I'd say 2009 Trek, but I wasn't there for anything prior.
I pretty much quit Facebook groups so I miss out on all that negativity
I pretty much quit Facebook groups so I miss out on all that negativity
Is Discovery the most polarizing Trek property ever?
- Thread starter TheMadCloner
- Start date
2009 Trek generated a huge response; I thought a sizeable portion of it was positive, with some strong negative reactions, and also a significant portion who didn't love it but was willing to accept its role in resurrecting the franchise.
I don't know about DISCO, but over at Doctor Who, Moffat told all writers and actors to quit social media as soon as they work on the show if they want to preserve sanity
This is precisely my experience as well. I watched ENT and was really excited about it going in...because frankly I was tired / burnt out on the same era, tone and aesthetics that TNG-DS9-VOY had done for 21 seasons between them. I was underwhelmed by the Broken Bow pilot...but stayed loyal for about half the first season. I even argued with haters on the message boards...telling them to be patient and give it time (hmmmm...my how things have changed...haha). But, I realized that I was done with it because it wasn't really any different than any of the previous Berman-era stuff. It just looked different, but it was very much the same exact formula. I didn't hate it because "IT IZN'T TEH TROO STAR TRACK!!!!" or "IF THIZ IZ TEH PREQUIL DEN WHY SO ADVANCED????" or whatever....I just didn't like the characters, story, or tone (much the same as many of the concerns you hear now about DSC, btw). ENT was so bad though that there were knock-down drag-out bloodbaths over the opening music. THE OPENING MUSIC for chrissakes. Like that even matters....!!
The difference is, however, that rather than rant and rave endlessly like a frigging self-loathing lunatic for 4 years, I basically just let it slip. I'd watch it every now and again if there was a big-profile episode...but otherwise I simply went about my business.
It's like I've said before though, the people who keep watching and relentlessly complain at every given opportunity are usually driven by 1 or 2 big things:
1. They like conflict, especially (most likely exclusively) the conflict that the anonymity and safety of a message board gives you. Why otherwise does it make any sense to torture yourself with what you don't like and then compound that by going on to a message board filled with people that have opposing opinions, and bang away at them as if you're going to change their minds?
and/or
2. They genuinely feel that someone from the "studio" or the "production team" is there, taking notes, and will see their loud and vocal minority complaints, and certainly change the show to be more to their liking in the coming seasons.
2a. They actually believe that if they are loud and vocal enough...the show will fail and they will get something more to their liking as a result of the vacuum that is created.
This is what I witnessed back in 2001 with ENT, and certainly with JJTrek in 2009. We see it now too, but it's almost a joke it's so sparse and obvious.
Last edited:
I am actually one of those people. I re-watched ENT last spring/summer and actually really enjoyed it now, especially that time has past and a different perspective is in play.
Compare that to VOY which I can't seem to get through despite massive efforts to do so...or even TNG which, despite seeing every single episode first-run...I can't seem to slog through in a re-watch. It feels like more of a chore than something I enjoy...it's kind of sad.
I can only imagine Wilson Cruz and Anthony Rapp have a thickness of skin heretofore unknown to medical science.
I remember a LOT of "outrage" over DS9 cuz it wasn't "on a spaceship" and "didn't go anywhere" ....
It's interesting that you feel that way, and I don't begrudge you that. I'd like to see the evidence that most people are apathetic and don't care, though. That would be fun to see.
Also interesting is that, if it's such a "boring piece of poop that many don't even care"....what the hell are you doing out here talking about it, rating it, etc...? I'd like to understand that a bit.
DS9 was not well recieved initially. A lot of through it violated gene's vision by being so dark and being on a station that sat there and didn't go anywhere. A remember lots of comments that gene would have never approved of DS9 before it aired.
I was a toddler watching TOS when it first broadcast and so obviously was much older when TNG came out, and I can say firsthand that there were quite a few fans who absolutely HATED TNG. There was no internet, so the anger didn't have a convenient outlet for people to vent on, but there was genuinely some sizable anger about it.
People hated the sanctimonious and politically correct Picard. They hated having a counselor frequently on the bridge to explore people's feelings. And of course, there was almost universal hatred for the Mary Sue character of Trek -- Wesley Crusher.
LOL, I know a person who to this day refuses to use the acronym "TOS". For her, there is only Star Trek, and "the crappy spin-offs".
It's the same thing as playing with a magnifying glass and an ant-hill. It's interesting to see the ants reaction
Half of the fun is seeing others reaction
This is demonstrably untrue.
It's the same thing as playing with a magnifying glass and an ant-hill. It's interesting to see the ants reaction
I can't say that this makes any sense to me. It certainly doesn't answer the questions I've asked.
As a follow-up, I think it's interesting to point out that on this very message board, which I find to be the very best on the entire internet with regard to fair and appropriate moderation, quality and knowledge of fans, etc...
Next Gen has 205,000 messages and is a well-established fan favorite that's been around for 30 years.
DS9 has 170,000 messages and is a "mature, engaging, sweeping" fan favorite with tons of nuance and layers of depth rich for discussion, which has been around for 25 years.
Discovery already has 103,700 messages dedicated to discussion. This is the show that is so boring, nobody gives a shit about it? And it's been around for 4 months. It's halfway to TNG's post total...and it's been around for 4 months. The TNG board has numbers and posts going back to 2007.
I don't think it's a boring piece of shit to most people. I think maybe you think that it is, and that's fine.
"Everyone's entitled to an opinion, lad"
But, saying that nobody cares is about as wrong as it gets. It's a nice try...but it's wrong.
Oh geez, ENT was at least as polarizing. The shipping wars: Trip/T'Pol vs Archer/T'Pol; Akiraprise; the tech being too advanced; why did we never hear of this ent before; why did we never hear of the Xindi/Florida being blown up before; not to mention Stewey. To be honest, a lot of the arguments here are VERY similar to what they were then. I'm just waiting for Ash/Burnham vs Lorca/Burnham shippers.
+1 for you sir!
On this board, Enterprise was by far the most polarising. The ENT forum was a clusterfrak back in the day - the big difference was that there weren't just pro and anti camps, there were also shippers, Akiraprise die hards, B&B haters, and a half dozen other special interests.
Discovery is a comparative breeze.
Discovery is a comparative breeze.
By far not!
Sadly, I think part of it is because Discovery simply isn't that big of a splash like other Trek series were before. There is simply SO. much. genre tv out there, and a whole lot of it arguibly better, DIS is somewhat under the radar.
Also, the Trek fandom has endured a lot in the last time: A prequel somewhat clashing with aesthetics, the cancellation of both their last series AND the movie line, a full blown half-reboot that has also fizzled out at this point... basically already everything that can happen to upset fans has already happened.
Like, many people loathe what they did to the klingons. But this "canon violation" is simply not as big a deal as it would have been in the 00's. And if they would suddenly change them back to their more familiar aesthetics, nobody would really bat an eye.
I think the biggest, dicisive thing upsetting fans about DIS is simply the show's quality. Which really isn't bad, mind you! Just failing to deliver on (the ENOURMUS!) expectations fans had for a new Star Trek show.
Sadly, I think part of it is because Discovery simply isn't that big of a splash like other Trek series were before. There is simply SO. much. genre tv out there, and a whole lot of it arguibly better, DIS is somewhat under the radar.
Also, the Trek fandom has endured a lot in the last time: A prequel somewhat clashing with aesthetics, the cancellation of both their last series AND the movie line, a full blown half-reboot that has also fizzled out at this point... basically already everything that can happen to upset fans has already happened.
Like, many people loathe what they did to the klingons. But this "canon violation" is simply not as big a deal as it would have been in the 00's. And if they would suddenly change them back to their more familiar aesthetics, nobody would really bat an eye.
I think the biggest, dicisive thing upsetting fans about DIS is simply the show's quality. Which really isn't bad, mind you! Just failing to deliver on (the ENOURMUS!) expectations fans had for a new Star Trek show.
I'm going to assume the OP is asking about how polarizing the show is among Trek fans. Some folks seem to be talking about its impact in mainstream pop culture, but IMHO there's way too much spread and variance there to draw any meaningful conclusions.
On the first point, I'll assume you meant to write "between 1966 and 2000." ;-) After all, if you take TOS out of the equation (as if that were possible), ENT would seem a lot more compatible with TNG and what came after.
(I did, in fact, eventually find a blog that literally dissected the film minute-by-minute, in far more exacting detail than I could have managed myself. It was very satisfying!...)
Truth on that second point... this era of "peak TV" has increased both the quality and quantity of material available to viewers. Seriously, who can keep up with half of what's worth watching any more?
On the first point, I'll assume you meant to write "between 1966 and 2000." ;-) After all, if you take TOS out of the equation (as if that were possible), ENT would seem a lot more compatible with TNG and what came after.
It had the luxury of time to build a following, and it improved significantly in that time. The first couple of seasons were genuinely godawful, though.
This. I can't think of anything more polarizing than the first Abrams film. I remember going into that movie with friends, excited about the prospect of new TOS-era Star Trek... we even paid extra for the IMAX screen!... and walking out appalled, feeling that I'd wasted two hours of my life that I'd never get back and wanting to deconstruct everything that was wrong about the film minute-by-minute. The fact that my friends mostly enjoyed it only made things worse. And that range of reactions was mild compared to what I found online!...
(I did, in fact, eventually find a blog that literally dissected the film minute-by-minute, in far more exacting detail than I could have managed myself. It was very satisfying!...)
Another factor is simply that now there are multiple different factions as to what the "best" and "true" Trek is.
Just picking one example from your comments -- different fanboys would disagree with what a Klingon's "more familiar aesthetics" are. I'm an old codger who grew up on TOS. TOS Klingons with the Fu Manchu moustaches and brownface are the ones that look the most "authentic" to me, just because that is what I saw first.
Some folks that got into the franchise later no doubt think that TNG or other era Klingons are the more authentic look.
So part of the division is that it isn't even as basic as the original "Kirk vs. Picard" debates -- there are a LOT of different Treks for people to glom onto and decide for themselves that their particular version is the yardstick by which all of the rest of the franchise must be judged.
Similar threads
