Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That's not what most people refer to when they refer to the roots of trek anymore than filming in Technicolor prints and the return of Jolly Rancher computer consoles. That tends to instead be the disingenuous argument put forth by fans of nutrek when they're feeling generous by not accusing critics of various isms and phobias.

 Kroem wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Kroem wrote:
Well I haven't seen the Mandelorian, but my impression is that it is a lower stakes, character focused drama?
That would be difficult on a starship with loads of crew I guess.

I more meant how Mando was seen by many in the SW community as saving the franchise and setting things right after how bad the new trilogy was.

Basically, what will be the ST show or movie that returns to the roots of the franchise.

I think trying to return to the roots of Star Trek is not ideal though, I want it to return to the 90's heyday not the hokey original series with an alien babe of the week XD

Different people have different heydays - my favs are OS and DS9.

Discovery had potential but quickly showed its colours as entirely about a single, truly awful character. Picard had some really good stuff, for me ruined by a really awful last epsiode.

The problem with returning to the roots is so far they've not actually done it since TNG. Voyager, Discovery, Enterprise - they are all trying to go back, but at the same time they forget that one of the big things of Original Series and The Next Generation was that it was an exploratory ship out alone in space doing little things. By and large the bulk of episodes in both series have zero impact on the world outside of the ship; or if they do have impact its not something we often see followed up.

DS9 took things a bit further with a huge war, but it spend time on it and the war ramped up very slowly and had big shifts and changes through the entire length.



The problem with a lot of the seasons since then is they keep trying to be epic. Threats that will wipe out all existence kinda things. Thing is the more wild they go with that the more silly they start to get. Even DS9 wasn't quite that bad, it was just a military threat to the sector. It was a bog standard war between races just on a galactic scale. It wasn't vast fleets meeting in 2 episodes and the fate of the universe hinging on that one encounter and one battle.


I think this is where the writers have lost the "plot" so to speak. They've pushed and pushed for bigger more epic stories and sweeping events because "epic sells" and in the process of so doing they've lost track of the small person in the story. The fact that the bulk of fondness for many of the early Treks were small story plots, characters developing and learning and changing; the individual small struggles of a single ship etc....

Roots grow along with the tree and, with the golden age of Berman trek now about 25 years old on average, I personally view/include it as what trek is or rather should be. Ymmv.

 Togusa wrote:

 Kroem wrote:
Well I haven't seen the Mandelorian, but my impression is that it is a lower stakes, character focused drama?
That would be difficult on a starship with loads of crew I guess.

I more meant how Mando was seen by many in the SW community as saving the franchise and setting things right after how bad the new trilogy was.

Basically, what will be the ST show or movie that returns to the roots of the franchise.

30+ years after the launch of the Enterprise D, the Enterprise F launches with a new crew and a new mission to explore the Gamma quadrant after the fall of the Dominion.

One ship, weeks from the nearest starbase, a whole new region to explore building on what we saw in DS9.

Done.

They tried that with Voyager, and it sucked.

More than the plot, Trek is about the cast.

If TOS hadn’t had Kirk, Spock and McCoy bouncing off each other, I doubt it would be remembered as anything more than ropey SciFi with some interesting effects and terrible acting.

TNG was initially carried by Patrick Stewart. The rest of cast credit him with showing them how to do it properly. Many of the best episodes wouldn’t have worked without Stewart’s acting chops (swap out Picard for Kirk in Chain of Command....).

DS9? Nailed the ensemble cast thing. You had the Bajoran, Federation, Cardassian, Klingon, Ferengi and what not perspectives bouncing off each other. That let them explore more in-depth stories.

Voyager? Oh gods....just no.

Enterprise? But why?

Discovery - I liked the first two seasons. 3rd had moments of brilliance, only for Burnham to be Forgiven Again, and granted captaincy because reasons. She doesn’t really have a Spock, let alone a McCoy to bounce off. I don’t think anyone involved is a bad actor. I don’t think they necessarily lack chemistry. It just isn’t working, because any character beats belong to Burnham.

Picard - I love it. Other opinions are available.

I'm somewhat sad that one of the stronger actors brought into Voyager was brought in solely to put her in a skin tight suit and to show off her chest. Which does indeed speak about some of the issues Voyager had. I enjoyed it overall, but a little like Picard they did spoil the ending by rushing it somewhat and going for the extreme. In Voyagers case it was "lets beat ALL the Borg everywhere and get home in only 2 episodes!"

Picard however works great because it focuses on getting back to the core, the characters and their interactions. The bulk of the story is the small scale things, not the big scale that really only comes in at the very end.
I'm eager for season two and its been the most fun I've had with Trek in a long while.



Enterprise started well, it started really well and then they jumped down the "temporal war" hole. Which again was a bid to try and make some extreme super threat that would threaten everything and ultimately have it mean nothing because its a temporal war.... Instead of focusing on lots of early Klingon politics; on the mystical powers of Vulcans; on the mystery of space and meeting new races. On fleshing out and deepening the lore on lots of background races that are around, but which often get little to no screentime or are only glanced at for a few moments.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


TNG was initially carried by Patrick Stewart. The rest of cast credit him with showing them how to do it properly. Many of the best episodes wouldn’t have worked without Stewart’s acting chops (swap out Picard for Kirk in Chain of Command....).

What's interesting is that Stewart didn't even really want the job in the first place. From watching interviews he wanted to do "serious" acting and a sci-fi show wasn't really his kind of thing. And yet he wasn't going to let that get in the way of his acting so he filled the role and pulled everyone else along and in the end came to love the role and what it represented and also what influence his acting in the show had on other generations. He always wanted his acting to mean something and inspire people and I think he brings that with him no matter what he's acting, which pushes him up a huge level over some other actors who are skilled, but ultimately just getting their rent money. In the end he took what was to him a rent-money job and turned it into a multigenerational inspiration.

Honestly, as time has gone on I feel as though Picard has stuck around much better than Kirk. I don't say that as a comment on the quality of the actors or characters, so much as their influence in broader culture.

There are far more Picard memes than Kirk memes, and while I see much praise of Kirk I also feel like Picard has stuck in the imagination better than his predecessors or his successors. Much as I love Sisko, I think it's Picard that really set the standard for what being a Star Fleet captain was about.

So I guess what I'm saying is that Picard kind of won the Kirk/Picard war, just because Stewart is charismatic as all hell, carried his series, and has a lot more meme material XD

Kirk also had very little character development or change over time. Same for Spock and McCoy we actually see their character development in the movies not in the TV series itself. Even TNG had to warm up to doing character stuff.

Original Series was very much "alien of the week" with the bimonthly "alien chick".


Also I think TNG took itself a bit more seriously (big part was Stewarts acting) on all fronts whilst Kirk was at times serious, but also quite casual about it.



That said I think there's also a bit of a generational game going on. Lets not forget Original Series had a very multiracial acting group for its time. It pushed grounds that other TV series of its day were afraid too and whilst we can't easily appreciate that today (because the world has moved on) its not something I think we should forget. There might not be as many memes, but that's because all that cultural reference was pre-internet.

 LordofHats wrote:

There are far more Picard memes than Kirk memes, and while I see much praise of Kirk I also feel like Picard has stuck in the imagination better than his predecessors or his successors. Much as I love Sisko, I think it's Picard that really set the standard for what being a Star Fleet captain was about.

So I guess what I'm saying is that Picard kind of won the Kirk/Picard war, just because Stewart is charismatic as all hell, carried his series, and has a lot more meme material XD

Plus I think the show was (other than in the first and possibly early second seasons) purposefully made to be more timeless with things like pop culture references. TOS had space hippies but we didn't see Space Grunge or Gangster Rappers in TNG. Regarding the memes, I think it's also pertinent to point out that the people who grew up with TNG+ trek were the same generation as the originators of meme culture likely overlapping significantly as cohorts and that may be part of the reason for that. If boomers who grew up with origina run TOS made memes, it was probably ascii art on dialup c64 bbs's.

I don't want to see anything more made by the writers of Picard or Discovery.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Discovery - I liked the first two seasons. 3rd had moments of brilliance, only for Burnham to be Forgiven Again, and granted captaincy because reasons. She doesn’t really have a Spock, let alone a McCoy to bounce off. I don’t think anyone involved is a bad actor. I don’t think they necessarily lack chemistry. It just isn’t working, because any character beats belong to Burnham.

They did at least finally give the other crew members something to do right at the end of season 3, and the development of the Saru/Tilly relationship was nice... only for them to send Saru 'home'. I rather enjoyed Discovery despite its flaws (and my wife and I just made the whole Burnham-centricity of it a running joke to amuse ourselves), but the fact that we got to the end of season three and I still don't even know the names of most of the bridge crew is a little sad.

 Overread wrote:
Enterprise started well, it started really well ...

Did it, though? I only ever watched a couple of episodes, and it struck me as having the same problem everyone hates about Discovery - the Captain was the only real character given anything to do, and everyone else was just a cardboard cutout in the background.

 LordofHats wrote:
Honestly, as time has gone on I feel as though Picard has stuck around much better than Kirk. I don't say that as a comment on the quality of the actors or characters, so much as their influence in broader culture.

There are far more Picard memes than Kirk memes, and while I see much praise of Kirk I also feel like Picard has stuck in the imagination better than his predecessors or his successors. Much as I love Sisko, I think it's Picard that really set the standard for what being a Star Fleet captain was about.

So I guess what I'm saying is that Picard kind of won the Kirk/Picard war, just because Stewart is charismatic as all hell, carried his series, and has a lot more meme material XD

Part of that I think is just age. I've met an awful lot of Star Trek fans over the years who have either never watched or didn't like the original series, so Kirk is a non-entity to them. But also there's the fact that Kirk was a product of the era his show was born in, and his primary methods of dealing with a problem were to either punch it or sleep with it... which doesn't really stand up with today's audience. (Well, sci-fi audience, I guess. James Bond is still a thing...)

Funnily enough, I recall all the complaints from TOS fans when TNG started up, about how there was too much sitting down and talking their way through problems instead of just punching or sleeping with something... But over time, that 'try to find a common ground and just punch things as a last resort' approach came to be what Starfleet was all about, and so Picard became a much more fitting poster child than Kirk.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Kroem wrote:
Well I haven't seen the Mandelorian, but my impression is that it is a lower stakes, character focused drama?
That would be difficult on a starship with loads of crew I guess.

I more meant how Mando was seen by many in the SW community as saving the franchise and setting things right after how bad the new trilogy was.

Basically, what will be the ST show or movie that returns to the roots of the franchise.

30+ years after the launch of the Enterprise D, the Enterprise F launches with a new crew and a new mission to explore the Gamma quadrant after the fall of the Dominion.

One ship, weeks from the nearest starbase, a whole new region to explore building on what we saw in DS9.

Done.

You can do anything really. For example, why not have a show in which the first four seasons follow cadets at the academy and season five shows their lives after being posted to various ships. Pick say four characters to focus on, three of them stick together on the "main ship" while a fourth takes some sort of ancillary role and makes random appearances. The Beta Quadrant is largely unknown to us, as far as lore goes so that would be a great place to start.

 insaniak wrote:
They did at least finally give the other crew members something to do right at the end of season 3, and the development of the Saru/Tilly relationship was nice... only for them to send Saru 'home'. I rather enjoyed Discovery despite its flaws (and my wife and I just made the whole Burnham-centricity of it a running joke to amuse ourselves), but the fact that we got to the end of season three and I still don't even know the names of most of the bridge crew is a little sad.

I enjoy Discovery quite a bit, but that final episode of Season 3 was the straw that broke the camel's back. Burnham just wins at everything, gets to do whatever she wants, and gets rewarded for it constantly. I cannot fathom why she is the captain of the ship all of a sudden.

Discovery's greatest flaw is that it's not about the crew of a starship* like every other Trek show. It's about one person doing everything and having everyone revolve around her. There are good characters in there, like Saru, the best thing to happen on Trek in decades, but they got lost in the whirlwind that is Michael Burnham.

And of course, then there's this:

 insaniak wrote:
... I still don't even know the names of most of the bridge crew is a little sad.

... which is just shocking. Who'd've thought that, even 5 years ago, we'd have a Trek show where the bridge crew are mostly tertiary characters of whom we can't name even one**.

 insaniak wrote:
Part of that I think is just age. I've met an awful lot of Star Trek fans over the years who have either never watched or didn't like the original series, so Kirk is a non-entity to them.

I'm not a Star Trek fan, but I'm basically in the same boat for TOS. The Kirk I know is from the movies, not the show, which I've basically never watched.

 Overread wrote:
Enterprise started well...

Counterpoint: Medical gel scene.



*Or space station, in the case of DS9.
**Except Detmer, because hot redhead.

 insaniak wrote:

Part of that I think is just age. I've met an awful lot of Star Trek fans over the years who have either never watched or didn't like the original series, so Kirk is a non-entity to them. But also there's the fact that Kirk was a product of the era his show was born in, and his primary methods of dealing with a problem were to either punch it or sleep with it... which doesn't really stand up with today's audience. (Well, sci-fi audience, I guess. James Bond is still a thing...)

Funnily enough, I recall all the complaints from TOS fans when TNG started up, about how there was too much sitting down and talking their way through problems instead of just punching or sleeping with something... But over time, that 'try to find a common ground and just punch things as a last resort' approach came to be what Starfleet was all about, and so Picard became a much more fitting poster child than Kirk.

I'm definitely in that boat, I like all the sitting down and talking.
Only in Star Trek would an episode intro about being 3 days into complex negotiations between the Chiripians and Zogzanians over logging rights on the moon of Ostrog be so exciting!

I find the fact that Starfleet's SOP in a crisis is to call an all-hands staff meeting and watch a power point presentation to be the most realistic part of the Star Trek franchise.

I can recall several episodes of TNG where it was like that and it is my favorite.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I find the fact that Starfleet's SOP in a crisis is to call an all-hands staff meeting and watch a power point presentation to be the most realistic part of the Star Trek franchise.

I feel very seen right now, haha. Very true.

 insaniak wrote:
Part of that I think is just age. I've met an awful lot of Star Trek fans over the years who have either never watched or didn't like the original series, so Kirk is a non-entity to them. But also there's the fact that Kirk was a product of the era his show was born in, and his primary methods of dealing with a problem were to either punch it or sleep with it... which doesn't really stand up with today's audience. (Well, sci-fi audience, I guess. James Bond is still a thing...)

I think if you went back and rewatched TOS you would find that Kirk does not behave the way you seem to think he does.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Part of that I think is just age. I've met an awful lot of Star Trek fans over the years who have either never watched or didn't like the original series, so Kirk is a non-entity to them. But also there's the fact that Kirk was a product of the era his show was born in, and his primary methods of dealing with a problem were to either punch it or sleep with it... which doesn't really stand up with today's audience. (Well, sci-fi audience, I guess. James Bond is still a thing...)

I think if you went back and rewatched TOS you would find that Kirk does not behave the way you seem to think he does.

I think Joystick is just being a bit hyperbolic. Kirk solves loads of things without punching or sleeping with people and delivered many of his own lectures and diplomatic negotiations. However he was always far more of a rough and tumble character than Picard. He would go for the ladies, he would get into brawls and fights. Heck he gets into a fist right with a gorn in the very first episode of the series.

Just like Picard doesn't solve everything with words, sometimes he uses a ship as a ram or charges in with phasers and such; Kirk doesn't solve everything with a fist or the bed, but he does do those things a lot. Enough that they are traits of his character on the screen.

 Compel wrote:
Yeah, Conan Doyle was FLOODED with fan letters demanding he retcon Sherlock Holmes' death. He absolutely *hated* it. He, however, also liked getting paid, so he gave in...


As for wider canon... I'm just going to gesture widely at, well.... All. Religion.

Im pretty sure during ancient greek times, there was a persone who wrote an entire tome trying to make sense of all the regional myths and legends and codify greek mythology


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

Part of that I think is just age. I've met an awful lot of Star Trek fans over the years who have either never watched or didn't like the original series, so Kirk is a non-entity to them. But also there's the fact that Kirk was a product of the era his show was born in, and his primary methods of dealing with a problem were to either punch it or sleep with it... which doesn't really stand up with today's audience. (Well, sci-fi audience, I guess. James Bond is still a thing...)
.

Im soooooo attacked right now. Lol. I have never seen any episode of TOS, only a few season of TNG.
Im more of a Voyager, DS9, Enterprise fan myself haha,

Today, Paramount Studios announced that they will be releasing an untitled Star Trek Universe movie on June 9, 2023. As of now, the film is untitled.

StarTrek .Com.

Well that's a bit more optimistic than apparently this other recent article they posted.

https://www.startrek.com/news/the-star-trek-communist-hopes-star-trek-can-inspire-a-real-revolution

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Yeah, Conan Doyle was FLOODED with fan letters demanding he retcon Sherlock Holmes' death. He absolutely *hated* it. He, however, also liked getting paid, so he gave in...


As for wider canon... I'm just going to gesture widely at, well.... All. Religion.

Im pretty sure during ancient greek times, there was a persone who wrote an entire tome trying to make sense of all the regional myths and legends and codify greek mythology

Hesiod.

My favorite writer of 'Greek Canon' of course has to be Homer. He even spawned Fan Fic with that Virgil guy and a few others.

I'm going to assume that this new movie will be the Kelvin timeline, which I am 100% ok with btw. With Picard being a thing it won't be TNG themed, DS9 was rounded off so there's really no story there, Voyager is fine to have on while I'm painting some minis but there's nothing there for a movie, Enterprise is too hated (which is largely unfair imo) and like 70% of the TOS cast are kind of dead.

Burnham. The Motion Picture.


*runs away laughing maniacally*

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Burnham. The Motion Picture.
*runs away laughing maniacally*

Its probably the most likely - sadly

To be perfectly honest?

I like Burnham as a character, and the actress is amazing. So if the movie was upfront that “this is about Burnham and Burnham alone”? I’d probably watch it.

Certainly human adopted by Vulcan thing has greater narrative depth than Disco has bothered with.

I could go on and on and on, despite really liking most of Disco. But I’m on beer 7 so shall refrain!

I mean, logically....

You could probably do a whole film trilogy about 'the missing year' between Season 3 episode 1 and episode 2, that just stars Burnham, Grudge and Manchester Black.

Bunch of new trailers have dropped from Star Trek day:

Picard:

Strange New Worlds Casting Announcement
Prodigy Trailer