What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[HotRod]

So you're just hating on all derivative Trek works post TOS, just because they contain "Trekkies" who worked in later Trek Productions?

Because there were a LOT of them inside the TNG era and beyond.

*sigh*

No one is hating on anything.

It's simply being pointed out that ultra fans of the franchise will often put far too much thought into continuity, lore, and their personal nostalgia, while ignoring broader storytelling needs like character growth, or accessibility for new audiences members.

They make poor writers as they tend to stick only to what they know and love, rather than attempt anything new.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Picard looked better with the hairpiece.

Stewart could neither swindle the production out of a great hairpiece like Shatner nor go full badass bald like Brooks. Poor guy.

 

[Firebird]

Yes. TOS has the advantage of never having anyone who was a Trekkie growing up.

Trek that is nothing but referential to Trek is painfully boring.

Trek that builds itself on top of outside stories and movies can be super intriguing.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Trek that is nothing but referential to Trek is painfully boring.

Trek that builds itself on top of outside stories and movies can be super intriguing.

So you didn't enjoy Lower Decks, what about Prodigy & Picard?

It's simply being pointed out that ultra fans of the franchise will often put far too much thought into continuity, lore, and their personal nostalgia, while ignoring broader storytelling needs like character growth, or accessibility for new audiences members.

They make poor writers as they tend to stick only to what they know and love, rather than attempt anything new.

Then how do you feel about the writing staff for all the derivative shows Post TOS?

 

[cooleddie74]

Sweet Fancy Moses.

I go away for a couple of hours....

 

[Firebird]

This is the argument that never ends;
I’d prefer the heat death of the universe over this, my friends…

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

This is the argument that never ends;
I’d prefer the heat death of the universe over this, my friends…

This is the Controversial Topics Opinion thread, we're already at page 1347 and counting.

This thread started in Jun 2020

Why would you expect this thread to ever end?

 

[fireproof78]

*sigh*

No one is hating on anything.

It's simply being pointed out that ultra fans of the franchise will often put far too much thought into continuity, lore, and their personal nostalgia, while ignoring broader storytelling needs like character growth, or accessibility for new audiences members.

They make poor writers as they tend to stick only to what they know and love, rather than attempt anything new.

Indeed, yes. There is a struggle to let go of specific wants if the story calls for it.

Storytelling as an art is about balance. Indulge in one side and you alienate another part of the audience. Star Trek is no different. If it relies too heavily on one facet it will loose casual viewers who want to just enjoy an entertaining story, not focus on realistic combat (double handed fist strike anyone?) or the science of warp drive or lore driven history lectures.

 

[Jayson1]

Sweet Fancy Moses.

I go away for a couple of hours....

Hope you learned a valuable lesson. Nobody is allowed to have a life outside of Trekbbs. It is your fate. It is your duty.

 

[HotRod]

So you didn't enjoy Lower Decks, what about Prodigy & Picard?


Then how do you feel about the writing staff for all the derivative shows Post TOS?

Again, as has been pointed out to you many times, those writers are professional writers first and foremost. Being a Trekkie is secondary, at best.

Infact, most would probably just be casual fans, and not the crazy, foaming at the mouth Trekkies that many of us are.

Let's be honest, there's fans, and then there's Fans.

Most writers, even if they're fans of the franchise, don't give a flying fuck about half the shit we're super passionate about.

It's the hardcore Trekkies that need to stay the hell out of the writers room.

 

[Nerys Myk]

This is the Controversial Topics Opinion thread, we're already at page 1347 and counting.

This thread started in Jun 2020

Why would you expect this thread to ever end?

 

[Farscape One]

Okay, so you don't agree, then "What do you want to talk about"?

As has been stated by others...

ANYTHING else.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Storytelling as an art is about balance. Indulge in one side and you alienate another part of the audience. Star Trek is no different. If it relies too heavily on one facet it will loose casual viewers who want to just enjoy an entertaining story, not focus on realistic combat (double handed fist strike anyone?) or the science of warp drive or lore driven history lectures.

But massive Franchises like Star Trek, Star Wars, Marvel/DC Comics (Any of those Franchise Stories).

Every single one of them are legacy franchises who have "Giant Barrier" to entry for new folks who aren't familiar with it.

Those who are into it, are already familiar with it and usually spread the enjoyment of the show to those they know.

It doesn't matter which franchise you are, when you get big, it usually comes with a huge barrier to entry as is.

Especially the older the franchise is and doesn't have a easy starting point.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

So you didn't enjoy Lower Decks, what about Prodigy & Picard?

Don't you think you might be jumping to a conclusion? As far as I know, the poster did not state their opinion about Lower Decks. Although there is a lot of content that is self-referential to Star Trek, it is not exclusively that, and there's more besides. Myself, I see more in LDS than just the self-reference. It's possible that other fans do, as well.

 

[FormerLurker]

Are they made of cartilage rather than regular bone? It might explain why they seemed to move sometimes.

could be, but then we have seen skulls where thay are clearly bone and seem fused to the rest of it

Detailed ridges on the skulls is stupid, and they should have never depicted them that way.

The ridges are scales. The Klingons are a reptilian species.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Again, as has been pointed out to you many times, those writers are professional writers first and foremost. Being a Trekkie is secondary, at best.

Infact, most would probably just be casual fans, and not the crazy, foaming at the mouth Trekkies that many of us are.

Let's be honest, there's fans, and then there's Fans.

Most writers, even if they're fans of the franchise, don't give a flying fuck about half the shit we're super passionate about.

It's the hardcore Trekkies that need to stay the hell out of the writers room.

Ah, so "Casual Fans" only.

"Hardcore Fans", not welcomed or allowed.

That's how you perceive it. Gotcha.

Not very welcoming bunch to the rest of us Trekkies.

 

[korblborp]

We do not discuss it with outsiders!

No, really, my view has always been: No explanation of the visual differences between TOS/TAS and everything made from TMP onward should have ever been provided. Literally not ever. What they said in "Trials and Tribble-ations" should have been treated as a humorous* fourth wall violation and never referenced again, ever.

* - and it was hilarious.

There, that should stir the pot enough to get this thread back on track!

and that's the beauty of TUC, it just showed a wide variety of klingon foreheads, from super crennalated to almost smooth

 

[Finn]

Detailed ridges on the skulls is stupid, and they should have never depicted them that way.

The ridges are scales. The Klingons are a reptilian species.

Their women breast-feed their young. They are definitely warm-blooded...plus they are able to have kids with Humans.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Don't you think you might be jumping to a conclusion? As far as I know, the poster did not state their opinion about Lower Decks. Although there is a lot of content that is self-referential to Star Trek, it is not exclusively that, and there's more besides. Myself, I see more in LDS than just the self-reference. It's possible that other fans do, as well.

I want his opinions on it.

Because (Lower Decks, Prodigy, and then Picard) are the most "Self Referential" out of the 3x new shows.
With each further show being a bit less referential to the past.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

and that's the beauty of TUC, it just showed a wide variety of klingon foreheads, from super crennalated to almost smooth

To be honest, I never noticed that. Next time I rewatch, I'll take note to see if I can see the full range. (In the meantime, if anyone has pics showing the spread, that would be welcome!)