The experience of fans is always different too, which makes the equation more difficult. My dad thoroughly enjoys TOS and it's movies and the Kelvin films...and that's it. He never liked TNG and the rest of that era he ignored. And he's not much in to recent items either.
I agree. It was a bold promise, but I can't ignore that there are fans whose idea of Trek is different. I doubt there is a magical formula thst allows each series, each story to be universally appealing. Ideally, they should have launched three new series, not cancel or wind down all of them. The answer seems to be running SNW almost like an anthology. Same characters, but radically different genres from episode to episode. And to appeal to those who want less serialization, it means that all the development is in the characters. It ends up having a light feel in many instances. Regardless, promising to please the crowd can run them into trouble, when they should take the approach that "[their] job is not to give the fans what they want, our job is to give the fans what they need" (a paraphrase of Robert Bresson, which I've heard several Trek writers say).
Isn't clicking for you.
I wish I could like this more than once.Heck, I survived STAR TREK V and the first season of TNG.
But here's the thing. Was I disappointed by the fifth movie? Sure. Did I gripe about it to my friends? Absolutely. Did I hope to God the next Trek movie was better? You bet.
But then I got on with my life. I didn't demand that the movie be officially stricken from "canon." I didn't hyperbolically declare that Star Trek's sacred legacy had been sullied forever. I didn't vilify everybody involved in making the movie. And, no, I didn't take it personally and feel that all us of old-school Trekkies had been insulted or slapped in the face.
It was a disappointing sequel, not a crime against fandom.
And this isn't about not taking "a stand" because this isn't a matter of moral principle, IMO. It's merely about whether or not we enjoyed a particular installment in a favorite sci-fi series.
Just to put things in perspective.
I'm not making a claim on the feasibility of what Bakish promised, but he did promise it, no? I think that conversation needs to be with someone else.The thing is, even us ardent long-time fans do not speak with the same voice, as the internet (and this very BBS) prove every day. Even lifelong fans have different tastes, expectations, priorities, etc.
So "serving the fans" does not mean the same thing to all of us. For some, that means being very strict about "canon." For others, that might mean plenty of nostalgic easter eggs -- which other long-time fans may scornfully dismiss as "fan service." Some folks are all about the characters, some about the science and engineering, some about the topical allegories, or utopian messaging, or whatever.
Seriously, you're never going to be able to satisfy "all ardent long-time fans" because we're a famously opinionated bunch who seldom agree on anything.
Don't believe me? Go to any thread about the "best" or "worst" Trek movies, series, or episodes. Chances are, you're going to see the same titles appearing on both lists.
For every lifelong Trekkie who thinks that TMP is a masterpiece, there's another who thinks it's an utter bore. For every diehard Trekker who thinks DS9 is far and away the best Trek series ever, there's no shortage of fans who still can't get into it -- and are quite vocal about disliking it.
Heck, we can't even agree on "Trekkie" vs. "Trekker" so why think all devoted "long-time fans" are going to care about the same things?
I truly wish that more fans would give them the benefit of the doubt as you write, and that production teams would stop treating Trek as a delicate flower that needs loving, tender, care. I don't want a love letter to a franchise but a freaking adventure story.
I have no issue with Spock's interactions with Droxine. She flirts with him, and he parries with his own form of deadpan flirting- dry wit and self-control. He's 'good' at this (the Enterprise Incident, post-spores This Side of Paradise, the Apple to some extent); there is nothing in pre-Cloud Minders TOS to indicate that when met with someone openly flirting with him, he would clutch his tunic protectively, turn away and say "no, you musn't!" particularly where doing so would result in a diplomatic disaster. (The only times we get this sort of thing is when he realizes he is entirely losing self-control due to extraneous factors, as in the Naked Time and Amok Time). Why does he tell her about pon farr? Well, she brought it up-- what was he supposed to do, tell Plasus daughter to get lost as they're waiting on the zenite? Moreover, I don't understand the argument that this scene conflicts with his reluctance to discuss pon farr in Amok Time. Why would Spock, a highly rational creature, stubbornly stick with an approach that led to him murdering (as far as he knew) his best friend and nearly ending his career? It is far more logical that post-Amok Time Spock concluded 'well, that didn't work, and since it's going to come up again I need to land on a different approach.' Spock's curiosity and desire to understand new things extended beyond scientific principles and into sociological and psychological ones as well (see his knowledge and apparent dabbling in "One " in the Way to Eden)-- why wouldn't his curiosity extend to different ways to internally handle one's sexuality, even if those ways diverged from (demonstrably destructive) Vulcan mores?
That's very true! I'm glad you enjoyed it!
I generally love SNW, especially the characters and their development. It seems like a natural evolution from TOS. While SNW is still episodic, the characters grow over time. And they've done a fantastic job at that--and even giving us surprises within a prequel concept.
