Oh yeah, Calypso is good.
I quite like Spock and Una singing in a lift as well. That's fun.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Oh yeah, Calypso is good.
I quite like Spock and Una singing in a lift as well. That's fun.
While I’d like this (I assume by timeline order you mean in order of in-universe chronology), I wonder if another good alternative might be to arrange them by “production era” — something like
*The Original Series era (Roddenberry era I)
*The Seventies era (TAS and TMP; Roddenberry era II)
*The Movie era (Bennett era)
*The Next Generation era (Berman era; arguably includes Enterprise as its coda)
*The Kelvin era (Abrams era)
*The Paramount+ era (Kurtzman era; it’s all over the internal timeline)
EDIT: Or heck, just label the eras by main producer name; that way TOS,TAS and TMP would all be together as the Roddenberry era.
How I'd do it: Keep it simple, keep it neat.
Pre-Streaming Trek (1966-2016)
TOS/TAS
TNG
DS9
VOY
ENT
Movies
Streaming Trek (2017-Present)
DSC
PIC
SNW
LD
PRO
Short Treks go into DSC, PIC, or SNW. Whichever place each entry fits best. Section 31 would go into Disco. SFA would get its own forum. If Legacy is made, it would be combined with Picard.
The Kelvin Films are finished, and traffic has slowed waaaayyyyy down, so I'd just combine I-X with XI-XIII and call it a day.
Pre-Streaming Trek (1966-2016)
TOS/TAS
TNG
DS9
VOY
ENT
Movies
Streaming Trek (2017-Present)
DSC
PIC
SNW
LD
PRO
Short Treks go into DSC, PIC, or SNW. Whichever place each entry fits best. Section 31 would go into Disco. SFA would get its own forum. If Legacy is made, it would be combined with Picard.
The Kelvin Films are finished, and traffic has slowed waaaayyyyy down, so I'd just combine I-X with XI-XIII and call it a day.
Last edited:
A minority opinion, to be sure, since there's been no attention-grabbing call for DS9 to return, while the reaction to Picard was not exactly the sign of a triumphant return to that corner of the franchise.
Agreed.
Well, like I've said: ENT is the one Star Trek series I flat-out don't like as a whole. So, I don't take that series into consideration for anything. And, like I've also said, while I don't dislike SNW, I'm not actually a fan of that series either.[/quote]
Sort of in the same place: I can watch some ENT episodes, but overall, its not high on any re-watch list except for the TOS 2-parter. Regarding SNW, I can take it or leave it, as I feel the essence of Pike, his perspective on being a captain (i.e., the risks, depression, etc.) was perfectly explored in The Cage--and that's strictly a character assessment, not any particular judgement about the pilot.
And yet everyone seemed to love PIC S3, which was basically TNG S8.
Also, people definitely want DS9 to be revisited. The series wrapped up its storyline well, but I definitely see quite a few people complaining that TNG and VOY are revisited a lot, but not DS9. Also, a lot of people really seem to be clamouring for an O'Brien reappearance. (Yes, I know he's originally from TNG. But DS9 made far better use of his character.) But of course, this is all just based on anecdotal evidence.
And did you just call thinking TNG and DS9 are peak Trek a minority opinion? Because that's certainly not true.
PIC 3 is probably my least favorite season of Trek.
^One of my least favorite, as well.
On the other hand, I quite liked season 2. (And 1.)
On the other hand, I quite liked season 2. (And 1.)
Liked 1.
Didn't like 2, for the most part. Picard had some OK stuff. Q was a drag.
3 was good in the beginning.
Didn't like 2, for the most part. Picard had some OK stuff. Q was a drag.
3 was good in the beginning.
I think a return to DS9 is complicated by two problems: Ira Steven Behr probably wouldn't be involved. I think more than any other Star Trek series, DS9 is synonymous with a very specific writing team. The second problem is they can't have the full cast back. René Auberjonois is dead, and getting Avery Brooks to come back isn't going to happen. Avery Brooks isn't like Patrick Stewart. When he says he's done, he's done.
If they ever do a full reunion with another cast, it would be VOY. Not including if they ever make a Discovery TV Movie.
I like Season 3 of PIC, I'm just more baffled that it features almost all of the same issues some folks complain about in other Kurtzman era shows, but those are rendered moot simply by featuring the TNG cast. Maybe those people need to be honest with themselves and admit their perceived issues didn't actually matter and the true complaint is they don't care about Picard as a character unless he's surrounded by Riker, Data et al., which is fine, TNG was an ensemble after all.
Production era would be my preference as well, e.g. I find ENT is much more of a Berman era prequel than it is TOS.
Exactly. I understand that the Star Trek Universe eventually turns into Berman Trek, but what rubbed me the wrong way in 2001 was the idea that -- in-universe -- it starts off with Berman Trek, becomes TOS, and then goes back to being Berman Trek again. I wanted ENT to be made by someone else, so they'd have three separate eras with three separate production sensibilities. As it was, in the early-2000s, it looked like TOS was surrounded by Berman Trek.
This is why I didn't have issues when JJ Abrams or Alex Kurtzman came around. The ship had already sailed. TOS was -- and is -- never going to have what feels like a natural prequel. No sense in getting bent out of shape about what will never be.
It's also why I always prefer going forward over going backward. Because then it doesn't matter.
Last edited:
100%
At this point the “Prime Universe” is shaped largely on decisions made in Berman era Trek, which in itself is based more on 70s and beyond canon (and fandom!) assumptions than what literally happened in TOS.
Member berries cover a multitude of criticism
Here's a controversial thought. QUIT USING ESTABLISHED ERAS OR CHARACTERS! Someone wants to tell their own story in the Star Trek universe? Cool. TELL YOUR OWN STORY. Quit relying on established characters like Kirk, Spock, Pike, etc. Do your own thing. Make your own characters. Tell your own story instead of constantly trying to recreate Wrath of Khan.
Last edited:
That's dangerous.
That's the main reason why, as far as the new series, I'm Team Discovery. Especially in the 32nd Century. After Discovery, it's a process of going down the list and picking my poison.
Picard's my favorite type of poison. <-- Someone quote that soundbite out of context!
Starfleet Academy will be another one made up of characters introduced entirely in the Streaming Era. And in the 32nd Century, a time period that's still in the process of being fleshed out. Discovery's barely had a chance to scratch the surface.
I've been thinking about this, and I don't think it's fair to include Pike in this list. "Established Character" is using the term loosely. The only episode he was in was "The Cage". Technically "The Menagerie" too, but really "The Cage". He never had the chance to be developed like Kirk and Spock were. And Pike's crew included Spock. Like it or not, it makes sense for Spock to be there in a Pike Series.
Then there are situations like with Number One. We only got a vague thumb-nail description of her in "The Cage". We know a lot more about her in SNW than we ever did in "The Cage".
Last edited:
Alternative controversial opinion:
If I could snap my fingers and control the future of the entire Trek franchise, my choice would be a full reboot with an entirely new continuity where mixing and matching previously established characters is actively encouraged.
I appreciate the amount of space that's available in the Star Trek universe for new characters to exist and have great stories, and I wouldn't ever say there shouldn't be any new characters at all. But I'm genuinely starting to get tired of meeting one new crew after another. Especially when all the recurring character spots are almost universally reserved for the same handful of characters leaving awesome folks like Kira, Garak, Sisko, etc to just fade into obscurity for reasons entirely unrelated to the characters' merits while we're already on version 3.0 of frickin Christine Chapel. (Nothing against the current actor, she's great.)
I'd rather see Trek become a sort of mythological gestalt where all the different characters are fair game for any story and no story is required to come up with all brand new characters just for the sake of coming up with all brand new characters.
If I could snap my fingers and control the future of the entire Trek franchise, my choice would be a full reboot with an entirely new continuity where mixing and matching previously established characters is actively encouraged.
I appreciate the amount of space that's available in the Star Trek universe for new characters to exist and have great stories, and I wouldn't ever say there shouldn't be any new characters at all. But I'm genuinely starting to get tired of meeting one new crew after another. Especially when all the recurring character spots are almost universally reserved for the same handful of characters leaving awesome folks like Kira, Garak, Sisko, etc to just fade into obscurity for reasons entirely unrelated to the characters' merits while we're already on version 3.0 of frickin Christine Chapel. (Nothing against the current actor, she's great.)
I'd rather see Trek become a sort of mythological gestalt where all the different characters are fair game for any story and no story is required to come up with all brand new characters just for the sake of coming up with all brand new characters.
Similar threads
- Locked
