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

[plynch]

I was an original TOS kid in the 70s when nerdy wasn't cool. I liked TNG just fine, but it came on at the end of colllege, then marriage and grad school and we didn't have a tv. Later friends taped them and DS9 and then VOY off their huge backyard dish. I never thought "these are not Star Trek."

 

[fireproof78]

^^^
Welcome to how I felt after TNG premiered in 1987.

I mean, we all have that "Trek Box" that current Trek usually doesn't quite fit in to

 

[Vger23]

I think it's fine. It's been successful, different, and exciting. It's not flawless by any stretch...but it's also not trying to rekindle the glory days of 1991 either, and for that I am grateful.

I think the "Star Trek always explored things" perception is way over-done. Star Trek was actually not often about exploring anything. Most of the plots were about:

Rescue missions / distress call response
Patrol and Police actions
Diplomatic missions
Time travel shenanigans
Enforcing / being an instrument of Federation policy
War / combat / pew-pew

 

[Vger23]

I'm already resigned to the fact that this is The Peak for me with Star Trek. I've seen what's happened next to superfans of previous series and films who've been where I'm at right now. I'm hoping that when my time comes, I handle it better than a lot of them have. I stopped watching when I didn't like what B&B were putting out, so I hope to do the same again when I start thinking "This isn't like Discovery or Picard!"

I've said before that I think I grew up in fandom at the perfect time to be more open-minded and receptive of things in the franchise being different.

I was an 80's kid, so I watched TOS in re-runs, saw TMP on HBO and got to see TWOK in the theater when I was 6. So, I saw one version of Star Trek, and then suddenly the thing looked and felt TOTALLY different with a movie, and then TOTALLY different again with the second movie. Then they stole the ship, blew it up, and got a new one. Next year, TNG premiers and that's really different too. DS9 was then different, but still had tremendous visual and style continuity. It wasn't until VOY / ENT that the changes really stopped hitting, and everything felt almost exactly like TNG had felt 10-15 years earlier.

So, my norm is "Star Trek changes looks, tones, feel, etc a lot." So I have no trouble adapting to how very different the latest iterations of Trek have been (Kelvin, DSC, PIC, LD). In fact, I like them BECAUSE they have continued that same trend I grew up on and they are wildly different in tone and style from the bulk of what came before.

Now, if you're a TNG child...that's a different experience. Everything in the TNG era was written, directed, produced and designed by roughly the same core people. It created an illusion that "this is what Star Trek is." Hell, even the pacing, cinematography, and musical scoring was virtually identical across 25 seasons of television (with 20-30 episodes per season). I think people who identify primarily with that era struggle far more with changes to continuity or the details of alien make-up etc. than someone who grew up in the era I did would.

For me, the Klingons changed looks all the time. Uniforms changed all the time. Production design changed all the time. I could care less about that shit. In fact, I honestly love and look forward to all the changes. It's the sameness that tends to turn me off and/or bore me.

 

[fireproof78]

So, my norm is "Star Trek changes looks, tones, feel, etc a lot." So I have no trouble adapting to how very different the latest iterations of Trek have been (Kelvin, DSC, PIC, LD). In fact, I like them BECAUSE they have continued that same trend I grew up on and they are wildly different in tone and style from the bulk of what came before.

Precisely so. I started with TOS on VHS and went from "Where No Man Has Gone Before" to "Balance of Terror" and moved on through things like "Friday's Child" and "Enterprise Incident, among others that I distinctly remember. Then it was TMP that felt so out of left field that I wasn't sure but I tried it out. Then TNG brought a whole different aesthetic.

Star Trek, for as much of a "comfort food" label it gets saddled with, doesn't have to be the same. In fact, the whole idea was a world were things were quite different from the norm of the time. So, it can explore a lot of things and treating it as same old, same old, is just going to bring it back to Enterprise days.

 

[Lord Garth]

Star Trek I prefer: TOS Movies, DS9, DSC, and PIC. The more it's like these, the more I like it. The better I think it is. What they have in common is serialization and a darker, harder edge among most of them. It makes the brighter stuff in them pop out more too, because it stands out more and becomes more precious.

As much as I like TOS itself, whenever subsequent Star Trek has tried to follow that mold, the results have been mixed. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. And there have been hundreds of hours of it. We'll see how SNW handles the execution.

The TNG and Kelvin Movies are pretty much self-contained action movies in my opinion. Once again: sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't.

"When I grew up" doesn't have much to do with it. I just have a very specific set of tastes. And when it's time to move on, I'll do so gracefully.

 

[plynch]

A hero ship crewed by a space navy who go about doing good in their opinion.

PIC really was kinda generic sci-fi (as someone mentioned above or in another thread, just set in the Trek universe, the more I think on it.

Eh, it's cool, like what you like. Be well!

 

[Steve Roby]

I recall fans saying TOS was only a rough blueprint, badly dated and not to be taken seriously and that TNG was the True Trek from which others should be judged.

What used to bug the hell out of me was how obvious it was that a lot of people who said that back when TNG was still on had never bothered to watch more than five minutes of TOS. They’d just trot out talking points: lothario Kirk, maverick Kirk, campiness, etc, all of which are greatly exaggerated. They’d also get miffed if someone pointed out TNG stereotypes, like Picard having a conference instead of actually doing something every time the ship was about to be destroyed.

 

[Vger23]

What used to bug the hell out of me was how obvious it was that a lot of people who said that back when TNG was still on had never bothered to watch more than five minutes of TOS. They’d just trot out talking points: lothario Kirk, maverick Kirk, campiness, etc, all of which are greatly exaggerated. They’d also get miffed if someone pointed out TNG stereotypes, like Picard having a conference instead of actually doing something every time the ship was about to be destroyed.

People still roll out that rhetoric today.

 

[Lord Garth]

People still roll out that rhetoric today.

It's always the first time. Just like last time.

 

[Mudd]

There is very little of the "gourmet" that appeals.

The failing there is not the product's.

 

[Camren]

I completely agree. New Trek is awful. I've not watched the new cartoon series but Picard and Discovery are just terrible. Easily the worst 2 Trek series ever created. Maybe it's just me and now I'm in my late 30s, I might be too old for these new series. The target audience for these series are definitely not fans of TNG, DS9, VOY etc. Fans of the earlier series tuned in to watch interesting science fiction stories and characters that were easy to like. These new series are more interested in snazzy effects, emotional hysterics, action scenes and little in the way of intelligent sci-fi and without a single redeeming character in either Discovery or Picard. Not one.

 

[antinoos]

 

[Mudd]

New Trek is awful. I've not watched the new cartoon series but Picard and Discovery are just terrible.

No. New Trek is mediocre. Lower Decks is clever and works well within its limits; it's refreshing. I liked Picard, but the writing failed toward the later episodes and it just fizzled. STD has generally been poorly written and conceived in just about every respect, but from what people say it sounds like it has improved some in season three.

 

[fireproof78]

Those were definitely repeated talking points. I loved how being a fan of DSC means you don't like other shows. Also that age some how applies.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The rosey goggles some people have over old Trek really astounds me some times.

I mean, out of 700 or whatever episodes, maybe 10 were actually "great" and maybe another 20 "really good". That's less than five percent. Everything else was varying degrees of mediocrity. Even as someone who is contentiously lukewarm about nuTrek, I have to admit that it's batting at a higher average.

But the whole "Old Trek is for us intelligent people; nuTrek is for kids" is prejudicial bullshit. Star Trek has never been intelligent. Mary Tyler Moore was intelligent. All in the Family. The West Wing. Westworld. Shit, Gilmore Girls. But not Star Trek. Sometimes it managed to be pretty smart. Often it was pompous and pretentious. And other times it could be exceedingly puerile.

Disco does have one thing none of the other shows had: one helluva marquee. #Yeohgonnayeoh

 

[fireproof78]

I mean, out of 700 or whatever episodes, maybe 10 were actually "great" and maybe another 20 "really good".

And what are considered the top ten good ones? Ones that involve darker themes, violence, and destruction. A lot of emotion, and action and tension. It is not usually the "intelligent" ones that are rated so highly.

You called it right-it's prejudicial bull because Discovery dared to do something against long held Berman era Trek belief systems.

 

[The Wormhole]

Maybe it's just me and now I'm in my late 30s, I might be too old for these new series. The target audience for these series are definitely not fans of TNG, DS9, VOY etc.

I'm in my mid 30s and watched all the other Treks growing up. I started just before TNG's last season aired, watched those episodes new and the previous seasons and TOS in syndicated reruns. Watched DS9, Voyager and Enterprise as they aired. And you know what? I enjoy all three new shows. Sure, Disco had a rough first season, but the second season shows marked improvement and it's absolutely killing it in the third season. Picard is an excellent show, and Lower Decks is hilarious.

little in the way of intelligent sci-fi

Star Trek never really qualified as "intelligent sci-fi." Not ever.

Ones that involve darker themes, violence, and destruction.

I'm always fascinated by the fans who claim Star Trek is all about peaceful exploration and optimism, to the point they complain about the Dominion War being "against Gene's Vision" because "Star Trek is not about warfare." And yet one of the fan favorite TNG episodes is Yesterday's Enterprise, which takes place in an alternate timeline where Starfleet legitimately is a military, the Enterprise actually is a warship, and the Federation is fighting a war where they are on the losing side.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I'm in my late 30s, I might be too old for these new series. The target audience for these series are definitely not fans of TNG, DS9, VOY etc.

Gee, I'm sixty-one and a big fan of TOS and DS9. I quite enjoy DISCO and PICARD. I've even come around to VOY recently.
Generalize much?

Fans of the earlier series tuned in to watch interesting science fiction stories and characters that were easy to like. These new series are more interested in snazzy effects, emotional hysterics, action scenes and little in the way of intelligent sci-fi and without a single redeeming character in either Discovery or Picard. Not one.

People tuned in for various reason and continue to tune for various reasons. We got Treknologists, the ship porn addicts, the shippers, the production pundits, the Trekeologists, the droolers... No one Treks the same.

If you think past Treks didn't have snazzy FX, action and emotional hysterics you didn't really watch Star Trek.
Curious what make these characters non redeeming and unlikeable?

 

[fireproof78]

Curious what make these characters non redeeming and unlikeable?

Even if unlikeable I am far more interested in non-redeemable? Because, if that's the case then I feel bad for thinking that current humanity can ever evolve.