Does the current state of Star Trek say anything about what fans want?

[Greg Cox]

I've always said that I think people who really "grew up" with the TNG era Star Trek struggle with changes to continuity or production the most.

I grew up seeing TOS first, and then watching all the changes that TMP brought about, and then more changes in TWOK, and then more changes with TNG. For me, the changes and inconsistencies are not only "normal" they are an expected part of the Trek experience.

Yep. And our generation has also seen umpteen other old favorites updated and tweaked over time; we're used to the idea that nothing is really set in stone and are accustomed to rolling with the punches. Klingons have ridges on their heads now? Okay, whatever. They're still the same Klingons I grew up watching, just with a bigger makeup budget. Spock has a sister? Okay, we didn't know he had a fiancee or a half-brother either. Learn something new every day.

At the risk of channeling my inner curmudgeon, is it just me or do modern audiences take this stuff way more literally than we used to back in my day? And why this extreme aversion to anything that might "knock them out of the story" by reminding them (gasp) that they're watching a show?

Of course it's a show. And sometimes, over the course of sixty years, you have to refresh the sets and costumes and stuff.

 

[Sci]

Yep. And our generation has also seen umpteen other old favorites updated and tweaked over time; we're used to the idea that nothing is really set in stone and are accustomed to rolling with the punches. Klingons have ridges on their heads now? Okay, whatever. They're still the same Klingons I grew up watching, just with a bigger makeup budget. Spock has a sister? Okay, we didn't know he had a fiancee or a half-brother either. Learn something new every day.

At the risk of channeling my inner curmudgeon, is it just me or do modern audiences take this stuff way more literally than we used to back in my day? And why this extreme aversion to anything that might "knock them out of the story" by reminding them (gasp) that they're watching a show?

Of course it's a show. And sometimes, over the course of sixty years, you have to refresh the sets and costumes and stuff.

There is a certain personality type that does not watch these programs for entertainment; it watches these programs as though they're living Wikipedia entries whose sole value is how well they "fit into" other Wikipedia articles.

 

[fireproof78]

At the risk of channeling my inner curmudgeon, is it just me or do modern audiences take this stuff way more literally than we used to back in my day? And why this extreme aversion to anything that might "knock them out of the story" by reminding them (gasp) that they're watching a show?

I think part of the whole "you're watching a show" for some reason is taken as derogatory. Maybe because it's a thing that's precious to them, but I'm not sure. It strikes me as being quite a weird response to it that it being a show doesn't take away the value that it means to them. Or if continuity changes happen it doesn't impact your personal affinity for it.

 

[Awesome Possum]

To some people it seems to take on a form of religious fanaticism to the point that giving a CG model more details is seen as sacrilegious. It just seems like it can only end in misery since there is no way to realistically get what they want.

 

[fireproof78]

Indeed. But I think there is a certain level of preferring to be miserable.

 

[Dukhat]

I think anyone who joins an internet BBS devoted to said show should not be so quick to make judgements about the fans of that show. And yet the judgments fly like birds.

 

[fireproof78]

My observations and interactions with fans has let me to that conclusion. When I was growing up being a Trekkie was not considered a positive. So, it became a bit of an outsider status symbol within my Trek circle of friends.

Now, I see so much infighting and lack of enjoyment with the franchise and I can't help but think it's because it's not an outsider mark. It's niche, but the divides in fan opinions make it even more splintered.

These are my observations
No judgement here. Just noticing behavior and possible reasons why.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

When it comes to visual consistency and TV series feeling like they all belong in one setting I've been absolutely satisfied by Star Wars recently. The Mandalorian is a fun action-adventure Western, Andor is a gritty dialogue-heavy drama, The Bad Batch is literally a cartoon, but when I watch any of them I'm immersed in the ongoing narrative of a consistent but evolving Star Wars universe. And this makes me happy.

Star Trek would only be improved by getting on its level.

 

[fireproof78]

Star Wars is literal fantasy. It's not supposed to change. Star Trek has change built in to the premise.

The Mandalorian leaves much to be desired.

 

[Lord Garth]

All I know is that before, I never understood how the Holy Wars in history started. Now I do.

 

[Weyoun 251]

I think anyone who joins an internet BBS devoted to said show should not be so quick to make judgements about the fans of that show. And yet the judgments fly like birds.

Implying, I presume, that discussing something on the internet makes you a super fan?

We see plenty of range across the board in terms of how "hardcore" a fan people are and over the types of things about a show that people do/do not care about.

This is no different to the myriad other online forum related to sports, movies, history etc - we are all more invested than your average person but not so much that we can't comment on the healthiness of the level of investment.

The key thing is that this is meant to be fun - it is entertainment produced for mass consumption, not your mates 1 man show that they have forced you to come to.

 

[Qonundrum]

There is the other question of "What defines a fan?" Also, of course, if a show has no fans, what does it do to get them? Do you want more fans or change the desired fanbase, which can be a side-effect if one wants more fans? How big a college essay do people want to read? (Hint: Most want "tldr", myself not excepted.) In the end, make what ya want and you'll gets fans and detractors?

 

[Mudd]

Fifty years ago, Star Trek was exciting to a lot of people just because it was unusual.

There's nothing innovative or different enough about it now for it to stand out as popular entertainment unless you're part of the steadily diminishing fandom. It sits somewhere in the grey middle of long-running pop culture IPs, more attention-getting than stuff like Ghostbusters, less so than Star Wars.

 

[Qonundrum]

Fifty years ago, Star Trek was exciting to a lot of people just because it was unusual.

There's nothing innovative or different enough about it now for it to stand out as popular entertainment unless you're part of the steadily diminishing fandom. It sits somewhere in the grey middle of long-running pop culture IPs, more attention-getting than stuff like Ghostbusters, less so than Star Wars.

Unusual, yes - it definitely can be a draw. How long people stayed watching back then to bask in more of the unusualness, or if they run out of unusualness that's also interesting (hence returning characters, it's inevitable and most of them have a lot more that can be done with them too...) Being new, TOS needed bigger numbers and it was a mail writein that saved it, of course... (Not unlike Battlestar Galactica in 1978, which did okay but not enough relative to its budget, and was axed, and after fan commotion - including a tragedy - the show was revived, but the initial cost-saving tactic to have it focus on the Galacticans altering human development via time travel and meddling to improve them to a point where they can fight Cylons was replaced with -- eh, what got aired... It's also interesting to note that BSG2004 took an idea poorly executed in Galactica 1980 (human cylons in the hideous halloween episode I recommend everyone sit through both parts of) and used it to proper effect, fortunately. )

Sci-fi was much smaller back then, so overlap or repeating ideas didn't happen. Save for the comparisons between Twilight Zone and early-TOS in particular, of course, but TOS had more wiggle room and a larger universe thanks to the space exploration angle - rendering comparisons lesser over time. Didn't Gene once want TNG to not have a starship, claiming humans will have perfected another means of travel and to save on budget?

 

[Dukhat]

Implying, I presume, that discussing something on the internet makes you a super fan?

We see plenty of range across the board in terms of how "hardcore" a fan people are and over the types of things about a show that people do/do not care about.

This is no different to the myriad other online forum related to sports, movies, history etc - we are all more invested than your average person but not so much that we can't comment on the healthiness of the level of investment.

The key thing is that this is meant to be fun - it is entertainment produced for mass consumption, not your mates 1 man show that they have forced you to come to.

Let’s not kid ourselves here: the members of the TrekBBS probably make up about .01% of the Star Trek fandom, and are probably the most vocal of that fandom. We also tend to think that all the other Trek fans think just like we do, when that isn’t remotely the case.

Case in point: I was on the recent Star Trek cruise. And while there were a ton of Trek actors on the ship, I wasn’t interested in talking to them or having them answer my nerdy questions. I was far more interested in talking to Ira Steven Behr, because unlike most fans, I’m obsessed more with the background goings-on of the shows’ production, while 99% of the people on that cruise only care about what was on the surface. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing; it’s simply typical that most fans don’t care about the minutiae behind the scenes like I do.

I’m also a starship porn guy. Ever since I was a kid, I was obsessed with the different types of ship designs to come out of the shows over the years. Guess what? Most Trek fans don’t really give a shit about what a ship looks like. But places like the Flare Forums and the Trek Tech section of this site are places where I can geek out about it, because I can’t talk about it with my Trek fan friends in real life because none of them care that the Abramsprise is ugly or that the SNW Discoprise looks nothing like the TOS Enterprise.

Oh, one more thing: while I was on the cruise, I had a habit of asking people I met if they happened to be a member of the TrekBBS. None of them were. You’d think that anyone who actually loves Star Trek that much that they’d pay shitloads of money to be on a cruise ship would be just as anal retentive about Star Trek as a TrekBBS member is…but no.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, if anyone wants to geek out over BTS minutia I am always down for that, having listened to podcasts, moving making lectures, and reading memoirs of cast and crew.

Let’s not kid ourselves here: the members of the TrekBBS probably make up about .01% of the Star Trek fandom, and are probably the most vocal of that fandom. We also tend to think that all the other Trek fans think just like we do, when that isn’t remotely the case.

I have never met a Trek fan who thinks like I do.

 

[Weyoun 251]

Let’s not kid ourselves here: the members of the TrekBBS probably make up about .01% of the Star Trek fandom, and are probably the most vocal of that fandom. We also tend to think that all the other Trek fans think just like we do, when that isn’t remotely the case.

Case in point: I was on the recent Star Trek cruise. And while there were a ton of Trek actors on the ship, I wasn’t interested in talking to them or having them answer my nerdy questions. I was far more interested in talking to Ira Steven Behr, because unlike most fans, I’m obsessed more with the background goings-on of the shows’ production, while 99% of the people on that cruise only care about what was on the surface. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing; it’s simply typical that most fans don’t care about the minutiae behind the scenes like I do.

I’m also a starship porn guy. Ever since I was a kid, I was obsessed with the different types of ship designs to come out of the shows over the years. Guess what? Most Trek fans don’t really give a shit about what a ship looks like. But places like the Flare Forums and the Trek Tech section of this site are places where I can geek out about it, because I can’t talk about it with my Trek fan friends in real life because none of them care that the Abramsprise is ugly or that the SNW Discoprise looks nothing like the TOS Enterprise.

Oh, one more thing: while I was on the cruise, I had a habit of asking people I met if they happened to be a member of the TrekBBS. None of them were. You’d think that anyone who actually loves Star Trek that much that they’d pay shitloads of money to be on a cruise ship would be just as anal retentive about Star Trek as a TrekBBS member is…but no.

But is it any more/less weird than joining a football forum to discuss what is happening at Liverpool or Man U and getting into the murky world of transfer talk?

It is all a spectrum and I do think there is a much wider range on here than you think - in pure numbers you may be right but in terms of people's views and what interests them I think it is much more diverse.

I consider myself a very superficial fan in that I love the show, I enjoy discussing it and coming up with theories on what might come next, enjoy a good laugh about some aspects, a debate about others, but I am not going to go into the minutiae of tech manuals or read a full Deks run down of why the science doesn't work, or get into the depth of why the nacelles were 2 degrees off in their slant etc

Trek is about fun and entertainment, just like football is. I, and many others on here, don't need the whole world to work as if it was real or lose our enjoyment because one line from 40 years ago doesn't match a new line now.

This doesn't detract from how you enjoy the show/mean that either of us a more or less a fan of it - we are just different parts of the spectrum in terms of what we get enjoyment from

 

[Dukhat]

And I find fun in breaking down the minutiae that most Trek fans could care less about. Doesn’t make my reasons for being here any more or less valid than the other guy. I just don’t presume to think that the average Trek fan cares about the same stuff I do.

 

[Weyoun 251]

And I find fun in breaking down the minutiae that most Trek fans could care less about. Doesn’t make my reasons for being here any more or less valid than the other guy.

I think this is something we can both agree on wholeheartedly - however me, you, or anyone else on here finds enjoyment in Trek then so long as we don't do it at the exclusion of others or in a way that spoils others enjoyment then we are all equally valid

 

[fireproof78]

a full Deks run down of why the science doesn't work, or get into the depth of why the nacelles were 2 degrees off in their slant etc

Yeah, I use to do the technical breakdown but I can't any more.

I prefer the human elements, both BTS and character elements now.

I think this is something we can both agree on wholeheartedly - however me, you, or anyone else on here finds enjoyment in Trek then so long as we don't do it at the exclusion of others or in a way that spoils others enjoyment then we are all equally valid

Indeed. And that's often my own personal struggle is feeling very much an outsider, even amongst Trek fans.