Have you ever given up on a Trek series? If so, what was the last straw for you?

[fireproof78]

Yup, agreed. You can't levy the argument of "well, people talked differently 500 years ago, so why should people in the future talk like us today" when that's exactly what the franchise has always done. Television is written for contemporary audiences. If you tried to extrapolate what future English might sound like, it would be so incomprehensible that the first note from the network would be to "lose the archaic language and make it so people can understand."

Whenever I read about slang I'm like, "did people not think about ink wells and pay checks" as something no longer existing in that era? Like, why is that acceptable in TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY but the moment newer Trek inserts it it is distracting?

Honestly, we utilize phrases that are derived from a wide variety of sources over the decades and millennium

Getting back to the original topic, it dawns on me that I have still never watched TAS in its entirety.

I think it's great and worth at least one watch.

 

[Greg Cox]

That's interesting. Since novels are considered non-canon also, what harm would there be in referencing another non-canon source?

The books need to be consistent with the TV continuity -- whatever that happens to be at the time.

That's just part of the approval process, regardless of what franchise you're talking about.

(In other words, not just a Trek thing.)

 

[bdub76]

The same way "slag" was a good fake slur on the Alien Nation series. It had the right sort of ugly sound for a slur.

It worked well.

I binged all of Alien Nation last year. It holds up.

 

[bdub76]

The second I heard the theme to “Enterprise.” I could never ever take the show seriously. Nope.

I actually liked the theme song. No idea why. Maybe because it was so different than what came before it.

 

[The Wormhole]

People today do not speak the same as people did 500 years ago and it is ridiculous to think people 500 years in the future will speak the same as people do today.

However, if you were watching something set 500 years ago, the characters are very likely talking like people today do, simply because people of today are the ones watching it, it should be something they can follow. Hell, the show Reign, set in th 16the century included modern day pop music within the show's narrative.

Simply because they weren't dropping f-bombs doesn't mean that they were using language that contemporary audiences could not decipher.

Of course it was decipherable. The problem with the dialogue in TNG, or really all the Berman era was that it was too stiff and formal to the point of alienating some people. 90s Trek was the kind of show which would call a spade a soil blade as opposed to simply calling it a spade. Indeed, Ron Moore later complained this gave things an unnatural feel to him and was a factor in why he took the approach he did with BSG.

Indeed, I'd go so far as to say the "anti-Trek" sentiment that defined sci-fi television of the 2000s was in reaction to this. Stargate, Nu BSG, modern Doctor Who, these are sci-fi shows which endured in an era where sci-fi was trying to distance itself from being Star Trek and they all had their characters talking and acting in a way modern audiences could relate to. Even Star Trek itself took notice of this fact, which is why all Trek produced since these shows had their heyday has also had the characters talking and acting in a manner modern audiences could relate to. Hell, Star Trek might actually kicked off this trend, as Enterprise predates Nu BSG and modern Doctor Who. Stargate does predate Enterprise, though Stargate's popularity was only just starting to kick off when Enterprise premiered.

 

[Farscape One]

It worked well.

I binged all of Alien Nation last year. It holds up.

ALIEN NATION was fantastic.

 

[CoveTom]

However, if you were watching something set 500 years ago, the characters are very likely talking like people today do, simply because people of today are the ones watching it, it should be something they can follow. Hell, the show Reign, set in th 16the century included modern day pop music within the show's narrative.

Okay, that is very fair.

Of course it was decipherable. The problem with the dialogue in TNG, or really all the Berman era was that it was too stiff and formal to the point of alienating some people. 90s Trek was the kind of show which would call a spade a soil blade as opposed to simply calling it a spade. Indeed, Ron Moore later complained this gave things an unnatural feel to him and was a factor in why he took the approach he did with BSG.

Indeed, I'd go so far as to say the "anti-Trek" sentiment that defined sci-fi television of the 2000s was in reaction to this. Stargate, Nu BSG, modern Doctor Who, these are sci-fi shows which endured in an era where sci-fi was trying to distance itself from being Star Trek and they all had their characters talking and acting in a way modern audiences could relate to. Even Star Trek itself took notice of this fact, which is why all Trek produced since these shows had their heyday has also had the characters talking and acting in a manner modern audiences could relate to. Hell, Star Trek might actually kicked off this trend, as Enterprise predates Nu BSG and modern Doctor Who. Stargate does predate Enterprise, though Stargate's popularity was only just starting to kick off when Enterprise premiered.

I understand your point. However, my counter to that is this: TNG was the absolute height of Star Trek's popularity and remains the peak to this day. Nothing that has come since TNG has ever come anywhere close to matching the viewership or pop culture penetration of TNG. It was an absolute phenomenon at the time.

Even today, which series was the only one that Paramount thought had enough audience demand to warrant all of the time and expense of reconstructing the episodes from the original camera negatives in order to get a true HD Blu-ray release? Which is the only series that they thought warranted a full-blown sequel in Picard season 3? TNG is beloved.

And I tend to think the anti-Trek sentiment that you mention from the 2000's was more among the writers than among the fans watching. I don't think people were out there clamoring, "gee, I wish sci-fi would be way less like TNG."

Ron Moore, who you mentioned, is a good writer, but as good as he is, he always chafed against actually writing within the confines of the Trek format. One of the reasons I respect Brannon Braga, in spite of him hanging around for what I consider the "deteriorating, stagnant era" of Trek (mid-Voyager to the end of the Berman era), is that he accepted the challenge of working within the rules Roddenberry (and Berman and Piller) laid out and said he thought it made him a better writer to have to find different ways to tell stories in order to stick within those confines.

 

[fireproof78]

The past is the answer to future success is all I see, ignoring all cultural changes or attitudes.

TNG might have been Trek's height for popularity but the characters made me wince.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Getting back to the original topic, it dawns on me that I have still never watched TAS in its entirety.

Not because I "gave up on it," but just because, as a teenager, I was no longer in the habit of watching Saturday morning cartoons back when the show debuted.

I keep meaning to go back and fill in this gap in my Trek knowledge, but have yet to get around to it.

You’re not missing much.

It’s pretty terrible, IMHO.

Yeah, there aren't too many TAS episodes I feel the need to revisit these days. I like "Yesteryear," "Albatross," and maybe one or two others. The rest of them are either too kiddie for me to get into, or they're underwhelming sequels to TOS episodes.

However, if you were watching something set 500 years ago, the characters are very likely talking like people today do, simply because people of today are the ones watching it, it should be something they can follow.

Yeah, but there are limits. I remember when the 2003 Lone Ranger movie came out, one of my friends lost interest in it as soon as the Lone Ranger said "Let's do this" in the trailer.

 

[The Wormhole]

Even today, which series was the only one that Paramount thought had enough audience demand to warrant all of the time and expense of reconstructing the episodes from the original camera negatives in order to get a true HD Blu-ray release?

That's a biased way of looking at it. They remastered TNG for Blu-ray release because they were finished doing so with TOS and TNG was the next series to be released. However, TNG Blu-rays didn't do so well in sales, which is why DS9 and Voyager weren't subsequently remastered.

Which is the only series that they thought warranted a full-blown sequel in Picard season 3?

That sequel has the TNG cast fighting DS9 villains for most of the season while hanging out with Voyager characters?

Besides, Prodigy is a Voyager sequel, just without the entire main cast. Though I guess that doesn't make it "full blown" in your opinion?

And I tend to think the anti-Trek sentiment that you mention from the 2000's was more among the writers than among the fans watching. I don't think people were out there clamoring, "gee, I wish sci-fi would be way less like TNG."

I dunno. In the late 2000s something people liked saying about Stargate was "it was anti-Trek before anti-Trek was cool."

 

[Tallguy]

Getting back to the original topic, it dawns on me that I have still never watched TAS in its entirety.

Not because I "gave up on it," but just because, as a teenager, I was no longer in the habit of watching Saturday morning cartoons back when the show debuted.

I keep meaning to go back and fill in this gap in my Trek knowledge, but have yet to get around to it.

(In my defense, at the point I started writing Trek novels professionally, back in the eighties, TAS was not considered "canon" and we weren't supposed to reference it in the books anyway.)

My recommendation for folks who can't handle the animation is to listen to them like radio plays.

My faves are One of Our Planets is Missing, The Time Trap, Albatross, More Tribbles, More Troubles, The Jihad, The Pirates of Orion.

Everybody loves Yesteryear.

 

[Farscape One]

TAS definitely had some imaginative stories, and it should be recognized more than it is.

 

[Greg Cox]

I dunno. In the late 2000s something people liked saying about Stargate was "it was anti-Trek before anti-Trek was cool."

Don't forget Farscape back in the nineties. That crew was pure anarchy, with nothing resembling a command structure, let alone decorum.

I loved it!

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I recommend that anyone who likes TOS and TNG give TAS a try, and I'd also suggest that if they try a couple of episodes and it's not their thing, then they should stop watching because it never changes. Sometimes the Spocks get bigger, sometimes the science gets worse, but it's pretty consistent in tone and quality. To my recollection.

 

[CoveTom]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[fireproof78]

TAS definitely had some imaginative stories, and it should be recognized more than it is.

TAS is widely imaginative. Definitely good for a good time.

 

[Farscape One]

Don't forget Farscape back in the nineties. That crew was pure anarchy, with nothing resembling a command structure, let alone decorum.

I loved it!

FARSCAPE... the best series ever!

 

[CoveTom]

FARSCAPE... the best series ever!

Farscape was good, I must admit. However, everyone knows that the best series ever was My Mother the Car.

 

[FredH]

I actually liked the theme song. No idea why. Maybe because it was so different than what came before it.

I wasn’t crazy about doing a song at all, but if you had to do one, that one certainly fit.

 

[Starflight]

And I tend to think the anti-Trek sentiment that you mention from the 2000's was more among the writers than among the fans watching. I don't think people were out there clamoring, "gee, I wish sci-fi would be way less like TNG."

Ron Moore, who you mentioned, is a good writer, but as good as he is, he always chafed against actually writing within the confines of the Trek format.

This is something that's always annoyed me about Moore and latter-era DS9; it wants to play at "deconstructing" Star Trek but doesn't bother to engage with it in the first place. They just wrote the series they'd rather have made instead of Star Trek and slapped some Trek iconography on it; Behr liked to get giddy over the Federation being "compromised" or w/e but the Federation doesn't recognisably exist in post-S4 DS9 to begin with.

It does confuse me that a huge recurring criticism of Kurtzman-era stuff from DS9 fans is "the writers openly sneer at classic Star Trek and have turned it into a generic dark sci-fi series with muddled serialisation and characters who all talk the same!" when that's a word-for-word description of Moore and Behr's work, the only difference being that Moore/Behr were far more openly hostile to Star Trek than the newer writers.