Poll Which era of Star Trek would you rather see continue?

[Saul]

Just curious to know where the majority of fandom rests at the moment. After the Kelvin movies, 3 seasons of Discovery, Short Treks, Picard and 2 seasons of Lower Decks do you feel satisfied and glad Star Trek has moved on? Or, after giving Discovery and Picard a chance do you want to go back to the era of episode of the week? Lower budgets but stories that aren't dependent on a mystery box arc?

So if Q showed up and gave you a choice to continue with Star Trek as it was in 2005 or continue this current era which would you choose?

Don't fight over it.

 

[fireproof78]

I just want Kelvin.

 

[STEPhon IT]

JJTrek, there's a potential to branch off and produce something interesting, in my opinion the canvas is open where a producer could anything with it besides aping off themes from TOS movies.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

All of them.

 

[Tim Thomason]

This seems a bit of an odd take. Is the current era a continuation of the Kelvin era? Is TOS the same era as Enterprise? What happened between 2005 and 2009 to split this down to two eras?

 

[F. King Daniel]

There's like 700 episodes of the old stuff and at least that many novels and comics. Isn't that enough for anyone?

Give me TOS for 4 more seasons. Otherwise, new stuff.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

If you said 1966 to 1999 I might have voted that. But Enterprise shows that group had clearly run out of fuel.

 

[valkyrie013]

Which Era? Enterprise. 2155 on up.

 

[Greg Cox]

There are lots of different flavors of STAR TREK. Why try to limit the selection? Infinite diversity and all that.

Plus, honestly, STAR TREK does not exist in a bubble, outside the rest of pop culture. All STAR TREK movies and series are inevitably going to reflect the eras they were made in. TOS looks and feels like a 1960s show. TNG and its spawn feel like the 1990s, even ENTERPRISE which, arguably, was a 21st-century series that too often felt like it was stuck back in the 1990s. Modern shows feel like modern TV, but will show their age with time.

You can't roll back the clock. Even if you tried to make a "classic-recipe" show in the style of TOS or TNG or whatever, it would invariably look and feel more modern than you might intend. That's just how it works.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I like the Kelvin movies but I think a 4th would wrap it up.

Picard, DISCO, and Lower Decks forever.

 

[Trelane_Squire_of_Gothos]

Just curious to know where the majority of fandom rests at the moment. After the Kelvin movies, 3 seasons of Discovery, Short Treks, Picard and 2 seasons of Lower Decks do you feel satisfied and glad Star Trek has moved on? Or, after giving Discovery and Picard a chance do you want to go back to the era of episode of the week? Lower budgets but stories that aren't dependent on a mystery box arc?

So if Q showed up and gave you a choice to continue with Star Trek as it was in 2005 or continue this current era which would you choose?

Don't fight over it.

1966 to 2005 scores an easy win for me. There is no Trek I enjoyed more. I had hoped for a better tie in to original canon with the newer stuff, but I have found it pretty disappointing.

The Kelvin stuff got old very fast.

If you said 1966 to 1999 I might have voted that. But Enterprise shows that group had clearly run out of fuel.

Interesting that the sum total of 1966 to 1999 is enough to make you pick that over current Trek, but Enterprise getting lumped in diminishes 1966 to 1999 enough to make you pick current Trek instead.

I could do without Voyager altogether, but despite how weak I think that series was, the sum total of that era is still greater than new Trek for me.

 

[Lord Garth]

"2017 on" would be more accurate in my case, not "2009 on". I don't dislike the Kelvin Films, but I'm also not a fan of them. NuKirk is too Dudebro for me. I generally can't stand dudebros. And the action isalittlebittoofranticallypaced for my style. DSC and PIC took out and/or toned down what I didn't like about New Trek, and made it something I do like.

TOS was of a time-and-place. The TOS Movies ran their course and that cast is dead or too old. And I'm of the opinion that the Berman Era definitely ran its course. I thought it back in the early-2000s and that opinion still stands in the early-2020s.

 

[Spot261]

There are lots of different flavors of STAR TREK. Why try to limit the selection? Infinite diversity and all that.

Plus, honestly, STAR TREK does not exist in a bubble, outside the rest of pop culture. All STAR TREK movies and series are inevitably going to reflect the eras they were made in. TOS looks and feels like a 1960s show. TNG and its spawn feel like the 1990s, even ENTERPRISE which, arguably, was a 21st-century series that too often felt like it was stuck back in the 1990s. Modern shows feel like modern TV, but will show their age with time.

You can't roll back the clock. Even if you tried to make a "classic-recipe" show in the style of TOS or TNG or whatever, it would invariably look and feel more modern than you might intend. That's just how it works.

OK, supposing you time travelled back to 1967 and tried?

 

[Greg Cox]

OK, supposing you time travelled back to 1967 and tried?

Have you seen "City on the Edge of Forever"? Suppose I accidentally saved Joan Collins or something?

Seriously, I wouldn't be able to make a modern-style series in the 1960s, just as I wouldn't be able to make a TOS-style series today. Acting styles have changed, filmmaking styles have changed, censorship restrictions have changed, the audience and their expectations are not the same.

Older movies and TV series are time capsules. That's part of their charm and appeal. And I'm not sure you can really recreate that.

Says the guy who was watching a 1953 Hitchcock movie just last night, and is listening to the soundtrack to an old Vincent Price movie as I type this . . .

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

And while we're seeing new series set in roughly the TOS era (the first two seasons of DSC, and the upcoming SNW), the look and feel is very different from actual TOS episodes.

At the same time, though, I very much enjoy watching a number of television series I grew up with: not only TOS, but Get Smart, Emergency!, Banacek, Quark, Mork & Mindy, WKRP in Cincinnati (I strongly disagree with the people who are screaming about certain songs being swapped out for production music because of licensing issues: the show isn't about rock; it's about a radio station being run by misfits, and would be just as funny if it were a classical station), and Welcome Back, Kotter. I also very much enjoy my DVD set of a superhero spoof cartoon series, Batfink.

 

[tomalak301]

I would like to see more in the Kelvin era. In terms of canon timeline, I would love to see something from the end of Enterprise to the birth of the Federation or something between The Undiscovered Country and TNG.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I have my own Head Canon for 3 TV shows that I want to implement.
I'd take the end of Star Trek Nemesis, and jump forward to the 26th century.

Specifically, the 1st episode of the 1st show that I want to do will take place on 2501/01-01, beginning of the 26th Century.

I'd include all the major continuity from the Berman-Braga era and even most of the changes that comes along with the Kurtzman era and make fixes to them in my time-line and my section of the Star Trek Universe.

Don't worry, Michael Burnham will get the happy ending she deserves and I'll prevent "The Burn" and a few other massive tragedies from happening in my Timeline (e.g. Synth Attack on Mars & Romulan Infiltrator in StarFleet Security).

But otherwise, my show would take place 122 years after Star Trek Nemesis at the start of the 26th Century.

 

[fireproof78]

Seriously, I wouldn't be able to make a modern-style series in the 1960s, just as I wouldn't be able to make a TOS-style series today. Acting styles have changed, filmmaking styles have changed, censorship restrictions have changed, the audience and their expectations are not the same.

This is close to my view as well. Capturing the 60s style is difficult not only because of the changes but also the view on entertainment media. What is tolerated in TOS or other of the era shows would not fly far now.

Many fans will disagree with me because they think it can be done like fan films have. But, even that hits a very small niche of a niche. It might work for some fans but not all and certainly not enough to profit off of. And, even if the production values are similar the stories, acting and cinematography will be completely different.

Ultimately, it comes to what people want in entertainment. Me, I'm interested in Trek trying something a little different. It might fail horribly but thats ok. I still have my VHS/DVD/streaming if I need the nostalgia fix.

 

[dupersuper]

Though I have issues with Picard and Discovery, and consider ST 2009 just stupid fun and Into Darkness terrible, I still consider 2009 - present Trek a continuation of 1966 - 2005 Trek, so for me it's a false dichotomy and 1966 Trek is continuing.

 

[fireproof78]

Yes. I find this to be a very binary choice.