Do you prefer stand-alone episodes, or parts of long-running storylines?

[Richard S. Ta]

I prefer standalones in Trek ‘cause it’s comfort TV for me. I’m not looking for longer, narrative complexity, I’m looking to fill short gaps on breaks from work.

For serialised stuff, I tend to turn to other shows that are just, overall, better suited to the form. Trek works best as an anthology.

Saying that, when Trek does a good arc, it’s enjoyable. It just hasn’t done many over the years and the quality of them has always been so variable.

 

[DonIago]

I think DS9 did it best, with significant serialization but plenty of room for relatively standalone, character-buidling episodes as well.

With regards to serialization though, what I don't like is the increasing artificiality that I perhaps first noticed with BtVS, where there's a seasonal "Big Bad" and you can anticipate that the BB will be defeated in the final episode of the season and definitely won't be defeated in any episode prior to the season finale. That's not how life works and tying everything up that way feels contrived to me. DISCO and PIC are perhaps especially guilty of this. The latter in particular, where each season could practically be considered its own show.

I'd actually love it if the BtVS follow-up that's in the works somehow winked at the audience in this regard. "I know we'll defeat our enemy...but probably not for another three to four weeks!"

 

[Turtletrekker]

[Buffy]"I know we'll defeat our enemy...but probably not for another three to four weeks!"

Nova (the new slayer): "Huh?"

 

[Forbin]

Having grown up in the 60s, I like episodic - one good story per episode, and the ability to watch any single episode without needing further information. You can have a friend over and show them an ep without having to explain the whole season.

Having said that, 80s TV and onward has gotten me used to serialization and story arcs, which I like fine as well.

So a combination thereof is good - a show where each ep has its own story, but there are overall character arcs and story arcs blended in.

 

[Dar70]

Stand alone with a fine line running through the season to set up a two or three part season final. Ds9 did this really well. They planted the seeds of the Dominion war very early with a mention.

 

[LadyGayle]

My concern is the storytelling. So I prefer whatever serves the story better.

Traditionally, Trek has done better with episodic stories with some serialized elements, but I don't think that's because it's an inherently better format.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I do prefer characters and storytelling that grow and evolves. DS9 is by far my favorite Star Trek. However when you're telling arc-based storytelling, it's essential to nail the landing, and that's been a serious weakness of modern Star Trek.

 

[Rahul]

I like a lot what ENT did with "Minefield" & "Dead Stop".
In the first episode the NX-01 had to escape the Romulans, but was heavily damaged. And the 2nd then starts with them severely needing repair by all means. They're completely different plots. But the consequences (& urgency) carried over & felt more natural.


I also like what ENT did between season 3 & 4. While S3 has a very straight plotline, S4 had a thematic arc, about the first steps toward the Federation. While S3 was all in the unknown frontiers, S4 was mostly back at home turf, with recurring species and characters, and had to deal with long term consequences. Therefore each season was pretty distinct, in plots, characters and galactic location, even though each season had many stand-alone plots.

 

[Rahul]

In theory I would prefer a mix between stand -alone & seasonal arcs.

The problem is, serialised arcs usually try to be Trek "movies", but unnecessarily stretched out, and Trek movies plots are often very reductive & repetitive. There's a reason people say Star Trek works better on tv than at the cinema - the variety of plots & scopes. And the streaming arcs really combine the worst part of Trek movies, with the weaknesses of television.

As a role model I would look at Stargate SG-1: They always had long running arcs in the background - but most episodes were standalone, and then the "arc" episodes sprinkled in-between, that build up to a climax at the season finale. But many breathers in-between (e.g. the superweapon wasn't introduced in the first episode, but build up slowly). And for the "normal" episodes you'd never knew in advance if it would be a one-off, or part of the bigger picture.

 

[The Wormhole]

One of the main problems with Star Trek's long term story arcs is they're always about two subject: war and/or the galactic apocalypse. There are other things they can spend a season on. Hell, everyone and their dog are always claiming Star Trek is about exploration, why not have an entire season about a ship doing a long term in-depth survey of a planet? It could be a serious take on the mission of the Second Contact ships like the Cerritos and other California class ships.

 

[Frontis]

Imo actually all Star Trek series are actually long running story lines. All of them are telling us the story of one space ship /space station and the crew.

 

[XCV330]

Imo actually all Star Trek series are actually long running story lines. All of them are telling us the story of one space ship /space station and the crew.

it's all Benny

 

[DonIago]

Nah, I'm pretty sure DS9 wasn't set in Albany...

...I'll show myself out!