• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Where Trek went Wack...

I think that Trek went "whack" with the general public around 1994/95 when TNG, DS9 and Voyager and a couple of movies were all piled on top of each other.

It wasn't just a quality issue, it was a quantity issue. The amount of Trek was intimidating, and the average viewer started to feel like they had to watch ALL of this stuff just to stay on top of what was going on (even when they didn't).

My dad was like that, and he watched TOS as a kid. Imagine you're the university student or 31 year old woman who watched TNG in 1993 like millions of other people did every week. Trek started to feel like an obligation.

In a way, it's a bit like how comic books took an impact when people felt they had to read 15 different series just to stay on top of what was going on in whatever new "Crisis" they'd invented.
 
With TOS we got 3 seasons. Not great seasons. One was really bad. But we only got three seasons so we loved it.

TNG + DS9 + Voyager was 21 seasons in addition to a flood of movies. It was too much.

In addition, the release of "Trekkies" really made Star Trek uncool. The average viewer did not want to admit to watching Star Trek for fear of being type cast with the people featured in Trekkies.
 
In addition, the release of "Trekkies" really made Star Trek uncool. The average viewer did not want to admit to watching Star Trek for fear of being type cast with the people featured in Trekkies.

How many people regularly watch documentary films? That was 1997 not the current renaisance era of 2004-present. If Trekkies was broadcast on cable don't you think the person most likely not to flip the channel would be someone already inclined to enjoy Star Trek or general sci-fi?
 
VOY, ENT, Insurrection, Nemesis.

Mandate of homogenization from Rick Berman (or maybe from above him I'm not sure).

Anyways there was a corporate mandate to steer away from doing anything interesting.

Why is it that Farscape, on like half the budget (if that) could do ridiculously exotic aliens and Star Trek couldn't? Because Berman flat out said only stick to forehead aliens.

Interesting and cool music? forget about it. Berman thought music shouldn't be prominent and he's the reason we got that same droning shit all the time.

Constant reset endings? Well... you already know where I'm going.

Really, Star Trek was the victim of having non-creative people dictate creative terms. The best producers know when to back the the f up and let their creative people do their shit. For example, B5, that Netter guy handled all the other stuff and let JMS do everything creative. BSG was more or less similar, with Moore being the writer guy while Eick handled the other stuff (besides that one crappy script Eick wrote in S2).

I actually work in a marketing dept right now so I know all about this 'preserving the brand' stuff. And it works just fine when you're managing a business brand. Not so good when your brand depends on having great creative.
 
In addition, the release of "Trekkies" really made Star Trek uncool. The average viewer did not want to admit to watching Star Trek for fear of being type cast with the people featured in Trekkies.

How many people regularly watch documentary films? That was 1997 not the current renaisance era of 2004-present. If Trekkies was broadcast on cable don't you think the person most likely not to flip the channel would be someone already inclined to enjoy Star Trek or general sci-fi?

Trekkies got a lot of publicity on news broadcast. We live in a time when news agencies love to enhance the negative. For many networks the movie did the legwork. They only had to use clips from the movie and tie it to a news story. For many people the image of a Trek fan became the woman sitting on a jury wearing a Trek uniform or a man with an Enterprise bridge in his basement. They insinuate that the average "avid" ST fan has trouble separating fiction from reality. Fuel for the fire…
 
It got so...strangled by perfection I guess. With TNG (which was great) it became Mormons in Space. And that was cool up to a point but when each series resembled the former it just got tedious. Its like a Starbucks coffee, nice flavour but no variation, obviously because its a franchise but for me its a major failing point. No coffee is any better or any worse than the other. There is no humanity.

Voy irritated me a lot. Janeway appearing in Nemesis was dire. Even the fact that they could just easily repair the ship after it had been damaged, not a scratch, destroying borg cubes, I wanted that ship to blow up.
 
I think people are placing the decline too early. Wasn't everyone relatively happy through the finale of DS9? Those were good times.

Voyager had watchable episodes as well before their final season.

I pin the decline timeframe around 2000-2002.



Maybe Bush getting into office soured the country's mood.
 
Not sure if by 'went wack' you mean in terms of quality or popularity.

So I'll answer in terms of quality.

Trek went wack with TNG by abandoning TOS's premise of fun, adventure, humor, compelling unique characters, compelling dialogues, compelling stories and conflict.

Trek went un-wack with DS9, which restored all of those things.

Trek then went wack again with VOY and ENT, which devolved back into TNG's wackness.
 
Enterprise I think was the downfall of Trek, it wasa great idea, but badly executed and I think even though season 3 and 4 were a lot better, it was already gone. Nemesis didn't help either but don't get me started
 
Not sure if by 'went wack' you mean in terms of quality or popularity.

So I'll answer in terms of quality.

Trek survived fine with TNG by maintaining TOS's premise of fun, adventure, humor, compelling unique characters, compelling dialogues, compelling stories and conflict.

Trek expanded on what had gone prior with DS9, which was a partial success.

Trek then went wack with VOY and ENT, which suffered from too much Network meddling.

Fixed ;).
 
Like someone said above...watching Trek became an obligation.Very strange.
Not enough "wow" moments.This is a show about starships&alien worlds...and they made it boring.The only time during the entire run of Voyager that made me ,well,happy to be a trekker was when the Prometheus split in three and kicked Romulan tail.One cool moment in 7 seasons.:wtf:

During the movies run,there seemed to be too much reverence,a reluctance to take all the toys out of the box and have a little fun.
And reluctant as I am to say it,the aging cast,the feeling of flabbiness that pervaded all TNG big-screen outings did not sell the movies to those all important casual audiences.("First contact" being a notable exception).
 
I don't think aging has any effect on the experience, I mean the cast of TOS were all in their 50s and 60s in their movies.
 
I'm just going to cut to the chase and say that what went wrong was that...time simply passed.

It's actually something I'm having to learn at my current stage of life. (I'm 35--not old yet, but not all that young anymore, entering the mid-section of life.) This is not directed at anyone reading, just some cosmic philosophy to chew on. You think everyone's at the same pace as you, everyone's keeping up with what you are, everyone around you has the same perception of the passage of time--then one day you realize it's just you.

I'm one of those people who, perhaps incorrectly, still doesn't feel like any time has passed since high school, when for me TNG was mainstream and everyone watched it like any other show on TV. I thought my friends and family graduated to DS9 and VGR. They didn't. My friends and family don't know that INSURRECTION and NEMESIS exist, much less that there was a prequel series called ENTERPRISE. Additionally, most people don't have an attention span that can last 15 years much less 30. People move on. It's the human way. The nature of the beast. People want to experience a variety of things during their lives and may not adhere to a single adventure.

Some of us, such as myself--geeks like me--we have no sense of "ago." It's still 1979, 1989, or 1999 in my head. I can be anywhere in time I want to be. I remember being so excited to see RETURN OF THE JEDI at age 9 in 1983 and wishing, then, that I'd been old enough to have seen SW in theatres in 1977! I remember the BACK TO THE FUTURE's and the INDIANA JONES's and being so excited for each of those. I remember the vibes surrounding each section of the STAR TREK franchise at the time, series or movie. People forget how huge STIV was in 1986, for example--it was a runaway blockbuster hit that was the firing pin that allowed Paramount to greenlight TNG in the first place. People forget the rocky year leading up to that. To me, there's no concept of time passing. But I must realize that there is for most humans--people want to "progress." They can't keep doing the same things. I'm content to continue with DOCTOR WHO, for example, something that started in 1963 in England. It's still going. I'm still keeping up. It's a lot harder for most people who, I must face it, have *lives*, have *children*, have *careers* and who have needed to move on--to other places, to other spouses, even to other families, etc.

I'm a geek. I live for TV and movies. They set me free. Real life is too boring. Movies are real life with the boring parts removed. I'm an escapist. (An escape artist?) I'll close with one example of two separate lives. In the relatively short time since FIRST CONTACT (1996), I have eagerly awaited each installment in the TREK canon, series or movie. I lived the SW prequels, one by one, all the hoopla and hype. The LOTR and HP films, one by one, all the hoopla and hype. I did the midnight release parties for the merchandise, etc. I have loved LOST from Day 1 and look forward to it each week. That's how I define the last 13 years. In that same space of time, my *younger* sister has achieved a Masters in Microbiology, gotten married, moved around and lived in three states and had two children. I'm not a failure in comparison, nor do I consider my life less "real." It's just the difference between people. I've always lived in my head, because fantasy is more fun than reality, and that's a big place to live in.

Maybe I haven't answered the question correctly: Where did it go wrong? I think I've tried to demonstrate how hard it is for any long-running franchise to hold onto its fan base. We think the new STAR TREK film has it, the franchise is safe in Abrams' hands, etc. But in no time, in only a few years, this vibe will disappear. 2009 will give way to 2015 and 2019. This cast will age. These fans will tire and wander. Life goes on. It's just that some of us are aboard for the long haul and others aren't. It's all about perception, and the only culprit is time itself.
 
Definitely the end of DS9. Behr left, Wolfe left, Beimler left, Echevarria left and Ron Moore left as well after a few weeks at Voyager. It was like a mass exodus of talented people from the franchise.
 
I love Star Trek and have loved it for most of my life. I am 49 and just about peed my pants waiting for this new movie to come out. One of the things that irked me about TNG was that every freaking thing was sentient. If a big rock came flying through space towards the ship Picard would wait until the ship had been bashed several times before taking a more aggressive stance. We might offend the rock if we fire on it. It made for some boring TV. I watched all of it and still watch the reruns but find myself saying, oh that one again and change the channel. I loved DS9 because it was building up each episode to the big ending. Babylon5 was a five year long story that I loved and still watch on DVD today. I have DS9 and the original Star Trek on DVD. I wish Enterprise had lasted longer.
 
I think, while there are some good arguments here, that people are missing a simple truth about why Trek has lost its relevance over the years. Nearly everything stated in this thread, from creativity issues to the hacking of the great birds original vision has led to this point and has its place in the larger picture, But I think you have to add in cultural evolution as well.

DISCLAIMER: This is my opinion only, I am not an expert in any form of sociology. I'm an IT man Jim, not a Doctor :D

I know this is hard for some hardcore folks to take, the average person is more sophisticated and "tuned in" than they were in the 60's, 70's 80's and even the 90's. They tend to look for relevance and accepted "reality" in entertainment, even if these are sometimes questionable. People tend to gravitate towards TV shows that are wound up in modern world events and politics....shows that tackle their fears of terrorism, accepted evil and rampant crime.

I do not think the capacity for escapism and fantasy has vanished, it simply morphed into a more "realistic" landscape dictated by fear. The modern forensics shows and crime dramas hit these fears head on and 99% of the time they triumph, banishing the terror into the ether even if for only a short time. I also believe that in some strange way these shows also help people to justify certain questionable political dogma within their own minds...lol...but that's for another discussion.

Trek falls short of touching the "reality" of our lives. Even if Trek episodes took on a darker, less Utopian cast towards the end the idea of trying to make a cardassian, or a Klingon into the embodiment of a terrorist, or a Facist simply packs a small punch these days. And fixing things with all they hyper-tech gadgets does not allow for a person to think that the terror of today is being defeated by the good guys.
 
The worst mistake was when they kept the VOY writers instead of the much-superior DS9 crew to do the fifth series, thus dooming ENT to failure.

amen.

i didn't watch DS9 every week, beginning in the 5th year - the first episode i ever missed entirely (ie, without catching a reurn later) was "rapture." 3 or 4 years prior to that, i wouldn't have considered just missing an episode, but after almost 10 years of putting everything on hold for a new star trek episode, i just didn't have the energy to anymore. the interest was still there, and i kept up with DS9 as much as could through the end of the series, but i no longer cancelled all my plans (whatever they were) for a new episode.

i quit watching VOY entirely around the same time - late 1996. i never liked the show to begin with, and i was just tired of waiting for it to get good. it never did.

so, i am thinking around late '96, early '97, i was beginning to lose interest somewhat. "insurrection" didn't help.

once VOY was the sole representative of the star trek universe, it was all over.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Trek ever went "whack." I was not fond of Enterprise (though it had some good points), and I haven't loved the movies (though I've liked several, including the new one), but I've found things to like and even love about all the other Treks.

The fact that it became less popular is not, no matter what some might think, proof that it went downhill. Popularity is no proof of quality and neither is lack of popularity. The two things are completely separate. It's satisfying, of course, to have one's own taste validated by popular opinion, but it's meaningless.

To those of you who have decided Trek went whack, I'm sorry it took a direction that wasn't to your taste. But I liked a lot of it, and evidently I am not the only one.
 
Last edited:
The franchise's problem started WITH DS9, had nothing to do with anything else. DS9 was a darker show showing war, corruption... don't get me wrong, I love this darker theme but it's just not that great with rating. Everything went down ongoing. They tried to patch storylines over and over... Yes, Enterprise was doomed from the begining.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top