Paul Rudd is now older than Wilford Brimley was when he made Cocoon. Let that sink in for a moment.
We've come a long way.
We've come a long way.
I mean, I agree but I think the simple fact that Star Trek was considered to be on the fringes, especially in the 80s and 90s, and you had pop culture teasing, like in Night Court poking fun at Trekkies arguing over TOS vs. TNG, there is a certain amount of discomfort that can come from freely accepting Trek being closer to the main stream.I find that very sad. I was like that for awhile, but I realized it was no way to live. I'm thankful most people on this board prefer to discuss and enjoy our geeky stuff.![]()
Which is ironic and kinda sadI mean, I agree but I think the simple fact that Star Trek was considered to be on the fringes, especially in the 80s and 90s, and you had pop culture teasing, like in Night Court poking fun at Trekkies arguing over TOS vs. TNG, there is a certain amount of discomfort that can come from freely accepting Trek being closer to the main stream.
Personally, Trek fandom has tried to frame itself as inclusive, but the reality is it struggles with a very basic human idea of trying to distinguish itself and it's identify within the larger cultural context. So, when you have people who are perhaps more casual fans trying to come in to franchise, or you have other science fiction/space fantasy that infringes on a territory there is a protectivist reaction, largely because one's identity is so wrapped up in this fiction. Not only that, but arguing about it can feel way more empowering because then you are protecting your "realm" and by extension, your identity. And, when so much time was spent arguing about it, it becomes easier and more comfortable to just argue, rather than accept different opinions.
It's fascinating from a psychological perspective, but I struggle at times because it really feels like Trek would rather be this isolated little niche and not let anything new in.
Thank you for unpacking that more. I remember feeling "special" and smarter than "mundanes". As a teen, that probably helped me survive. Even now, I love going to conventions to be around "my people." So that I understand - the desire to belong somewhere is hardwired into us.I mean, I agree but I think the simple fact that Star Trek was considered to be on the fringes, especially in the 80s and 90s, and you had pop culture teasing, like in Night Court poking fun at Trekkies arguing over TOS vs. TNG, there is a certain amount of discomfort that can come from freely accepting Trek being closer to the main stream.
Personally, Trek fandom has tried to frame itself as inclusive, but the reality is it struggles with a very basic human idea of trying to distinguish itself and it's identify within the larger cultural context. So, when you have people who are perhaps more casual fans trying to come in to franchise, or you have other science fiction/space fantasy that infringes on a territory there is a protectivist reaction, largely because one's identity is so wrapped up in this fiction. Not only that, but arguing about it can feel way more empowering because then you are protecting your "realm" and by extension, your identity. And, when so much time was spent arguing about it, it becomes easier and more comfortable to just argue, rather than accept different opinions.
It's fascinating from a psychological perspective, but I struggle at times because it really feels like Trek would rather be this isolated little niche and not let anything new in.
I think I have mellowed to some degree as well, and definitely have a much different viewpoint on my participation in fandom. But, more than that, it just makes me so freaking sad to see a franchise that rails about diversity struggle with accepting new points of view.Thank you for unpacking that more. I remember feeling "special" and smarter than "mundanes". As a teen, that probably helped me survive. Even now, I love going to conventions to be around "my people." So that I understand - the desire to belong somewhere is hardwired into us.
The gatekeeping and protectionism rubs me wrong. When a newbie or casual fan comes up to me, I'm thrilled to share the things I love! The more the merrier!
Maybe it's part of the general divisiveness of our (US) culture right now. People seem less able to tolerate differing opinions about anything. As I've gotten older, I've realized I'd rather try to understand (emphasis on try - I'm not always good at it) than fight. I've learned new things, found common ground where I didn't expect to, and even changed my mind. Maybe I've just mellowed.
I feel that a lot. Should diversity mean we all have to think alike or you're cast out or canceledI mean, I agree but I think the simple fact that Star Trek was considered to be on the fringes, especially in the 80s and 90s, and you had pop culture teasing, like in Night Court poking fun at Trekkies arguing over TOS vs. TNG, there is a certain amount of discomfort that can come from freely accepting Trek being closer to the main stream.
Personally, Trek fandom has tried to frame itself as inclusive, but the reality is it struggles with a very basic human idea of trying to distinguish itself and it's identify within the larger cultural context. So, when you have people who are perhaps more casual fans trying to come in to franchise, or you have other science fiction/space fantasy that infringes on a territory there is a protectivist reaction, largely because one's identity is so wrapped up in this fiction. Not only that, but arguing about it can feel way more empowering because then you are protecting your "realm" and by extension, your identity. And, when so much time was spent arguing about it, it becomes easier and more comfortable to just argue, rather than accept different opinions.
It's fascinating from a psychological perspective, but I struggle at times because it really feels like Trek would rather be this isolated little niche and not let anything new in.
If a '80s weather satellite can analyze a sample of kryptonite to this extent, I'm sure a tricorder can figure out the mystery component too.
Or they can substitute it with something. Though maybe not tar.
![]()
WAIT a minute! He's younger than ME!Paul Rudd is now older than Wilford Brimley was when he made Cocoon. Let that sink in for a moment.
We've come a long way.
Hmmm. On the one hand I totally see it. OTOH the biggest hit that Star Trek ever had was JJ's Into Darkness (even adjusted for inflation). So, more inclusive but not really the most Star Trek thing that's ever been made. (WOW! Star Trek: The Motion Picture still holding on at number TWO! Making that movie must have been truly a miserable experience - and it was - for the studio for them to have kicked Roddenberry out after a bona fide hit!)It's fascinating from a psychological perspective, but I struggle at times because it really feels like Trek would rather be this isolated little niche and not let anything new in.
Ok, but why are the two things mutually exclusive? Is there a balance point between Trek thing and inclusive?So, more inclusive but not really the most Star Trek thing that's ever been made.
I think so, yes. Where is it? Who knows? I'm certainly not entitled to more Star Trek the way that I like it. The new fans and creatives can make new things and I'm in favor of people liking things that they like.Ok, but why are the two things mutually exclusive? Is there a balance point between Trek thing and inclusive?
Two words...I never cared about the Disney Afternoon Ducktales but BOY am I a fan of the Disney Channel reboot. Really, have you seen it? It's SOOOOO GOOD!
Thanks for the list of people slightly younger than I am.
I guess that's the thing: I wanted more people to like Star Trek. But I didn't want them to change Star Trek so that more people would like it.Controversial Opinion:
I always wanted Star Trek to be more mainstream. I never, ever had any desire for it to be "my special thing" and I never bought into the total bullshit that it was/is "science fiction television for a smarter, more intellectual audience." That was something Gene made up in the 70's and 80's to make everyone feel special.
Those attitudes are what has kept Trek in the fringes for decades. I'd rather everyone be able to enjoy it as much as I do.
I guess that's the thing: I wanted more people to like Star Trek. But I didn't want them to change Star Trek so that more people would like it.
(And I wanted WAY more people to like Firefly. But I'm not willing to trade The Avengers for it.)
But let's not take that tone. What should Roddenberry have changed to be more accessible?
Yes, but that was all after the fact. It certainly wasn't part of the marketing. And unless you were already "in" you didn't hear it.I think the rhetoric that Trek is only for “smart, intellectual science fiction aficionados” probably didn’t help the show’s appeal. It’s condescending and exclusive.
In most ways, yes. But it's still way cooler to like Star Wars and Spider-Man.And has Trek changed, or evolved?
Yeah. "Make it more accessible" has too often been the kiss of death for good shows. I really don't know what Gene could've done - we already had miniskirts and action scenes. What beat it in the ratings?I guess that's the thing: I wanted more people to like Star Trek. But I didn't want them to change Star Trek so that more people would like it.
(And I wanted WAY more people to like Firefly. But I'm not willing to trade The Avengers for it.)
But let's not take that tone. What should Roddenberry have changed to be more accessible?
Definitely evolved. Back when TNG was on the air, I'd never have envisioned Prodigy or Lower Decks or Picard. There's so much more diversity of tone, subject matter, characters, and casting.And has Trek changed, or evolved?
And no one thought there even were female fans! (The Big Bang Theory pissed me off for still using those stereotypes.) Just existing put me beyond the pale to most non-fans.If anything you heard it from the people NOT watching the show (not "fans") that Star Trek was for dweebs who couldn't get girls.
I think if they had been more aggressive with the Kelvin universe movie releases it might have bumped up the popularity with the general public. They had six years before Star Wars returned and only managed to release one movie during that time.In most ways, yes. But it's still way cooler to like Star Wars and Spider-Man.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.