STP S3 writer/producer replies to negative reviews about "fan service"

[gvn2fly]

The creatives can't win. Don't have references to what came before and people get mad. Reference what came before and then its fanservice and memberberries.

 

[Sketcher]

Fan service aint exactly new to Trek. TNG's first episode has McCoy drop in. It's second is a literal sequel to a TOS episode.

DS9 starts with the battle of Wolf 359 and features the Enterprise and Picard. I suppose you could say that all serves story purpose, but you could have had Jennifer die in the Cardassian War and still get the same emotional impact with Ben. Hell, in the long run that might've been a better plot point for the show.

But then a few episodes later Q shows up.

 

[RuleofAcuisition17]

There's been a long held infection inside Hollywood in which they tend to spit at the idea of fans and people who care about the franchise outside of blind obediant cheerleading. Quite an attitude for a while of "BE GLAD ITS EVEN BEING MADE" in many, many other franchises and places (The Witcher and Velma being the latest casualties)

So its kind of refreshing to see a writer go "No, fanservice should be given to people because otherwise it doesn't get made".

However I also agree 100% with the others who say it should be done in a way that makes sense to the plot, or be shoved in the background when not. Or be used in a clever enough way that it operates as the plot of an episode.

 

[Tuskin38]

DS9 starts with the battle of Wolf 359 and features the Enterprise and Picard. I suppose you could say that all serves story purpose, but you could have had Jennifer die in the Cardassian War and still get the same emotional impact with Ben. Hell, in the long run that might've been a better plot point for the show.

That's not fan service, that's continuity.

Fan service are appearances and such that serve nothing for the story.

 

[James Cole]

"Fan service", "memberberry", "toxic fans", "gatekeepers", "Mary Sue", hell even "woke"... all are buzz words that mean different things to different people and aren't very useful for clear conversation and conveying meaning.

Following up continuity, revisiting characters... almost need to describe what's trying to be said

 

[Tosk]

I still can't believe we're using 'memberberries' instead of 'roddenberries'.

 

[James Cole]

I still can't believe we're using 'memberberries' instead of 'roddenberries'.

Blame South Park for that one!

 

[fireproof78]

So its kind of refreshing to see a writer go "No, fanservice should be given to people because otherwise it doesn't get made".

This is what bothers me is that a property should only exist to cater to the fans. No, I don't agree with this. Productions should not assume if they pander to my fan sensibilities then I'm in. Producers should work to appeal and woo me as an audience member who appreciates the characters, the story and the art of it.

 

[RuleofAcuisition17]

This is what bothers me is that a property should only exist to cater to the fans. No, I don't agree with this. Productions should not assume if they pander to my fan sensibilities then I'm in. Producers should work to appeal and woo me as an audience member who appreciates the characters, the story and the art of it.

Why not both? You can quite literally have that matter both ways. As others have pointed out, to a casual audience member who's never seen TNG they won't know half of the references or only be dimly aware of them, while a fan will appreciate someone has gone into some care and attention for them as long term supporters of the show.

 

[Lord Garth]

Can't sleep. Been avoiding this forum for two days. I argued this topic to death some years ago, so this is all I'll say...

That's not fan service, that's continuity.

Fan service are appearances and such that serve nothing for the story.

"Fan service", "memberberry", "toxic fans", "gatekeepers", "Mary Sue", hell even "woke"... all are buzz words that mean different things to different people and aren't very useful for clear conversation and conveying meaning.

Following up continuity, revisiting characters... almost need to describe what's trying to be said

These two have it right.

Now I'm going to lay in bed and fail miserably at falling asleep.

 

[donners22]

This is what bothers me is that a property should only exist to cater to the fans. No, I don't agree with this. Productions should not assume if they pander to my fan sensibilities then I'm in. Producers should work to appeal and woo me as an audience member who appreciates the characters, the story and the art of it.

I quite liked Nicholas Meyer's comment before Disco started that "art is a dictatorship". Focusing on appealing to fans is risky, as fans are not a homogenous group. We want a variety of different - and often - conflicting things from Trek, and can't even agree on what defines Trek. Just make the damn show, and we'll work out for ourselves if it's what we want to see.

 

[fireproof78]

Why not both? You can quite literally have that matter both ways. As others have pointed out, to a casual audience member who's never seen TNG they won't know half of the references or only be dimly aware of them, while a fan will appreciate someone has gone into some care and attention for them as long term supporters of the show.

Does it make sense in the story? That's the care and attention I want, not name drops.

 

[Char Kais]

Oh, now it's all about "fan service".
Now "fan service" is OK.

"We love fan service long time". Yeah right.

I remember how it was 3 years ago.

Alex Kurtzman, Akiva Goldsman, and Patrick Stewart, all of them said in multiple interviews that Picard is not a sequel to TNG and that it's not a TNG reunion show.
And they all said multiple times that the show is not about "fan service".
They called out "fan service" explicitly and took a stance against it!

https://ew.com/tv/2020/01/22/patrick-stewart-star-trek-picard-interview/

Patrick Stewart on how Star Trek: Picard strives to avoid fan service
"he didn’t want to fill the series with fan service"

https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/star-trek-picard-producers-fan-service-romulans-161153044.html

'Star Trek: Picard' producers explain how they've avoided fan service
“We tried to be very judicious,” adds Goldsman. “We tried not to - and we are fans - we tried not to be in fan service"

https://screenrant.com/star-trek-picard-not-next-generation-sequel-show/

Why Star Trek: Picard is Not a Next Gen Sequel
"Well we pointedly wanted to not make a sequel to Next Gen"

Our JOB is to service the fans
we tell fans we love not just what they love, but THEM, as well.

Oh really? Michael Chabon said the exact opposite 3 years ago. He explicitly said that he wanted to "piss off or provoke people".

https://variety.com/2020/tv/features/michael-chabon-star-trek-picard-1203544717/

‘Star Trek: Picard’ Is Divisive — and Showrunner Michael Chabon Doesn’t Mind at All

Sometimes you’re motivated to have things simply because it’s possibly going to piss off or provoke people who seem to have missed the memo about just what exactly “Star Trek” is and always has been all about.

And the pinnacle of fan scorn, the cherry on top: Alex Kurtzman

executive producer Alex Kurtzman says. “This really is the first truly adult drama in the world of Star Trek.”

THX Alex for the first truly adult Star Trek drama. Everything before was just for children.
Well, by that logic S3, with all its "fan service", it's again a children's show.

Sheer Fucking Hubris

 

[fireproof78]

Well, by that logic S3, with all its "fan service", it's again a children's show.

Yup.

 

[James Cole]

Oh really? Michael Chabon said the exact opposite 3 years ago. He explicitly said that he wanted to "piss off or provoke people".

A completely different team is responsible for season 3. Apparently lanterns are even hung on season 1's more questionable choices.

I'd really try and approach this season with an open mind. They are doing the opposite of doubling down on season 1.

 

[Ovation]

A completely different team is responsible for season 3. Apparently lanterns are even hung on season 1's more questionable choices.

I'd really try and approach this season with an open mind. They are doing the opposite of doubling down on season 1.

Meh. I’d be much more excited if they were doubling down on season one. I prefer my expectations be challenged than reaffirmed. It’s not that I can’t enjoy something familiar. I just don’t enjoy it as much. But what I’ve NEVER done, nor will ever do, is dismiss something I don’t like with “that’s not “Real Trek” or “they’re not TruFans”. That would be…arrogant presumption.

 

[Mudd]

Well, that was a long exercise in self-justification. The criticism must hit close to home.

 

[Uhura's Song]

There's no way a Next Gen reunion series is gonna be anything other than a fanwank explosion. But since all of Trek has been that since the Kurtzman era began (and Into Darkness, before that), I'm prepared for this to be the most extreme example yet.

It is not a thing of Kurtzman. It has been there from the start.

TNG: McCoy was in Farpoint. The third episode of TNG (counting Farpoint as 2), was "The Naked Now." They did "Where No One Has Gone Before" as well in S1. Ep 6. Scotty in "Relics." Spock in "Unification." Sarek (&Amanda?) in "Sarek."

DS9. Picard was in "Emissary." O'Brien was main cast. Keiko. Worf. Q. Vash. Lwaxanna Troi. And more. Bashere was on TNG. Kang, Koloth, and Kor. Lursa. Betor. All of TOS in "Trials and Trible-ations." Gowron. Thonas Riker. Kurn. Alexander.

VOY. Quark and Morn in "Caretaker." Sulu, Rand, and Kang in "Flashback." T'Pau. Riker. Barclay. Troi. LaForge.

ENT. Zefram Cochrane in "Broken Bow." T'Pau.

That list is incomplete.

But yeah, fanwwank is totally a NuTrek thing.

 

[Char Kais]

But yeah, fanwwank is totally a NuTrek thing.

Yes, it is.

"fanwank" is a bad term. I use "fan service/nostalgia bait/memberberries".
All NuTrek shows are built around "fan service/nostalgia bait/memberberries".

JJ movies/Kelvin Timeline: Reimagined Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the Enterprise.

DIS: Set 10 years before TOS with Spock's sister, and reimagined Spock, Sarek, Amanda Grayson, Harcourt Fenton Mudd, Pike, Number One, and the "original" Enterprise.
SNW: reimagined Pike, Spock, Number One, and the "original" Enterprise. With the addition of more reimagined legacy characters (Uhura, M'Benga, Nurse Chapel), and a relative of legacy characters (Khan Noonien Singh). SNW had two original characters, and one is dead now.
PIC: Sequel to a legacy show from the 80s, named after a legacy character with legacy characters galore, especially in season 3.
Lower Decks: One giant memberberries show. It's all about the references.
Prodigy: Janeway, a legacy character, is at the center of this show.


Let's get through your list:

"The Naked Now": That's the only episode on your list where I would say it's nostalgia bait. A reimaged TOS episode. But this was the first episode after the premiere episode.

"Where No One Has Gone Before" "Where No Man Has Gone Before": Similar titles, but completely different stories.

"Trials and Tribble-ations" and "Flashback" are tribute episodes for the 30th Star Trek anniversary. Pass.

McCoy had a 30s cameo in TNG. Are you seriously comparing this to a show that is built around Spock's sister or a show built around a reimaged Pike, Spock, and Enterprise?

Any new TNG-era character from the 80s/90s/00s (Q, Vash, Lwaxanna Troi, Quark) that shows up in other 80s/90s/00s TNG-era shows is not "nostalgia bait/memberberries".
A TNG character moving to DS9 (O'Brien, Worf) is not "nostalgia bait/memberberries".

TNG had 176 episodes.
Three of these episodes were focused on legacy characters. Sarek, Unification, Relics.

DS9 had 173 episodes.
Three of these episodes were focused on legacy characters. Blood Oath, The Sword of Kahless, Once More Unto the Breach.

VOY had 168 episodes.
No episode was focused on legacy characters (I don't count 80s/90s/00s TNG-era characters in a 80s/90s/00s TNG-era show as "nostalgia bait/memberberries").

ENT:
T'Pau was in 3 of 97 episodes. But these episodes didn't focus on her. She plays a major role, but she is not the focus (unlike Sarek in "Sarek"). Enterprise was not built around these 3 season 4 episodes with T'Pau.

TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT were not built on legacy characters.

From 614 Berman-era episodes, 6 (9 if you count the 3 ENT episodes) are focused on legacy characters. Even if you count the two 30th Star Trek tribute episodes you get 11 out of 614 episodes.

Maybe you call these episodes "fan service/nostalgia bait/memberberries", but TNG DS9 VOY and ENT are not built around these episodes. That is not their identity.

But you know what you can call these 11 episodes? Awesome Star Trek.

 

[KennyB]

Yes, it is.

"fanwank" is a bad term. I use "fan service/nostalgia bait/memberberries".
All NuTrek shows are built around "fan service/nostalgia bait/memberberries".

JJ movies/Kelvin Timeline: Reimagined Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and the Enterprise.

DIS: Set 10 years before TOS with Spock's sister, and reimagined Spock, Sarek, Amanda Grayson, Harcourt Fenton Mudd, Pike, Number One, and the "original" Enterprise.
SNW: reimagined Pike, Spock, Number One, and the "original" Enterprise. With the addition of more reimagined legacy characters (Uhura, M'Benga, Nurse Chapel), and a relative of legacy characters (Khan Noonien Singh). SNW had two original characters, and one is dead now.
PIC: Sequel to a legacy show from the 80s, named after a legacy character with legacy characters galore, especially in season 3.
Lower Decks: One giant memberberries show. It's all about the references.
Prodigy: Janeway, a legacy character, is at the center of this show.


Let's get through your list:

"The Naked Now": That's the only episode on your list where I would say it's nostalgia bait. A reimaged TOS episode. But this was the first episode after the premiere episode.

"Where No One Has Gone Before" "Where No Man Has Gone Before": Similar titles, but completely different stories.

"Trials and Tribble-ations" and "Flashback" are tribute episodes for the 30th Star Trek anniversary. Pass.

McCoy had a 30s cameo in TNG. Are you seriously comparing this to a show that is built around Spock's sister or a show built around a reimaged Pike, Spock, and Enterprise?

Any new TNG-era character (Q, Vash, Lwaxanna Troi, Quark) that shows up in other TNG-era shows is not "nostalgia bait/memberberries".
A TNG character moving to DS9 (O'Brien, Worf) is not "nostalgia bait/memberberries".

TNG had 176 episodes.
Three of these episodes were focused on legacy characters. Sarek, Unification, Relics.

DS9 had 173 episodes.
Three of these episodes were focused on legacy characters. Blood Oath, The Sword of Kahless, Once More Unto the Breach.

VOY had 168 episodes.
No episode was focused on legacy characters (I don't count TNG-era characters in a TNG-era show as "nostalgia bait/memberberries").

T'Pau was in 3 of 97 episodes. But these episodes didn't focus on her. She plays a major role, but she is not the focus (unlike Sarek in "Sarek"). Enterprise was not built around these 3 season 4 episodes with T'Pau.

TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT were not built on legacy characters.

From 614 Berman-era episodes, 6 (9 if add the 3 ENT episodes) are focused on legacy characters. Even if you count the two 30th Star Trek tribute episodes you get 11 out of 614 episodes.

Maybe you call these episodes "fan service/nostalgia bait/memberberries", but TNG DS9 VOY and ENT are not built around these episodes. That is not their identity.

But you know what you can call these 11 episodes? Awesome Star Trek.

TWoK was nothing but fan service. I kinda enjoyed it tho.