Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by HelenofBorg, Sep 14, 2019.
Well if the series secedes from CBS All Access and embraces a more libertarian philosophy I'm sure that turn of events will please some viewers.
I like the 20 year time jump over 100 too. It gives us time for society to have moved on from the Dominion war without it having become an abstract historical event. It's 9/11, not World War 2.
Another issue with the 100 is that you'd have to advance technology 100 years to the point it's so story breaking you need to handwave its existence half the time.
Although if they did go further in the future, I'd love one where they finally have propulsion to explore other galaxies, and they are dispatched to the Andromeda galaxy where they meet totally alien non-humanoid species they have to open diplomacy with.
Man of Steel is a Superman movie. Discovery and Picard are no less "Star Trek" series than TNG was, DS9 was, VOY was, ENT was. Each reflected the era in which they were produced.
And Man of Steel was a complete reboot from scratch, ignoring the continuity of the Christopher Reeve and Brandon Routh movies that preceded it. It's not even a good comparison.
My tolerance for this becoming a backdoor Man of Steel thread is, like, 20 below zero.
... with three feet of snow falling and blowing sideways.
Aaaand that's where you lost me.
Yeah, it sucked when TOS pushed Gene's politics on us
That's true. They reflect the era, but to varying extents. The shows put out an ideal for what they want (but might not work to achieve) based partially as a response to the times in which they live, which doesn't always translate well when watching decades later since - among other things not discussed - are that miniskirts have to be described to younger people, who look at them and don't perceive them as being any form of empowerment but exploitation instead (Grace Lee Whitney - she wanted the miniskirt brought in as empowerment, reflecting via visual allegory that the future would show empowerment.) The only things truly reflected tend to be related more to hairstyles, pop culture designs, and technological limitations of the time, some requiring more imagination than others - hence a good story and/or good acting and/or good costume design will overcome the lack of technological prowess in the effects or other imbalances. Little can replace a good story, unless the acting is robust...
Can a show be a show and not reflecting the times in which it was made? Beyond visual aesthetics and fads? (Color TV, miniskirts, beehive hairdos, 80s friz hairdos, et al.)
And when it comes to sci-fi, what looks silly could mean things other than obvious sledehammer tactics. Allegory can be as potent as an easter egg hunt, hidden in plain sight, or spoonfeeding with a sledgehammer - the latter of which can come in handy if there's too much room for "creative perception". It did reflect then-current social situations, not always directly, translations of definitions don't always hold up, nor did they offer any solutions. It's all entertaining to watch, though.
I hope PIC skewers Brexit and Trump politics through its own lens. That's what Trek does. Takes laughable or stupid and dangerous political viewpoints and tells us how bad they are through viewpoints of people living in the future.
You can answer all those questions and many more set 20+ years after Nemesis while also having 3 casts worth of characters to draw upon in addition to new characters. I dont just want to see what has become of civilizations, but what has become of the characters we got to know for so many years.
The Kelvin Timeline brought miniskirt uniforms back into Starfleet and even got rid of the long sleeves, but eschewed the plunging necklines in favor of collars that matched those of male shipmates. If 2009-2016 films can revive a 1960s aesthetic then it can be done.
That sounds awful.
Sums up a lot of fan theories, including my own
Separate names with a comma.