• 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!

32nd century was a big mistake... BIG

And what certain fans are forgetting, DSC S3 / SFA's setting is nearly a copy of two recent ideas - Andromeda and Star Trek: Final Frontier.

Andromeda had the Systems Commonwealth destroyed, Dylan Hunt landed in the future to reestablish the Commonwealth.

Star Trek: Final Frontier was set in the 26th century where the Vulcans left the Federation, the Klingons were defeated by the Romulans and no travelling the galaxy due to Omega particle bombs that have gone off by unknown attackers.

Sounds very familiar doesn't it?
Honestly at this point I wouldn't mind seeing final frontier given a green light. I liked the concept art and the storyboard for the first episode I found online.
 
What I wish the 32nd century stuff had done more of (and what my imaginary Fenris Rangers show would do) is more small stakes stories.

You would have an entire series set in a period in Seven's life that she eventually left behind.
 
Last edited:
I didn't really care if Trek sets a show in the 32nd century or the 128th or whatever. That's fine. The only thing that was a little weird is that Enterprise had the 31s century as this seemingly unseen futuristic place and then it just became the past. But that happens in real life, so why should fiction be any different.
It's almost like an in-universe version of the 1990's and the Eugenics Wars.
 
Nah. Because in this scenario, Seven would never have joined Starfleet.

I really thought the idea of the Fenris Rangers was intriguing and something new.
Seven rejoining Starfleet always seemed like backwards character development for me. She had found a purpose with the Fenris Rangers -- helping people who had no one else to help them -- and then she abandoned those people to rejoin the system that put those people in the situation that they were in in the first place.
 
The 32nd century was a huge mistake. First it gave the federation we were all watching an end date. So any new story we watch in the 25th century to the 31st we know now the federation will survive and that it won't end until the mid 31st. So the stakes no longer seem urgent. The technology in the 32bd doesn't seem to be much more advanced than what we saw in the 24th. They even use padds that look clunkier than some 21st century tech. Should have sent the Discovery to the 25th.
 
Now it can be said.
Trek never should have gone into the future future.
Plenty of stories that could be (and were successfully) told between 22nd and early 25th centuries.
My recommendation (that no one asked for) to bring Star Trek from it's death (again)
  • Mark everything in 32nd century non-canon
  • Delete Section 31 from archives
  • Green light Star Trek Legacy
  • Fire Alex Kurtzman
Not going to happen, but it better if you want to see new Star Trek, in any form within next 10-15 years
Agreed. After SNW ends, I'll be done with Trek unless something new really peeks my interest.
 
Seven rejoining Starfleet always seemed like backwards character development for me. She had found a purpose with the Fenris Rangers -- helping people who had no one else to help them -- and then she abandoned those people to rejoin the system that put those people in the situation that they were in in the first place.

Seven nearly died in S2. She's not the same person she was twenty-five years ago.

IMHC, age was creeping up on her. She no longer wanted to do what she did for the previous twenty years. She felt she needed a change and that she felt she could accomplish a lot more as a Starfleet officer than she ever could alone.
 
The 32nd century was a huge mistake. First it gave the federation we were all watching an end date. So any new story we watch in the 25th century to the 31st we know now the federation will survive and that it won't end until the mid 31st. So the stakes no longer seem urgent. The technology in the 32bd doesn't seem to be much more advanced than what we saw in the 24th. They even use padds that look clunkier than some 21st century tech. Should have sent the Discovery to the 25th.

It never seemed urgent in any previous Star Trek show. There was never a feeling of any true danger that the Federation might collapse.

Plus there’s nothing to stop the Federation collapsing in the centuries we know nothing about. Empires rise and fall and rise again.
 
Any perceived jeopardy in a Star Trek episode comes from either:

A) The idea a ship may be destroyed
B) The idea a main character might die

Even that’s the kind of false danger you might see in a comic book as in either case, a viewer can be 99.99% certain that neither will happen.

Star Trek is not a high-stakes show. The question is not ‘will they die?’, it’s ’How will they avoid dying this time?’.
 
Were you really on the edge of your seat every episode wondering if THIS would be the episode where the Federation ended?

OTOH, then you tuned in to Disco one week and it actually happened!

Pretty much. Look at the borg. Its not even just the end of the federation .its also technology advancement. 790 years from the Picard timeliness of the early 25th we see stsrfleet technology has changed little or the changes they did have are not that great. They should have put the discovery in the late 24th or early 25th.
 
Any perceived jeopardy in a Star Trek episode comes from either:

A) The idea a ship may be destroyed
B) The idea a main character might die

Even that’s the kind of false danger you might see in a comic book as in either case, a viewer can be 99.99% certain that neither will happen.

Star Trek is not a high-stakes show. The question is not ‘will they die?’, it’s ’How will they avoid dying this time?’.
Which is why the 'galaxy ending threat' was overused and got ridiculous in the Kurtzman era. For example...

DISCO:
Season 1 is the End of the Federation by Klingon War. Season 2 is end of all organic life. (Quite the upgrade of threat level. Just insane.) Season 4 is the destruction of entire worlds throughout the galaxy. Season 5 is finding the Progenitor tech that could destroy... well, everything.

PICARD:
Season 1 has... giant Lovecraftian tentacle machines ready to kill all organic life. (That was a strange sentence to write.) Season 2 has some anomaly and having to restore the timeline. Season 3 has the Borg... again.

PRODIGY:
Season 1 has the end of Starfleet. Season 2 is the end of... everything, with the Loom.

SNW:
Season 3 has the Vezda, who were 'apparently' the most evil creation that ever eviled in all of evildom. (In that case, the threat never even FELT like a threat because they never presented themselves as really that bad compared to so many other things seen before.)

Even LOWER DECKS wasn't immune to this.


Galaxy/Federation ending threats were more sparse in previous eras, which helps make the danger at least feel somewhat special. When it becomes a dime a dozen, it means nothing.
 
It never meant anything. Was anyone really watching TOS week on week and thinking, ‘maybe this is the week everyone dies and the Federation will collapse’?
No, but I'd think the goal would be for the audience to feel something besides the need to eyeroll at the latest galaxy ending threat.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top