What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Vger23]

Do you often speak for everyone?

Not sure what that means. If you have any insight into who “gets” Star Trek, I’d like to hear it (I mean, besides YOU obviously...because clearly you get it and we all don’t).

Because the implication of your post is not just that the people who have been making Star Trek don’t “get it,” but that the people enjoying it don’t either. And, by your own admittance, there are a lot of those people around here in that category.

And that’s insulting. And it’s rude to continue to question the tastes and intelligence of people who disagree with you simply in an attempt to feel validated.

Here’s a bit of admittedly unsolicited advice (no sarcasm or meanness here): it’s a franchise with over 750 hours of content spanning 54 years. It’s ok if there are pieces of it you don’t like. LD accounts for less than 5 total hours of content in the franchise. If there are parts of the franchise you do like, it might be a better expenditure of your energy to discuss and interact on those topics. You don’t seem happy talking to people who disagree with you about stuff you don’t like. That’s not unusual btw...most humans would be miserable and even defensive while talking about things they don’t like with rooms full of people who disagree with them.

I’m just not sure why anyone would purposefully do that to themselves repeatedly...which is what you seem intent on doing.

 

[fireproof78]

So who DOES “get Star Trek?”

Oh wait....I know....whoever makes a version of Star Trek that you personally like, right?

It's the whole "I know Trek when I see it" type of argument. But, we can't possibly describe it.

Not sure what that means. If you have any insight into who “gets” Star Trek, I’d like to hear it (I mean, besides YOU obviously...because clearly you get it and we all don’t).

Because the implication of your post is not just that the people who have been making Star Trek don’t “get it,” but that the people enjoying it don’t either. And, by your own admittance, there are a lot of those people around here in that category.

And that’s insulting. And it’s rude to continue to question the tastes and intelligence of people who disagree with you simply in an attempt to feel validated.

Here’s a bit of admittedly unsolicited advice (no sarcasm or meanness here): it’s a franchise with over 750 hours of content spanning 54 years. It’s ok if there are pieces of it you don’t like. LD accounts for less than 5 total hours of content in the franchise. If there are parts of the franchise you do like, it might be a better expenditure of your energy to discuss and interact on those topics. You don’t seem happy talking to people who disagree with you about stuff you don’t like. That’s not unusual btw...most humans would be miserable and even defensive while talking about things they don’t like with rooms full of people who disagree with them.

I’m just not sure why anyone would purposefully do that to themselves repeatedly...which is what you seem intent on doing.

I think that people want to be miserable now. Like that is a defining aspect of fandom and seeing Trek become popular, when it used to not be, is a bitter pill to swallow. So, putting new Trek at arm's length, insisting that the new production team doesn't "get it" is easier than accepting a harsh truth that not all Trek is for me.

The sad part is, the same could be said about TMP, TWOK and DS9. Those Treks didn't get what made TOS, TMP and TNG work, respectively. They could be construed as "insulting" to fans who liked what had come before and suddenly were changed for no other reason than they could. Certainly Bennett and Meyer were accused of not getting Trek.

I don't know. The more I observe regarding fandom the more I worry about people's mental health.

 

[Oddish]

Lower Decks is kind of a litmus test for Trekkies. It determines whether or not they can laugh at their chosen fandom. I don't see it as canonical, any more than I see "Spaceballs" as part of the "Star Wars" narrative. It is, to put it simply, a parody. As someone who has written one Trek parody and numerous parodies in other fandoms (most notably Pokemon and Harry Potter), I know the signs.

Trekkies who don't like to see their fandom parodied will want to steer clear of Lower Decks. But I like it just fine.

 

[Nenya]

Lower Decks is kind of a litmus test for Trekkies. It determines whether or not they can laugh at their chosen fandom. I don't see it as canonical, any more than I see "Spaceballs" as part of the "Star Wars" narrative. It is, to put it simply, a parody. As someone who has written one Trek parody and numerous parodies in other fandoms (most notably Pokemon and Harry Potter), I know the signs.

Trekkies who don't like to see their fandom parodied will want to steer clear of Lower Decks. But I like it just fine.

Imagine if Spaceballs was part of the Star Wars narrative. That's where we are at now. We've already had a Star Trek parody, it was called Galaxy Quest. Lots of us can laugh at Star Trek just fine. We laugh at it outside of the narrative.

 

[cooleddie74]

LD is canon. Just treat it the way we treat wacky and silly Lou Grant from The Mary Tyler Moore Show and serious, politically-minded Lou Grant from Lou Grant. One was a sitcom and the other was a serious newspaper drama yet both involved the exact same character and both were in the same continuity.

 

[Nyotarules]

Starfleet captains are not famous to the ordinary public, except for when they save Earth from an alien disaster. The ordinary public does not care what Starfleet gets up, to unless there is a war on.
Ask a real life person on the street to name their top armed forces personnel, from captain rank and above plus their ships/planes, you would get a wide eyed stare.

 

[fireproof78]

Lower Decks is kind of a litmus test for Trekkies. It determines whether or not they can laugh at their chosen fandom. I don't see it as canonical, any more than I see "Spaceballs" as part of the "Star Wars" narrative. It is, to put it simply, a parody. As someone who has written one Trek parody and numerous parodies in other fandoms (most notably Pokemon and Harry Potter), I know the signs.

Trekkies who don't like to see their fandom parodied will want to steer clear of Lower Decks. But I like it just fine.

If Spaceballs were part of the Star Wars narrative I would still laugh. Because that's the point-to laugh.

Lower Decks isn't laughing at Star Trek-it is a genuine look at some of the more ridiculous elements of the franchise and having fun with them. It isn't mean spirited, or mocking, or whatever. It's just plain fun.

I think a better example is "Wormhole Xtreme" in Stargate SG-1. The show recognized it and had fun with it, rather than taking itself super seriously all the time.

 

[BillJ]

I don't see it as canonical

Every bit as much “canon” as any other series with Star Trek in the title.

 

[Lord Garth]

Non-Trek Controversial Opinion: I think people wearing shorts outside in October is ridiculous. Put some pants on.

 

[fireproof78]

Non-Trek Controversial Opinion: I think people wearing shorts outside in October is ridiculous. Put some pants on.

It's freaking 70 degrees!!! And I'm working outside!

 

[Farscape One]

If Spaceballs were part of the Star Wars narrative I would still laugh. Because that's the point-to laugh.

Lower Decks isn't laughing at Star Trek-it is a genuine look at some of the more ridiculous elements of the franchise and having fun with them. It isn't mean spirited, or mocking, or whatever. It's just plain fun.

I think a better example is "Wormhole Xtreme" in Stargate SG-1. The show recognized it and had fun with it, rather than taking itself super seriously all the time.

STARGATE knew how to do meta references to itself. It worked really well.

SUPERNATURAL is another show that completely gets it when it does the meta and comedic references about itself. Look at episodes like "THE REAL GHOSTBUSTERS", "THE FRENCH MISTAKE", "FAN FICTION", and "SCOOBYNATURAL". (I'm a firm believer that it's part of the reason why it lasted 15 seasons... they know how to be self-deprecating.)

 

[Oddish]

Every bit as much “canon” as any other series with Star Trek in the title.

As is the case in our discussions elsewhere, I respect your right to feel as you do... and choose not to adopt your position

 

[fireproof78]

STARGATE knew how to do meta references to itself. It worked really well.

And I think Trek does it as well. And I think GR was more aware and worked that in to the TMP novel a little but it got sandbagged by super serious Trek.

 

[Farscape One]

STAR TREK does, but to a much lesser degree. Before LOWER DECKS, possibly the most outright example would be "TRIALS AND TRIBBLE-ATIONS". (Berman and Braga should have taken notes...that is how do a 'Valentine to the fans'.)

 

[Nenya]

As is the case in our discussions elsewhere, I respect your right to feel as you do... and choose not to adopt your position

The only way Lower Decks works for me is that it's a show (or holo-novel) set within the Star Trek universe and not events "actually" happening within the universe. This is a show for cadets at the Academy about what life would or could be like aboard a starship.

 

[fireproof78]

STAR TREK does, but to a much lesser degree. Before LOWER DECKS, possibly the most outright example would be "TRIALS AND TRIBBLE-ATIONS". (Berman and Braga should have taken notes...that is how do a 'Valentine to the fans'.)

Yes, which is why Lower Decks is so necessary. Star Trek is constantly purposed to have "great significance" (trademark pending) and is so self-serious that something like "Trials and Tribble-Ations" feels like an outlier. But, other franchises are able to take themselves less seriously and play around with their concept. Star Trek is behind on the curve to actually have fun with itself, and having to make a series a "comedy" to emphasize the need to have fun.

The only way Lower Decks works for me is that it's a show (or holo-novel) set within the Star Trek universe and not events "actually" happening within the universe. This is a show for cadets at the Academy about what life would or could be like aboard a starship.

Cool. That's how I treat TOS.

 

[Farscape One]

I agree. Self-parody is good and healthy for not just a series or franchise, but for people in general. I've always felt that if you can't laugh at yourself on things you've said or done, you have no right to laugh at what other people say or do.

And it's about time STAR TREK understood that.

 

[Nyotarules]

And I think Trek does it as well. And I think GR was more aware and worked that in to the TMP novel a little but it got sandbagged by super serious Trek.

GR drank his own kool aid, hence his 'in the 24th century humans won't have conflict and brothers won't fight'. He hated the TNG episode Family. The writer had to fight for it to be produced. And GR expected a child who lost his mother to not grief! Utter bollocks!

 

[Orphalesion]

GR drank his own kool aid, hence his 'in the 24th century humans won't have conflict and brothers won't fight'. He hated the TNG episode Family. The writer had to fight for it to be produced. And GR expected a child who lost his mother to not grief! Utter bollocks!

And yet it was totally okay for Riker to mope and jump around like some jealous goblin when Deanna was preparing to marry someone else in "Haven"
Sometimes you really gotta wonder what was going on there...

 

[Nyotarules]

And yet it was totally okay for Riker to mope and jump around like some jealous goblin when Deanna was preparing to marry someone else in "Haven"
Sometimes you really gotta wonder what was going on there...

Good ole 20th century maleism seeping into the script?