi and Crusher were treated on TNG, etc.

I think the Kurtzman Era is the first production era of Star Trek where women are actually shown to be complete equals. And for the people who don't like that, I think it says more about them than it does about Star Trek.

 

[Farscape One]

1/3 of the cast of VOYAGER were women. ENTERPRISE was about the same. (2 out of 7.) DISCOVERY lead cast is about 1/3 women. PICARD and LOWER DECKS, exactly half the cast. PRODIGY, 1/3 of the cast.

Strictly speaking, the casts have been about the same male/female proportion since 1995. I'm not sure it's fair to say the Berman era was fully disproportionate. TNG and DS9, I'll agree.

 

[Orphalesion]

While TOS probably has aged the worst of all the shows, I have never had a problem watching any episode and view them all without the judgments of the current era. I'm able to fully enjoy my shows because I can separate the era a show is produced and the current views of the world.

Two arguments to that, which I hope explain my POV

1) But I just don't enjoy watching people who behave like that. I can't relate to it. I don't find it interesting or entertaining. So well...if I can't find the characters interesting or likeable that kinda ruins the show, doesn't it?
2) I can accept that in historical shows or shows that are set in (back then) present time (to an extend)...but in Science Fiction I find it hard to swallow. And I know the fate of all science fiction is to eventually be outdated both technologically and socially, but that's the way it is with me. I also kinda have a cut-off date on how much outdated social norms I can bear in Science Fiction (it's the mid-late seventies, I think)
Like...I could not finish the first book of Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy because I could neither enjoy nor accept the characters and "future" world he presented. I already don't like the 1940s, why would I want the 1940s in space?

So it doesn't sound like I'm just dumping on TOS: the Berman Era doesn't have a stellar track-record with women either, just not to the same degree. The casts were disproportionately male, there's the way a lot of the women were costumed, how Troi and Crusher were treated on TNG, etc.

Yeah I have no issue saying that the further we move away form the 1980s/90s and even the early 2000s, the more awkward many aspects of Tng-Ent become. Not that it was already awkward in comparison to conemporary shows in many ways. (as was TOS)

 

[Farscape One]

I can understand the first point, because at the end of the day, if we don't care about the characters in some way, we won't watch. If that is one of the barometers you set for characters, I can certainly see your point.

To the second point, and please don't take this as an attack or judgment because it's not what I'm trying to do... I feel you are putting yourself in a straightjacket on what you can enjoy. If you don't like a particular era, I agree on not watching it. It's why I'm not really into Westerns. But science fiction of any era is always going to get outdated at some point. Doesn't mean the characters, stories, or settings aren't worth visiting or revisiting.

 

[Orphalesion]

To the second point, and please don't take this as an attack or judgment because it's not what I'm trying to do... I feel you are putting yourself in a straightjacket on what you can enjoy. If you don't like a particular era, I agree on not watching it. It's why I'm not really into Westerns. But science fiction of any era is always going to get outdated at some point. Doesn't mean the characters, stories, or settings aren't worth visiting or revisiting.

Don't worry, I don't see it as an attack. Yeah that's why I said I kind of have a "cut-off" date in the mid-late 1970s, that's the point where I can into Science Fiction (there are of course some outliers both before and after that point, but this is generally speaking)
It's also easier with science fiction that doesn't profess to be the "glorious, enlightened future". Stuff like Star Wars or the original Battlestar Galactica, for example are whole different cultures or dystopian fiction generally shows society after some calamity that might have led to regression (like for example in Logan's Run, for example). But with Science Fiction like Star Trek and the Foundation books that claims to be the utopian (or at least technologically and societally advanced) future, then I have trouble stomaching when people behave like in the 1940s/1960s.

 

[Lord Garth]

Controversial Opinion because I'm on a roll it seems. They should make a movie out of Prodigy, or something along those lines. If they want to build up a new audience, especially a new movie-going audience, start from an early age.

Forget about 20-somethings and older who already made up their mind a long time ago. It's too late to do anything about adults. Probably teens too. They're not going to go to the theater to see something they already made up their mind about.

Start over with the children, it'll take a decade or two for them to grow up, but then Star Trek will eventually have a new audience of adults, if they look long-term instead of short-term.

 

[Farscape One]

Thst's actually not a bad idea, with reasonable logic behind the idea.

 

[Orphalesion]

Controversial Opinion because I'm on a roll it seems. They should make a movie out of Prodigy, or something along those lines. If they want to build up a new audience, especially a new movie-going audience, start from an early age.

Forget about 20-somethings and older who already made up their mind a long time ago. It's too late to do anything about adults. Probably teens too. They're not going to go to the theater to see something they already made up their mind about.

Start over with the children, it'll take a decade or two for them to grow up, but then Star Trek will eventually have a new audience of adults, if they look long-term instead of short-term.

How about one of those "interactive" shows aimed at toddlers? (do they still make those?)
Select a couple colourful alien designs for characters and it's good to go. And the Borg Queen can teach the children count.

(sorry don't mean to belittle your idea, I just got the idea from it and wanted to share)

 

[Lord Garth]

How about one of those "interactive" shows aimed at toddlers? (do they still make those?)

Probably. I wouldn't know, but I don't see why they'd stop.

I got the idea myself while watching Prodigy. I thought to myself, "They could make a movie out of this, for a fraction of the budget they've been spending on the Abrams Films!" And if the parents take the kids, they might end up "accidentally" becoming Trekkies themselves, if they like what they're watching.

I don't think the Abrams Films and the way they've been doing them are the only answer. Especially if they can't get the Marvel and Star Wars numbers it seems like they'd love to get. So they have to try something else, where it doesn't matter if they don't get those kinds of numbers.

 

[Vger23]

Unfortunately, I’d guess PRO is the franchise’s best-kept secret right now.

My young sons love it…but I’d guess it’s not exactly a well-known go-to for kids.

 

[Vger23]

Controversial Opinion:

S6 of Star Trek: Voyager, which I have never seen a single episode of up until now, may be one of the better seasons in the Franchise.

 

[Lord Garth]

Unfortunately, I’d guess PRO is the franchise’s best-kept secret right now.

My young sons love it…but I’d guess it’s not exactly a well-known go-to for kids.

If they get enough episodes and Nickelodeon's marketing team handled it right, that could change. I'm not saying it will. But if I were Paramount+ or Alex Kurtzman, that's where I'd be looking to build a new audience.

 

[Vger23]

If they get enough episodes and Nickelodeon's marketing team handled it right, that could change. I'm not saying it will. But if I were Paramount+ or Alex Kurtzman, that's where I'd be looking to build a new audience.

I wish they’d really sell the heck out of it. It’s a high-quality product. I can’t get my kids to watch much that isn’t YouTube…but they watch this faithfully every Thursday with me. I think it would appeal to a broad audience.

And, my boys are already asking me about VOY so they can see “Real Janeway”