Twitter is stuggling with a black man cast in Academy, I think at this point anything and everything is divisive with the ultra-toxic fan base.
What is your personal head canon?
- Thread starter AmandaSmith
- Start date
I actually don't entirely disagree with that. I actually thought Picard was fantastic from start to finish and absolutely do see Season 1 as very much a continuation of Post-Nemesis. I even enjoy S2, although I wish we had spent a bit less time in the 2020's.
There was something of a tonal shift in S3 though. S1 was doing the "everything has to be serious all the time" thing Discovery was doing, but just the overall design of the show made it feel more like Star Trek.
S3 introduced a shift in that tone where the plot was serious, there was a tone of drama and darkness, but the show also allowed itself to have some fun and be light where possible. That's part of the magic. My favorite S1 episode is "Stardust City Rag"... partly because we got take a momentary break from the "all serious, all the time" vibe with Picard dressing up like a vampy space pirate.
Yes. There aren't many i've heard who think that we'll just TNG Part 2 as a season. They want to pick up where PIC left off, with Captain Seven and Jack.
All different things. The buzz? Sure, it was the TNG reunion. The magic? Not neccesarilly, a part of it. The awards? No, the awards are just because it was well written, well acted and entertaining.
I will agree on Stardust City Rag, but I also didn't think Discovery or Picard were serious all the time, so I'm a terrible judge on that. The tone was a bit more serious, but struck me as closer to TNG dramatic moments or DS9 than anything else. But, then, Star Trek to me is TOS and that's it. TNG doesn't quite fit.
Interesting, especially given the focus on Season 3. I don't think it will be what people think they are asking for.
Ok, but that wasn't Seven or Jack to my mind.
And well written? Dude, it reminded me of Picard Season 1 and that gets passed over as being poorly written. So...
At this point, I have no fucking clue what people want from Star Trek, and Legacy I fear will be more of the same. "It has to feel like Star Trek but not that, or this. More like this."
At this point, I have no fucking clue what people want from Star Trek, and Legacy I fear will be more of the same. "It has to feel like Star Trek but not that, or this. More like this."
Thus is the problem with most anything at this point, but Star Trek seems to have it worse than some others.
What people want from Star Trek is incredibly diverse. I don't think there is a universal "this is what fans want". There is only "this is what some fans want", which also happens to be the exact opposite of what other fans want.
I'm fairly simple. I want Star Trek that is visually consistent with Star Trek and tells Star Trek type stories. The easiest way to do that is to set it in a progression in the timeline "after" the "more recent" Star Treks, ala Picard.
I want things to be different, but the same... what I mean is that I want the world to be the same. I want Klingons to look like Klingons and the Enterprise to look like the Enterprise. We already know what things look like. I want new stories told in that visually consistent world. It's really not rocket science. And quite frankly, even new Star Trek understands that by and large... PIC looked great. Lower Decks takes great pains to look right. Prodigy looks great. SNW is still wrong but has moved closer to looking right. It was really just one bad one, that was just... REALLY bad.
Yeah, agree to disagree at this point.
In my experience and life time Trek was not that visually consistent. It told Trek type stories, but those were all over the map, from horror, to comedy, to Western, to adventure and action. You had Balance of Terror with an extremely somber end, and then you had "Day of the Dove" with a very laugh track style end.
Then you had TMP which said, "Nope, can't look like that any more!" and upended the apple cart. Then you had TNG which did the same, and no 80 years in to the future doesn't make me go, "That's a reasonable update." Then TWOK which upended TMP's apple cart for no reason either.
Change, to me, is in Trek's DNA. I didn't start with TNG though. I don't have that fondness for TNG or its aesthetic. I have change and despite my misgivings on change most of the time Trek is one thing I can handle change with.
Also, if I demand Trek look "right" to my eyes I'll never actually be entertained. Star Trek has been about our humanity's future so I expect it to change based upon an understanding of technology. It's a world meant to evoke our future, and our understanding, from our past. I can't expect it to be consistent because it's not its own period; it's our imagined future.
Agreed on this point.
Furthermore, one keeps running into individuals who not only feel that their understanding of Trek (and however it has inevitably gone “wrong”) is THE valid, “correct” perspective, but that those who disagree with them are dupes at best, or People Of Inferior Understanding at worst. Such opiners are a blot on the fandom.
(Same in other fandoms, alas.)
There's no wrong way to like a Star Trek.
Then Legacy would be terrible for you, because the Enterprise-G is an idiotic design for that era and looks two hundred years older than it should. Don't pretend you have a leg to stand on when talking about visual continuity.
It's about time we agreed about something, besides Disco.
100 years older. If you're going to go there, get it right. The Enterprise-G looks like a ship from the turn-of-the-24th Century and would've made the perfect Enterprise-B.
Disclaimer: I like the Enterprise-G, but I have to call it the way I see it.
The G has grown on me, but I'd like do see what Dave Blass could do with the interior. He's said that he'd like to alter and upgrade it in the event of a spin-off. And yes, providing he's involved.
The floor always looked very shiny and squeaky, so I can't help but think it's a health and safety report to Starfleet waiting to happen.
The floor always looked very shiny and squeaky, so I can't help but think it's a health and safety report to Starfleet waiting to happen.
The Enterprise G looks wrong for the era, but it doesn't really break visual continuity as we've never seen an Enterprise G before. Starfleet made an awkward-looking ship with a retro design, there's nothing that breaks suspension of disbelief there, there's no retcons going on.
Playing into the idea of Headcanon, and feeling like I've read this before somewhere, I like the idea that the 25th century starfleet has made a conscious decision to evoke the golden age of 23rd century exploration. Largely as an effort of move away from the introverted and guarded Starfleet of the late 2380s and 2390s.
Excelsior, Stargazer, Constitution and even the Reliant class borrowed from STO reflect this, but they also seem to be evoking mid-24th century era Starships in the form of the Ross Class and Sunderland class.
It's like their way of saying to the galaxy "Hey! Remember us? Well, we're baAAck"
Excelsior, Stargazer, Constitution and even the Reliant class borrowed from STO reflect this, but they also seem to be evoking mid-24th century era Starships in the form of the Ross Class and Sunderland class.
It's like their way of saying to the galaxy "Hey! Remember us? Well, we're baAAck"
It's similar to when Starfleet did away with the Monster Maroons around 2350, to change their image. They do that from time-to-time.
I wish that a character had actually mentioned this on screen.
Same here, but that's why we're in the Head Canon Thread.
I always rooted for the Captain Worf show that never came. Or Captain Flipper, if we judge his past.
I've only seen year one in PICARD. But if Seven made Captain, she'd have to cut down on her fatalism to her co-stars. 17 ''You will fails'' in one shift tends to get on underlings.
Prediction: most of those people are either alt-right plants or people under the spell of one. It's sad, but I always thought sci-fi fandoms had a degree of insulation from that type...
Similar threads
