Ditto.
The End of Star Trek on TV
- Thread starter EnriqueH
- Start date
Seconded.
I think one of the things that made Trek work was that it didn't depict a bleak and gloomy future, but one we'd actually like to live in and aspire to. Even DS9 with its multi-season Dominion War and ENT with its season-long Xindi arc had our heroes fighting to preserve that. You can still have intense drama without having to destroy Trek in the process.
Oh, no doubt, BUT ... but ... Hollywood's always going on about the marvels of CGI and was, even then and yet ENTERPRISE - of which I consider myself a fan - never benefited properly from it. I've seen posted "home movies" that regular people have done who know how to create CGI environments and characters and it's superior to anything that I see in ENT. So, for me, that doesn't coincide ...
Making the Federation a "dystrophy" would (imho) be going too far. However, depicting a political and social dedomiciling of the Federation would be certainly a new way to go. While there would be a "old Federation" that remained, the majority of the Federation would cancel their memberships and proceed on their merry ways, some would form new associations (little Federations), others just become independent.
I see this happening in the aftermath of the Dominion War.
It's not the same thing when it comes to a weekly TV show, however. Time is money in Hollywood as they say, and while a "home movie" could spend weeks (if not months) working on CGI for a single episode, a weekly TV show doesn't have that luxury. And the more photorealistic the CGI, the more expensive it is and the longer it takes to render for a show with a fixed budget and not a whole lot of time per episode. In comparison, the posted home movies you've seen may have it easier with more time (it gets done when it gets done) and not having to pay big Hollywood-scale production salaries.Oh, no doubt, BUT ... but ... Hollywood's always going on about the marvels of CGI and was, even then and yet ENTERPRISE - of which I consider myself a fan - never benefited properly from it. I've seen posted "home movies" that regular people have done who know how to create CGI environments and characters and it's superior to anything that I see in ENT. So, for me, that doesn't coincide ...
I like the idea of a splintered Federation in a state of decline. The utopian future failed at the Dominion War, much that was built up over centuries was destroyed or lost. Where there was cooperation and prosperity there's now fear, distrust, superstition and need. It would be a very interesting scenario.
But (!) I would not like if the show and its characters just rolled over and accepted their bleak universe, or openly embraced it like a certain other science fiction show did.
Rather I would like it as a starting point to highlight Star Trek's trademark idealism. As Sisko said "it is easy to be a saint in paradise"
In a splintered, devastated Federation we could see characters that are "saints in hell" no matter how bleak or how hopeless the situation seems our characters don't give up. They face the impossible and stretch their limited resources to the breaking point in order to help and save AND they go the extra mile, putting their own lives at danger to save that one poor sap who was not quick enough to get to the escape pod.
Victories are celebrated and defeats are mourned, sometimes dealing characters wounds they will struggle with for years or forever, but the overall trend would be "from Darkness to a New Dawn", with clear signs that things do get better from season to season and hey never lose sight of the ideals of Sarfleet and the Federation they want to reinstall in others.
Would that not be a show that embraces idealism, if in a different form?
But (!) I would not like if the show and its characters just rolled over and accepted their bleak universe, or openly embraced it like a certain other science fiction show did.
Rather I would like it as a starting point to highlight Star Trek's trademark idealism. As Sisko said "it is easy to be a saint in paradise"
In a splintered, devastated Federation we could see characters that are "saints in hell" no matter how bleak or how hopeless the situation seems our characters don't give up. They face the impossible and stretch their limited resources to the breaking point in order to help and save AND they go the extra mile, putting their own lives at danger to save that one poor sap who was not quick enough to get to the escape pod.
Victories are celebrated and defeats are mourned, sometimes dealing characters wounds they will struggle with for years or forever, but the overall trend would be "from Darkness to a New Dawn", with clear signs that things do get better from season to season and hey never lose sight of the ideals of Sarfleet and the Federation they want to reinstall in others.
Would that not be a show that embraces idealism, if in a different form?
TNG is the only Star Trek show that became more popular during its initial run, but my observation is that DS9 is more popular now than it was in 1999. People who didn't watch Trek until recently tend to like DS9 most, and a lot of fans who didn't give DS9 a chance originally came back later and loved it.
@Orphalesion
I totally agree that a great new series would be starting out with the Federation in decline after the war, and following the attempt to rebuild it to its prior idealistic state.
@Orphalesion
I totally agree that a great new series would be starting out with the Federation in decline after the war, and following the attempt to rebuild it to its prior idealistic state.
Very interesting about DS9!
Now by personal observation are you meaning statistics that are coming to light these days that you've been reading yourself? Or in the strictest sense meaning large numbers of people you know or have met?
Multiple people I know. One friend I used to game with never watched Star Trek when it was on, but he kept IMing me about how awesome DS9 was when he was watching through it. Or, a coworker who didn't watch DS9 and when it was on because it wasn't about exploring and focused too much about Ferengi, I got him to give DS9 another chance and he loved it. Plus my sixty year old mother out of the blue told me she was watching DS9 on Netflix and loving it. (Then later she didn't even make it through the first season of Voyager). And, well, me. I didn't like DS9 when it was on and now I consider it at least equal to TNG.
Pretty much 100% of the people I've talked to who didn't watch DS9 when it was on then gave it a chance later ended up loving it.
Pretty much 100% of the people I've talked to who didn't watch DS9 when it was on then gave it a chance later ended up loving it.
Super. I just found this too:
"Deep Space was only a modest success during its original run, but its reputation has steadily grown over the last decade."
It 'looks' like it was posted last year, and of course I have no idea at all if this person is credible enough to 'speak for the reputation of DS9' or anything. But it is saying what you said. Now of course I could be doing some Confirmation Bias gathering
because I had to ignore a lots of negative stuff to find this one thing.
But I find this thought intriguing; that DS9 is getting more interest. I will remember what you've mentioned and what this guy mention, and keep my ear to the ground for some quantifiable data.
Thanks!!! Oh yeah, I am interested in the demographics reporting this too. Parents? Teens? Retired? 40 hour a week workers? Gamers? Social activists? Genders? Education levels?
You know, the typical stuff that pieces things like this together to make a picture.
"Deep Space was only a modest success during its original run, but its reputation has steadily grown over the last decade."
It 'looks' like it was posted last year, and of course I have no idea at all if this person is credible enough to 'speak for the reputation of DS9' or anything. But it is saying what you said. Now of course I could be doing some Confirmation Bias gathering
because I had to ignore a lots of negative stuff to find this one thing. But I find this thought intriguing; that DS9 is getting more interest. I will remember what you've mentioned and what this guy mention, and keep my ear to the ground for some quantifiable data.
Thanks!!! Oh yeah, I am interested in the demographics reporting this too. Parents? Teens? Retired? 40 hour a week workers? Gamers? Social activists? Genders? Education levels?
You know, the typical stuff that pieces things like this together to make a picture.
Last edited:
That's more or less what I had in mind. I didn't want Trek to turn into The Road or The Walking Dead! And political and astrographic splintering doesn't have to mean total collapse, or at least we don't have to join events at their worst. I'm thinking more post-Trantor, Foundation-era, "Galactic Empire" Asimov, maybe a few hundred years into the Foundation's rise. I was thinking that one "unit" of the old Federation could be seen to be in ascendancy. Heck, maybe they could loosely adapt Foundation, but put it in the AQ and with aliens and not just humans (which would screw with Seldon's equations completely, but heck, this would be an adaptation).
Actually, I wouldn't mind something like Fargo or True Detective; a show plays with big dark and scary concepts, but ultimately remains optimistic and hopeful in the face of them. How was it Ferguson described "Doctor Who"? "The triumph of innocence and romance over brute force and cynicism?" You don't have to pretend one side doesn't exist to side with the other.
Last edited:
When I think of 'State of decline' I think more in terms of, politicians are pushing for more Draconian security measures, and people are becoming xenophobic to the point of wanting to shut down exploration programs and militarize the Federation. The main characters would be acting against this trend pushing to return to 23rd and 24th century ideals.
This would keep the tone of the show optimistic and have a lot of modern cultural relevance. It would raise the question, can high minded principles really stand up to actual outside threat, or do they force us to retreat in fear and turn on each other? Can you have optimism without naivete?
This would keep the tone of the show optimistic and have a lot of modern cultural relevance. It would raise the question, can high minded principles really stand up to actual outside threat, or do they force us to retreat in fear and turn on each other? Can you have optimism without naivete?
I like the idea of characters reacting to a more militarised status quo.
I'm less sold on "pushing to return to 23rd and 24th century ideals." There's a nostalgia there that I'm not entirely comfortable with, like the contemporary nostalgia for the fifties and sixties that tends to gloss over the fact that the fifties and sixties were not great times to live in if you were not white, male, heterosexual and comfortably middle-class.
The same is arguably true about the 23rd and 24th centuries "in-universe." Kirk and Picard were just as prone to make mistakes and make errors in judgment, even if the show seldom called them on it. I don't want main characters clamouring for a return to Friday's Child or The Apple or A Private Little War.
"We must be better than we are" is a great message. "We must be as great as we once were" is decidedly more problematic. (And, perhaps, reflects a nostalgia in the broad Star Trek fanbase.)
It may be due to DS9's re watch-ability. Its style allowed characters to express themselves in a more interesting way. It was less restricted.
The subject matter was more gripping and cutting edge than the usual alien/plot of the week style.
I don't think it's a coincidence that in the age of Walking Dead, and Game of Thrones, fans find DS9 more interesting.
Picard or Kirk would make makes mistakes, but because they were the hero character, the show would rarely acknowledge it. Or, despite the mistake, everything would always work out in the end anyway.
In today's shows, a hero character can actually do the right thing, and still pay for it, simply because they were naive of the people or circumstances they were dealing with.
In G.O.T, Ned Stark did the right thing and warned a dangerous queen that he was going to reveal her infidelity to her husband, the king.
So she would have enough time to flee to safety before the king takes revenge. She killed the king before he could be told, and Ned ended up being beheaded.
Later even the other good characters made note of how naive he was to even tell her, even though he was a good man.
But it made the story more complex and interesting to watch, than the simple black/white morality tale without considering other factors.
Last edited:
@Darren Mooney
I'm in agreement that the nostalgia for the 1950s was really just nostalgia for white moneyed people. But a 'Return to ideals' story in Star Trek wouldn't be like Glenn Beck's idea of a 'Return to ideals', it would acknowledge the hypocrisies of the past and try to apply the ideals inclusively without hypocrisy. And maybe 'Return to ideals' isn't the right way to put it. Maybe a 'Return to optimism' and 'Rejection of fear'.
@Nightdiamond
Ned Stark's fate worked really well for Game of Thrones, but it wouldn't work for Star Trek.
(As an aside, you think Cirsei was responsible for Robert's death? Is this a thing that was different in the book? In the show at least, Robert was killed by a boar, and it happened before Ned confronted Cirsei.)
I'm in agreement that the nostalgia for the 1950s was really just nostalgia for white moneyed people. But a 'Return to ideals' story in Star Trek wouldn't be like Glenn Beck's idea of a 'Return to ideals', it would acknowledge the hypocrisies of the past and try to apply the ideals inclusively without hypocrisy. And maybe 'Return to ideals' isn't the right way to put it. Maybe a 'Return to optimism' and 'Rejection of fear'.
@Nightdiamond
Ned Stark's fate worked really well for Game of Thrones, but it wouldn't work for Star Trek.
(As an aside, you think Cirsei was responsible for Robert's death? Is this a thing that was different in the book? In the show at least, Robert was killed by a boar, and it happened before Ned confronted Cirsei.)
True, but I think that may be the problem. Trek's style is more simplistic-- The hero always makes the right choice, and everything always turn out all right.
It's gotten a little worn out and predictable. A show where doing the right thing can get you killed or in trouble, it forces the writing to be more creative and original.
If they did do a show where people were struggling to put the Federation back together again, using this format might make it even more interesting.
Cersei arranged for King Robert to have strong wine to drink while hunting. That's how he got killed.
Robert went hunting right before Before Ned was going to tell him about Cersei's affair and illegitimate children.
That's how she got him out of the way.
And yet, if those concepts were carried out, people would be complaining about how 'this isn't really Star Trek' yet again. But I do like what you've proposed.
And to back you up, here are some fan concepts:
Star Trek: Japanese Highschool (kids in a Japanese high school who wear Starfleet uniforms as school uniforms)
Star Trek: The Maiden Voyage
And let's not forget this concept, already carried out:
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mHyGlqsjsQ[/yt]
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnSW1lpAGyU[/yt]
Nowhere is this better shown than on this 1963-1964 TV show:
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvBcS8I664A[/yt]
[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egJnoLMyBvw[/yt]
Last edited:
I think the downfall in Trek TV ratings post-1993 might have had something to do with it.
I think there are multiple reasons for the ratings collapse, to include over saturation and poor writing.
-TNG started off slow. It took a while for the characters to develop, but television audiences were willing to keep giving it a chance early on anyway (probably because it was the first Star Trek show since the 1960's). TNG really started to take off with the Klingon civil war and ratings improved with the show's improvement.
-DS9 started off slow. It took a while for the characters to develop, and television audiences were not willing to keep giving it a chance (probably because it just wasn't the same a TNG). DS9 started to improve when they brought Michael Dorn in but really started to take off with the Dominion war. Television audiences were already tuned out though.
-VOY was a good idea but poorly written from start to finish. It also ran alongside DS9 for a period of time, which was also declining in the ratings, so the demographic was over-saturated with TREK.
-ENT was a good idea but the first three seasons were crap. Television audiences were looking for the back story to TOS but mostly got time-travel and new strange aliens (with the exception of the occasional Andorian episode and a re-writing of first contact with the Klingons). Enterprise really started to get interesting with season 4, when Brannon and Braga were replaced as head writers by Manny Coto. But, by then it was too late, audiences had already had enough.
Last edited:
And that's the problem with a chunk of the fandom, imho that they have this extremely narrow view of what kind of stories the franchise is "allowed" to tell, what characters "can" or "should" be used and what constitutes "real" Star Trek.
This in turn causes the franchise to be stale and in love with its own past.
In my opinion, as long as it is set in the Star Trek universe and keeps the basic trappings of Science Fiction (other planets, space travel, aliens etc) it's still Star Trek. Within those parameters a HUGE amount of stories could be told DS9 was a big step into the right direction... and Voyager was a giant step back.
Aside from the colony, civillian ship, ground trooper settings they could also tell stories based around a research base, academy cadets or political intrigue in the Federation parliament. The possibilities are, theoretically, endless.
Even of the concepts you posted even Aurora plays it WAY to save with its "classical" duo of "gung-ho captain" and "Vulcan sidekick" all they need is a grumpy doctor who spouts racial slurs at T'Ling and they're there yet again.
Similar threads
