Why the hate for Disco?

[Char Kais]

Why does an utopia and enlightened future have to be told from the perspective of the military? If anything, an enlightened Star Trek in a peaceful, enlightened utopia would make the military more of a formality than a necessity, and more interesting stories would be told outside of Starfleet.

Exactly. It's a ridiculous box to put Star Trek in to that it can only be told from the point of view Starfleet.

The members of Starfleet are not just military personal.
They are scientists, explorers, diplomats, and most importantly official representatives of a utopian vision of an enlightened mankind.

You could tell a story about the Klingon / Romulan war, or BontyHunters (like the Tellarite who captured Archer for the Klingons) and with good writers (that means without Alexander Hilary Kurtzman and Akiva Goldsman), it could be a good show.
But how would that be a Star Trek show other than in name only and not just a generic SciFi action-adventure/military show?
How do you contrast a fictional, enlightened version of ourselves against others? What do these stories say about us, how do they reflect on us? How do you tell allegorical stories about mankind this way?

Even if Trek isn't an utopia, I kind of think Starfleet's been overexplored after literally 50 years. Picard has shown that stories outside of Starfleet can exist.

No, the opposite is true. Picard is worse than Discovery. A huge disappointment.
I don't want to list all the failures and problems of Picard here.

 

[fireproof78]

How do you tell allegorical stories about mankind this way?

Simple. You describe a problem and a possible solution the way Science Fiction has been doing for years. Star Trek just takes a more optimistic (note not utopic) perspective.

Also, Star Trek was slated as an action/adventure show. There is zero wrong with it being an action adventure series again. Star Trek is not so special it cannot have action or be like other shows.

ETA: for more musings on Star Trek as not a utopia see @Vger23 post here.

 

[BillJ]

The Federation would let an entire civilisation die if saving them meant violating the prime directive

Have we ever actually seen the Federation let die a civilization they could've saved?

 

[Tuskin38]

I don't want to list all the failures and problems of Picard here.

Yeah because there aren't any. Or at at least barely any.

 

[Yistaan]

The members of Starfleet are not just military personal.
They are scientists, explorers, diplomats, and most importantly official representatives of a utopian vision of an enlightened mankind.

The Trek franchise itself has shown us tons of scientists, explorers, diplomats, etc. who weren't in Starfleet. In TOS they (like Robert Fox, John Gill, etc.) were usually dumbed down to make the Starfleet characters look like the heroes (something that's continued with making the Soongs look eccentric etc.) I don't agree that good stories require Starfleet in them. If Trek wrote characters outside of Starfleet better, that would be a start (and that's probably part of the problem you have with Picard, but just my guess).

 

[The Wormhole]

The budget for the TNG movies was similar to movies of that time.

Tell it to Brannon Braga who insists otherwise, and claimed the budget was a major handicap for the TMG movies. Or at least the two he worked on.

Star Trek is an allegorical SciFi show about a utopia and an enlightened mankind.

TOS wasn't about either.

If you deviate from that, you end up with a generic SciFi action show

If you ask Average Joe on the Street to name generic sci-fi, it's 50/50 he's going to say Star Trek.

And even when it has darker themes (which tend to be the more popular stories,

Definitely. For all The Fans love to get on their soapbox and insist Star Trek is about Utopia and exploration, as opposed to GrimDark warfare, one of the most popular episodes of TNG is the one in an alternate timeline where the Federation is at war which they're losing. Not to mention, Starfleet is depicted as a legitimate military and the Enterprise an actual warship in this fan favorite episode.

Oh, that's right, The Fans love it because it's about a temporal anomaly, obviously.

Even if Trek isn't an utopia, I kind of think Starfleet's been overexplored after literally 50 years. Picard has shown that stories outside of Starfleet can exist.

Hell, The Fans love to get on their soapbox and insist the novels are more Star Trek than what's been onscreen since TNG ended, and even the novels have told stories that didn't focus on Starfleet with settings aboard a Klingon ship, the Federation government, a courtroom novel with Samuel T Cogley and the Department of Temporal Investigations. Granted, the novels are aimed at a more niche audience than the shows, and it's certainly no coincidence the first attempt to do a series not focused on Starfleet was in the much hyped TNG revival centered on Picard, but ultimately the point is the Star Trek universe has plenty of ground to cover not limited to Starfleet.

The members of Starfleet are not just military personal.
They are scientists, explorers, diplomats, and most importantly official representatives of a utopian vision of an enlightened mankind.

Really don't want to beat this dead horse again, but science, exploration, diplomacy and representing their nation and people are all things the military does. The categories of military and science, exploration and so on are not mutually exclusive.

Besides, considering how many Starfleet Captains and Admirals turn corrupt, they're not really doing a very good job representing "a utopian vision of an enlightened mankind." If anything the very presence of so many renegades in Starfleet's upper echelons seems to be sending the message that utopia breeds corruption. Which, coincidentally is the intentional message Doctor Who is sending with so many Time Lords being corrupt and downright evil.

 

[Tuskin38]

There's a reason 'In the Pale Moonlight' usually hits near the top of a lot of favourite episode lists.

 

[fireproof78]

There's a reason 'In the Pale Moonlight' usually hits near the top of a lot of favourite episode lists.

Because Sisko gives a speech and defeats the bad admiral? Right? Right?

 

[Swedish Borg]

It's a faaake!!!

 

[Yistaan]

It's a faaake!!!

Vreenak's rolling over in his grave that future Romulans have become such Federation followers they're willing to try to override Vulcans to try to stay in the Fed after the Burn.

 

[F. King Daniel]

No, the opposite is true. Picard is worse than Discovery. A huge disappointment.
I don't want to list all the failures and problems of Picard here

I'm gonna guess most of them have to do with retired old Picard seeing the failings in the organisation he dedicated his life to? Or rather Picard depicting a Starfleet and Federation with failings.

 

[cooleddie74]

Utopia sucks from a dramatic standpoint and Trek never confirms that humanity gets there, so...yeah.

 

[MacLeod]

The Trek franchise itself has shown us tons of scientists, explorers, diplomats, etc. who weren't in Starfleet. In TOS they (like Robert Fox, John Gill, etc.) were usually dumbed down to make the Starfleet characters look like the heroes (something that's continued with making the Soongs look eccentric etc.) I don't agree that good stories require Starfleet in them. If Trek wrote characters outside of Starfleet better, that would be a start (and that's probably part of the problem you have with Picard, but just my guess).

And I'm sure you can find examples of shows of where guest characters are potrayed as power-mad, war mongering etc.. whilst the regulars are potrayed in a more positive light.

 

[dupersuper]

Have we ever actually seen the Federation let die a civilization they could've saved?

The horribly written Homeward springs to mind.

 

[Swedish Borg]

The horribly written Homeward springs to mind.

Plus Pen Pals where Picard was all set to let them die but changed his mind because of a ten-second communication!!

 

[dupersuper]

Plus Pen Pals where Picard was all set to let them die but changed his mind because of a ten-second communication!!

Riker was the hardest hit in that one: with his absurd, pretentious rambling about destiny.

 

[Swedish Borg]

Riker was the hardest hit in that one: with his absurd, pretentious rambling about destiny.

In total contrast with what he said in Angel one! "I'd rather face a court-martial (for violating the prime directive) than let people die"

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Have we ever actually seen the Federation let die a civilization they could've saved?

Yes The Boraalans. If it wasn't for Nikolai Rozhenko, Picard would have willingly allowed the Boraalans to die so the Prime Directive was not violated.

The horribly written Homeward springs to mind.

Ninja'd

 

[Vger23]

Yes The Boraalans. If it wasn't for Nikolai Rozhenko, Picard would have willingly allowed the Boraalans to die so the Prime Directive was not violated.



Ninja'd

I think "Homeward," along with "Aquiel," "Eye of the Beholder" and "Suspicions" are the only TNG episodes I have not watched since their initial airing.

"Homeward and "Suspicions" didn't even get a full watch from me when they aired. I'm pretty sure I turned them off.

 

[cooleddie74]

The best thing about "Homeward(TNG)" is that it had Paul Sorvino and gave us another Rozhenko. Man, Trek loves digging up never-before-mentioned siblings, half-siblings and adopted siblings, doesn't it?

#ShareYourPain