Is it time to put Star Trek to rest?

[Lynx]

I bet folks said the same before TNG came on the scene.
The more (some) fans change, the more (some) fans stay the same.

Which is quite normal.
And remember, if you alienate the loyal fans who have been there from the start, then you are in trouble.

I know about a rock band who had been very succesful for some years. Then they decided to try to attach new, younger fans by adapting their music to a more lightweighted "pop" sound so they made an album which was quite different from what they had done before.

It backfiredd. many of the old, loyal fans thought they had "sold out" and turned their back on them and they didn't gain any new fans either because the new fans they wanted to attract already had their share of more lightweight bands and didn't care about an older hard rock band who all of a sudden change their style.

The band realized their mistake and on the next album they were back to the old style again. But the damage was done and they never became as popular as they once had been.

I have to disagree; IMO it needs less continuity. It needs to totally detach itself from pre-existing series.

TNG's approach was more or less to do exactly that. It treated Star Trek as a storytelling engine - the nice vaguely-pacifist Federation go out into a psychedelic and surreal universe, and stories arise from the people and places they encounter, with tight plotting because you generally have 45 minutes to tell a complete story. TNG didn't really care about lining up with TOS, nor about reusing its ideas (beyond one-offs like Relics), and didn't even give much thought to its own episode-to-episode continuity. The focus was always on telling a good original story within any given episode, without worrying if it contradicted throwaway lines (or even major plot points) from other episodes.

That approach is, I think, the one that will eventually give us a truly superb new Star Trek series - when writers see Star Trek as an ethos that can birth entirely new stories, rather than a MCU-style set of existing characters and ideas to be remixed and revisited endlessly.

I have to disagree here.

Star Trek needs continuity, built on TOS, TNG, DS9 and maybe VOY to build from there and move on.

Less continuity will mean chaos, just like those silly Batman movies when The Joker is killed of in one movie and then returns in another as som punk rocker with bad makeup and no one cares about why.

TNG was actually realistic when it came to show up an Universe which had changed somewhat in hundred years or so while series like ENT and DSC totally failed, instead messing up established Trek history in the worst possible ways.

Now we have all those different universes and timelines where something which happens in one of those don't exist in the next one and where ego-maiac psroducers tries to be "remembered" by killing off one main character here and destroy another important planet and species there. If that continues, Star Trek will become like Star Wars, a mess which rapidly will lose its fans.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Star Trek needs continuity, built on TOS, TNG, DS9 and maybe VOY to build from there and move on.

If you actually watched the modern stuff, you'd know the constant references to everything and anything in Trek's past are truly tiresome.

Spoiler: something recent

A prequel episode about Trelane for no reason, that points out at the end that Trelane is Q's son?

Less continuity will mean chaos, just like those silly Batman movies when The Joker is killed of in one movie and then returns in another as som punk rocker with bad makeup and no one cares about why.

That's because it's a different world with a different Batman and Joker, ones who never met before. A remake.
DC have even had crossovers on TV and film explaining this stuff for those who need an in-universe explanation

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Lynx]

If you actually watched the modern stuff, you'd know the constant references to everything and anything in Trek's past are truly tiresome.

Spoiler: something recent

A prequel episode about Trelane for no reason, that points out at the end that Trelane is Q's son?

That's because it's a different world with a different Batman and Joker, ones who never met before. A remake.
DC have even had crossovers on TV and film explaining this stuff for those who need an in-universe explanation

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Just what I mean, different universes, crossovers and a total mess of everything.

As for the spoiler, I can actually agree.
But what to expect in the current Trek era?

 

[Nyotarules]

Which is quite normal.
And remember, if you alienate the loyal fans who have been there from the start, then you are in trouble.

I know about a rock band who had been very succesful for some years. Then they decided to try to attach new, younger fans by adapting their music to a more lightweighted "pop" sound so they made an album which was quite different from what they had done before.

It backfiredd. many of the old, loyal fans thought they had "sold out" and turned their back on them and they didn't gain any new fans either because the new fans they wanted to attract already had their share of more lightweight bands and didn't care about an older hard rock band who all of a sudden change their style.

The band realized their mistake and on the next album they were back to the old style again. But the damage was done and they never became as popular as they once had been.



I have to disagree here.

Star Trek needs continuity, built on TOS, TNG, DS9 and maybe VOY to build from there and move on.

Less continuity will mean chaos, just like those silly Batman movies when The Joker is killed of in one movie and then returns in another as som punk rocker with bad makeup and no one cares about why.

TNG was actually realistic when it came to show up an Universe which had changed somewhat in hundred years or so while series like ENT and DSC totally failed, instead messing up established Trek history in the worst possible ways.

Now we have all those different universes and timelines where something which happens in one of those don't exist in the next one and where ego-maiac psroducers tries to be "remembered" by killing off one main character here and destroy another important planet and species there. If that continues, Star Trek will become like Star Wars, a mess which rapidly will lose its fans.

You mean loyal fans like this? Loyal fans are not a monolith. There will always be fans that complain about something. It is not the producers' job to be 'pleasing loyal fans'.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Lynx]

You mean loyal fans like this? Loyal fans are not a monolith. There will always be fans that complain about something. It is not the producers' job to be 'pleasing loyal fans'.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

View attachment 48125

And if you stop pleasing the loyal fans, you will lose them!
And you will end up like that rock band who sold out and never became as popular as they once were.

I remeber that they were some TOS fans who complained but TNG was a success, won a lot of old fans and new fans too and spawned at least two spinoff series which were good.

That can't be said about the chaos we have seen in recent years.

 

[Turtletrekker]

And if you stop pleasing the loyal fans, you will lose them!
And you will end up like that rock band who sold out and never became as popular as they once were.

I remeber that they were some TOS fans who complained but TNG was a success, won a lot of old fans and new fans too and spawned at least two spinoff series which were good.

That can't be said about the chaos we have seen in recent years.

I have seen no "chaos". What a hyperbolic overstatement. Anyway, I'm what you would call a "loyal fan". I've been a fan ever since the TOS syndication heyday and have seen every piece of Star Trek ever made at least once. Speaking as a loyal fan, I greatly enjoyed Star Trek Discovery and the things that it brought to the franchise. Was it perfect? No. In fact, I agree with a lot of the criticisms (pacing, the need for every season to have a Galaxy threatening scenario, not being able to stick the landing in the finales), but I still thought it was a solid production. I'm greatly enjoying the first spin-off, Strange New Worlds, and I think the upcoming spin-off Starfleet Academy looks amazing and I'm greatly looking forward to it.

Saying that they have to "please loyal fans" is ultimately self-defeating, because clearly people who consider themselves "loyal fans" can have greatly different opinions on the same subject. The best thing for any creative to do is to create the best product they can at the best of their ability and hope for the best. Clearly, there's no conceivable way to please every person, so there is absolutely no reason why they should try to pander to anyone specific group.

 

[Nyotarules]

And if you stop pleasing the loyal fans, you will lose them!
And you will end up like that rock band who sold out and never became as popular as they once were.

I remeber that they were some TOS fans who complained but TNG was a success, won a lot of old fans and new fans too and spawned at least two spinoff series which were good.

That can't be said about the chaos we have seen in recent years.

The chaos that produced Discovery, SNW, Picard, Lower Decks, Prodigy and SFA - 6 new series? If these are chaos bring it on!
After all you're still watching right? You seem to get a kick out of hate watching nuTrek on behalf of The Society of Loyal fans. Are you its president?
And comparing the popularity of a TV franchise to a rock band????? There are no words

 

[Dukhat]

And if you stop pleasing the loyal fans, you will lose them!

The 'loyal fans' aren't enough to keep Paramount+ afloat, much less to be able to rely on them to buy tickets to any movie Skydance might want to make.

 

[Qonundrum]

You mean loyal fans like this? Loyal fans are not a monolith. There will always be fans that complain about something. It is not the producers' job to be 'pleasing loyal fans'.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

View attachment 48125

Cool find, thanks for sharing!

It gets even more complex, or convoluted, noting that TNG was also as much Gene's baby as TOS. Everything post-TNG was not Gene's direct decision or involvement, having the initial blessing for DS9 would not count and he would have been livid over some of what DS9 did as well. Then again, TOS is loaded with "bad Starfleet captain" tropes, just not "Starfleet itself doing questionably bad things" in terms of plot fodder.

Maybe that fan was a fan of "Doctor Who", where "Frontier in Space" featured a "galaxy class starship" but it's clearly a studio set? The same name, somewhat over a decade later, makes the moniker actually work as there's more appropriate weight behind it (the size, the scope, families on board, seeking out what's out there for the entire galaxy - the great unknown. And baked ice cream, gotta have that...)

Were the novels deemed canonical back at the time? In early-TNG's favor, clunk aside, it was worldbuilding and just didn't explain everything at once - partly because that's a ton of exposition to have to stay awake through. Compelling scripts that hook and maintain interest, sprinkled with explanations over the weeks as relevant for worldbuilding, is probably the best way to do that?

I agree, why Excelsior's great experiment was quietly forgotten about is a fair nitpick, but headcanon it off as "oops, we found more problems than protomatter" or "dog ate the homework" works just as well and navel gazing over every bit of minutiae... as they say, "pick your battles more carefully than your nose."

I'll agree, the warp speed calculation change (surely a headcanon rendered de facto?) was not quite explained on screen or could have been explained later on, which loosely ties into:

Saucer separation, which he claims was done too soon in the show's run. As a series opener, it should have some gimmick for more than just the shiny new characters... Some also wonder what he tastes like but I couldn't care less, I'm more depressed in that they stopped popping the saucer because it detracted from the drama - which it didn't when the show was in the middle of action adventure where the in-story need made separation a good idea. Instead of using it sparingly, they just dropped it for glorified navel gazing, but I digress.

 

[Qonundrum]

The 'loyal fans' aren't enough to keep Paramount+ afloat, much less to be able to rely on them to buy tickets to any movie Skydance might want to make.

True, it's inevitable that there will be format changes to find and maintain larger swaths of audiences. The guesswork is to find what works the most within the framework of the show. Not always an easy task. At $8 million per episode and a handful of episodes per year doesn't seem to help. After all, it took TNG 2 to 3 years. TOS mostly nailed it from the get-go, but the ratings weren't looking at all the demographics...

Actually, it didn't have the ratings if the following article's cited sources are correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series#Season_2_(1967–1968) reveals a smaller but dedicated fanbase that was largely not "younger audience" (but the syndicated reruns was when the show really took off, proving it was ahead of its time anyhow. As if that mattered, how often do you make a show that's intended to be popular 5 years in the future with nothing to go on regarding audience trends regardless of demographic?) And I say "correct" because moving the show to "the Friday night death slot" where the younger audience are out playing with each other in the backseat of cars and thus wouldn't be a factor in either case...

Contrary to popular belief among its fans, the show did not have a larger audience of young viewers than its competition while on NBC

regarding season 2, versus

NBC instead moved the show to 10:00 pm Friday night, an hour undesirable for its younger audience

regarding season 3.

Syndication and with enough stations airing it because there wasn't as many tv shows available at the time, people finally tuned in and dug it.

But that was for TOS, only three TV networks, only so much old stuff that could be re-aired, etc.

 

[HotRod]

Now we have all those different universes and timelines where something which happens in one of those don't exist in the next one and where ego-maiac psroducers tries to be "remembered" by killing off one main character here and destroy another important planet and species there.

Two. There's exactly two universes that we follow in the Star Trek franchise, and one hasn't had a new entry in almost a decade. It's not terribly hard to follow for most people.

If that continues, Star Trek will become like Star Wars, a mess which rapidly will lose its fans.

Star Wars just aired one of the finest additions to its entire franchise. If only Trek were lucky enough to produce something of such immense quality.

 

[bdub76]

Star Trek "drowns in nostalgia" because what has come after TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY have been so bad.

Star Trek needs that nostalgia to go back to basics, get it all together and create something which is good again.

Nostalgia has been making Doctor Who unwatchable for the casual fan.

If you expect new viewers to watch all of 90s Trek to get it, then that's way to much to ask. MCU crumbled under its own weight, and you can binge all of the movies on D+. It takes far less time to binge all of the MCU movies than to do the same for 90s Trek.

My suggestion is to get back to basics and create Trek for the next generation like TNG did without relying on all of the baggage of TOS. The call backs to TOS were very few.

 

[BillJ]

My suggestion is to get back to basics and create Trek for the next generation like TNG did without relying on all of the baggage of TOS. The call backs to TOS were very few.

Not sure about fewer, but less obvious.

 

[The Wormhole]

There's exactly two universes that we follow in the Star Trek franchise

Well, three if you count the Mirror Universe, which does get visited sporadically, most recently earlier this year.

Nostalgia has been making Doctor Who unwatchable for the casual fan.

Interesting, since one of the common criticisms of the recent Doctor Who seasons is that there is hardly any acknowledgment of the franchise's past, outside of the finales.

MCU crumbled under its own weight, and you can binge all of the movies on D+.

The MCU's current state of decline has more to do with the rule of What Comes Up Must Come Down. The MCU had its day at the top of pop culture, that day is over. Nothing more complicated than that.

 

[Ovation]

you will end up like that rock band who sold out and never became as popular as they once were.

Which rock band? There are several bands I can think of who changed their musical focus over time where some (but hardly all) “loyal fans” viewed them as “sellouts” and stopped supporting their formerly favourite band—but those bands went on to far more success and a far bigger overall fandom, not fewer.

 

[Dar70]

You mean loyal fans like this? Loyal fans are not a monolith. There will always be fans that complain about something. It is not the producers' job to be 'pleasing loyal fans'.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

View attachment 48125

You can't fairly compare 1987 to today. That was the first new Star Trek that had nothing to do with TOS. When I first saw it I liked it a lot, there were a small few things I didn't like. (Things that were improved on as the season progressed) But overall I enjoyed it very much. It only got better of course and by the end of the season I had a new Star Trek to be obsessed with. It respected TOS and it's Films. The series that followed were just as almost as good, just as good or better. Today???? Well I can say Its been 7 years of new productions and I don't have the same feelings at all. Except for Picard Season 3 everything else has been a very mixed bag with holes....

I can assure you that Trek from 2009-2025 will never have the following that previous Treks did.

 

[Dar70]

If you actually watched the modern stuff, you'd know the constant references to everything and anything in Trek's past are truly tiresome.

Spoiler: something recent

A prequel episode about Trelane for no reason, that points out at the end that Trelane is Q's son?

That's because it's a different world with a different Batman and Joker, ones who never met before. A remake.
DC have even had crossovers on TV and film explaining this stuff for those who need an in-universe explanation

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Well that's the thing..why is SNW for example constantly mining other shows??? It should have been its own thing from the beginning. Except for a few elements it should have been totally different. But here we have almost the entire TOS crew, constant references to stuff that is just plain weird. (Holodeck) Constant retconning etc. but what do I hear over here at the BBS???? Well TNG retconned the Eugenics war year (which it really did not)
and TOS had errors it's first season blah blah blah......

All to try and justify SNW's complete and utter disregard for canon.

 

[Turtletrekker]

The MCU's current state of decline has more to do with the rule of What Comes Up Must Come Down. The MCU had its day at the top of pop culture, that day is over. Nothing more complicated than that.

And even if Marvel Studios were to fold up and call it a day after Secret Wars, I would still call it a victory because Marvel Studios would still have delivered everything that I ever wanted out of the MCU and more.

 

[The Wormhole]

Honestly, even if you just go as far as Endgame, the point many have arbitrarily declared the MCU's "ending" these days, then that's eleven years of box office number ones with Endgame itself taking the slot of top money-making movie of all time. A pretty impressive accomplishment and it may be years before anyone else achieves similar popularity, if not decades.

 

[XCV330]

SNW proves to me every week that Star Trek can do just fine if the writers just actually make Star Trek and stop trying to pull it in directions it wasn't meant to go. You can have those variant shows. Sometimes like DS9 it works out fine. But the original recipe still works. Explore new worlds. Have a crew you give a damn about. Don't get too angsty. Don't be too scared to be relevant.