About the only thing Trek-related that would excite me now. And that is only if they completely axe the current writers/producers.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
About the only thing Trek-related that would excite me now. And that is only if they completely axe the current writers/producers.
With the way the real world is these days, the last thing I want to see in my Trek is a constant barrage of evil, mustache twirling villains. I already see enough of those type on the news.
My Star Trek will have blackjack. And hookers!
It could be interesting, but it wouldn't be Star Trek. It would be about whatever the heck Gary Seven's people were called.
We could use some more escapist adventures for a refuge from the world, that's for sure.
I want a series set in the very early days of the Federation. A series filled with hope and optimism. I want to see the founding members of the Federation form the lasting bonds of friendship and cooperation that help make the UFP a symbol of hope and decency in a Galaxy filled with hardship.
I'm over dark and edgy Star Trek.
I'm over dark and edgy Star Trek.
Well, yeah. That's specifically what would interest me in it. It's not Star Trek. Just sort-of Star Trek-adjacent. I always liked "Assignment: Earth" as an episode, I thought it would make for a good series. I like Gary Seven, I like Roberta, I like Isis, and I think they could've carried a show.
And, while I like Picard Season 2, you'll notice I hardly ever go out of my way to defend it (unlike S1 and S3) because -- among other things -- they were given a second chance to do so much more with the Watchers (that's what Gary Seven's adoptive-people are called) and they fumbled the ball. But, even still, I liked Tallinn, a.k.a. Not-Laris, being a Watcher.
I thought Prodigy handled the "Assignment: Earth" angle better. Wesley, as a Watcher was way more fun than I expected. But Wil Wheaton isn't who I'd want in this type of series. At least not as a regular or recurring character.
Last edited:
I think it should be written by someone who can do something that's far more Earth-based and where the sci-fi is just barely there, except where it counts. Mostly grounded, sometimes fantastical, and humans are written as humans. Gary or whoever just has to watch out for them and save them from themselves.
Last edited:
One the things I do not like about the wild success of Star Trek 2009 is because it was made by JJ Abrams so much streaming live action Trek has to have the mystery box bullshit because we're supposed to all be into that stuff these days. JJ's mystery box habits have a very limited shelf life, and they just don't translate to series Trek, at least not year after year.
They barely translate to any series. Turns to treading water very fast.
As much as I love the 2009 movie, some habits it's encouraged with streaming Trek producers do not make me happy. At all.
The mystery box format has two enormous weaknesses:
- The season spends far too much time building up towards the reveal of the mystery and too little time resolving the conflict. And, as a result:
- The answer to the mystery is underwhelming in comparison to the excessive amount of time setting it up.
This.
When the Borg were shown to be the villians of Picard season 3, the reveal should have been accompanied by the sound of a balloon deflating.
Plus, if they crash, it pretty much makes any rewatch pointless.
Hence why I rarely revisit episodes from most seasons of DSC. Eight episodes of middling buildup to a payoff that 4 times out of 5 was underwhelming....yeah, how about we not do this anymore?
Similar threads
- Locked
