Some could argue that Dirk Benedict in 1978 was more "fair-of-face" than Katie Sackoff in 2003.
New Star Trek Crew Flies into Trouble from the Trekkies
- Thread starter Shalashaska
- Start date
That new show is trying way too hard to push diversity 
Hi folks
I'm sure everyone is just being tongue-in-cheek on this and you're all probably reacting specifically to the above article, but the differences are that in 1986/7 there was only the original show, the cartoons and the first 4 films as far as screen Trek was concerned. I bet some of the fans didn't know about 'The Cage', thinking the Pike scenes in the 'Menagerie' were filmed especially for that episode. I certainly didn't know about TAS until seeing a clip of one once. When I first heard about TNG it was in the letters pages of an issue of DC Comics Star Trek comic and then I thought the new show would feature the original cast having adventures on the NCC-1701A using the final scene of 'Star Trek IV' as their 'pilot'. The difference now is that the fans have no problem with there being a new show, they're just concerned variously about the execution/time period/production design. Things like that and in that sense I think the criticisms have changed.
I'm sure everyone is just being tongue-in-cheek on this and you're all probably reacting specifically to the above article, but the differences are that in 1986/7 there was only the original show, the cartoons and the first 4 films as far as screen Trek was concerned. I bet some of the fans didn't know about 'The Cage', thinking the Pike scenes in the 'Menagerie' were filmed especially for that episode. I certainly didn't know about TAS until seeing a clip of one once. When I first heard about TNG it was in the letters pages of an issue of DC Comics Star Trek comic and then I thought the new show would feature the original cast having adventures on the NCC-1701A using the final scene of 'Star Trek IV' as their 'pilot'. The difference now is that the fans have no problem with there being a new show, they're just concerned variously about the execution/time period/production design. Things like that and in that sense I think the criticisms have changed.
It would be interesting to know, if the fans quoted from back then have changed their minds. Maybe when they finally had the opportunity to watch TNG, they still thought it was crap.
It is also a different situation now. I read the article and one of the fears was that TNG might affect the making of new TOS movies. There actually really weren't many more made and they were replaced by TNG movies. Maybe the end for TOS movies was near either way though, because the actors were getting old, but who knows.
So or so there is no similar reason to fear right now. Back then there was just one company owning all Star Trek rights. Now TV and movie rights are divided. Paramount will act independently of CBS.
And we had so many Star Trek series in the past. People are used to seeing new crews. So the complains are more about thinking DIS will be bad for whatever reasons and not because the characters in it won't be Kirk, Spock, etc. anymore. And when it comes to thinking that DIS will be bad, you also have to distinguish between those, who only think they personally won't like it and those, who think DIS will be financially unsuccessful and won't last long. Or course some predict both, but others just one of them.
It is also a different situation now. I read the article and one of the fears was that TNG might affect the making of new TOS movies. There actually really weren't many more made and they were replaced by TNG movies. Maybe the end for TOS movies was near either way though, because the actors were getting old, but who knows.
So or so there is no similar reason to fear right now. Back then there was just one company owning all Star Trek rights. Now TV and movie rights are divided. Paramount will act independently of CBS.
And we had so many Star Trek series in the past. People are used to seeing new crews. So the complains are more about thinking DIS will be bad for whatever reasons and not because the characters in it won't be Kirk, Spock, etc. anymore. And when it comes to thinking that DIS will be bad, you also have to distinguish between those, who only think they personally won't like it and those, who think DIS will be financially unsuccessful and won't last long. Or course some predict both, but others just one of them.
I don't think the point is whether one set of complainants (anti-TNG or anti-DSC fans) have legitimate concerns or whether the situations lend themselves to or against these complaints, but rather that both sets of complaints are ultimately unfounded - however heartfelt. Without actually having seen the crews, shows, and messages in question, without actually seeing the intent of the producers and the direction of the shows (and the franchise), without actually examining the quality of the show in question, these complaints ring hollow and, for Discovery I predict, will eventually been seen as hollow with enough perspective.
Then again, maybe Discovery will be terrible (unlikely) and all the Chicken Littles will be proven prophetic.
I don't know. Have you never judged anything based on promotion material? I do it all the time. Sometimes just one sentence is enough to make me disinterested in a series like for example this one: "The series focuses on the fictional lives of surgical interns, residents, and, as they evolve into seasoned doctors while trying to maintain personal lives and relationships." If someone is right now 100 % convinced that DIS won't be for him or her after seeing all the promotion material, it likely really won't be to his/her taste. Now people who only have doubts though, who in my opinion are in the majority of those who aren't convinced by what they have seen so far, they might like DIS in the end.
And run their own YouTube channels *cough cough*Midnight's Edge*cough cough*.
Which is a channel about 1000 times more funny than Orville.
Having misgivings over the promotional material is perfectly normal, but then so is having higher expectations or excitment.
The problems arise when either turns into preconceived bias, and I see a lot of that going on (in both directions).
The problems arise when either turns into preconceived bias, and I see a lot of that going on (in both directions).
I think a lot of people decided this "wasn't for them" when they heard it wasn't post-Nemesis. "Not another prequel!" "Prequels are always terrible!" "Enterprise was terrible because it was a prequel. DIDN'T THEY LEARN??!!"
Yeah...no. Enterprise didn't "suck" because it was a prequel. It sucked for its first two years (and got only marginally better in its third) because the man in creative control had run out of steam but wouldn't give up. When the right man came on board, we got a kick-ass final season...with the finale ruined by the previous man insisting on writing it.
Enterprise was not bad because it was a prequel. It was bad because it was set up as a prequel but not used as one, until the final season.
But sad funny. Not funny funny. Probably the saddest thing is its defenders keep talking about its "proven track record". That record? "Everything they said about Ghostbusters proved to be true". Um...everything they said about Ghostbusters wasn't a secret. We all knew what we were getting there. Plus, getting one right doesn't mean you have a "proven track record". It just proves you were right once. The National Enquirer gets stuff right from time to time as well. And that's what Midnight's Edge is; tabloid YouTube.
Wait ... this looks like it was taken from the National Enquirer; a tabloid that epitomized the worst journalism possible. I wouldn't put it past that rag to manufacture those quotes and don't trust a thing from it. Between the NE and the Weekly World News, you were guaranteed to get your fill of gossip, manufactured scandal (as seen here), ghosts, flying saucers, Sasquatch, and Bat Boy!
Except many fan reactions like these were also chronicled in fanzines at the time as well. They were real.
Well, that's sorta like saying that if they never made Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade that you would have been perfectly happy with Raiders of the Lost Ark and Temple of Doom. You can't miss something that doesn't exist. No one expected Trek to start exploring the rest of its universe, or at least not onscreen.
But that doesn't mean what followed was automatically needless or awful. Last Crusade is the best Indiana Jones movie, and TNG and DS9 are awesome series in their own right (and ENT got good as well). Just because there were some missteps in the franchise like Young Indiana Jones (VGR) and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (early ENT) doesn't mean that it should have ended with Temple.
I have no doubt that there were some ... it's the 'many' that I quibble with.
Many is a pretty vague term. Still in the fan circles I traveled in there was some negativity towards the show. I may have made a disparaging comment or two my self at the time.
Thing is if Discovery season 1 is of the same quality as TNG season 1 there's no way it's surviving.
It already looks higher. And let's face it, the bar's been raised. TNG survived its first season by being a new Star Trek series. All three shows that followed it had better pilots.
