What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[F. King Daniel]

And as I'm sure I've already said in the past 418 pages, it's those fans of the conservative Berman-Trek era who are hitting the ceiling that Discovery dares to have gay characters and non-white people in charge.

"Star Trek has become too woke"
Fuck off. Fuck all the way off. You're the 2022 equivalent of people fuming that a white man kissed a black woman in 1967.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

And as I'm sure I've already said in the past 418 pages, it's those fans of the conservative Berman-Trek era who are hitting the ceiling that Discovery dares to have gay characters and non-white people in charge.

"Star Trek has become too woke"
Fuck off. Fuck all the way off. You're the 2022 equivalent of people fuming that a white man kissed a black woman in 1967.

So much this and so well said.

 

[Captain's Coffee]

"Star Trek has become too woke".

I’m wiping away a tear.

 

[gweeps]

And as I'm sure I've already said in the past 418 pages, it's those fans of the conservative Berman-Trek era who are hitting the ceiling that Discovery dares to have gay characters and non-white people in charge.

"Star Trek has become too woke"
Fuck off. Fuck all the way off. You're the 2022 equivalent of people fuming that a white man kissed a black woman in 1967.

The problems with a lot of current Star Trek are simple:

1) less episodes per season = less time to focus on individual characters

2) a focus on season long arcs over finding a balance of episodic and serialization

3) what you end up with is surface storytelling, and hardly any honest build-up to things happening

But I get it, "must watch" TV has changed...

 

[Farscape One]

The problems with a lot of current Star Trek are simple:

1) less episodes per season = less time to focus on individual characters

2) a focus on season long arcs over finding a balance of episodic and serialization

3) what you end up with is surface storytelling, and hardly any honest build-up to things happening

But I get it, "must watch" TV has changed...

THANK YOU!

These are exactly a LOT of the reasons why Berman era is overall better than the current era. (To be fair to DISCO, they did improve getting character beats from the secondary characters from season 2 onward, but it's still far cry from getting great episodes centered on them like "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON".) I also want to add that there are NO light hearted or fun, for lack of a better term, episodes in the live action shows. There's a couple scenes here and there, but the overall tone of every episode is dour. ALL the previous shows had light hearted episodes, and that helped balance things. And some of those are among the best of their respective shows. (Particularly DS9, which is probably the best example of balancing dark and light episodes.)

Assuming someone has an issue with the current era of STAR TREK because they are white or homophobic or racist or anything else is exactly the kind of thinking that is an underlying problem with people today in general. And it definitely doesn't stop at this franchise or entertainment. What happened to people having a difference of opinion without being judged as something they are not? What happened to a little acronym called IDIC? It's closed-minded thinking like that that prevents people from having real discussions.

 

[gweeps]

THANK YOU!

These are exactly a LOT of the reasons why Berman era is overall better than the current era. (To be fair to DISCO, they did improve getting character beats from the secondary characters from season 2 onward, but it's still far cry from getting great episodes centered on them like "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON".) I also want to add that there are NO light hearted or fun, for lack of a better term, episodes in the live action shows. There's a couple scenes here and there, but the overall tone of every episode is dour. ALL the previous shows had light hearted episodes, and that helped balance things. And some of those are among the best of their respective shows. (Particularly DS9, which is probably the best example of balancing dark and light episodes.)

Assuming someone has an issue with the current era of STAR TREK because they are white or homophobic or racist or anything else is exactly the kind of thinking that is an underlying problem with people today in general. And it definitely doesn't stop at this franchise or entertainment. What happened to people having a difference of opinion without being judged as something they are not? What happened to a little acronym called IDIC? It's closed-minded thinking like that that prevents people from having real discussions.

Well said. There's an old saying about how it's easier to tear down than create.

 

[Nyotarules]

THANK YOU!

These are exactly a LOT of the reasons why Berman era is overall better than the current era. (To be fair to DISCO, they did improve getting character beats from the secondary characters from season 2 onward, but it's still far cry from getting great episodes centered on them like "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON".) I also want to add that there are NO light hearted or fun, for lack of a better term, episodes in the live action shows. There's a couple scenes here and there, but the overall tone of every episode is dour. ALL the previous shows had light hearted episodes, and that helped balance things. And some of those are among the best of their respective shows. (Particularly DS9, which is probably the best example of balancing dark and light episodes.)

Assuming someone has an issue with the current era of STAR TREK because they are white or homophobic or racist or anything else is exactly the kind of thinking that is an underlying problem with people today in general. And it definitely doesn't stop at this franchise or entertainment. What happened to people having a difference of opinion without being judged as something they are not? What happened to a little acronym called IDIC? It's closed-minded thinking like that that prevents people from having real discussions.

I doubt IDIC = 'I welcome your criticism of how diverse Trek is, next time we will keep the straight white male as the lead for all future Trek shows. Here's SNW to cream your knickers...enjoy!'
There is legitimate criticism to be made of Discovery Trek, (or any Trek) however there are enough fans and YouTube clips whose heads explode at black female Burnham being the lead character, the existence of the Adira and Grey characters. Whenever you see the Woke comments about Trek, let's not pretend we don't know what they are referring to.
OK back to the thread topic

 

[fireproof78]

THANK YOU!

These are exactly a LOT of the reasons why Berman era is overall better than the current era. (To be fair to DISCO, they did improve getting character beats from the secondary characters from season 2 onward, but it's still far cry from getting great episodes centered on them like "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON".) I also want to add that there are NO light hearted or fun, for lack of a better term, episodes in the live action shows. There's a couple scenes here and there, but the overall tone of every episode is dour. ALL the previous shows had light hearted episodes, and that helped balance things. And some of those are among the best of their respective shows. (Particularly DS9, which is probably the best example of balancing dark and light episodes.)

Assuming someone has an issue with the current era of STAR TREK because they are white or homophobic or racist or anything else is exactly the kind of thinking that is an underlying problem with people today in general. And it definitely doesn't stop at this franchise or entertainment. What happened to people having a difference of opinion without being judged as something they are not? What happened to a little acronym called IDIC? It's closed-minded thinking like that that prevents people from having real discussions.

I'm all for fair and reasonable discussion. But, I'm also some who has the controversial opinion that I will not compare shows to shows. If I did, none of the recent era Star Trek would hold a candle to TOS. TOS would top all the lists and it would not be a close match. Unreasonable? You're right. That's why I don't go and say "Well, that was an OK episode but it was no "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON." To be perfectly blunt, I don't care. Did the episode engage me, entertain me and tell me about the characters? Ok, very good.

TOS is a perfect example of dour episodes and still be engaging. So, I can handle so called "dour" episodes of current Trek. Far better than TNG which was downright insufferable in it's approach to characters.

 

[Oddish]

And as I'm sure I've already said in the past 418 pages, it's those fans of the conservative Berman-Trek era who are hitting the ceiling that Discovery dares to have gay characters and non-white people in charge.

"Star Trek has become too woke

Depends on how you define it...

"Woke" as originally coined simply means "aware of that society does not treat all of its members equally". Trek pretty much did that from its inception, with its inclusion of women and people of all races. It even tried to put a woman in the first officer's seat from Day One.

However, the term has evolved into an epithet for some, associated with cancel culture, "shutting down" people instead of having rational discussions, and attacks on people's freedom of speech/religion. Trek does none of these things.

 

[cooleddie74]

Trek has always been "woke." The day Gene made his second-in-command a strong woman, his science officer an alien with pointed ears and made his Yeoman female Trek was "woke." It's just that some fans prefer not to think about that because it gets in the way of the in-universe action and real world posturing about how Trek has been ruined.

 

[fireproof78]

It's just that some fans prefer not to think about that because it gets in the way of the in-universe action and real world posturing about how Trek has been ruined.

I truly want someone to tell me in specifics how Trek has been ruined who actually believes it. Not in buzz words or talking points but how they look at the franchise and say they no longer view it positively.

 

[cooleddie74]

I don't. Whatever explanation they give will be bullshit and a waste of my time so I'm not even interested.

All of the explanations will be bullshit. If you want to say Trek should have less open crying and fewer story arcs there's room for debate. If you say Trek has too much woke inclusion for the sake of woke inclusion you don't have a legitimate argument. That's like arguing that Frosted Flakes have too many flakes of corn in the box for the sake of pushing a corn agenda.

 

[fireproof78]

That's like arguing that Frosted Flakes have too many flakes of corn in the box for the sake of pushing a corn agenda.

Well, they do...

I don't. Whatever explanation they give will be bullshit

Maybe. Maybe not. "Ruined" implies a loss. What has been lost in Star Trek?

 

[Farscape One]

I doubt IDIC = 'I welcome your criticism of how diverse Trek is, next time we will keep the straight white male as the lead for all future Trek shows. Here's SNW to cream your knickers...enjoy!'
There is legitimate criticism to be made of Discovery Trek, (or any Trek) however there are enough fans and YouTube clips whose heads explode at black female Burnham being the lead character, the existence of the Adira and Grey characters. Whenever you see the Woke comments about Trek, let's not pretend we don't know what they are referring to.
OK back to the thread topic

I'm not saying there aren't sexist or racist people who make those comments. I know they exist. But automatically presuming such things the instant anyone says anything negative about Burnham or Gray or Tal... I have seen people assume racism/sexism/insert phobia or ism here many times where none such exists by the poster. THAT is something I have a problem with.

Going back to the topic.

I'm all for fair and reasonable discussion. But, I'm also some who has the controversial opinion that I will not compare shows to shows. If I did, none of the recent era Star Trek would hold a candle to TOS. TOS would top all the lists and it would not be a close match. Unreasonable? You're right. That's why I don't go and say "Well, that was an OK episode but it was no "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON." To be perfectly blunt, I don't care. Did the episode engage me, entertain me and tell me about the characters? Ok, very good.

TOS is a perfect example of dour episodes and still be engaging. So, I can handle so called "dour" episodes of current Trek. Far better than TNG which was downright insufferable in it's approach to characters.

You are right in that all the shows, past and present, had dour subjects. But there was a spirit of adventure in those previous shows that feels lacking in DISCO and PICARD.

I applaud you for not comparing the shows to each other. That's a difficult thing to do... even I find myself incapable most of the time. But I enjoy each of the new shows for different reasons, for the same way I can enjoy shows from almost any decade because I keep in mind the era they were produced in. It's just there's some things that I feel have been lost in the current era, like a good bottle episode or having some standalones where the stakes are not the end of the galaxy. Some of the best episodes were bottles, and frankly you can only do 'end of the galaxy' threats so many times before it becomes mind numbingly dull. DOCTOR WHO suffered that same problem by ramping up the threat higher and higher until it got beyond ridiculous.

 

[1001001]

If you say Trek has too much woke inclusion for the sake of woke inclusion you don't have a legitimate argument. That's like arguing that Frosted Flakes have too many flakes of corn in the box for the sake of pushing a corn agenda.

You've obviously been duped by Big Corn.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I'm all for fair and reasonable discussion. But, I'm also some who has the controversial opinion that I will not compare shows to shows. If I did, none of the recent era Star Trek would hold a candle to TOS. TOS would top all the lists and it would not be a close match. Unreasonable? You're right. That's why I don't go and say "Well, that was an OK episode but it was no "IT'S ONLY A PAPER MOON." To be perfectly blunt, I don't care. Did the episode engage me, entertain me and tell me about the characters? Ok, very good.

TOS is a perfect example of dour episodes and still be engaging. So, I can handle so called "dour" episodes of current Trek. Far better than TNG which was downright insufferable in it's approach to characters.

I'm the exact opposite of this. I've been rewatching TOS, TNG, Voyager and Enterprise alongside the new series, alternating between them each episode, so that I can compare them as accurately as possible. I feel like current Star Trek should match and hopefully exceed the quality set by the previous series, or else they're clearly doing it wrong. They've got more money, better technology, the writers don't have to put 26 stories out a year, and they've got decades of television to learn from.

Of course 'quality' is subjective. Some people would even say that TNG is a bad show!

 

[cooleddie74]

You've obviously been duped by Big Corn.

My favorite '70s Hee Haw character, by the way.

 

[Farscape One]

Well, they do...


Maybe. Maybe not. "Ruined" implies a loss. What has been lost in Star Trek?

I wouldn't go so far as to say STAR TREK has been ruined in the current era, but I do feel like it has lost something.

Bottle shows, as an example I mentioned above. The nature of the season arcs don't allow for them anymore, and it's a shame because we got some truly great character stories from bottle episodes in the past, both for regulars and secondary/recurring characters.

Also, a sense of adventure has been lost in favor of the season long threat. Granted, TNG, DS9, and VGR lost it later in those shows' lifetime, but they all had some wonderful bottle shows or great secondary characters to fall back on. (DS9 especially in that regard.) You can have an episode devoted to a single character and be engaged fully... like "The Inner Light", "Frame of Mind", "THE VISITOR", "MELD", "COUNTERPOINT", etc. And ENTERPRISE, for all the faults of the first two seasons, did bring back that true spirit of awe and adventure that was lacking for years before it premiered.

All that being said, the current era DOES have the spirit of the franchise there, such as how DISCO proved in season 4's finale. (While the arc was not the best, it was the best finale of DISCO to date.) There's great messages in DISCO and PICARD, which is something that the franchise has always been about.

Think of it like this... in some video games, you have the primary mission/goal but there are a lot of side quests that are a great deal of fun. Many times, those side quests enhance the overall story and appreciation of the game. I look at shows the same way.

Perfect example of doing it right... SUPERNATURAL. Each season had its own major arc, and episodes within the season followed on it, but there were plenty of side stories that were not only a lot of fun, but ended up being among the BEST of the show.

Speaking of fun, that's another thing that feels lost in the current live action era... a sense of fun. You'll never get another "Captain's Holiday", "Qpid", "A Fistful of Datas", "BADDA-BING, BADDA-BANG", "BRIDE OF CHAOTICA!", or the like again because of how seasons are made now. Give the characters a chance to breathe and enjoy being those characters for an episode or two.

It's quite telling that in the current game being played in the General section, 'Most Disliked Comedic/Light-hearted Episode', Sakonna and I couldn't come up with a single one from DISCO or PICARD, and that's over 70 episodes.

 

[fireproof78]

Some of the best episodes were bottles, and frankly you can only do 'end of the galaxy' threats so many times before it becomes mind numbingly dull.

I mean, I guess. I guess this is a mileage will vary type of a reaction because end of the galaxy isn't dull to me.

I'm the exact opposite of this. I've been rewatching TOS, TNG, Voyager and Enterprise alongside the new series, alternating between them each episode, so that I can compare them as accurately as possible. I feel like current Star Trek should match and hopefully exceed the quality set by the previous series, or else they're clearly doing it wrong. They've got more money, better technology, the writers don't have to put 26 stories out a year, and they've got decades of television to learn from.

Of course 'quality' is subjective. Some people would even say that TNG is a bad show!

I can appreciate that point of view though I do not subscribed to it. To me, there are too many variables in productions to say that it should meet or exceed past Trek. That's quite a difficult measure because, as you note, it is highly subjective. More money, better tech doesn't make jack as evidenced by another franchise in Star Wars, with the Special Edition and prequel trilogy. To me when expecting a franchise to do something better than the last because money is setting up for disappointment.

That's part of the reason why I don't compare in terms of quality. I look at the characters and stories first and then look at how it works together as a whole, rather than how they measure against each other.

Finally, what these TV writers learn from past 26 years doesn't mean they will learn from the fans want or learn what we would learn. I recall one of my favorite games and how different the sequel was from the original. I watch an interview with the same creators and they discussed how they how received feedback from industry professionals who gave them a long list of critiques of stuff they didn't like. Which was in contrast to what fans actually liked.

We take Trek a lot differently than professionals. There is a different type of investment that writers can't always afford to have like fans do, as it limits how the story might go, or what direction would characters may go, i.e. unwilling to make it hard choices even if it makes sense in the story. The phrase "kill your darlings" is a key one in writing that fans may be reluctant to utilize as part of the story.

This is why I don't compare. Each writer brings their own stuff with it, what they like, don't like, care about and don't care about, and rarely is that going to sync up with past writers.

I wouldn't go so far as to say STAR TREK has been ruined in the current era, but I do feel like it has lost something.

Bottle shows, as an example I mentioned above. The nature of the season arcs don't allow for them anymore, and it's a shame because we got some truly great character stories from bottle episodes in the past, both for regulars and secondary/recurring characters.

Also, a sense of adventure has been lost in favor of the season long threat. Granted, TNG, DS9, and VGR lost it later in those shows' lifetime, but they all had some wonderful bottle shows or great secondary characters to fall back on. (DS9 especially in that regard.) You can have an episode devoted to a single character and be engaged fully... like "The Inner Light", "Frame of Mind", "THE VISITOR", "MELD", "COUNTERPOINT", etc. And ENTERPRISE, for all the faults of the first two seasons, did bring back that true spirit of awe and adventure that was lacking for years before it premiered.

All that being said, the current era DOES have the spirit of the franchise there, such as how DISCO proved in season 4's finale. (While the arc was not the best, it was the best finale of DISCO to date.) There's great messages in DISCO and PICARD, which is something that the franchise has always been about.

Think of it like this... in some video games, you have the primary mission/goal but there are a lot of side quests that are a great deal of fun. Many times, those side quests enhance the overall story and appreciation of the game. I look at shows the same way.

Perfect example of doing it right... SUPERNATURAL. Each season had its own major arc, and episodes within the season followed on it, but there were plenty of side stories that were not only a lot of fun, but ended up being among the BEST of the show.

Speaking of fun, that's another thing that feels lost in the current live action era... a sense of fun. You'll never get another "Captain's Holiday", "Qpid", "A Fistful of Datas", "BADDA-BING, BADDA-BANG", "BRIDE OF CHAOTICA!", or the like again because of how seasons are made now. Give the characters a chance to breathe and enjoy being those characters for an episode or two.

It's quite telling that in the current game being played in the General section, 'Most Disliked Comedic/Light-hearted Episode', Sakonna and I couldn't come up with a single one from DISCO or PICARD, and that's over 70 episodes.

I guess I find the season long threats adventure and fun enough. I don't need any of those episodes you describe because, well, to me they are highly skipable, Qpid especially. A Fistful of Datas makes me cringe very hard as does the rest.

I guess I'm not looking for the best of the show. I'm looking for characters I care about and want to see succeed. Bottle shows don't always do that. In fact, they are usually about characters I don't care about.

You description of a video game side quest is apt but also one that I don't completely agree with. I once did a game in about 2 hours because all I did was the main quest. Did I miss out on some fun quests? Yes. Did I still enjoy the game? Yes. And that's more important. Not awe, not fun, not the best, but just genuine entertainment, and character connection.

Maybe I'm splitting hairs but that's what it is for me. Discovery scratches one itch and TOS another. And that's my preference.

 

[cooleddie74]

I for one will not weep a single tear if year-long story arcs are jettisoned in favor of a return to episodic storytelling in every new series of the franchise. It won't happen, but I can sit and hope. Arcs have their place but year after year after year and show after show after show is getting tiresome.