A decline in quality in everything or am I just getting old??

[theenglish]

The recent Star Trek series are really quite good. They may be different in flavor but they are better "quality" than the Kelvin verse--which was enjoyable in its own right. Picard has its flaws--notably the cardboard cutout villains--but as far as the characters go it was beautifully written and executed. The final episode was a tear jerker for a TNG fan because Data never got the resolution he deserved. And Patrick Stewart is such a great actor, he elevates everything he does.

 

[Relayer1]

I love Discovery and Picard, unlike the Kelvinverse.

Doctor Who has always been patchy, and Star Wars has been very uneven with the good (Rogue One, The Last Jedi), the bad (The Force Awakens, The Rise of Skywalker) and the indifferent (Solo), but I loved The Mandalorian.

 

[Blamo]

Star Wars went downhill because modern cinema just isn't a good match for it (atleast when it comes to blockbuster movies). Same goes for other movie franchises from that era. While Star Wars can never really be called high-brow, deep or even slow-paced (by 70's standards), modern blockbuster movies are more like Saturday morning cartoons (or 80's TV shows). Meanwhile TV more closely matches 70/80's cinema.

In the case of Star Trek, I feel it should be pointed out that pre-2010's TV Star Trek was very hit and miss. TNG didn't really find its footing until season 2 (and didn't really get good until 3). DS9 was confused about what stories it should tell until it decided to become a war story. VOY never found its footing IMO. ENT only found its footing in its final season. Compared to that, Discovery and Picard are success stories, even with the issues both have.

While I think Picard is fine, Discovery's problem is it has its a mess of ideas that none of the writers really cared for. Discovery season 1 was all about getting themselves out of that mess and season 2 was trying to win back the crowds. Season 3 will be where it truly sinks or swims. I say all that as someone who actually likes Discovery.

The problem with Doctor Who is its been on for over a decade now and its developed multiple issues. What was once fresh open territory is now well-trodden. The Doctor doesn't really have much room to develop, which is a problem since the show has gradually increasingly shifted focus to him/her. Nothing feels like it matters (the Daleks were brought back in season 5 permanently and have seemed to have done nothing). The show has become increasingly formulaic, uses a Buffy-like-tone that got tried about a decade ago and hasn't really evolved. I mean, classic Who would change in tone quite drastically from season to season... New Who hasn't really had a drastic change in tone, it is essentially the same show it was in 2005, just a lot less interesting.

Its now reached a point it can't really attract substantial new viewers (Series 11 was the closest it got to that), can't change without upsetting old viewers and if it doesn't change will probably eventually bore them into leaving anyway.

 

[Kerock]

I've heard t's the high definition - Makes all the sets look fake. Not like the old days of TOS when the sets looks all so real....lol.

 

[Jayson1]

The Jedi were also around for thousands of years before there were any Skywalkers.

You know my eyes played tricks on me when I read this. I thought you said the Jedi were so aroused thousands of years before there were any Skywalkers. I mean it's a kind of funny misreading but then it kind of made think about what would make for a cool Star Wars show. What if in the far past you had Sith but almost no Jedi and the Sith were like roaming pirates raiding and plundering worlds. Then the first Jedi was born and raised to fight them and find other Jedi to fight them. Also you would see the creation of the first droids and maybe explain what happened to Earth.


Jason

 

[JD]

The Sith have been pretty solidly established as split off from the Jedi, so that wouldn't work.

While I think Picard is fine, Discovery's problem is it has its a mess of ideas that none of the writers really cared for. Discovery season 1 was all about getting themselves out of that mess and season 2 was trying to win back the crowds. Season 3 will be where it truly sinks or swims. I say all that as someone who actually likes Discovery.

I think a lot of that comes from all of the changes in showrunners. As much as I've enjoyed Discovery, the constant chang over has made things a bit inconsistent.

 

[Jayson1]

The Sith have been pretty solidly established as split off from the Jedi, so that wouldn't work.

I think a lot of that comes from all of the changes in showrunners. As much as I've enjoyed Discovery, the constant chang over has made things a bit inconsistent.

What if they set it in a alternate universe. I don't know if Star Wars has established a multi-verse but it seems like everyone does these days so I don't see why the couldn't.

Jason

 

[theenglish]

It seems to me that a lot of people are looking at the past with rose-colored VISORS. As Blamo points out, the programs that people are nostalgic for all had their own problems and issues. TNG wasn't good until the third season, for example. STTOS had many episodes that were clunkers. Even in Doctor Who there were many, many mediocre stories that we sat through between the good ones. We continue to enjoy them because we have fond memories of those times.

I think one of the reasons why I did love ST: Picard so much is because, despite its flaws it hits many of the right nostalgic notes and incorporates references and storylines from the original series in valid ways, unlike the recent Star Wars movie.

 

[Imaus]

I think we just have less tolerance for things we can't enjoy. That's fine. I think that the quality has always been somewhat low/variable, it's just now we can pointedly say 'this ain't to my liking/ this sucks!' and never look back without a worry in the world.

After all, we're in a time of plenty. If we don't like something, we can (and should) drop it for something else. Back in the day time could be wasted, or rather, had to be wasted, but now we can just flip the channel, close the web-page, find a new thing.

So now not only can we gripe and complain freely, we can leave things just as fast.

I hope that makes sense. I mean, I barely have watched anything but clips since '09 and my consumption comes from ST:O of all things than the shows.

 

[Jayson1]

It seems to me that a lot of people are looking at the past with rose-colored VISORS. As Blamo points out, the programs that people are nostalgic for all had their own problems and issues. TNG wasn't good until the third season, for example. STTOS had many episodes that were clunkers. Even in Doctor Who there were many, many mediocre stories that we sat through between the good ones. We continue to enjoy them because we have fond memories of those times.

I think one of the reasons why I did love ST: Picard so much is because, despite its flaws it hits many of the right nostalgic notes and incorporates references and storylines from the original series in valid ways, unlike the recent Star Wars movie.

I'm not sure if it's rose-colored visors but more about how people like a certain kind of consistency when it comes to long running franchise. People want something that feels both old and new alike. That's why Orville is popular. It feels like TNG but it's been updated with more modern casual type of character. The Mandolarian has all the old tech and gadgets in Star Wars and even a cutter Yoda but it's a western that feels like it would sort of belong next to classic movies. I also think issues like racism and sexism is very overplayed criticisms and i'm not even saying people who complain don't have those feelings inside them. History has shown that when it comes to movies and sports and music people make exceptions when it comes to their entertainment that they might not have for some average joe who look like Lando for example in real life.

The real life politics are huge issue with some people who don't share those political beliefs. Like if a character says racism is bad they don't mind and many even believe it. But if you imply that Brexit is racist then they loose their shit because they either don't think it's racist or they don't want their views challenged. People's views on social issues are often very morally complex and some don't like it if they think their show is taking a side but even then that wouldn't be a huge issue in the past because you had stand alone episode so if you don't like what they writers have to say about the President for example then next week their favorite show would be exploring something else. The difference between story arcs that have a political bent and a show that does stand alone stories that cover a vast array of issues is very underrated reason for many fans dislike of some of the modern stuff. Arc based storytelling and stand alone stories creates a very different feel for shows unless we are talking about shows like say Stargate that use to do arcs somewhat but it was like the arcs were woven into the stand alone stories they wanted to tell except for maybe a important arc episode once in awhile especially in the season opener and closer.


Jason

 

[Thomas Elliot]

It seems to me that a lot of people are looking at the past with rose-colored VISORS. As Blamo points out, the programs that people are nostalgic for all had their own problems and issues. TNG wasn't good until the third season, for example.

A lot of TNG holds up exceptionally well, while some of it doesn’t. The difference is that there was a long stretch of quality in TNG, and it was episodic in nature so individual episodes were stories that could stand in their own. With the current trend of serialized tv shows, if you don’t like a story, you’re stuck with it for the entire season.

Back to TNG, it was off to a rocky start, but it was always unique for its time considering the limited amount of television programming available and how SF was represented in the mainstream at the time.
Now TV and the SF genre itself is so much more competitive, so in this new context, modern Trek doesn’t seem too unique or special.

 

[Jayson1]

TNG will always be unique because building a show around trying not to have conflict with your regulars just isn't done. The fact that it ended up being good is a miracle. It's one of the most underrated greatest success stories in tv history because of how it became a success. Had to follow a iconic show in TOS. Had to follow what is crazy for any regular show the Roddenberry rules. Your captain was a older bald British man. Not exactly what people expected from series leads back in the day or even today. Had one bad first season and mediocre second season that would have gotten many shows cancelled. It beat some very high odds it would fail and instead became the head of what I consider the first cinematic universe even though of course it was on tv and not movies like the MCU.


Jason

 

[fireproof78]

After all, we're in a time of plenty. If we don't like something, we can (and should) drop it for something else.

Exactly. There is no reason to invest time in to something we don't like when we go from just a couple of options to literally hundreds of hours for different SF shows to satisfy different SF tastes.

 

[Jayson1]

Exactly. There is no reason to invest time in to something we don't like when we go from just a couple of options to literally hundreds of hours for different SF shows to satisfy different SF tastes.

This has always been easier said than done when it comes to franchises fans have invested literally decades to. I mean it's easy to drop some brand new thing that you don't like from the start but when it comes to something like Trek and Star Wars I would even say people have invested some of their identity into being fans of those shows. Friends with other fans of them, going to conventions and collecting merch and the whole thing. People sometimes like to complain about gatekeeping but gatekeeping is just another word for passion and I can see why people get upset if they think the shows are just tossing them away when they have done so much to support by buying all the merch and in many cases keeping the franchise alive during dark times like when Trek was off the air for along time after Enterprise or the long gaps between TOS and the The Motion Picture or Star Wars and Doctor Who were for awhile the only new material was coming from books.

Jason

 

[Grendelsbayne]

TNG will always be unique because building a show around trying not to have conflict with your regulars just isn't done. The fact that it ended up being good is a miracle. It's one of the most underrated greatest success stories in tv history because of how it became a success. Had to follow a iconic show in TOS. Had to follow what is crazy for any regular show the Roddenberry rules. Your captain was a older bald British man. Not exactly what people expected from series leads back in the day or even today. Had one bad first season and mediocre second season that would have gotten many shows cancelled. It beat some very high odds it would fail and instead became the head of what I consider the first cinematic universe even though of course it was on tv and not movies like the MCU.


Jason

Cinematic universes were not rare on tv to begin with - TNG was hardly the first.

 

[Jayson1]

Cinematic universes were not rare on tv to begin with - TNG was hardly the first.

Well I know their have been crossovers and spin-offs but those always seemed to be sitcoms and sort of regular shows. TNG being a science fiction seemed to really expand on it to the point were the shows are sharring the same aliens and guest stars and sometimes even plots of one episode impacting a episode on another show. Like how two Ferengi in a season 3 TNG episode disappear to the DQ and then years later Voyager does a ep that shows what happened to them.

Jason