Is it time to put Star Trek to rest?

[XCV330]

Star Trek went through some "me time" around 2005-2009, trying out meditation, joining Old Franchises Anonymous, trying a healthier diet, and commiting to taking time to reflect on what it did all day before going to bed. But by 2009 it was out of money and reduced to siphoning gas out of other people's tanks to keep the Harley it bought on credit running to the next town where its third gf Mitzi lived and it could get a gig playing reruns for a few beers and avoid the repo man one more month. Things had to change so it made the call to J .J. Abrams with a promise that THIS time it was going to clean itself up.

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

"Star Trek. When will it end?"
"Never."

As a younger kid, the concept of even BLISSFUL eternity freaked me out severely, particularly at night.

The thought of eternal TREK may be comforting, and for now, it's the current case.
But I submit that eternal TREK is.....unnecessary.

Like Bradbury's FAHRENHEIT characters, we'll still memorize all the TOS dialogue, quite likely until the end of time. Perhaps that's sufficient.

 

[Lord Garth]

As a younger kid, the concept of even BLISSFUL eternity freaked me out severely, particularly at night.

The thought of eternal TREK may be comforting, and for now, it's the current case.
But I submit that eternal TREK is.....unnecessary.

Continuing eternally is unnecessary.

Just giving my read of the situation. I expect the current production era to end sooner or later, another one will start up, rinse, repeat.

Even right now, David Ellison seems to really want to get the Star Trek movies out of limbo. Will I like whatever those movies are? If it's another Kelvin Movie, probably not. Something else? Who knows. I'll only watch something it if interests me.

I think people should only watch something if they want to watch it. As soon as they're only watching it because they think feel like they have to, to be part of the conversation, or they're only watching it out of habit, or just to be completionists, or whatever, they should stop.

At the end of the day, we vote with our views. And whether or not something should continue should be determined by how many are watching. Someone who keeps watching something they that think should stop is shooting themselves in the foot. They're helping to continue something they want to stop. Which is why I'm against the whole concept of hate-watching or "watching just so I have an opinion!"

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

After VOYAGER ended, I was no longer a constant weekly watcher of TREK. Before that, I wasn't able to catch the middle years of DS9 or the 2nd-4th VOYAGER years. I missed two TNG episodes on first-run, though I could (should?) have bailed out of far more of them.

 

[Lord Garth]

After VOYAGER ended, I was no longer a constant weekly watcher of TREK. Before that, I wasn't able to catch the middle years of DS9 or the 2nd-4th VOYAGER years. I missed two TNG episodes on first-run, though I could (should?) have bailed out of far more of them.

I watched from 1991 (when I discovered Star Trek) to 1999. Stopped watching after DS9 ended, though I finally finished VOY in 2008. Caught up with TOS and the first half of TNG through reruns.

For New Trek, I watched all of Discovery and Picard (I know, I know... ), and none of the rest really grabbed me. So, 2017 to 2024.

Seems like Star Trek can't keep me for more than seven or eight years at a time!

 

[Set Harth]

I for one cosign what RedLetterMedia's Mike once remarked about pre-Abrams Trek: "Star Trek used to have its head up its ass... but that's what we fans liked about it."

Birds of a feather, and all that.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The Simpsons is a show that really should have been put to rest many, many years ago.

 

[Lord Garth]

The Simpsons is a show that really should have been put to rest many, many years ago.

That I think we can all agree with!

 

[JoseNoodles]

After VOYAGER ended, I was no longer a constant weekly watcher of TREK. Before that, I wasn't able to catch the middle years of DS9 or the 2nd-4th VOYAGER years. I missed two TNG episodes on first-run, though I could (should?) have bailed out of far more of them.

I was mostly out of the Star Trek loop for the later half of the 90s and only came back in 2000 when I learned about the Dominion War and all the was going on with Voyager. I did get caught up to speed with reruns and startrek.com's episode synopses, just in time for the final season of Voyager.

 

[XCV330]

The Simpsons is a show that really should have been put to rest many, many years ago.

Once Conan stopped writing for it, its glory years were over. Who knew it had a half life of millennia?

 

[Dukhat]

They can't put Star Trek to rest until they make Star Trek: The Lost Years, the first Trek series made just for me, about the years 2293-2363, exactly 70 years of monster maroons, Excelsiors, Mirandas, the Tomed Incident and the last of the Romulans until 2344, the Cardassian War, young Picard on the Stargazer, young Miles O'Brien working a transporter for the first time, Noonien Soong building Data and Lore and then the USS Tripoli finding Data later and influencing him to join Starfleet, the Enterprise-C at Narendra III, the USS Intrepid rescuing young Worf, the Setlik III massacre (whatever date it takes place in), young Sisko and Curzon Dax on the USS Livingston, the construction of Terok Nor, the Pegasus mutiny, the USS Olympia launching to the Beta Quadrant, and most of all, the switch from the monster maroons to the TNG season 1 jumpsuits, because I desperately need a date for that. Screw Star Trek: Legacy. Nobody gives a shit about nepo babies on an Enterprise that looks wildly anchronistic. Gimme a show with the same exact production values as the TMP films and TNG "Tapestry." This fan will not want anything less.

 

[Danja]

Screw Star Trek: Legacy. Nobody gives a shit about nepo babies on an Enterprise that looks wildly anchronistic.

Trek has always had a degree of nepotism (Tom and Owen Paris, Wesley Crusher, etc.. Janeway's father was an Admiral.)

As for the ship, I prefer the Connie III over the Galaxy.

 

[The Wormhole]

The Simpsons is a show that really should have been put to rest many, many years ago.

Meh, I just stopped watching it many, many years ago. Well, okay, it's been thirteen years since I regularly watched new episodes, though I did catch random new episodes over the years, which did not inspire me to go back to regularly watching the show.

At this point, I think it's been a few years since I watched reruns from the show's heyday. Full episodes, that is, I see clips on YouTube all the time. No particular reason why, I just haven't.

 

[Dukhat]

As for the ship, I prefer the Connie III over the Galaxy.

Well, then, there's just something severely wrong with you.

 

[BillJ]

As for the ship, I prefer the Connie III over the Galaxy.

That “Connie” was a butt ugly disgrace to the prior classes.

 

[Dukhat]

That “Connie” was a butt ugly disgrace to the prior classes.

Although the ship it was based on was pretty good.

 

[Danja]

Well, then, there's just something severely wrong with you.

"New" isn't always better.

The Galaxy just looked wildly impractical (The bussard supports are so fragile I could snap them in half).

 

[BillJ]

The Galaxy just looked wildly impractical (The bussard supports are so fragile I could snap them in half).

That is what futuristic material, and structural integrity fields are for!

 

[Dukhat]

"New" isn't always better.

The Galaxy just looked wildly impractical (The bussard supports are so fragile I could snap them in half).

Granted I was only making a joke, but exactly what ship's nacelle pylons aren't fragile?

 

[BillJ]

Granted I was only making a joke, but exactly what ship's nacelle pylons aren't fragile?

None of them. Futuristic materials and structural integrity fields!