Indeed. One thing that I have come to appreciate, especially revisiting TOS and now with newer Trek, is the options and sandbox style environment of the setting. It invites a lot of creativity and variety in the storytelling.
Seriously, don't get the hate for ST: ENT
- Thread starter Photon
- Start date
Or does it feel like Star Trek because there are big block letters at the beginning that say STAR TREK? Some people will say that of course it's Star Trek, it says so right there in the title. I've always had a bit of a problem with that because it gives them license to create whatever they want and still call it "Star Trek"
Of course, they have the right to do that because they hold the IP. That still doesn't make it necessarily "Star Trek" for me. For others it does and that's fine. When ENT first came out, I didn't feel like it felt particularly Star Trek-ish to me but my stance on that has changed a bit since I just watched the whole thing.
If the makers of Babylon 5 created the same type of show within the ST universe, would that have been "Star Trek?" Personally, I don't think so. For me, the Kelvin stuff doesn't feel like Star Trek. It feels like some alternate universe copy of what I consider to be Star Trek. That doesn't mean I can't enjoy it, just that it feels different.
Last edited:
For me, if it says Star Trek on it then it’s Star Trek.
Whether or not I like it is another matter.
I think if you asked 5 fans what Star Trek is supposed to feel like then you’d get 5 different answers.
Whether or not I like it is another matter.
I think if you asked 5 fans what Star Trek is supposed to feel like then you’d get 5 different answers.
No you wouldn't.
lol
lol
Yes, it would, because Star Trek is first and foremost a variety action/adventure style platform that accommodates several types of stories, rather than just one flavor.
Well...that's literally what it was..
I mean...
This, really. Why should we have a problem with an IP holder utilising it's IP?
I don't think anyone's saying that Paramount doesn't have the right to use their IP. They clearly do.
Just as we have the right to speak out when we think they aren't using it well.
Just as we have the right to speak out when we think they aren't using it well.
I love TOS but think it's incredibly dated. It's still rewatchable though.
I haven't seen TAS.
I love TNG but also think it's dated. Still rewatchable.
I love DS9 the best of all Trek series, but it's going the way of TNG. Still rewatchable.
I initially liked VOY but it went downhill after season 2. Have no desire to rewatch it.
I hated ENT initially, stopped watching halfway through season 2, didn't watch any of season 3, but watched all of season 4 other than the first episode. May go back in the future and rewatch it plus what I missed before.
I liked DSC but over time got bored with it. Still haven't seen season 4. No plans to ever rewatch it.
I don't care for PIC at all, but I've watched both seasons and plan to watch season 3.
I have a love-hate relationship with Lower Decks.
I like PRO.
So just because 'Star Trek' is slapped on the title doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be a good product.
I haven't seen TAS.
I love TNG but also think it's dated. Still rewatchable.
I love DS9 the best of all Trek series, but it's going the way of TNG. Still rewatchable.
I initially liked VOY but it went downhill after season 2. Have no desire to rewatch it.
I hated ENT initially, stopped watching halfway through season 2, didn't watch any of season 3, but watched all of season 4 other than the first episode. May go back in the future and rewatch it plus what I missed before.
I liked DSC but over time got bored with it. Still haven't seen season 4. No plans to ever rewatch it.
I don't care for PIC at all, but I've watched both seasons and plan to watch season 3.
I have a love-hate relationship with Lower Decks.
I like PRO.
So just because 'Star Trek' is slapped on the title doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be a good product.
This conversation is getting weird now.
@Dukhat
Who said that slapping the words ‘Star Trek’ on something equates to quality?
@McCoy's Disco Collar
A few inches above my post is someone saying they sometimes have a problem with the usage of the Star Trek IP. And for that matter, who said we aren’t allowed to voice displeasure?
It’s like two people have come into a room, heard half a conversation and then made comment without really knowing what’s being discussed.
@Dukhat
Who said that slapping the words ‘Star Trek’ on something equates to quality?
@McCoy's Disco Collar
A few inches above my post is someone saying they sometimes have a problem with the usage of the Star Trek IP. And for that matter, who said we aren’t allowed to voice displeasure?
It’s like two people have come into a room, heard half a conversation and then made comment without really knowing what’s being discussed.
<walks in>
Because using it increases the chances of violating, "teh cannon" Let it rot on the shelf rather than take that chance.
Uh, they still can and probably will do more in that era. Remember back in the days, the "know it all's", on message boards would always shoot down any suggestion for future Trek by saying; That'll never happen. Well, my attitude on that today is...
Because using it increases the chances of violating, "teh cannon" Let it rot on the shelf rather than take that chance.
Uh, they still can and probably will do more in that era. Remember back in the days, the "know it all's", on message boards would always shoot down any suggestion for future Trek by saying; That'll never happen. Well, my attitude on that today is...
Last edited:
I think this is a point that gets bulldozed over quite often. Fans disagree with how the IP is used. Fair enough and I agree. Been doing this since TAS. Fans declare something "Not Star Trek!" Hmmm...no, because we are not the IP holders and don't get to say what is or isn't Star Trek.
Now, fans can discuss the lack of quality until the cows come home and I'll say more power to them, and might even agree on some points regarding quality. But, quality is a) highly subjective and b) doesn't make it less Star Trek. Yes, the IP holders get to slap the brand on it and yes fans will decry it for multiple things, from being lesser quality to ruining the brand. I will always be skeptical of categorical declarations of ruination because ultimately what makes "good Star Trek" is not even consistent across a series, much less a franchise.
I think that sums it up pretty well
I was referring to a post Herbert made. Feel free to go back and read it.
Star Trek doesn't mean "quality" though. Certainly we wouldn't say that about all the episodes produced in TOS or TNG, right? While I am no fan of looking to mass opinions on things, there was the running idea that Season 3 of TOS was not great, Season 1 and 2 of TNG were not great, and only the even numbered Trek films were good. So, if we go in to a labeled thing called Star Trek and demand quality does it make it less Star Trek if the quality is less?
Because, at least from my various experiences across several boards, while there were cries about "not real Star Trek" for some iterations, they were still accepted as Star Trek eventually. What changed? Did the quality change? Did our experience change? What changed?
Exactly.
If a new product, or a lot of new product, is low quality that does increase the likelihood that a lot of the general public, and even of the subset of sci fi fans, will regard most or all of a franchise as not good and not give any of it a chance.
And a lot of people can, will have a problem with, in the sense of objecting and complaining, when they think a sequel or remake will be made worse than and potentially hurting the image of the original. So many people would have a problem with for example remaking Casablanca that's an archetype of a bad idea that shouldn't be done, would be stupid to try.
What’s low quality? How do you define that?
I’m sure you have something more interesting to say than “Some people don’t like it so they shouldn’t make it”. Unfortunately that’s all your post seems to amount to.
The idea of "hurting the original " is one I find quite odd. Like, are people worried others might like it and not appreciate the "better" works? Even if so what does that take away from the original? What hurt is being done?
That’s not true. It was UPN who had too much creative control over both VOY and ENT. But I honestly don't think Berman & Braga would have done much better had they had free reign.
Last edited:
As I said, some reasonable worry that people might dislike it and therefore also dismiss, not even try out the earlier works.
Similar threads
