I said comparison not criticism. The two are not the same.
What do older fans think?
- Thread starter Admiral Jean-Luc Picard
- Start date
? Of course they are, or film schools would be unable to examine specific ways in which one film director influenced another, who then went on to develop a new approach. Next thing you’ll be arguing is that story construction and cinematography don’t exist as universal skills that can transfer between shows, that Star Trek is bound by its own “laws of story” which have nothing to do with those on Breaking Bad. No, all that’s different is those in charge and whatever confluence of factors generates a consistent production vs a haphazard one with recurring upheaval behind the scenes. Better Star Trek can exist in theory, in practice maybe never, but anyone can see it and say so. There is no contradiction in saying DSC is nothing special even as we still watch it because it’s Star Trek.
Back to the original topic, I think people put too much emphasis on age and how much it impacts whether or not someone likes a new Star Trek series.
TNG --> Premiered in 1987 when I was 8, didn't see any of it until 1991 when I was 11 --> I liked the TOS Movies better.
DS9 --> Premiered in 1993 when I was 13 --> I thought "Emissary" was great but the rest of the first season didn't grab me. I didn't start to become more interested in it until the second season, going into the third.
VOY --> Premiered in 1995 when I was 15 --> I enjoyed "Caretaker", and it looked like VOY would be an exciting series, and the intro and effects blew me away. That was legitimately impressive stuff for 1995. Then the rest of it was lukewarm on average.
ENT --> Premiered in 2001 when I was 22 --> I was Anti-B&B, I thought Ron Moore should've been involved, it didn't fit my image of a Pre-TOS, blah, blah, blah... I'm re-watching it right now in 2020 and I'm eating crow. But back in 2001? Forget it. Give it a decade or two.
DSC --> Premiered in 2017 when I was 38 --> I loved it. It became my favorite Star Trek series besides TOS. Then it got to the point where it was my favorite Star Trek series period. I'm a Disco Fan. I own it.
PIC --> Premiered in 2020 and I'm 40 --> I like it as much as DSC, though I'm still going to give the nod to Discovery as my absolute favorite Star Trek series... but I still like PIC better than TNG, DS9, and VOY. You know, the Star Trek series from my youth. And I'm not afraid to say it. I like Picard better than TNG.
So there's no correlation between my age and which Star Trek I like at all.
TNG --> Premiered in 1987 when I was 8, didn't see any of it until 1991 when I was 11 --> I liked the TOS Movies better.
DS9 --> Premiered in 1993 when I was 13 --> I thought "Emissary" was great but the rest of the first season didn't grab me. I didn't start to become more interested in it until the second season, going into the third.
VOY --> Premiered in 1995 when I was 15 --> I enjoyed "Caretaker", and it looked like VOY would be an exciting series, and the intro and effects blew me away. That was legitimately impressive stuff for 1995. Then the rest of it was lukewarm on average.
ENT --> Premiered in 2001 when I was 22 --> I was Anti-B&B, I thought Ron Moore should've been involved, it didn't fit my image of a Pre-TOS, blah, blah, blah... I'm re-watching it right now in 2020 and I'm eating crow. But back in 2001? Forget it. Give it a decade or two.
DSC --> Premiered in 2017 when I was 38 --> I loved it. It became my favorite Star Trek series besides TOS. Then it got to the point where it was my favorite Star Trek series period. I'm a Disco Fan. I own it.
PIC --> Premiered in 2020 and I'm 40 --> I like it as much as DSC, though I'm still going to give the nod to Discovery as my absolute favorite Star Trek series... but I still like PIC better than TNG, DS9, and VOY. You know, the Star Trek series from my youth. And I'm not afraid to say it. I like Picard better than TNG.
So there's no correlation between my age and which Star Trek I like at all.
Since I'm not a film critic I'll stand by my approach. I will not compare. If a story doesn't work it doesn't work. End of story.
Of course not, but it’s still unusual that you should applaud the two shows centered on far-fetched and ultimately defused conspiracies threatening life as we know it, as opposed to TNG or DS9 with their ensemble casts and a wide variety of subjects designed to explore the individual characters so they could evolve in their personal history and quirks.
You’ll find yourself to be a massive exception since most people who are taught literary and art criticism in high school or earlier remember to apply the necessary observations later in life also. Anyone can retain an interest in great storytelling and continue to analyze it and discover why it is great.
Fine, I can be the exception. I don't mind that. I know how storytelling works and what works for me. I don't need to compare DSC to TNG to know what I like. I don't need film critic theory to support my engagement with a work.
I can analyze a work without comparison.
Mileage will vary. But the amount of times that comparison has benefited me in my entertainment life can be counted on one hand.
I'm not going to change my opinion just for the sake of satisfying an argument on a TrekBBS thread. When I'm watching the shows on TV, I know what I prefer. And no gatekeeping argument you post will change my mind.
Personally, I think the shows have explored the main characters just fine.
I see no need for the ensemble cast that is constantly pinned for.
Gatekeeping? When a first officer mutinies because of an opinion based in Vulcan philosophy and is then recruited by a captain who turns out to be … from the Mirror Universe! When
a season ends on a happy note with a murderer remaining freely on the bridge, and begins with a Cylon attack on Mars?
Last edited:
I can post a long eloquent post but A) It's Easter, and B) It won't do anything. You're not receptive to anything I say. So this is an utter waste of time.
So you're saying they're Star Trek?
I'm just saying it's strange you don't see them in all of the earlier shows.
Because it's a part of Star Trek from the beginning.
The Terran Emperor comes along to become a member of… Section 31?
You and other commenters are ignoring the proportion of fan-serving extremes here. When yon only have 10 to 15 episodes per season and extended production time in 2017+, the result should be something like picking the best 10 to 15 varied, representative episodes from two 26-episode seasons of TOS, TNG or DS9, the idea being that the franchise has learned its lessons and found a way to present its best foot forward for this day and age. Instead, we get a mix and match of sci-fish highlights expanded into structural members with little regard for character development. What do we learn about Burnham or Stamets as people with everyday lives beyond plot needs? Very little, since there just isn’t time before the universe is lost.
You don’t build a Star Trek season by extending a TNG/JJ movie plot by a few blank slots and filling them in with famous callbacks: instead they should diminish in proportion and thus basically disappear, leaving us with no time at all for something like the MU or S31.
I fully believe that DSC is what a modern version of DS9 would be like, which is why it eclipsed that series as my favorite - and best - iteration of Star Trek.
Just as DS9 was Benjamin Sisko's story (the narrative was completely filtered through his perspective even though not everything about the narrative directly revolved around or was related to him), DSC is Michael Burnham's story (with everything about the narrative filtered through her perspective).
Just as DS9 was Benjamin Sisko's story (the narrative was completely filtered through his perspective even though not everything about the narrative directly revolved around or was related to him), DSC is Michael Burnham's story (with everything about the narrative filtered through her perspective).
Cool story, bro.
Exactly, and if one doesn't enjoy Michael then they probably are not going to enjoy DSC. Not good, not bad; just is.
While I don't think I would call it my favorite or the best Trek yet, DS9 is still my favorite, I am actually and rarely in almost one hundred percent agreement with you.
I'm frightened. Have the end times come?
*looks out window*
Oh...
Agreed.
The same thing applies to the other Trek series and their main characters.
If you don't like Kirk/Spock/McCoy, you're not going to enjoy TOS; if you don't like Picard/Riker/Data, you're not going to enjoy TNG or PCRD; if you don't like Sisko, you're not going to enjoy DS9; if you don't like Janeway/Seven/The Doctor, you're not going to enjoy VGR; and if you don't like Archer/Trip/T'Pol, you're not going to enjoy ENT.
Similar threads
- Locked
