What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Eckauskas]

How about there is nothing about the flagship status that adds any real value to the narrative. Never mind the fact that there is no flag officer serving aboard so the terminology of "flagship" is used incorrectly.

You might *think* it adds nothing to the narrative, but it absolutely takes nothing away from the narrative. Just makes this response all the more pointless;

Me.

Just have a regular degular starship, not the flagship.

No point getting pissy about someone saying they'd like the show to be set on the flagship, just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[JesterFace]

Controversial?
I can't take animated Star Trek seriously.

 

[Birb-of-Prey]

Controversial?
I can't take animated Star Trek seriously.

You're not supposed to take LDS seriously. Treat it like a humorous exaggeration of canonical events and have fun with it

 

[fireproof78]

You might *think* it adds nothing to the narrative, but it absolutely takes nothing away from the narrative. Just makes this response all the more pointless;

Curious. What does it add?

No point getting pissy about someone saying they'd like the show to be set on the flagship, just arguing for the sake of arguing.

I'm stating a preference. Any 'pissiness' is read in. My only objection is the idea that everyone would want such a show.

 

[1001001]

Controversial?
I can't take animated Star Trek seriously.

I agree when it comes to TAS.

PRO is fine for what it is.

LDS is wonderful fun.

 

[cooleddie74]

TAS is my least favorite of the three but it has episodes like "Yesteryear" and "The Counter-Clock Incident" so it has its really good moments. Also, the return of Mudd, Koloth and Korax from TOS so there's in-universe continuity from the live action series.

It's not a series I actively seek out to watch but I've seen far worse episodes of Trek and in every decade.

 

[Birb-of-Prey]

I thought TAS was quite good for what it was and when it was made. Many of the episodes are as solid as TOS.

 

[Paul755]

I finally watched all of TAS over the summer. There was some good stuff there.

But mostly…woof.

 

[BillJ]

I'd love to know the viewing figures compared to Disco, Picard and SNW.

Like the other shows, it is obviously meeting whatever metrics CBS has set for it, because it keeps getting renewed.

That is really all that matters.

 

[cooleddie74]

Hell, TOS never topped 52nd in the year-end ratings but managed to last three seasons. The streaming shows are probably in great shape from Paramount's point of view.

 

[Eckauskas]

Curious. What does it add?

I'm stating a preference. Any 'pissiness' is read in. My only objection is the idea that everyone would want such a show.

That's interesting, because at no point did I ever say "everyone" would. This is what I actually said;

Who doesn’t love a show set on board the Federation flagship?

I suspect there isn't that significant a cross section of the fandom who don't count at least one of TOS, TAS, TNG or SNW among their favourite shows of the entire franchise. You've openly admitted your fondness for the JJ films, which (unless I'm mistaken) are set aboard the Federation flagship. So this all reads as someone who's very keen to be contrary for the sake of it.

Feel free to point out how the narrative suffers from the setting of the flagship. Since you seem to have such strong opinions on it, to argue such a small point so vehemently.

 

[fireproof78]

Feel free to point out how the narrative suffers from the setting of the flagship. Since you seem to have such strong opinions on it, to argue such a small point so vehemently.

It's a poor and incorrect use of the term. TOS, and DS9 didn't use it and I find it distracting because there is no flag officer on the ship.

The implication of your question was no one would object to it. Well, call it pedantic because I object to it because the word doesn't fit the ship. It might be made up but can words be used correctly?

 

[Eckauskas]

It's a poor and incorrect use of the term. TOS, and DS9 didn't use it and I find it distracting because there is no flag officer on the ship.

The implication of your question was no one would object to it. Well, call it pedantic because I object to it because the word doesn't fit the ship. It might be made up but can words be used correctly?

If you're letting something like ruin your enjoyment of a TV show, you have greater problems than what a stranger on the internet wants to see from that franchise going forward.

 

[fireproof78]

If you're letting something like ruin your enjoyment of a TV show, you have greater problems than what a stranger on the internet wants to see from that franchise going forward.

Pray tell, please.

And who said ruin?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I’m typically more forgiving of the “mistakes” in TOS because they were making things up as they went along.

Up to a point, then they did have "a past".

 

[Eckauskas]

Pray tell, please.

And who said ruin?

Your strong opinions on something that doesn't really matter tell their own story.

 

[BillJ]

Your strong opinions on something that doesn't really matter tell their own story.

I'm pretty sure we all have had strong opinions on something that didn't really matter, at one point or another. Lighten up.

 

[fireproof78]

Your strong opinions on something that doesn't really matter tell their own story.

Continue on. Your analysis in of itself is quite fascinating.

 

[1001001]

Okay that’s enough of that.

 

[MAGolding]

So DS9, Voyager, Discovery, Prodigy and Lower Decks then?

EDIT: 12 series in total, less than half of them set aboard the Federation flagship. Definitely don't see enough of lesser ships in the fleet right enough.

I don't remember for sure, but as far as I known only the Enteprise D was called the flagship of Starfleet and/or the Federation onscreen in TNG.

And even that example doesn't make sense. The Starfleet flagship would be the ship that the commanding admiral or maybe the secretary or minister of Starfleet would travel in, and the Federation flagship would be the one that the President of the Federation would travel in.

So I can only guess that some 24th century word or expession is wrongly translated into 20th century English as "flagship".

I don’t know why it’s a big deal to anyone. The episodes would be exactly the same regardless of the status of the vehicle they fly around in.

Except that if their ship was really the permanent "flagship" it would always be hanging around headquarters waiting for the Stafleet commander or the President to go somwhere in it. Thus it would not be constanlty exploring strange ne worlds and getting itno trouble.

How about there is nothing about the flagship status that adds any real value to the narrative. Never mind the fact that there is no flag officer serving aboard so the terminology of "flagship" is used incorrectly....

If the ship of the protagonists was seriously the flagship i any real sense, things would be rather boring and routine on it, and they wouldn't constantly be having adventures. So true flagship status would not only not add any real value to the narrative, it would detract from it and make the show boring (unles the show was more of a drama than an adventure show and written by really great writers).

So its good for those shows set on the "flagship" that it isn't used like a real flagship would be.

You might *think* it adds nothing to the narrative, but it absolutely takes nothing away from the narrative. Just makes this response all the more pointless;...

See my remarks right above.