inherently dark. No it is not "Inherently is defined as something that is built-in or a part of the makeup of a person or thing. When a child behaves very badly all the time and his parents just assume that he was wired that way, this is an example of a child whose behavior would be described as inherently bad."
Niw that I am reading through the posts, I suppose I phrased my thought incorrectly. That's my fault. I agree that STAR TREK is about striving to be better, so inherently dark was a poir choice on my part. I think a better way to put it is that it has darkness within, which is why I used "THE ENEMY WITHIN" episode as an example. I'm sorry... a lot going on lately, I think I am having problems translating my thoughts coherently. lol
Its neither. Its optimistic most of the time, but adapts in accordance to the story that’s being told. That means there has to be some sort of problem for the protagonists to deal with in order for them to overcome it.
I think it's fair to say that each series has dark elements, but it wasn't until ENTERPRISE's Xindi arc, and DISCOVERY that things got Dark. I won't see PICARD until the DVD set comes out so I can't speak to that one yet.
Dealing with imperfect characters and exploring a Federation that has made mistakes is not negativity. It's a starting point for a far more interesting story than just having perfection and sunshine handed to us on a platter. Besides, we have no idea how this will all wrap up.
While Trek deals with dark themes and some of its episodes might have a darker tone, there was always a twinge of of optimism, even if it was just we survive into the future. There is also still some joy and humor in Trek even when the story is dark. With PIC, at least for me, it seems relentlessly dark in tone and themes. There is no relief. In that, it feels more like other contemporary SF, such as nuBSG and The Expanse. Even in Deep Space Nine when Starfleet acted questionable, there was still some light in the show, usually represented by our main characters. However, in Picard, everyone is so traumatized and damaged, there is apparently no beacon of hope. That's my take on why people are reacting the way they are to PIC. DISCO was also like that in the first season, at least tonally. But it at least had Tilly to remind us and the characters about what Trek stands for. However, I won't say those shows aren't Trek. They are, even if someone doesn't agree that they are.
I think Picard will be different because the story is still progressing. It is, after only all, just over halfway through. It's a redemption tale. While I appreciate the reaction to Picard I do think the reactions are premature. Now, I could be wrong. But, I don't feel the darkness as relentless.
Some of us predicted the reactions we're seeing right now last year. But I'm also going to say the people who have those negative reactions are in the minority.
I think Picard will end up having themes of finding our moral identity in a time of darkness. And a critique of the “All or nothing” morality of TNG, where Picard learns to accept small attainable victories even if they’re not morally pure. If ever we needed people to learn that lesson it’s 2020.
No, not at all. It's a dangerous universe out there, but it's still a hopeful future. Old enemies can become friends, allies work together, the common species is advanced beyond war and want for the most part, and the universe is explored.
I think Star Trek is inherently, at least naturally, dramatic, and it should also be mainly serious. Those aspects can definitely easy lead to dark aspects and moments but they don't have to and IMO should not predominate. I think TNG, while tending to feel-good, was about as dark as often as those or other come-to-mind examples from the original series, TNG also had its downer and ambivalent moments including endings, the tones of the shows weren't that different. The original's "The Enemy Within" yes a pretty big exception, pretty dark in its overall themes and messages, but I think from the original show as well.
Yes. It assumes that superhuman tyrants will rise up and terrorize the world populace and that we will nearly wipe ourselves out in global nuclear war. Kor
Quite true. Unfortunately, there's still the little detail of the betterment of humankind not actually starting anytime before 2063, still 43 years away. So a lot of people here probably won't make that. Also, In the meantime we'll still have to overcome minor problems such as sanctuary districts, militaries controlled with drugs, the "post-atomic horror" of the mid-21st century, WW3 with 600 million dead, most major cities destroyed, few governments left, etc, ...... but I suppose that's just minimal collateral damage that cannot be avoided It's all for a good cause, after all, right?. Of course Star Trek has 'darkness within'. I couldn't think of any TV-series worth my time watching that hasn't any whatsoever. As for the original premise, ('inherently dark') I'd answer "no", though.
Picard isn’t really any darker than what we see in DS9. The only difference is that characters emotionally react to negative things more. In Bermantrek nobody shows their anguish, they react to it stoically and mutedly, then they cut to a comic scene to raise the mood.
TNG season 2 also showed a dangerous universe. Trek was never as dark before then and even then sunglasses are required given how anti-dark it is compared to the episode and clips of PIC I'd seen. Apart from the Borg episodes...