What do you think of as "Old Trek"?

[Ryva Brall]

Old Trek: the original pilot, with Captain Pike.
New Trek: Abrams-verse.
Anything in between is just Trek. Except Enterprise. That's Fake Trek.

By the way, Captain Kathryn, I love your new signature and avatar. Enjoy my favorite picture of the Doc:

Worst. Poker face. EVER.

 

[Captain Kathryn]

Old Trek: the original pilot, with Captain Pike.
New Trek: Abrams-verse.
Anything in between is just Trek. Except Enterprise. That's Fake Trek.

By the way, Captain Kathryn, I love your new signature and avatar. Enjoy my favorite picture of the Doc:

Worst. Poker face. EVER.

LOL

Good one~

 

[Anika Hanson]

TOS (TV show). I think of Abrams Trek as That 'Other Trek' or 'A different Trek'

 

[T'Girl]

23rd century TOS is Old Trek (series, animated and movies).

24th century TNG - DS9 - VOY - ENT are New Trek (series and movies).

Abrams movies are Alt Trek (alternate Trek).

There is also a subcategory known as "Mirror Trek."

 

[Kevman7987]

I tend to group Trek around what era it takes place (Movie dates included):

Classic Era (TOS, TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TFF, TUC [2265-2293])

Next Generation Era (TNG, DS9, VOY, GEN, FC, INS, NEM [2364-2379)

Enterprise Era (ENT [2151-2161])

Reboot Era ('09, ID [2258-2260)

 

[Belz...]

So "Old" would be Enterprise, then ?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

oldTrek is everything before Abrams; nuTrek is the Abrams movies.

Pretty much this, but I can't quite fit TAS or Enterprise in with oldTrek. They're both so out of place that I consider them to exist in a sort of limbo.

Enterprise is more like TOS than any of the other modern Treks. I don't have a problem seeing it as being of a piece with the rest of oldTrek continuity; there's nothing particularly different about it.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Enterprise is more like TOS than any of the other modern Treks. I don't have a problem seeing it as being of a piece with the rest of oldTrek continuity; there's nothing particularly different about it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That's...charming, but really not at all impressive.

Tell me again what brilliant drama all those actors buried in foam rubber playing war on DS9 constituted. Most Trek viewers fled that series (dropping from an initial high of 18 million to less than 4 million in its final season); ratings-wise, most of the decline that destroyed the TV franchise is attributable to it and to some degree to Voyager. So viewers voted on its merits with their remote controls.

 

[The Old Mixer]

^And how did DS9 come into this...?

 

[Lord Garth]

These are dead horses.

 

[F. King Daniel]

^I'll get the

Spoiler: Into Darkness

Khan blood

 

[Belz...]

^And how did DS9 come into this...?

I don't know. Personally I think Voyager is more to blame for the ratings falling on Trek.

 

[BillJ]

^And how did DS9 come into this...?

I don't know. Personally I think Voyager is more to blame for the ratings falling on Trek.

DS9 lost more than 75% of its initial audience. That is a huge slide.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Exactly so. People make excuses for the series they like and hang blame on those they don't, but numbers are numbers.

 

[Belz...]

DS9 lost more than 75% of its initial audience. That is a huge slide.

Yeah but my opinion is that the competition from another Trek show with a more familiar format hurt the whole franchise.

Exactly so. People make excuses for the series they like and hang blame on those they don't, but numbers are numbers.

I don't make excuses. I'm well aware that DS9 was a tougher sell than TNG or VOY, but these numbers have causes, and it might be more than just "people didn't like DS9".

 

[Kelthaz]

Exactly so. People make excuses for the series they like and hang blame on those they don't, but numbers are numbers.

Except that no one here is talking about popularity, so you're kinda ranting about nothing. We all know that Deep Space Nine failed with the mainstream (as did Firefly, Farscape, and Babylon 5), but that says nothing about the quality of those shows.

 

[BillJ]

Exactly so. People make excuses for the series they like and hang blame on those they don't, but numbers are numbers.

Except that no one here is talking about popularity, so you're kinda ranting about nothing. We all know that Deep Space Nine failed with the mainstream (as did Firefly, Farscape, and Babylon 5), but that says nothing about the quality of those shows.

The shows you mention were never mainstream to begin with though. They started with small audiences and continued to have small audiences. DS9 started with an absolutely huge audience, especially by syndication standards, and it bled away because people weren't interested.

It doesn't make DS9 a bad show, but its wrong to blame its slide on Voyager. The ratings slide is simply a product of mainstream audiences not being interested in the show after sampling it.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

DS9 lost more than 75% of its initial audience. That is a huge slide.

Yeah but my opinion is that the competition from another Trek show with a more familiar format hurt the whole franchise.

Exactly so. People make excuses for the series they like and hang blame on those they don't, but numbers are numbers.

I don't make excuses. I'm well aware that DS9 was a tougher sell than TNG or VOY, but these numbers have causes, and it might be more than just "people didn't like DS9".

Nah. Looks like it's time to trot this out again.

DS9, VOY, and ENT lie on the same curve of decline in ratings. The problem wasn't DS9 in particular, VOY in particular, or ENT in particular. The decline was shared among all post-TNG Trek shows.

As to the OP's question, what do I consider old Trek, by this point, given the reboot, it's any series not currently in production. So, it's anything not the two most recent films.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Old (aka Proper) Trek is anything before JJ Abrams got his hands on the franchise.