Do you think modern day issue's will be addressed on "Discovery?"

[Tenacity]

Why?

To demonstrate that there are multiple different characters on the show, and not just one person walking around in five or six bodies.

In Insurrection, someone (I think Crusher) should have spoken up and told Picard that he was wrong.

In Dear Doctor (while I agree with the final decision) someone should have voiced a opposing view point to Archer as a counter-balance to Phlox's advocated course of action.

 

[Nerys Myk]

To demonstrate that there are multiple different characters on the show, and not just one person walking around in five or six bodies.

I don't think that's the same thing. The show/episode/movie/book will have a point of view on a topic. That's an artistic choice. Having other characters voice the opposite view will still be in service to that point. It won't be "fair"

 

[somebuddyX]

I feel Star Trek should always be about looking at relevant social themes but never focusing on any particular individual. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't and may seem condescending but I like it that they try.
To pilfer from Jammer's review of Voyager's Memorial:
"But we're used to Star Trek using its characters as mouthpieces for social commentary—even when the Greater Meaning is only thinly disguised as inter-character dialog. Trek wears its morality on its sleeve. That's part of what makes it what it is."

 

[Tesophius]

I'm sure they will but I'd rather they didn't. It's supposed to be about the future, and projecting 2017 onto the 23rd century doesn't make any sense, but it's also being done by every other show. I want STAR TREK to stand out. If I want to learn about modern issues, I wouldn't do it through Star Trek, even if I was to choose entertainment as a medium.

I hated the blatantly obvious and disgusting metaphors over the fall of the Soviet Union in Undiscovered Country.

 

[fireproof78]

I would expect it, especially given that was a part of Star Trek from the beginning.

 

[Kor]

I hope any social commentary is done with thoughtful understatement and elegant subtlety, rather than bonking the audience over the head with heavy-handed clumsiness that takes precedence over good storytelling.

And if a PSA ever appears immediately after the episode, in which the main actor of STD tells the audience exactly what lesson they were supposed to learn from the episode, then I think I'm gonna puke. *cough* ENT *cough*.

Kor

 

[Brass]

It wouldn't be Star Trek if they didn't have episodes revolving around some moral dilemma. I hope they do a few things. First, that they have a lot more episodes dealing with grey areas, where the available choices that the character can make are difficult and actually have a consequence. You know, where the choices have meaning and develop the character further. [DS9 "In the Pale Moonlight for example"] Nothing is more boring or condescending when it is a black and white choice.

Secondly, that they make the aliens less one dimensional. [TNG Ferengi, etc.] The klingons, cardassians, etc. actually became interesting when they expanded on their internal politics and culture. Since they seem to have cast permanent(?) klingon characters I'm very hopeful they will do that.

 

[queerTrekker]

Say what you will about the world today, one thing you can't say is that it doesn't offer up alot of potential drama for a show like "Star Trek" that is supose to address issue's. Everything from Trump to refuge's can be dealt with. In fact I wonder of the Issac's character might actually be a stand in for Donald Trump or at least the Admiral character that is supose to be on the show.

Jason

I wouldn't be surprised if there was, considering the current political and social climate, and the fact that the franchise has almost always reflected something of the social climate of their particular points in time, though again it depends also in part how much CBS will unwind itself with its permissions (I know its on a digital platform so it might be edgier but i am not holding my breath until i see the goods), how much the writers and actors will work under the wire and so forth.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's supposed to be about the future, and projecting 2017 onto the 23rd century doesn't make any sense, but it's also being done by every other show. I want STAR TREK to stand out. If I want to learn about modern issues, I wouldn't do it through Star Trek, even if I was to choose entertainment as a medium.

Uh, have you ever watched Star Trek? Read about Star Trek? Commenting on modern issues in a Science Fiction framework is part of it's raison d'etre. It hasn't always done it well, but it's been part of the show.

III. Keep in mind that science fiction is not a separate field of literature with rules of its own, but, indeed, needs the same ingredients as any story -- including a jeopardy of some type to someone we learn to care about, climactic build, sound motivitation, you know the list.

IV. Then, with that firm foundation established, inter- weave in it any statement to be made about man, society and so on. Yes, we want you to have some- thing to say, but say it entertainingly as you do on any other show. We don't need essays, how- ever brilliant.

 

[fireproof78]

I hope any social commentary is done with thoughtful understatement and elegant subtlety, rather than bonking the audience over the head with heavy-handed clumsiness that takes precedence over good storytelling.

And if a PSA ever appears immediately after the episode, in which the main actor of STD tells the audience exactly what lesson they were supposed to learn from the episode, then I think I'm gonna puke. *cough* ENT *cough*.

Kor

You're wrong. The PSA will run before the the episode so that you and I won't have to work that hard at thinking.

Also, is "Let that be your Last Battlefield" an example of elegant subtlety in social commentary?

Uh, have you ever watched Star Trek? Read about Star Trek? Commenting on modern issues in a Science Fiction framework is part of it's raison d'etre. It hasn't always done it well, but it's been part of the show.

Precisely so.

 

[Kor]

Also, is "Let that be your Last Battlefield" an example of elegant subtlety in social commentary?

The third season was just a bad trip, man.

Kor

 

[Nyotarules]

1. Denobula votes to leave the Federation due to its extreme eugenics ban and states they can do deals with the rest of the galaxy.
2. The Sentient rights commission takes Starfleet to court for discrimination toward female/non male officers who desire to reach the rank of captain and above.
3. The Sentient rights commission takes Starfleet to court for discrimination for its extreme Terrancentric set up, only 1% of the officers and enlisted staff are nonhuman.
4. Vulcan campaigns for species only starships for psychological and cultural reasons - the USS Intrepid goes into active service.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The third season was just a bad trip, man.

Kor

[Woodstock Announcer] Stay away from the third season [/Woodstock Announcer]

 

[Nyotarules]

I'm sure they will but I'd rather they didn't. It's supposed to be about the future, and projecting 2017 onto the 23rd century doesn't make any sense, but it's also being done by every other show. I want STAR TREK to stand out. If I want to learn about modern issues, I wouldn't do it through Star Trek, even if I was to choose entertainment as a medium.

I hated the blatantly obvious and disgusting metaphors over the fall of the Soviet Union in Undiscovered Country.

Then you would have hated The Omega glory

 

[fireproof78]

The third season was just a bad trip, man.

Kor

Except for "The Enterprise Incident." "Tholian Web" and "Day of the Dove"

Then you would have hated The Omega glory

I'm surprised that ever made it to air

 

[Nerys Myk]

I'm surprised that ever made it to air

It was one of Gene's babies.

 

[fireproof78]

It was one of Gene's babies.

I am aware, which is amazing, given his later political views.

I find it an interesting episode, introducing the Prime Directive, but it certainly isn't subtle.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I am aware, which is amazing, given his later political views.

I find it an interesting episode, introducing the Prime Directive, but it certainly isn't subtle.

I've seen cartoons with an anvil to the head that were more subtle.
Trek was a bit back and forth when it came to the Cold War. It was created in the Kennedy Era but came to fruition in the Johnson Era. So there is a strain of "Commie Bastards" in some episodes.

 

[Ing3nu]

Discussing contemporary issues (and touching on stuff that everyone freaks out about) is a long Trek tradition. I can't imagine they won't tackle current affairs, but there's room for lots of stories. It's the mix that makes it appeal to so many people (some morality plays, some shooty shooty bits, high drama, low humor) It'd be disappointing if they didn't chuck a Trump-analog in there, maybe with a side of Trudeau and the recent controversy over feeding gummy bears to cows thrown in for good measure.

 

[Spider]

If they make the UFP president orange, I'm not watching.