• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

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

I'm pretty Canonista when it comes to Classic Trek and even this General of the People's Nerd Brigade(originally founded 1967) is willing to overlook some stuff I don't like to see SNW succeed. All it takes are tweaks and bones thrown here and there to make modern mesh with old school and blend the two into one general continuity.

I just treat it all as a multiverse. TOS looks like TOS, Strange New Worlds looks like Strange New Worlds. Broad strokes are relatively the same, the details are different. The only thing I really worry about is whether or not the show is entertaining. Mount is an entertaining actor, especially as Cullen Bohannon in Hell on Wheels. So I'm interested in where him and the writers take this version of Pike. Same with Romijn and Peck. Slightly different versions of old favorites.
 
Hardcore TOS only will not be appeased. Thus far,appearances are selling SNW. Once episodes roll will be the test.
 
Hardcore TOS only will not be appeased.

We really have no idea how the show will play or who might or might not end up liking it. They're saying the right things right now, and I know I'm looking forward to a more episodic show, but none of those things mean it will be good.
 
No one cares about "hardcore TOS-only fans," least of all the studio. It's a strawman, a red herring - there aren't that many. TrekBBS is a gathering place for hard core trekkies, after all, and there are probably half a dozen posters on TrekBBS that really fit the stereotype to the extent that they "will not be appeased," no matter how the boosters of everything new want to caricaturize the folks who've no interest in stuff like STD.

The truth is that the direction Trek is going is very simply retrenchment. Kurtzman and company have moved in a long curve away from whatever ideas Fuller and CBS might have had of breaking new ground and doing something really different, back toward product that depends upon fan service and nostalgic fondness for its very identity.

The turn in direction was already in progress by the time they struggled to the end of the first season of STD. They literally hauled the Enterprise onscreen and into the story, trumpeting the TOS fanfare, as a come-on for season two.

No, no one will ever remake old shows in the style or mood of the originals - that would not attract new viewers, and without adding some new viewers the Trek fanbase will shrink. It's quite another thing to claim that it's substantially growing in size, simply because there are new fans.

So, you get a show built around the cast of TNG and other TNG-era characters, which is Picard. A show that's a TNG-era light comedy, Lower Decks. You get another show with Janeway in it, Prodigy. And you get a kind of reboot of TOS-era Star Trek, Strange New Worlds, built around modern versions of the original Trek characters. And those shows are where all the heat and excitement and promotional energy goes. None of it is "redefining Trek for a new generation" or anything like that. It's exploiting the fondness that viewers have for Trek from the past.

Which is fine, I suppose. Star Trek is a "mature property." There's no widespread demand for taking Law & Order in "a bold new direction to keep up with the times," nor is there one for Trek. Just keep as many of the folk who've always watched it watching it now, program to attract new viewers - especially kids - to replace the old folks who drift off or, at this point, literally die off, and hope to sustain some slow growth of viewership over time.
 
Last edited:
In other words: don't expect Remastered Blurays of DS9, but if they ever happen it shouldn't be a shock. ;)
 
We really have no idea how the show will play or who might or might not end up liking it. They're saying the right things right now, and I know I'm looking forward to a more episodic show, but none of those things mean it will be good.
They are saying the right things. And it makes me skeptical.
 
Yes, it can be that too.

That producer reason though is... I guess. And I guess the once-in-a-generation chemistry reason too is... okay, I guess.
No. It is THE thing. For time immoral, chemistry is the one "X-factor" in all great cinema. From WOZ and Casablanca to the Avengers or All in the Family and Cagney and Lacey to The Sparanos, it is the cast chemistry that ultimately makes them great in the end. This is true for Star Trek as well. The Shatner, Nimoy, Kelly relationship was a rollercoaster over the years to be sure, but there was a time those three men were undoubtedly close. And just look at the 90s shows in comparison. From old con panels to the Zoom stuff they're doing now. It is so blatantly obvious how much closer the TNG cast is to the other two. That's not to say the others hated each other (Well...) but there's was a much more working professional atmosphere. And that shows on screen.

How many scenes have the three of them been in together?
More than enough for anyone paying attention to say "Well... Duh!" But this completely ignores all the on-set time they spent together that we don't see but everyone with a clipboard did.

No, but literally the only (or main) reason it's happening is because "the fans demanded it." Because this show wasn't part of their plan, was it? They were going to do the Section 31 show, but that got a somewhat lukewarm reaction from a lot of people online. But a lot of people online immediately liked Pike when he came on Discovery, so now they're doing this show.
And why do you think this is? Do you honestly think fans would have been remotely as eager had the three of them had gone out and just been fine -- neverminded completely bomb? Of course not. People are excited for it because any half-wit can see these three people belong together. And if you actually think Kurtzman needed the fans to tell him that, then you're basically saying you think he's completely inept at his job.

That's how it happened, isn't it? And nothing is wrong with that, but that's how Strange New Worlds came about, right?
This is an assertion based on facts not in evidence.

As for as the sequence of events goes, no one can say. But it's not like he could just finger-snap a show into existence. And this was going be a much tougher sell than the other two live action shows because it wasn't being half paid for by another distributor nor was going have one of the most universally beloved actors staring as its titular character. "To placate the crabby old-timers" was never reason enough for CBS to care. And suggesting it even could be it utter bullshit.
Anyway, if Strange New Worlds was something that they planned all along
No where did I - or anyone else - imply that it was.
 
"To placate the crabby old-timers" was never reason enough for CBS to care. And suggesting it even could be it utter bullshit.

Anyone who thinks Kurtzman pitched or CBS ordered a TV series to "placate" some minority of unhappy viewers is sufficiently unaware of anything about the entertainment business that they may as well just be Midnight's Edge fans.
 
Last edited:
So this is how it's going to be. You didn't even remotely consider the idea that we just stay out of each other's way.

Anyone who thinks Kurtzman pitched or CBS ordered a TV series to "placate" some minority of unhappy viewers is sufficiently unaware of anything about the entertainment business that they may as well just be Midnight's Edge fans.
Next time you want to bait me, don't make it so fucking obvious.

No one cares about "hardcore TOS-only fans," least of all the studio. It's a strawman, a red herring - there aren't that many. TrekBBS is a gathering place for hard core trekkies, after all, and there are probably half a dozen posters on TrekBBS that really fit the stereotype to the extent that they "will not be appeased," no matter how the boosters of everything new want to caricaturize the folks who've no interest in stuff like STD.
Don't worry. I'd never call you a "TOS Only Fan". Let alone a Star Trek Fan of any kind at all.

I'm done with this shit. I'll watch SNW, and I'll probably like it, but the last thing I want to do is come on here and talk about it with someone like you. Get bent.

If I want to talk about SNW, it sure as Hell isn't going to be here.
 
There is no nihilism anywhere in Star Trek. That's a complete misuse and misunderstanding of the term.

You nailed it, Serveaux; people that don't want to deal with real life love to say that about their favorite media franchise when the do something 'dark' because it upsets them (these people now know how I feel about the kitchen sink movies of the recent decades that critics love to give a bajillion stars to, like this one.) At least this 'nihilism' is in small doses.

Fuck, even Zack Snyder doesn't do nihilism.

Case in point as mentioned above, people (IMHO) deliberately misinterpreted Man Of Steel as being dark and nihilistic compared to the Donnerverse Superman movies when it actually was realistic and grounded about how people would receive a person like Superman, and how he would really have deal with a person with his powers like General Zod-a person who had no real reason to be other than to be a warrior because that was what he was born to only do, so he commits suicide by cop trying to kill a human family, forcing Superman to recall what the Jor-El AI simulacrum said about choosing Earth or Krypton and
Superman kills Zod with his heat vision.
In fact,
Superman kills Tyrell, the main bad guy of the book, because Tyrell will most likely destroy Earth, and Superman can't just send him into the Phantom Zone-he doesn't have the projector yet in this story.
.

Considering that the Snyderverse movies (with the exception of the original cut of Justice League) made a lot of money at the box office, and Snyder helped out with Wonder Woman, this accusation of nihilism is bullshit and then some.


You want a close example of nihilism watch a flick like I Care A Lot. Even it invests a bit too much meaning in the proceedings.

Not that interested.
 
Last edited:
Snyder did nihilism? Dark and uninteresting for the most part was "nihilism"? ;)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top