I just don't want to become stuck in a unilateral "new stuff sucks" mindset.
This is based on the assumption that some people hate something just because it’s new, and thats a simplistic and unfair generalization.
I grew up with Sean Connery Bond reruns on television and Roger Moore Bond in the films. I read all the original Fleming books. I enjoyed the Moore films on a certain level, but I always envision Connery when reading the books. Timothy Dalton’s Bond films were okay. I cannot stand the Pierce Brosnan Bonds. I loved Daniel Craig as Bond early on
(Casino Royal was fantastic!), but as his tenure progressed I became less enamoured. But the real core of the Bond films I liked or didn’t like were largely the stories, the overall tone and execution.
TOS will always be my
Star Trek—the real
Star Trek in its purest form. It’s not perfect, but it got far more right than wrong. And it was fresh and creative in a way no successive Trek could ever be because they would be building on what TOS brought to the table first.
I initially disparaged TNG, and its first season made that easy. “Encounter At Farpoint” is simply not a good pilot—it comes across as rough, unpolished and padded. I understand why it’s that way, but that doesn’t excuse what we finally got. Subsequently first season TNG rarely seemed to find its groove. On network television TNG likely wouldn’t have survived the first season. Season 2 was hit-and-miss, but generally better than one—they were starting to find their rhythm.
While I initially resisted TNG their essential approach was laudable—create a new
Star Trek that didn’t just regurgitate TOS. Eventually I would see all of TNG and I would mellow some. Some of TNG’s best could stand with TOS’ best even though TOS will always be my favourite. In the end I find myself liking about 1/3-1/2 of TNG and the vast bulk of that is in the first four seasons. For me Season 5 is where I felt the show starting to get tired. By Season 7 it’s almost a total write-off.
I started out liking DS9, but during the third season I discovered
Babylon 5 and I liked that so much better. I bailed on DS9, dropping in once in awhile to see what was happening. For me DS9 is like
The West Wing—I know it’s decent, but it just doesn’t grab me.
From the get-go I couldn’t stand VOY and could never warm up to it. It impressed me as being a TNG wannabe and it bombed in my eyes. I didn’t like the characters and I found it stale.
I was initially intrigued with ENT—exploring a pre Federation era. Then I saw it and it never worked for me. It hit me as a dishonest reboot of TOS only loaded with easter eggs and saying “we’re the ones who were first, not the TOS crew.” I had wanted to like it, but nothing was how it could have been.
And since then Trek has never recovered in my eyes. Indeed it’s gotten worse with unimaginative vision and generally poor writing. JJtrek is a fucking sin. Old Trek appealed to many ages for differing reasons, but it was still aimed at adults and written by adults. Current Trek s written by those with an inexperienced juvenile mindset. As others have said it’s been infantilized. All they do is regurgitate or rearrange what came before and load it up with Easter eggs and dare to call it creative.
I have long thought a Pike era series—live-action or animated—could be interesting. Sadly SNW isn’t that series. Their approach is to rewrite and redefine what came before and it’s lame.
Part of what is sad is that all the successive Trek series have had good casts, but they were wasted by producers who mostly don’t understand or even like the original source materiel. They won’t to recapture the success of TOS and TNG, but they don’t understand what made those shows work. They’re playing in a sandbox they don’t understand.
It’s easier to give something new a fair shake when it’s fresh and doing its own thing. It’s a lot harder when something is riding the coattails of something successful that came before—comparisons will be inevitable. You better bring your A game.
