Has the Roddenberry Vision of " Trek " become an Anachronism?

[CaptainStoner]

Was Roddenberry really utopian in all things? His ideas were turned into Andromeda and Earth Final Conflict, albeit after his death.

Not necessarily. But Star Trek was. It had always been about utopian approaches to very real problems.

I think "humanist" is nearer the mark. I can't remember the term. I hope the soul of the franchise remains.

Personally I think DS9 already ruined the Roddenberry format. They went to a dystopian serial.

Please. Read some real dystopian works like Nineteen Eighty-Four or Brave New World or Fahrenheit 451 or The Handmaiden's Tale and then tell me with a straight face that Star Trek: Deep Space Nine was a dystopia just because it didn't present an idealized future.

Yes DS9 was more of contrasting a basically dominant "utopia" with other elements.

What is your very first thought when you think..."Star Trek"?

I think of the TOS Enterprise in an establishing shot, moving into orbit of some unknown planet...

...But what would a network audience want? What would entertain them? Bajoran world building? Civil war in the Klingon Empire? No. They want fun adventure stories where Kirk and Spock kick ass and take names...

...The "prime universe" now only exists in literature, in the minds of true fans. Trek has been rebooted and we need to let the past go.

Absolutely Right(TM).

Hopefully by letting go, we can rediscover the roots of it...the enterprise pulling into orbit of an unknown planet. Spock looks into his weird, uncomfortable looking blue-screened thing....

 

[Dusty Ayres]

What is your very first thought when you think..."Star Trek"?

I think of the TOS Enterprise in an establishing shot, moving into orbit of some unknown planet.

I like TNG and I like DS9--and even the other spinoffs to a lesser extent. Of course I do! I'm a sci-fi fan. But sci-fi is a fairly marginalized genre when it comes to being taken seriously. The fans want deep, meaningful Star Trek. They want "All Good Things" and "In The Pale Moonlight."

But what would a network audience want? What would entertain them? Bajoran world building? Civil war in the Klingon Empire? No. They want fun adventure stories where Kirk and Spock kick ass and take names.

Serialized shows like Lost are the exception to the rule when it comes to success--look at the fate of all its clones. And Star Trek is no Lost. No one could honestly make that claim. While the new movie went a long way towards rehabilitating Trek's image as cheese, it also set a standard that post-1987 Roddenberry Trek can no longer meet.

So in a way, Roddenberry's Trek will live on; but it will not be his vision of the 24th century that takes Star Trek into the future. The "prime universe" now only exists in literature, in the minds of true fans. Trek has been rebooted and we need to let the past go. Embrace it, even.

It might be fun.

My sentiments exactly.

I've been trying to get this into the heads on some people at a YouTube channel, but they are just so obdurate, hardheaded, and stuck in the past that nothing new that's Star Trek (like the movie) is good for them; These fans making their comments on this You Tube video are the kind of people you're talking about, and that I've unfortunately been dealing with.

Roddenberry's vision was a bit too optimistic, but you can have a positive future while still having conflict and flawed characters. But I don't think it needs to become like every other show and go for edgy and gritty. It can go darker without losing that vision. But I don't want to see it turn into Star Trek Universe, or Star Trek Galactica.

Again, I'm in agreement. I don't want BSG types as Starfleet officers, EVER. That approach worked on BSG because the civilization on that show had ended, and these refugees were on their way to finding a new one and (ultimately) getting rid of all of their technology to live primitively and found our civilization. The Starfleet officers, while having occasional lapses in judgment, problems, personality dysfunctions, and the like, were still able to deal with them and move on, not be trapped with them episode to episode, mostly because their civilizations are still around (well, minus Spock's, anyway.) Acting like Tigh, Starbuck, et.al, would turn people off who are used to Starfleet officers being what they are on TOS. I'm not saying they can't have what real people have, just not to the extremes that the BSG characters had.

 

[Arpy]

Yeah, we call that Star Trek.

That's the Trek you like. Look at my whole post. I was describing the Trek I like. Don't assume the whole is your favored part and don't be rude to those who disagree if you want them to give a damn about what you think.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yeah, we call that Star Trek.

That's the Trek you like. Look at my whole post. I was describing the Trek I like. Don't assume the whole is your favored part and don't be rude to those who disagree if you want them to give a damn about what you think.

He's right though. Star Trek isn't about "the future" its about us viewed through the funhouse mirror of Science Fiction.

One of the things I like about Trek's formal dialogue and unclear culture is that it allows for the mystery of the future.

Cant say I've found Trek's dialogue to be overly "formal" nor the culture to be "unclear". The future, as seen in Trek. isnt supposed to be mysterious, its supposed to be something we identify with. It is us only in the future.

 

[Nightdiamond]

I suppose Trek was declining and something had to be done.

The last series canceled, and the last two movies were not well received. And all withing a few years of each other.

I felt the last movie was too full of TV cliches.

Roger Ebert: "I'm smiling like a good sport and trying to get with the dialogue … and gradually it occurs to me that "Star Trek" is over for me. I've been looking at these stories for half a lifetime, and, let's face it, they're out of gas

I think the reason why some resist the new version is that with the current movies, it's all about big explosions and loud action.

Is just me or did anyone find the latest Trek movie fast paced to the point of being hyper?

I found the tinkering with the Trek universe like the movie did overkill, but then I finally realized-they're rewriting Trek.

After this, it's going to a whole new Trek-they better hope it takes.