Spoilers What does SNW get right that DSC and PIC got wrong??

[Citiprime]

This sounds like a typical "real Star Trek fan" argument. "NuTrek" fans simply must not care about the past. It's the "TruFans" that are the real fans because they can tell you the exact brand of paint that was used by Matt Jefferies on the port Nacelle in 1964. Or what brand of cigar Gene Coon loved to smoke.

We've had arguably at least story points from this season that I can think of off hand that have been major points of contention with a lot of fans, not only here but on other Star Trek fan sites.

1. The Gorn being unredeemable "monsters" (Akiva Goldsman's words, not mine) and how that fits with TOS
2. Khan and why it was necessary to do a total retcon of his origin for "aspiration" reasons
3. And Goldsman basically making it clear he doesn't have any concerns about how all of this fits together

NONE OF THAT is a superficial criticism of how something doesn't match 1960s production design. My criticism of the Gorn has NOTHING to do with SNW making a CGI/animatronic Gorn in 2023. My criticism of SNW's Gorn is that turning them into xenomorphs that Starfleet is aware of arguably doesn't fit with TOS "Arena" or the story intent of that episode, and it undermines the themes of it (e.g., given the depiction of the Gorn in SNW, Kirk's, Spock's and McCoy's speculation the Gorn might have been acting in self-defense in TOS makes absolutely no sense because SNW has literally made them into monsters).

All of that is unnecessary if you call them something other than Gorn. Or how you don't need to fuck around with Khan's backstory except if you're doing blatant fan service of the worst kind, when you could have had La'an go through the same crisis of conscience in a different way that doesn't become a jumbled mess of exposition that left fans trying to piece together when and what is supposed to have happened now.

In other words, it's substantive criticism of story decisions made by the makers of this show about how it applies to Star Trek as a whole. But if you don't give a fuck about how any of that fits together, and just come at it from the perspective of who fucking cares what TOS was doing, let SNW rewrite it all and do whatever they want to do whether it fits or not I can see how it doesn't matter.

 

[fireproof78]

In other words, it's substantive criticism of story decisions made by the makers of this show about how it applies to Star Trek as a whole. But if you don't give a fuck about how any of that fits together, and just come at it from the perspective of who fucking cares what TOS was doing, let SNW rewrite it all and do whatever they want to do whether it fits or not I can see how it doesn't matter.

And no middle ground?

 

[Dukhat]

I happen to know, anecdotally, that this is not the case. Friends of mine did a review talking Star Trek and express their frustration, to put it mildly, with the effects and combat. This was 15+ years ago, so before SNW. Certainly was not considered a highlight of an episode by that group.

Well if your friends didn’t like it, they must be speaking for the majority of the fandom, so I retract my statement.

 

[fireproof78]

Well if your friends didn’t like it, they must be speaking for the majority of the fandom, so I retract my statement.

That was not my point, though I suspect that is self-evident.

The idea that it was accepted at all corners, until recently, is one that I found eyebrow raising.

 

[Dukhat]

That was not my point, though I suspect that is self-evident.

That’s that sarcasm that you love so much.

 

[Citiprime]

And no middle ground?

There was an obvious middle ground. Create their vision but don't call them Gorn.

Same way they didn't need to call the things they made into Klingons in Discovery season 1 Klingons. But bad fan service is bad fan service.

 

[fireproof78]

There was an obvious middle ground. Create their vision but don't call them Gorn.

Same way they didn't need to call the things they made into Klingons in Discovery season 1 Klingons. But bad fan service is bad fan service.

That's not what I'm referring to and I have my answer.

I'll be over here not caring about Star Trek.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I promise you that in 100 years, 99.999% of the population of the planet won't care or notice the differences between the two.

It will still be "The Star Trek Enterprise."

44 years have passed since The Motion Picture's refit made its debut, and even that design is not universally recognized as the representation of the 1701, and I doubt anyone is blurring memories to think the refit and the original are one and the same. The TOS 1701 is one of the most exposed, well-marketed fictional vehicles in history, while its filming miniature (in one state of repair or another) has enjoyed a home in America's greatest museum--the Smithsonian--since the 1970s. Millions have viewed that miniature on TV, endless forms of merchandising, parodies, print and in person to the degree that the CG creation above is not easily thought to be the original.

Off the top of my head, I can think of several remakes that are vastly superior to their "classic" originals.
The Mummy

I dare ask which remake you are referring to.

Scarface

Debatable.

Planet of the Apes

The '68 film is considered a film classic and landmark. No other version, whether its Tim Burton's garish "reimagining" or anything made in this century will ever be regarded to that degree.

Invasion of the Body Snachers

Hardly.

Ocean's Eleven

Debatable.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Yoda is TESB was more believable than whatever nightmare fuel they used in TLJ for Yoda.

...add the awful video-gamey CG Yoda from the Prequels. The same can easily be said of Jabba, as none of the terrible CG versions match the obvious realism and perfect design of a life-size puppet constructed in 1982.

 

[HotRod]

The TOS 1701 is one of the most exposed, well-marketed fictional vehicles in history

Absolutely right. And 99.999 percent of the population still would hardly notice the differences between the TOS version and SNW. it a disk, with some cylinders and some glowing bits. Close enough.

I dare ask which remake you are referring to.

1999. It's miles away more entertaining then the Karloff picture. I say that as a fan of the classic universal monster pics.

Debatable

Not really.

The '68 film is considered a film classic and landmark.

Absolutely. And the modern Andy Serkis films are better.

Hardly.

The 78 flick is absolutelysuperiorto the 50's film.

Debatable

Fair enough.

 

[Mr J]

You may have just hit upon why I like it so much. I hadn't really thought of it as 'being' TOS, but in certain ways it is.

And this totally goes back to my "different strokes for different folks" analysis of the strategy when it comes to how nuTrek is being planned - and this just shows that strategy works!

 

[Tallguy]

Invasion of the Body Snatchers:

Hardly.

Not really, no. The 1978 film is considered at least as much of a classic as the original.

Ocean's 11

Debatable.

I don't think it is. The original might be a snapshot of the various performers but they all made better films. The 2001 Ocean's 11 is already a classic.

Oh, Planet of the Apes as Twilight Zone: If I remember rightly, Serling did not write the twist ending. Do I have that right?

Turning the 1701 argument on it's head: If people can't tell the difference of the various iterations then there are no real improvements and we might as well just put the 1966 (hell, the 1965!) model on the screen. It also means that all of the ideas that people love about the Enterprise come from TOS and Jefferies and Datin.

The only version that has garnered nearly universal acclaim was the 1979 ship. It's also the ship that has had details cannibalized in every other version (and some unrelated ships besides) going forward. The only thing that got taken from the JJ-Prise was having a window on the bridge.

 

[Citiprime]

Oh, Planet of the Apes as Twilight Zone: If I remember rightly, Serling did not write the twist ending. Do I have that right?

I believe there's disputes among those involved as to who came up with the original idea, but the ending does appear in Serling's original drafts.

 

[SalyutBuran]

My hot take is that if SNW had been first out of the gate, exactly as it is, it would have drawn just as much hatred, discontent, and consternation as DSC.

The fact that these other series paved the way has made SNW's journey a MUCH easier one.

That doesn't explain why orville is so popular

Or why few people complain about the expanse raised by wolves or mandalorian, before they screwed mando up at least

 

[Tallguy]

I believe there's disputes among those involved as to who came up with the original idea, but the ending does appear in Serling's original drafts.

Then I do have it wrong. I thought I read at one point Sterling disowning it. (Not because it was bad, but because he didn't have anything to do with it.)

 

[Tallguy]

That doesn't explain why orville is so popular

Or why few people complain about the expanse raised by wolves or mandalorian, before they screwed mando up at least

Orville gets to have it's cake and eat it too. It gets to have "This is real Star Trek!" while not having to worry about "Why did you change the ship / the characters / the color of the coffee cups?" (And popular in this case is very relative, isn't it? Critically acclaimed would be more accurate, I think.)

I don't know Raised by Wolves. The Expanse is just good sci-fi and a reasonably accurate adaptation. But I don't see what they have to do with Star Trek. Also, The Expanse got cancelled. Twice. So did Raised by Wolves.

Mando took the course of originally steering clear of most of Star Wars and really doing its own thing with well done Star Wars trappings. (And, as Star Wars does and Star Trek does not, not really changing anything.)

To @Vger23 's point, SNW would have put itself square in the crosshairs of trying to re-do TOS, just as the JJ movies had. If it was the first Star Trek in a decade, very close to TOS but maybe not close enough, with none of the learned lessons of Discovery OR Picard, it would certainly have been hated on quite a bit more than it currently is.

 

[ED-209]

Remember how the Xindi had multiple offshoots? Insectoid, Reptillian etc??

Perhaps the same is true of the Gorn but we don't know it yet - what we are seeing in SNW is the foot soldier class. What we saw in TOS is considered more intelligent and an officer class.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch but it would work.

 

[1001001]

Remember how the Xindi had multiple offshoots? Insectoid, Reptillian etc??

Perhaps the same is true of the Gorn but we don't know it yet - what we are seeing in SNW is the foot soldier class. What we saw in TOS is considered more intelligent and an officer class.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch but it would work.

That’s as good an explanation as any.

I agree that the idea of these Gorn developing interstellar travel seems far fetched. Can you imagine the creatures we’ve seen in a classroom, earning their PhD’s in Physics?



None of this bothers me though. I assume we’ll get some kind of explanation down the line.

 

[Lord Garth]

That doesn't explain why orville is so popular

The Orville isn't popular. It only lasted two seasons on FOX, probably because of Seth MacFarlane's clout, and then one season on Hulu.

It also takes place outside of the Star Trek Universe. So there were no canon issues and no continuity with actual Trek. As has been demonstrated repeatedly, continuity is a sticking point for a lot of people. I see continuity as a fun thing. I like seeing how it adds up, but I stop right at the point of, "Do I enjoy what I'm watching on screen or not?" They, on the other hand, have let it take over their enjoyment. Or at least that's how it appears.

The Orville was also made to be like TNG. Any new official Star Trek series that came out in 2017, whether it was DSC or SNW, would've been the first series to launch the third generation of Star Trek on television. Third production generation, just to be clear. So, based on that alone, the desire from the creators would be to make it different and say, "This is a new generation of Star Trek!" DSC and SNW didn't want to be TNG. PIC, even though it continued the story of TNG, didn't keep the same tone, and wasn't made in the same style as TNG. The Orville, from what I saw, screams, "We want to be TNG! Except with Seth MacFarlane humor added in!"

To say what @Greg Cox has said elsewhere: when a lot of people say something "doesn't feel like Star Trek!", they really mean "It doesn't feel like TNG!" The Orville gave them the TNG feel and Discovery didn't. But that's not what DSC was going for. SNW avoids the issue by avoiding TNG and going for being a 2020s version of TOS. SNW is also better accepted because it seems to be seen as a compromise after DSC, which wouldn't have happened if it came out in 2017.

Or why few people complain about the expanse raised by wolves or mandalorian, before they screwed mando up at least

The Expanse isn't Star Trek and isn't even off-brand Star Trek, it's something else.

I haven't seen The Mandalorian. But, from what I've been able to gather, they made it to appeal to kids, and they made it to appeal to fans of the original SW Trilogy. On a TV budget, even a Streaming TV budget, they can't go all-out like with the newer Star Wars movies. But someone who actually is a Star Wars fan (I'm not) could make this case better than I can.

 

[Tallguy]

Remember how the Xindi had multiple offshoots? Insectoid, Reptillian etc??

Perhaps the same is true of the Gorn but we don't know it yet - what we are seeing in SNW is the foot soldier class. What we saw in TOS is considered more intelligent and an officer class.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch but it would work.

That's the easy part.

The hard part is why the bridge crew of the Enterprise have no reaction to being told that their adversary, who they are chasing because of the sneak attack and slaughter through initial deceit and deception of a Fed base, are the group that had been within the last decade responsible for hijacking ships, destroying other colonies, and kidnapping Fed citizens for breeding material.

And CMO McCoy's reaction is essentially "Gee. Maybe WE'RE the bad guys here?" as if there is no prior history. I'm thinking Uhura, Scott, and maybe Spock would have an opinion on this statement.