Is it just me, or is Star Trek going the wrong way?

[Ometiklan]

I could go with either serialized presentation of intense storylines or episodic presentation of exploratory/wonderous stories; could be anthologies, could be set on a base/ship/planet/alternative dimension, as long as it does the following:

1. Plotwise, explores the human condition: i.e., is science fiction - how would X change in technology, society, point of view, experience, etc. change how we are, what we do, and how we react
2. Is Star Trek: ties into the Prime Trek universe so that what has happened and what will happen, matters
3. Writing: Has good writing: good characters, good concepts, and good execution
4. Point of view/optimism: has something to say about progress and the future - we can and will do better, greater things, evolving and helping each other

 

[Tim Walker]

One concept that was discussed awhile back...

That some Trek episodes could have come from the Twilight Zone or the Outer Limits. Similar to the X-Files, you could have a small team sent out to investigate strange cases/phenomenon.

 

[Focus Abbey]

That some Trek episodes could have come from the Twilight Zone or the Outer Limits. Similar to the X-Files, you could have a small team sent out to investigate strange cases/phenomenon.

I like that!

I’d be interested in a series about an archeological crew. Some of my favorite episodes have to do with uncovering glimpses of the galaxy’s ancient past. Each season might focus on a single expedition.

 

[Bornin1980something]

TOS is my favorite show in the history of television.

But, I don't want "more TOS." I have TOS already, which will never be topped. And then we have all of TNG and VOY and (in some respects) "ENT" which all follow that same format. We also have knock-off/homages like The Orville which further ape the concept directly.

I much prefer the series in the franchise that take the format into a different and unique direction and challenge my own notions of "what Star Trek is"... (DS9, DSC, PIC, certain elements of ENT).

I LOVE the cast of SNW....but I am hoping it's different enough from the core franchise for me to care.

A question, should taking the thing in a different and unique direction necessarily mean more pessimistic and conflict based?

 

[Vger23]

A question, should taking the thing in a different and unique direction necessarily mean more pessimistic and conflict based?

Not at all.

There’s another name for conflict. It’s called “drama” or even “excitement,” and I welcome it in Star Trek with wide open arms.

I don’t see anything pessimistic. If you mean mean “Star Trek that isn’t childishly simple in its portrayal of a ‘better future,’ ” I welcome that kind thing with wide open arms as well.

 

[Lord Garth]

i want to see new episode, not one big story arc , visit strange no worlds and explore lets see whats out there not jump to any where in seconds.

Yes, well, you'll get what you want with Strange New Worlds.

On a scale of 0 (not excited at all) to 100 (Super Excited! Oh my God! I can't wait!!!), my enthusiasm for Strange New Worlds is about a 55. My interest in it is going to live or die by its execution. Otherwise, it's the exact opposite of what I want. I like the direction of DSC and PIC a lot better.

I think SNW exists not just because people like Pike, but also to pacify gatekeepers and old-schoolers (same reason they moved DSC to the 32nd Century). They struck gold when they brought Pike onto DSC for its second season. Because they were then able to use the demand for more Pike to create a series based on him, to satisfy that crowd.

 

[fireproof78]

Not at all.

There’s another name for conflict. It’s called “drama” or even “excitement,” and I welcome it in Star Trek with wide open arms.

I don’t see anything pessimistic. If you mean mean “Star Trek that isn’t childishly simple in its portrayal of a ‘better future,’ ” I welcome that kind thing with wide open arms as well.

I tend to agree. I don't buy in to descriptions of recent Trek as "dark and cynical and pessimistic" because they don't portray humanity as being conflict free and actually struggling. I'm guessing that people just want very simple happy stories with people don't struggle.

 

[Vger23]

I tend to agree. I don't buy in to descriptions of recent Trek as "dark and cynical and pessimistic" because they don't portray humanity as being conflict free and actually struggling. I'm guessing that people just want very simple happy stories with people don't struggle.

"A better humanity" is absolutely valueless unless the stories highlight the struggles and drama and sacrifices it takes to continue to achieve and maintain that "better" state.

If it's all just handed to us on a perfectly-formed platter....it is so very uninteresting and virtually meaningless to me.

 

[Amaris]

I wish I could fly through space and explore all the unknown worlds out there, that's why I love star trek! I think they did a good job until they started trying to veer away from the motif set forth by FOUR fully successful and incredibly popular series (TOS, TNG, DS9, and Voyager) What I love the most about the first four series is that they were always exploring new worlds and seeing new things in the universe while they simultaneously told a story arc and it seemed like the writers were genuinely trying to stretch the limits of what people would imagine is possible to exist out among the stars, it made it a truly unique work of video-graphic art.

I also love how they portrayed humanities future potential in a very positive light, world peace, no more need for currency within our own species, scientific idealism, peaceful cooperation and exploration with the species we meet. Its a refreshing change from the millions of sci-fi stories that believe we are a hopeless species who will only end up killing anything intelligent we find out there. It seems that most authors believe humanity is much closer to the alternate negative dimensions version of events rather than the altruistic peaceful society that The Federation stands for. That's just depressing. If that's true we don't deserve to continue as a species, so I prefer to hope that Star Trek will be a good example of how humanity can still choose to show their best side and save not only our world but ourselves and our future.


I tolerated their experiments in the star trek enterprise even though the time travel was horribly convoluted and made little sense, they even ignored previously established super powerful beings for the convenience of forcing their story arc to exist mostly because I liked how they did do a bit of exploring and random adventuring or encountering random ships of unknown aliens unlike anything imagined in previous series.

However after that it seemed like they went all out sell out and tried to change the show to imitate the most popular mainstream counter parts such as "The Expanse" which seemed to be in direct competition with ST Discovery or it seems like Picard is a direct counterpart to the Mandalorian, as if their trying to make the new series about Picard as rough and gritty as the new series about the Mandalorian. Come one can't we please just have our series back? I dont care if "new viewers" like it, what about the already established fan base? Are we such worthless pushovers that they think we'll just throw our money at them no matter what they put the star trek logo on?

I'm sick of it, I'm about ready not to watch any new star trek series ever again, the last 3.5 series they came out with were basically a middle finger to the fans (because enterprise was half okay) they have all but said "...you know what, we hate our fan base and want a new one..." . It would be like if they took family guy and redrew it and rewrote it to imitate the simpsons from now on, sure it might still be an okay, but it definitely wouldn't be family guy anymore it would just be another show imitating something higher up in the "pop culture food chain". They even specifically said that they wanted to "Bring it to a new generation" which actually translated from PR double talk means "turning a classic into some desperate corporate shill scheme to get the wealthiest dumbest largest fan-base possible" so yeah, thanks for ruining something I used to be excited about.

Now to be clear, these would be perfectly good TV shows, if they weren't supposed to embody the spirit of their predecessors, just take the Star Trek name off them and no one would even realise they were star trek, and they could have their own style and story arc and not have to worry about living up to Gene Roddenberry's original vision.

Stop trying to make it into something its not. Star trek was always like us nerds at school, it was never the most trendy with the "popular kids" and it looked different than the other shows even of the same genre, but it always seemed to be more aware of where we were and where we, for better or worse, could one day be. If you've ever seen a friend try to force another friend to try to be something they're not then you know that its not right and its a bad idea! ^_^

The "wrong way" is always in the eye of the beholder, and you may not draw inspiration from the more modern shows, while others will. Some will want to choose a science or engineering career from watching the modern Treks. What worked for you, or me, may not work for others, and there comes a point where you have to accept the baton has been passed off to a new generation to do with it as they please.

 

[Pauln6]

I think they will take a leaf out of Marvel's book and try to give each show a different feel, to broaden audience appeal as much as possible. X-files Trek, or Mission Impossible Trek might be fun. You might get elements of both those in the Section 31 show of course. I'd be happy to see a show about non-Federation characters out on the fringe, sort of Firefly Trek.

Trek works best when its stories are morality plays, so any direction it takes should keep that in mind.

TOS certainly struggled to keep the single episode format fresh. TNG really hit its stride when it combined soap opera meta-plots with solid sci fi stories and recurring cast of semi-regular antagonists around season 4. DS9 used its recurring villains well too - my main criticism there was that the resolution to Kai Winn's and Gul Dukat's stories was lacking something. Voyager suffered IMO by NOT having a broad enough or diverse enough supporting cast to complement the bland regulars. Chakotay desperately needed an edge that he could only have got from interacting with a team of grumpy Maquis. Kes should have been kept as a semi-regular guest character whose powers gradually built following Year of Hell.

I've enjoyed Discovery and Picard but I think that spending almost all the whole season being driven by one overall plot arc is a mistake. Having a 'BBEG" as the finale has rarely delivered in Trek. The finale in Picard would have been far stronger without Robo-Cthulu - the fate of the android community is where we are invested. The finales in Discovery would also be far stronger without setting up universe busting threats. I really hope they have learned from the success of the Mandalorian. Small can be beautiful.

Ten episode seasons can allow for character development if they don't pin so much on the series lead. I actually think that Picard did a better job here, mixing the familiar and unfamiliar characters. In fact, parts of season 2 of Discovery were well received for similar reasons.

Mini arcs spread over 2-3 episodes work best I think, with character development carry overs.

 

[fireproof78]

I really hope they have learned from the success of the Mandalorian. Small can be beautiful.

 

[fireproof78]

Ok, to add to my thoughts. I think Mandalorian does OK with some of the smaller stories and it started out as such. But, much like Season 2 of Discovery, Mandalorian leaned heavily in to familiar elements, and touching on what the audience prefers as familiar elements.

I would love for franchises to feel comfortable with smaller stories but that doesn't seem to be the current trend.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The difference being that, even without the familiar elements Mando is still a solid space western. "The Jedi" still works as an episode even if it hadn't had been that Jedi.

New-nuTrek is nothing without its callbacks. "Nepenthe" is a story about an old man visiting long-time friends with an arbitrary [off-screen] tragedy to wax philosophical for an hour. The plot objective is solved with quick expository dialog slipped in at the end. There's no there there.

 

[fireproof78]

The difference being that, even without the familiar elements Mando is still a solid space western. "The Jedi" still works as an episode even if it hadn't had been that Jedi.

New-nuTrek is nothing without its callbacks. "Nepenthe" is a story about an old man visiting long-time friends with an arbitrary [off-screen] tragedy to wax philosophical for an hour. The plot objective is solved with quick expository dialog slipped in at the end. There's no there there.

I don't think "The Jedi" works as a stand alone. It rings very hollow, and worse yet, it makes the episode about a character not the main character and I already don't care about the main character. In other words, it feels like a wonderful story that just says "Isn't this cool?" There doesn't feel like a lot of there there with Mandalorian either. It just tells its story while looking safe and familiar so it is less offensive.

 

[Bornin1980something]

I would love for franchises to feel comfortable with smaller stories but that doesn't seem to be the current trend.

Even The Orville seems to suffer from that; all the critics seem to think the highlight of the show is the large scale, battle filled Identity two-parter. I disagree. For me, the best by far was 'Home', a family story complicated by a narrow culture of expectation -- and very high gravity!

The difference being that, even without the familiar elements Mando is still a solid space western. "The Jedi" still works as an episode even if it hadn't had been that Jedi.

New-nuTrek is nothing without its callbacks. "Nepenthe" is a story about an old man visiting long-time friends with an arbitrary [off-screen] tragedy to wax philosophical for an hour. The plot objective is solved with quick expository dialog slipped in at the end. There's no there there.

For me, the highlight of 'Nepenthe' was an EMH saying "Please state the nature of the -- oh bloody hell!" Of course, that too was a callback.

 

[dupersuper]

I don’t see anything pessimistic. If you mean mean “Star Trek that isn’t childishly simple in its portrayal of a ‘better future,’ ” I welcome that kind thing with wide open arms as well.

"Childishly simple"? Seriously?

 

[Vger23]

"Childishly simple"? Seriously?

Yup. 100%

What about that offends / confuses you? I'm happy to elaborate, as I did in this subsequent post:

"A better humanity" is absolutely valueless unless the stories highlight the struggles and drama and sacrifices it takes to continue to achieve and maintain that "better" state.

If it's all just handed to us on a perfectly-formed platter....it is so very uninteresting and virtually meaningless to me.

 

[fireproof78]

"Childishly simple"? Seriously?

Yes, it is. Humanity became better. The end.

 

[dupersuper]

Yup. 100%

What about that offends / confuses you? I'm happy to elaborate, as I did in this subsequent post:

Yes, it is. Humanity became better. The end.

Cynicism like this does make it hard to believe...

 

[fireproof78]

Cynicism like this does make it hard to believe...

Here's my think-show me humanity becoming better. That is where TNG lost me completely. They already assumed they were better and could look down on past humanity with no measure of compassion or awareness of what may have possibly driven their ancestors. It was pure contempt.

I have a firm belief that humanity can grown, can change and can become better. I believe that more with all of the work I do, and not because of a show tells me so. I'm not cynical about humanity. What I am is not willing to simply buy in to utopian stories without the how. Show me how, show me what humanity does to become better rather than assume it will all happen. Show me the struggles, show me the values, show me what makes it worth. Show me it can be challenged and endure.