Of course I make a predictive statement based on nothing but experience & a gut feeling here - it's the "controversial opinion thread" after all.My point is is that you're making predictive statements as an absolute about stories that we don't even know are going to come to pass.
You can't say with certainty how this is going to impact any stories that take place in the 25th century going forward
No major events in modern Trek will ever matter in-universe again (in the P+ streaming era of Trek).
When "Best if both Worlds" happened, Starfleet had a major defeat and lost thousands of people. That event had profound in-universe consequences and was acknowledged in most Trek series up until the most recent one. The Dominion war was also referenced in anything that in- universe happened later.
But no matter what happens in ANY of the modern streaming series - the destruction of all of Starfleet, the murder of millions of servicemen, A.I. wars spanning millennia and destroying entire planets, reboots of whole species or iconic characters, props, ships - despite never being "technically" erased via time-travel or reboot - NONE of these events will ever have any consequences or even be acknowledged in-universe ever again.
For all intents & purposes, Starfleet history "ended" with ST09. Anything else after that will only ever reference events from itself (but even then rarely - every new season is kind of a blank slate), or the 90s-00s Trek shows. The streaming shows will continue to show events that technically happen. But they will never be part of Treks fictional history. Basically what Voyager did after each episode, back to status quo, on a franchise-wide, galaxy-wide level.
And that is fine.
Just following Roddenberry and his vision.This has everything to do with the mindset of the current writers and how little they care about substance and how much they care for attention fame and money.
Controversial Opinion:
Sometimes it's ok to remember that Star Trek is not a real living, breathing universe...it's fictional and designed for maximum entertainment value, not maximum realism. So, in remembering this, we can pout aside frustrations with in-universe stuff that makes no sense and just allow ourselves the joy of being entertained.
I mean, there's no sound in space in real life...but we don't (?) jump up and down and complain about that...even though it's absolutely and profoundly ridiculous. Maybe most of the other things we could dismiss too....in the name of just for once being happy and joyful in the process of allowing ourselves to be entertained.
This was always happening throughout franchise history. All the forgotten technologies. All the forgotten solutions to various problems. Heck, even BOBW, which you site here, is guilty of one of the most egregious "realism hand-waves" in Star Trek history...and that is that Picard returned to command the Enterprise after taking nothing more than a few days off to hang out at the vineyard, after having undergone an unimaginably horrific and life-altering experience. There's no way this is realistic. I don't care how much gyrating and rationalizing anyone does. He would have been either grounded permanently or he would have been quietly and honorably discharged.
I'm calling bullshit. Star Trek is always stupid. Always has been, always will be. Because "realism" isn't conducive to being wildly entertaining.
First, it’s not a “mental disease”. Second, it’s not restricted to, nor dominant in, “the young of today”. Third, a clear manifestation of the effect is the presumption of amateurs to know more, and (hypothetically, as they are amateurs) perform better, than professionals in a particular field. Seem familiar?
I enjoy seeing some polarizing and controversial story points because it says more about the inability of fans with inflexible, rigid minds and imagination to adapt to change.
Star Trek either helps encourage you to change or exposes your flaws
And you have just provided a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger effect at work. Congratulations.No. I may be called an amateur if I was suddenly hired by paramount but that's just a technicality. I am wise enough and experienced enough in trek Lore, it's history, it's making, it's meaning, that I could produce a modern version of the trek everyone loved and went to conventions for without fail. I'm not saying it wouldn't take hard work, but beliebe me when someone else is paying the millions, it's A LOT easier. It's just too bad the millions are being paid to a classless talentless buffoon
Katherine Pulaski was a far more interesting character than Beverly Crusher and, even though Gates is a beautiful woman and talented in her own right, Diana Muldaur gave a more nuanced performance that could have developed into something far more interesting.
But can you see Pulaski getting busy with her grandma’s sex ghost?
![]()
Sadly, yes. And for a fee I can get that all down in story form for you guys.
Agreed by far. I just never liked crusher. She always too quickly gave in to commands to do something. Pulaski was hilarious in her own way and stood her ground, but also knew when to back off.
That last part would double the fee.
I actually hope not.
There is something the more angry people answering to my post (@Racefuel ) seem to have missed:
I like Marvel movies. I liked Endgame. I liked how they "kept" the Snap and didn't do the obvious solution of reversing it.
However - every time it was brought up later, it was awkward as fuck and took me right out of the movie I was currently watching.
"The snap" would realistically destroy & completely reform all aspects of society - from how romance & relationships work, to more abstract political stuff, like no way they would still live in a traditional Western capitalist society afterwards.
If that gets too deeply explored, it stops being a superhero show, and instead becomes a very abstract, socio-economic "what if"-story on civilization and human norms itself.
It's okay if franchises sometimes "forget" their own story, IF it would otherwise break their universe (see all "lost technologies" in Trek). And the current story-arc writing style of Trek falls under this umbrella, where it's the wiser decision to just move on & forget.
And you have just provided a textbook example of the Dunning-Kruger effect at work. Congratulations.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.