What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

Controversial opinion-having Klingons expanded in culture was a good thing.

 

On the "TOS looks more futuristic" front, I'm going to try to make it controversial by disagreeing with the emerging consensus: it doesn't. It might look more different from today, but that doesn't mean "futuristic".

It seems that those who agree only consider fashion rather than functionality. Sure, over the centuries some things change, but some things don't. "It's different from now" is not a sufficient argument, nor even a necessary one.
Take the screens: there is no reason to think that bulky TOS-like screens would reappar, because that's a question of functionality (delivering the same or better in less space and with less weight) over fashion. Returning to mechanical knobs over digitised sliders? Again, no reason to think it would.

And let's be honest, much of the TOS sets look like toys for babies and toddlers with big colourful buttons that don't do anything (or just make a noise).

 

The ENT novels lampshaded this by explaining that downgraded equipment (based on Tellarite tech, IIRC) was less vulnerable to Romulan telecapture devices, and even when the war was over, folks at Starfleet Engineering had been taken with minimalist aesthetics and were going to incorporate the look into future ships, despite having more advanced tech underneath.

 

While I don't agree Picard is #1 I do feel there is a case to be made along with TOS and DSC 1st seasons.

 

Did voyage ever mention Hugh? When they were first trying to bring 7 out of the collective janeway reviewing logs of previous borg encounters and finding notes about Hugh regaining individuality would have been a nice touch

 

As opposed to flat panels ... that don't do anything.

 

It's easier to control than a touchscreen when the ship is shaking XD
I think of the gumdrop and candy cube buttons as advanced holographic interfaces that can be pushed, squeezed, turned, pulled, bent in every direction.

 

I'm not really into modern Trek, so I was kinda skeptical going in. I thought the first episode was pretty decent but had some weak moments. Still, a promising beginning, imo. However, as the show progressed, I liked it less and less. In fact, by Stardust City Rag I kinda hated it.

I can handle some bad Trek; several of the shows have far more episodes that I dislike than I actually like, but they are still watchable. Picard manages to bore me and aggravate me at the same time. Watching it felt like a chore.

 

Watch Nepenthe at least

 

SNW will be an interesting phenomenon. I think it'll be New Trek for people who don't like New Trek.

 

Stardust City Rag... mix Tina Turner's "Nutbush City Limits" with the Blake's 7 episode "Gambit", add in a couple jaegerbombs and 900 micrograms of LSD, and "Stardust City Rag" is likely going to be the bulk of the end result. I never thought Blake's 7 would be an influence on Star Trek (it was the other way around), but I gotta be impressed.

 

Depends on if SNW stands apart from STD and STP, or if SNW is just more of the same.

 

Yeah I have quite trouble believing that it will be a completely old trek style, episodic show with little interpersonal conflict and things like that...

 

They've said it's episodic. It's probably going to be a 45-minute (give or take) version of Short Treks with more to the stories. I could be totally wrong, but I'm picturing they're going for something that looks/feels more like a modern version of TOS and the first two seasons of TNG.

I don't think it'll feel anything like the third season of TNG through ENT.

 

You're right you have a controversial opinion. You are also right that not every opinion in this thread is really that controversial. You win this thread on both counts.

Potentially Controversial Rebuttal Opinion: Picard or Discovery did not have better first seasons than TOS did.

There's nothing wrong with liking them more than any other first season. There's nothing wrong with loving the non episodic format and shortness of these seasons as opposed to TOS or Berman era Trek. I also understand wanting modern Trek to break away from its sometimes very restrictive past.

However I cannot accept Picard as having had a better first season than TOS. The only way that could be possible would be where TOS season 1 was a promising concept so badly executed that it was just waiting for Picard to come along and both reimagine it and perfect it. That is not the case and cannot have happened.

Picard could not even exist if it were not for TNG and TNG could not exist if not for the success of TOS.

I love ya Lord Garth but I cannot agree with your controversial opinion about Picard having the best first season of Star Trek. Sorry we will have to agree to disagree here and only see eye to eye about 98% of the time.

I feel like McCoy in Dagger of the Mind when he has to tell Kirk that his doubts about Dr. Adams are going into his medical log requiring Kirk to investigate and answer in his log. McCoy has to say friend to friend "sorry Jim." Well on this issue I have to say "sorry Lord Garth."

 

Why? It's a really big galaxy and we've only the POV of a small handful of people.

 

I knew what I was getting into when I posted what I did earlier.

It can't be a "controversial" opinion if someone doesn't disagree with it.

 

I always finding it kinda difficult to rank something as "best" so I would never be able to choose a first season of Star Trek as "best" I know TNG wasn't the best first season, but beyond that?

However I could never call anything about TOS "the best" of Star Trek, since to me it's a silly 1960s with heaps of cringe piled ontop of cringe and I know if it was the only show in the franchise, I wouldn't be a Star Trek fan. Mostly because form my 21st century POV it aged horribly. (That's why I also doubt SNW will be too much like it, you can't put stuff like that on television anymore, episodic or not, unless it's about deconstructing the sexism/homophobia/etc)

If we define "best first season" by how successful a show was finding its identity in the first season....I mean it's difficult to tell how Picard might develop, and the first Season of Discovery had some very dubious stuff it had to back-pedal on in seson 2.
But TOS also meandered around a whole lot before it found its identity.

 

TOS didn't have a stance on homophobia. None of the series really did until DSC. I understand it with TOS. I can still somewhat understand it with TNG. On DS9 and VOY, they should've tackled LGBT issues more than they (barely) did. By the time of ENT, there was really no excuse. So I'm not going to single TOS out for that. That's an issue with all Pre-Disco Trek. Even Star Trek Beyond's blink and you miss it scene with Sulu and his partner.

TOS got race right. They had blacks in positions of authority, such as Commodore Stone. And a genius computer inventor, Doctor Daystrom, was black.

Gender is the real issue with TOS. But SNW will correct that for sure. I can already tell from "Such Sweet Sorrow" and 2019's Short Treks.

When I say I think it'll be more like TOS and early-TNG, I'm thinking more it'll be story-driven. They'll run into whatever strange things they run into, with a budget where they can actually do it justice. I don't think we'll have B-stories focused on one of the main character's pet cat or anything like that or family issues, etc. They probably won't go too in-depth into interstellar politics either. They'll keep that stuff to the basics. That's what I'm picturing.

I'm not seeing a whole lot of conflict between the crew. If there is, I'm dead-sure it'll be the exception, not the rule. Pike, Number One, and Spock seem to be on the same page. "Q&A" does a good job of showing how Spock and Number One are different even if they have the same analytical outlook.