If you keep putting you in the conversation, by constantly pushing what you think is acceptable and pretty much ignoring what everyone thinks, people are going to call you out on it.
I just don't see where you've been "bullied".
There's a lot of bullying and instigation going on. I guess that you just haven't seen it.
Kurtzman Trek already delivers what later DS9 did. This is the part that confuses me; if you were just saying you wanted Star Trek to be more like TOS and/or TNG then I'd get you, but if you love what DS9 was doing toward the end, it's all there in the Kurtzman shows.
You might think it's done less well, but tonally and structurally Discovery and Picard both have roots in DS9 (some attempt at serialisation, performatively "darker" tone that's mostly conveyed through the Federation being reduced to a militaristic organisation and/or subject to a sinister deep state conspiracy, war arc that pays off very abruptly, etc).
As I see it, here are many differences between later Star Trek series and DS9.
The most notable are that while DS9 had "darker" episodes, there were also lighter episodes between them which prevented the series to become too dark and gloomy I also find the characters more likeable than what I see in current day Trek
Even the villains in DS9 are more interesting in many ways than the current Trk series have.
There just aren's such interesting characters as Garak, Weyoun, Dukat, Winn, Kira, Gowron, Sisko, Quark Odo and most of the DS9 characters in the newer Trek series and the stories aren't as good either.
Animation is an amazing way to tell stories. Gargoyles would be a great example, as well as Prodigy, Lower Decks , and some episodes of Star Trek the Animated Series. Among others.
Yes, I can agree on that.
But I still would like to see a good Star Trek series with real actors.
In some people's estimation, sure. My comment was about popularity, though, not perceived quality. A bunch of people might think it's better now, but the audience kept leaving while it was on.
Their mistake.
We all have cordial debates here. You do not. And again, you do not voice an opinion. You voice something you consider fact and all of us need to agree with you.
The reason there is no debate, is because you do not tolerate one. Use the words 'in my opinion' and 'I feel that' and the rest of us will know you are voicing opinions and debating.
Making statements like 'Enterprise was bad and should not have been made' is anything BUT voicing an opinion. It's simple English grammar.
Honestly, yes. I know you are right. But when people say they are debating but can't even observe the most basic rules of a debate....
Look who's talking!
The same person who often has posted childish "laughing emojis" as only replies to my comments and often has become personal while criticising my comments wether those comments have been about my dislike for how certain characters have been ruined in some of the series and books or my opinions about the standard of recent Star Trek movies and series.
This thread is actually a good example of that. While I've really tried and done my best not to make this personal in any way, you constantly turn this discussion into personal attacks.
To be honest, I don't think that you're the one who should tell me how to behave.
Typically, media aims for audiences 18-35. I was 7 when TNG premiered in 1987. I am now 46. I am outside of what media aims for. I am well aware of that. Fans of the TNG era are now largely past that 18-35 range. Those who were 35 at the start of TNG are now in their 70s. So for those who were present for the entirety of the TNG era they would be between their mid 40s and up.
Just to keep in mind.
I see both Prodigy and SFA as good jumping on points for the newer generation. Both extremely optimistic and geared largely towards younger audiences. And no need to reply and say you disagree with me here. I am well aware.
But isn't that sad actually.
And a bit age-discriminating too.
Not to mention that Star Trek with such actions can end up like the rock band which changed their style to more adapted music in order to win new fans but lost their old loyal fans while not gaining any new fans.
There's the risk that Star Trek might lose many of the old loyal fans while the younger fans who are raised with doom and gloom series stick around for a while , then move on to something like "Swords And Gore" or whatever new series there might be?
Robert Beltran had entered the chat.
Guess it's better for Trek to be on broadcast or cable TV then, if we want it to be competitive with shows like Andor.
And...
Irrelevant. My point was to the popularity of the show. I want commenting on the story telling.
Please no more attacks on Beltran!
He's a good actor and Chakotay is a good character, much better than most of what we have seen in recent series.
Which is why I suggest Prodigy or SFA. TOS is great, but hard for younger viewers. My 6yo loved Prodigy. Couldn’t finish an episode of TAS. If he liked it then I’d recommend TOS.
Series like Prodigy and Lower decks can actually be a good start for younger kids when it comes to watching Star Trek.
Anyway, I'm through with this thread now. It's been going around in circles the recent time and the most have been said.
I hope that Star Trek will continue to exist and that Star Trek will survive, maybe become what it once was in a better future than the 2010's and 2020's have been.
As for me, I will stick with TOS, TNG, DS9 and the first three seasons of Voyagerbecause i still find most of it enjoyable to watch. To be honest, I rather watch those series for the hundred time that watch any of those newer movies and series.
I just wish that there woulfd be some good books to read about the character from TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY. I did have some hope for that but unfortunately it lead to just another dissapointment.
I will keep my eyes open for new Star Trek series, movies and books. But i won't watch them if i don't like them.
