Thanks. I appreciate the time and effort to put that together.
I wondered about this but wasn't motivated enough to actually to it!
I wondered about this but wasn't motivated enough to actually to it!
You might be right about that. I'm not sure. I think psychology still supports the effectiveness of less kind approaches, such as positive punishment (and no I don't mean hitting or abuse) but the introduction of unpleasant consequences to reduce certain behaviors.
However, I'm just noting that changing behavior at all is very difficult. Failure to change someone's behavior can have less to do with the approach used than with that basic underlying fact.
The trumpie owners are trying to kill the franchise intentionally. First they make it "woke" (using the word in the sense that the right wing does) to alienate conservative ST fans (and they do exist). Then they make it bad to alienate progressive ST fans. Then who is left? Nobody. If there is any more ST it will be even less Trekish and more in line with currently prevailing cultural zeitgeist. The problem is that we've already seen that show and it was called NuBSG. We don't need to do that again. Star Trek is needed. Its' positive message is needed. Even in dark times like these, especially in dark times like these.
You make a fair point here. Perhaps after season 2 they could've gone to SFA: Field Training and brought some more excitement to the show in the form of going out and doing things. The classroom setting was a negative for me.
This is true. As a Buddhist might say, "change must come from within."
Behaviorist approaches can utilize unpleasant consequences but lack of feedback on doing well will not assist the desired change. Humans need both.
From TNG we got neither. Just condescension at the primitives of the past. Unless it was the French.
Do people now think Braga is one of the greats?! I hadn't heard that.
But, regarding Kurtzman, I don't think what you describe will happen. Some of it is so good and recognized as good during its time: SNW and LD. And shoot, I really liked S1 and S2 of Discovery. Some of it is very bad and recognized as such (later Discovery, Picard). Real extremes.
But, no, I don't see a strong resurgence down the road for the streaming era as a whole. But LD and SNW will stand the test of time for sure. So, it's just a mixed bag and will probably be seen as such. Even if different people think different parts are good or bad.
I'm a stickler for accurate numbers and I approve your correct and precise calculation of the percentage reduction. It's exactly 70%!
I have contradictory views on this issue.
Given the premise of SFA, I do think it's fair that parental relationships play a large role. It's accurate to the age group.
However, that's a big reason why I'm not a fan of SFA. That's just not what I'm looking for in any series, much less a ST series. I mean, its OK when it's present, but SFA does seem to focus on it more. And it's not just that but the other YA stuff when all combined is just too much. YMMV.
Again, fair given the premise, just not what I'm looking for in any series.
On the other hand, the approach they used did lure me in to staying for the season! I'm not looking for YA, so I liked the start quite a bit!
I love ST but I have to agree that lately all the best content has been elsewhere. I love the ones you mentioned. Dark Matter is great too. The Expanse.
Will there be more Murderbot?
Which was made by an ex-Trek person (Ronald D. Moore).
I liked Picard S1 (it was something different).
S2 dragged out the time travel for too long. The TNG reunion was unnecessary.
It had its flaws, but I don't think it was particularly awful.
Last edited:
I can respect that younger characters with storylines revolving around the experiences of younger people aren’t everyone’s cup of tea. I can’t claim that I was massively excited when they first announced the premise for this show. (Although that was mostly due to how poorly I think Discovery was written, so my fear was they wouldn’t be able make this interesting.) But watching the first season I came to appreciate how the younger characters were giving this Trek outing a unique perspective we didn't really have in Trek before. I enjoy stories about interesting characters going through human experiences in the fantastical future world of Star Trek. Bonus points if it attempts to say something meaningful every once in a while. And I think overall, while certainly not perfect, Starfleet Academy season one delivered on all of that.
No, I get that. But at this point, Paramount Plus has winnowed down to the "ride or die" Trek fans. Some of us love it, some of us are a bit critical, and some are hate watching, but we're here because we watch all the Trek. Most of us would be locked in for the discourse if nothing else.
Probably so, because TNG is the version of Star Trek that's most associated with the childhoods and youths of a majority of current adult filmgoers. TOS fans be old.
The milieu will be familiar and welcome, but if they're making theatrical film with an eye toward renewing the franchise, the vibe will be very different - more action and humor oriented than the rather dry, "drawing room" talkers that 24th century series had.
For that manner, the studio abandoned that tone when first trying to launch the TNG films thirty years ago, so...
The other thing, of course, is that they'll be creating their own characters going forward - at least that's the current intent, and it makes sense. Establishing identification with cinema-focused personalities and cast is greatly to be preferred to recasting old folks and characters like Picard or Seven of Nine, other than perhaps as walk-ons. There are no characters from the Roddenberry/Berman era that approach the pop cultural cachet of Kirk, Spock and Bones, so there's no reason to go through the hassle and hazards of trying to reincarnate them
Last edited:
We probably need a new thread in Future of Trek, but I think the best bet for the next TV series is:
- Back to basics. Just do a semi-episodic ship show with a new crew.
- I'm agnostic on whether it would be better to go to a "clean" era without any tie-ins to existing Trek or to try and set it in an established era for cameos.
- Find a way to produce it relatively cheaply (say $7 million an episode) and produce at least 15, but preferably more, episodes per season.
- Do a season every year.
- Don't add a second show for at least five years.
It'll be like this
Chaos is our...business indeed.
Chaos is our...business indeed.
Last edited:
If you're not going to tie it to existing Trek, why call it Star Trek? It might as well be a completely new show.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
