Trek Fans and Change

[Vger23]

This is NOT to get everyone shouting and angrymad. This is a genuine thought about the state of fandom...that's all.

I think Star Trek fans struggle badly with change (Capt. Obvious making a log entry right there). But, I don't think it's inherently because most Trek fans are inflexible, narrow, spiteful and joyless folks. Here's my theory:

Entertainment is largely for escapist purposes. Subconsciously (and consciously for that matter), that's what we are looking for when we go to a play, concert, or turn on the tube. But...the passion of Trek fans makes watching Star Trek, especially new Star Trek, a painful and stressful process. People care so much, that they are analyzing everything. Nitpicking everything. Having unrealistic expectations of everything. Eventually disliking / hating everything.

It's no longer escapist fun when this is your position. It's like "I have a meeting with a customer in 2 hours and don't have my shit together" stressful for people, and it kills any of the joy or ability to be objective / unbiased. We literally care too much to enjoy something we are supposed to love.

Now people will deny this and argue with me I'm sure (once again, supplemental log entry by Cap. Obvious)...but I have to say that I base this on:

1. People who dislike DSC generally get a massive thrill by throwing their love of "The Orville" in everyone's face while they rub poop all over the screen about now awful DSC is in the same post. Ok, whatever good for you. But, look me in the eye and tell me that if "The Orville" had been called "Star Trek: Orville" and characters were working for the UFP in Starfleet and wearing the delta badge on their uniforms, fans would be going frigging batcrap crazy right now. Fart jokes, colon jokes, weed jokes, sex jokes, unprofessional behavior..."THIS ISN'T GENE'S STAR TREK!!!! ARRrrrrhhghghghgh" But, since its not our sacred franchise...it all gets a pass. "No big deal, it's fun!" Interesting....

2. The scrutiny and standards that I've seen recent Star Trek productions held to would, if applied to other movies or television shows, absolutely bury most of those shows. Heck, the standards we apply to DSC and to the Kelvin films would bury half the prior Trek franchise itself, if not more! But no..Star Trek doesn't get a pass there because it's the sacred franchise....!

I wonder sincerely if we have lost the ability to view the franchise as the very thing we need (and the very thing Trek is intended to be): escapist entertainment. And, as a result of our stress/anxiety caused by our high level of expectations and standards...we end up resenting it because it does the exact opposite to us. It becomes the exact opposite of escapist.

 

[Apparition B5]

"People can be very frightened of change." - Captain James T. Kirk.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

There's grains of truth in your post but it's also heavily constructed to preemptively disparage reasonable rebuttals.

People have a good deal emotionally invested in Trek. It's something that's been important to me since I was 10. So of course it inspires a negative response in people when new things come out that don't match the idea they have in their heads of what Trek is that's been selectively cultivated from their favorite aspects of it.

People feel a new thing is retroactively changing this thing they love or blocking a better version of it from being created instead. And, to be fair, anyone who starts a Trek series knows full well this is what they are walking into.

And yes, all this does cause people to overreact to the negatives.

But that can be expressed without passive aggressively tearing people down for doing so.

 

[Vger23]

There's grains of truth in your post but it's also heavily constructed to preemptively disparage reasonable rebuttals.

People have a good deal emotionally invested in Trek. It's something that's been important to me since I was 10. So of course it inspires a negative response in people when new things come out that don't match the idea they have in their heads of what Trek is that's been selectively cultivated from their favorite aspects of it.

People feel a new thing is retroactively changing this thing they love or blocking a better version of it from being created instead. And, to be fair, anyone who starts a Trek series knows full well this is what they are walking into.

And yes, all this does cause people to overreact to the negatives.

But that can be expressed without passive aggressively tearing people down for doing so.

There wasn't anything passive aggressive about it, nor did I tear anyone down. I could respond by questioning if you are simply stung by having the mirror held up in front of you.

All I was trying to do was say that our passion gets in the way of our objectivity and our open ability to enjoy something we might otherwise like simply because it's Star Trek. I thought it was a worthwhile "self awareness" post. I'm sorry if that struck a nerve.

 

[Butters]

I hate change, especially change for the sake of change. My favourite pub on the planet changed recently after a refurb. It changed from being a traditional English public house to a traditional English style public house. The change is subtle, some might not notice the difference, but judging by the ability to easily find a table and get served on Friday night, I'm not the only one.

I hate change, but I like discovery. Its the right kind of change. I'm not sensing the same hatred to discovery as there was to ST09, where heated debates about where the ships was built would rage on like the springfield tyre fire.

Star Trek had to change to stay the same. Relevant engaging original entertainment, that is.

 

[Vger23]

I hate change, especially change for the sake of change. My favourite pub on the planet changed recently after a refurb. It changed from being a traditional English public house to a traditional English style public house. The change is subtle, some might not notice the difference, but judging by the ability to easily find a table and get served on Friday night, I'm not the only one.

I hate change, but I like discovery. Its the right kind of change. I'm not sensing the same hatred to discovery as there was to ST09, where heated debates about where the ships was built would rage on like the springfield tyre fire.

Star Trek had to change to stay the same. Relevant engaging original entertainment, that is.

Ohhh...the Star Trek 09 rage was off the charts. This is kindergarten recess compared to that.

 

[jaime]

This is NOT to get everyone shouting and angrymad. This is a genuine thought about the state of fandom...that's all.

I think Star Trek fans struggle badly with change (Capt. Obvious making a log entry right there). But, I don't think it's inherently because most Trek fans are inflexible, narrow, spiteful and joyless folks. Here's my theory:

Entertainment is largely for escapist purposes. Subconsciously (and consciously for that matter), that's what we are looking for when we go to a play, concert, or turn on the tube. But...the passion of Trek fans makes watching Star Trek, especially new Star Trek, a painful and stressful process. People care so much, that they are analyzing everything. Nitpicking everything. Having unrealistic expectations of everything. Eventually disliking / hating everything.

It's no longer escapist fun when this is your position. It's like "I have a meeting with a customer in 2 hours and don't have my shit together" stressful for people, and it kills any of the joy or ability to be objective / unbiased. We literally care too much to enjoy something we are supposed to love.

Now people will deny this and argue with me I'm sure (once again, supplemental log entry by Cap. Obvious)...but I have to say that I base this on:

1. People who dislike DSC generally get a massive thrill by throwing their love of "The Orville" in everyone's face while they rub poop all over the screen about now awful DSC is in the same post. Ok, whatever good for you. But, look me in the eye and tell me that if "The Orville" had been called "Star Trek: Orville" and characters were working for the UFP in Starfleet and wearing the delta badge on their uniforms, fans would be going frigging batcrap crazy right now. Fart jokes, colon jokes, weed jokes, sex jokes, unprofessional behavior..."THIS ISN'T GENE'S STAR TREK!!!! ARRrrrrhhghghghgh" But, since its not our sacred franchise...it all gets a pass. "No big deal, it's fun!" Interesting....

2. The scrutiny and standards that I've seen recent Star Trek productions held to would, if applied to other movies or television shows, absolutely bury most of those shows. Heck, the standards we apply to DSC and to the Kelvin films would bury half the prior Trek franchise itself, if not more! But no..Star Trek doesn't get a pass there because it's the sacred franchise....!

I wonder sincerely if we have lost the ability to view the franchise as the very thing we need: escapist entertainment. And, as a result of our stress caused by our high level of expectations and standards...we end up resenting it because it does the exact opposite to us.

Nope. The jokes in the Orville are there because it needs to differentiate itself from Trek (McFarlane originally wanted to do a straight Trek show at CBS, this is clearly that show with serial numbers filed off and jokes added. Not to mention Trek also has jokes.)

It’s not change that is the problem for some of us who disliked the two hours we have of DSC. It’s genuinely questionable things in some cases...bad makeup...a lead who is very unlikeable in many ways (which does not really work in Trek) to many people for many reasons across a spectrum...the war crime moment...the odd way it seems to play both sides of the field politically in these troubled times (Klingons are ISIS now, don’t confuse race with culture, etc etc....)... the way the pilot is actually two hours of backstory before we get the actual pilot with the actual titular ship in (Encounter at Farpoint wasn’t two hours of just Picard on the Stargazer) ...the fact it’s another prequel...the fact it’s another thing desperately riding the coattails of TOS...the fact it (and here’s the humdinger) actually is very predictable and lifts wholesale from other entries in the franchise (whole lines of dialogue, whole scenes, character concepts including the lead Tammy Paris Spock Ro...even when TNG did The Naked Now, it was not as derivative as DSC was in its first episode.) ...and the bad taste lead in where suddenly Sisko wasn’t the first black lead, Janeway wasn’t the first female lead, creating column inches but leaving a bad taste because it stands on the shoulders of a giant and then pretends the giant isn’t there. It plays up its progressive nature in publicity...then has both female leads go running to male authority figures to get permission to do...pretty much anything.

It can get better, I hope it does, I particularly hope it moves to a traditional ensemble series. The Orville though? It hit something out the gate, and it’s embarrassing that the tribute band is doing better than a band that has the name but none of the original line up save a lead singer (to use a simile) and is trying too hard to be edgy.
It’s also significantly cheaper yet somehow looks like more love and thought went into it.

However, I am literally judging the pilot episodes against each other, as that is all I have seen.
I hope for better things, and rather than being anti change, I embrace it...and will embrace it all the more if they change some of the things which just aren’t working in DSC as it has started.

 

[Shawnster]

I think Star Trek fans struggle badly with change (Capt. Obvious making a log entry right there). But, I don't think it's inherently because most Trek fans are inflexible, narrow, spiteful and joyless folks.

Star Wars fans are just as splintered and polarized. It's not exclusive to Star Trek fans.

It's the nature of the Internet. People are less confrontational in real life in general. I strongly disliked the JJ reboot. On the Internet I feel free to let loose and bitch. In real life, I do not feel as free when I meet a person that loves the JJ reboot. Politely disagree and move on to common interest. I'm out with friends to have a good time,. not to get into mindless arguments.

But online? I have the anonymity to shield me. I don't know any of you. I'm not friends with any of you. I don't have to face any of you and I definitely don't have to see any of you again tomorrow or next week. Or see your spouse or kid on a regular basis. I can take an hour and rant and rave uninterrupted. Hell, I can stop in the middle of this sentence, get up and get a piece of pizza, and then continue my rant uninterrupted.

It's the Internet. And the Keyboard acts like alcohol on the brain. It desensitizes us and lets us say things our filters would normally screen out.

 

[Vger23]

Star Wars fans are just as splintered and polarized. It's not exclusive to Star Trek fans.

It's the nature of the Internet. People are less confrontational in real life in general. I strongly disliked the JJ reboot. On the Internet I feel free to let loose and bitch. In real life, I do not feel as free when I meet a person that loves the JJ reboot. Politely disagree and move on to common interest. I'm out with friends to have a good time,. not to get into mindless arguments.

But online? I have the anonymity to shield me. I don't know any of you. I'm not friends with any of you. I don't have to face any of you and I definitely don't have to see any of you again tomorrow or next week. Or see your spouse or kid on a regular basis. I can take an hour and rant and rave uninterrupted. Hell, I can stop in the middle of this sentence, get up and get a piece of pizza, and then continue my rant uninterrupted.

It's the Internet. And the Keyboard acts like alcohol on the brain. It desensitizes us and lets us say things our filters would normally screen out.

I'm far more confrontational in real life than on the internet. My opinion is- if I don't know or care about you...why bother debating with you beyond just surface discussion?

I totally agree that it's not just Trek fans. It's any passionate fanbase. That's definitely part of the point I was going to make, but forgot to add a sentence.

 

[sbk1234]

I agree that the strong opinions come mainly from love and passion. When you love something so much, you want it to be the best it can be. Of course, we all have different ideas of what the best looks like.
At the end of the day, we need to remember it's just entertainment. (Not to belittle entertainment or its ability to inspire, teach, and influence opinion.)

 

[jaime]

I agree that the strong opinions come mainly from love and passion. When you love something so much, you want it to be the best it can be. Of course, we all have different ideas of what the best looks like.
At the end of the day, we need to remember it's just entertainment. (Not to belittle entertainment or its ability to inspire, teach, and influence opinion.)

That’s very true. I think my misgivings after this beginning to DSC though are borne out of a kind of attempt at objectivity. It is not the best it can be. Dark Matter, Killjoys, Orville....maybe The Expanse (Which DSC seems to resemble to an extent) and maybe even Defiance (though maybe only a few notches better...) all had objectively better pilots in my estimation. DSC doesn’t have intriguing world building to fall back on...it’s World is already built to an extent...so maybe it had a harder job, but it’s flaws could not be glossed. That’s ignoring the ‘Trek Taste Test.’.

I am hopeful though. There’s about fifty fifty hit rate for pilots in Trek anyway.

 

[fireproof78]

This has become my feelings as well, and to the point that I don't really want to visit any more. It simply isn't fun.It feels like it has become a game of comparing which Trek is "better" and holding it to a standard that feels very arbitrary, and really unreachable.

Does that DSC should be adulated with unending praise? No, of course not. But, that doesn't make Orville the second coming of Trek either. It means that DSC needs to find its footing within a world that is already preset, with a lot of assumptions built in to it.

I think DSC has a much harder job, because it is trying to change with the times, but, as noted above, it fails the "Trek Taste Test." Well, I don't know about anyone else, but TNG, DS9 and the rest all failed that Taste Test at first, at least for me. They had to take time to find their voice within the world.

Now, well, DSC apparently only has "one shot" and its one in a life time opportunity may be short lived due to expectations.

I don't know anymore. I just feel like there are a lot of arbitrary standards being set without any place for just approaching DSC as it is, warts and all.

 

[BillJ]

I don't mind change, but it needs to be change that makes sense.

...and holding it to a standard that feels very arbitrary, and really unreachable.

This is squarely on the shoulders of the Discovery showrunners, who proclaimed themselves Superfans and tried to plug something into an already defined time period instead of adding something new to the franchise. Or rebooting, if they truly needed to use elements of the 23rd century in their show.

I'm treating Discovery as a reboot and holding it to the standards of other dramas of today, not some idealized vision of what Trek should be. Right now? It fails badly on that count. It feels underbaked compared to The Handmaid's Tale, The Man in the High Castle and Mad Men, to name a few. Which is something, considering they had two years to get this right.

Change is change. Not all change is positive or completely thought out. Which seems to be the case for Discovery. At least in my eyes.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't mind change, but it needs to be change that makes sense.



This is squarely on the shoulders of the Discovery showrunners, who proclaimed themselves Superfans and tried to plug something into an already defined time period instead of adding something new to the franchise. Or rebooting, if they truly needed to use elements of the 23rd century in their show.

I'm treating Discovery as a reboot and holding it to the standards of other dramas of today, not some idealized vision of what Trek should be. Right now? It fails badly on that count. It feels underbaked compared to The Handmaid's Tale, The Man in the High Castle and Mad Men, to name a few. Which is something, considering they had two years to get this right.

Change is change. Not all change is positive or completely thought out. Which seems to be the case for Discovery. At least in my eyes.

That's not the feel I get. Yes, I agree, the production team painted themselves in to a corner with the visual design and time period selection. That's fair. But, the arbitrary comparison of "How does DSC's pilot compare against other pilots?" "DSC doesn't feel like Star Trek" "This isn't real Star Trek" etc, etc, feel like railing against change just because it is a change.

In my opinion, a reboot would have been more preferable, and avoided a whole lot of this. But, that's not the product. I'll not hold it to any other standard other than whether or not it is entertaining for me.

Change is change, and every body will respond differently. I just see a lot of hand wringing and DSC bashing because of the change, and not being "real Trek" rather than anything substantive.

 

[BillJ]

I just see a lot of hand wringing and DSC bashing because of the change, and not being "real Trek" rather than anything substantive.

Oh, it's real Trek. It has all the non-sensical pieces that it can't really be anything else. Non-sensical pieces that I thought supposed Superfans would weed out. Non-sensical pieces that stand out more because, so far, it has none of the warmth or optimism of Star Trek.

It feels like it brought so many of Trek's bad qualities with it, but nothing that actually made me love Trek to begin with. Everyone's mileage may vary.

 

[fireproof78]

Oh, it's real Trek. It has all the non-sensical pieces that it can't really be anything else. Non-sensical pieces that I thought supposed Superfans would weed out. Non-sensical pieces that stand out more because, so far, it has none of the warmth or optimism of Star Trek.

It feels like it brought so many of Trek's bad qualities with it, but nothing that actually made me love Trek to begin with. Everyone's mileage may vary.

I wish I knew what those qualities were so I could agree or empathize. At this point, all I can say is that it feels like its finding its footing, like TNG did at first, as did DS9.

 

[BillJ]

I wish I knew what those qualities were so I could agree or empathize.

I mentioned warmth and optimism.

 

[LJones41]

Hmm . . . I see that many Trek fans will be regarding "DISCOVERY" in the same manner it has regarded "VOYAGER".

 

[Kemaiku]

Discovery is still heavily dragged down by the crap that killed the other Prime series. it has changed, but not in a lot of the ways that matter. And it feels like a lot of that was because of the tantrum the fans would throw if they did.

So...I hope Orville tramples all over Discovery until it finally gets out of this 30 year old rut.

 

[KirkusOveractus]

I agree with the premise of the OP, in knowing a lot of Trek fans over the years. Me, I've always been open to changes in Trek, because that's where the embracing of what Trek means to different people, and how they interpret it on the screen (in fact, Roddenberry himself said words to that effect, where someone could come along and have a completely different and updated take on Trek).

The problem is, a lot of fans have taken Trek to this extreme, where it is to be held as sacred and not to be tampered with in any way. They sometimes claim that they'd prefer Trek to go further into the future, but even if a series or movie did that, they'd complain because the hand phasers were the wrong color.

As for the Orville comparisons, if it carried the Star Trek name, I'd still have the same opinion, which is that I love it completely. It captures the wonder, adventure, fun and ability to tell a story that the best moments in Star Trek did, and The Orville is doing so far with every episode.

DSC right now, for me, doesn't feel like Star Trek because the story itself doesn't have much depth, the writing for the situation isn't good, a lot of stupid mistakes were committed by someone who was supposed to be second in command of a Starship, and there doesn't seem any wonder, adventure or fun.