Justin Snead

Thread for helping us cope with how different Discovery will be

50 posts in this topic

I fully predict that fans are going to love this show. Still, we long-timers need to prepare ourselves for how different a 2017 Trek TV show will be from the previous 5 series. Two aspects of this difference are on my mind, and I will start with the shortened, serialized season of 13 episodes. You can go more in depth with my blog post: Discover will be a different kind of Trek than we are used to, Part I

Here's an excerpt:

Today I think everyone is aware of the benefits of season-long serialization: richer and more complex character arcs; more dramatic stories with higher stakes. But there is one drawback that might sting Trek fans in particular. The concept of The Episode may lose its meaning in fandom. Most serialized shows, especially genre shows, do not really have episodes: they are 13-hour movies with credit sequences arbitrarily dropped in every 50 minutes or so. If Star Trek fandom is based on any common bond it is this phrase: “Remember that episode when…?” It is easy to remember that one where Kirk fought the Gorn; when Spock mind melded with the pizza-rug alien; when the crew got space drunk; when Picard was assimilated; when the crew got caught in a time loop and kept reliving the same day; when Beverly made love with a space ghost, and on and on… (I remember having these conversations when there were precious fewer aired Trek episodes than there are now!).

With DISCOVERY, this may no longer be possible. If it is one gigantic story that rolls into itself through each episode, it will be impossible to recall later where one episode ended and the other began.

Also, a question for those of you who watch more genre shows than I do: Does this analysis describe most of these shows? If so, is this a drawback for you or not a big deal?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully predict that I will gonna hate it or dont care for it and will stop watching after the secomd episode.

Gus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the show is going to be different, but I also see that as a benefit. I have plenty of the same, and I believe that the biggest issues that hurt both Voyager and. Enterprise was their sameness. They became predictable and dull and boring, they had their moments, but on the whole the shows struggled to be fresh and new (even the much loved fourth season of Enterprise is mostly loved by fans for how it evoked the original series a bit more. As opposed the then overly-evoked TNG style. 

Time for a new serialized Trek, we got a fresh take in the movies, I can understand that they aren't to everyone's tastes but the movies injected a modern flair into Trek, and they opened up the door for a new show. I don't think the new show will be much like the movies, because to survive in TV you definitely need meatier characters, but the show will be modern and different and it won't be the same ol' song and dance. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Many serialized shows have episodes or small arcs that stand apart from the main story line. There will still be some, remember when opportunities.

Another thing that is different now is the public's expectation. During the sixties and seventies, serialized shows were looked down upon. The only serialized shows on prime time were shows like Dallas, or Knot's Landing basically soap opera's. There was a stigma against serialized shows and many people would not watch them. There was also the problem in an era without time shifting ability like VCR's. It was very difficult to watch a show if you missed an episode or two. Even then many people didn't like being tied down. "We can't go out. It's Tuesday night. My show is on." 

There is no reason Star Trek shouldn't be serialized now. They can still do the story/lesson/parable in an episode while exploring bigger themes in more detail over the course of a season. 

Edited by scenario
Added info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kenman said:

I think the show is going to be different, but I also see that as a benefit. I have plenty of the same, and I believe that the biggest issues that hurt both Voyager and. Enterprise was their sameness. They became predictable and dull and boring, they had their moments, but on the whole the shows struggled to be fresh and new (even the much loved fourth season of Enterprise is mostly loved by fans for how it evoked the original series a bit more. As opposed the then overly-evoked TNG style. 

Time for a new serialized Trek, we got a fresh take in the movies, I can understand that they aren't to everyone's tastes but the movies injected a modern flair into Trek, and they opened up the door for a new show. I don't think the new show will be much like the movies, because to survive in TV you definitely need meatier characters, but the show will be modern and different and it won't be the same ol' song and dance. 

^
This.

I look forward to the differences; I don't fear them.  IDIC applies to television shows as well as individuals...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm quite excited for this new iteration and to see an updated Trek for our time. I've been re-watching every series (but not every episode) this last year and a half, for the benefit of my girlfriend and, while considering that hindsight is 20-20 and we're in a different time now, both socially and from a TV-production point of view, I've realized a few things:

-There are way too many episodes, both per season and overall, resulting in a lot of repetitive stories. And often, a great scene, dialogue or character is drowned through layers of mediocrity. In the end, it results in way more bad or mediocre episodes than good ones, and the standouts are rare.

-Granted, each series is a product of its time and has aged to varying degrees of quality, but Enterprise stands out, as the most recent show, as strangely regressive in terms of sexism, relative lack of diversity and complete failure in imagination. It had a great premise, but was executed flaw...fully. There are actually many cringe-worthy moments, and it starts with the pilot. I also usually found some of the effects less impressive than they were on Voy. As for continuity, and the temporal cold war, these things are mostly just frustrating and confusing, especially to more casual audiences, not privy to encyclopedic knowledge of Trek like I, and most of you guys can be. Oh and hello races we've never heard of before and/or again!

-Same goes with Voyager. The most promising setting and group of characters by far, and yet, we ended with diet, boring, uneven TNG. I'll say this in defense of most of the cast and crews of Voy and Ent: The producers had become huge morons by then, as often related on behind-the-scene material.

-TNG had good and baaaaaad stuff! Thankfully, it had solid acting and was relatively original at the time.

-T'Pol and Seven's outfits are a teenage fanboy stupid wet dream. It shouldn't had happened. At all. Seven, when shown in other outfits, either when in uniform or in her fantasized holodeck life, always looked better, more relatable, and easier to take seriously.

-DS9 doesn't look as dated as many others and is more serialized, but there's still a lit of filler and unoriginal episodes, especially before it became heavily-serialized.

-Time travel, man. We need to stop going there.

-Same goes with holodecks. Both time-travel and holodecks had very good outings, but both concept are very prone to deus ex machina tropes, and they've been done to death.

-Speaking of making something boring, unimaginative and nonthreatening, the Borg got that treatment in Voy.

So maybe I'm not as much a fan as I thought I was: I hadn't watched this much Trek in years, but I was somewhat curious to see how it would stand to be revisited. I've introduced my girlfriend to many sci-fi stories and shows and she grew to love the genre, so it just seemed natural. But if I, and she, loved most characters and series settings, there was A LOT of boring stories and episodes. Really quickly, it was decided we'd selectively watch most shows (DS9 was almost viewed in its entirety). When we arrived to Enterprise, the first two seasons basically went by in a flash.

In the end, Trek has great potential, but has often been lacking when it comes to execution (And the same can be said, to a lesser degree, of the movie portion). So if there's a chance for Trek to survive the current media age, it needs to find a modern audience with updated story-telling methods, a diverse (and not only at the human level), progressive and even barrier-breaking cast, setting and stories, while remaining the optimistic view of a future we'd hope for humanity. The current state of our world is ripe with good allegories and themes that could be explored, and a shortened season would make sure we'd stay away from formulaic filler.

So yes, I'm excited to see what Discovery has in store, because much of the old Trek doesn't really do it for me anymore: The future shouldn't look so...old and dated!

Edited by Tupperfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tupperfan said:

I'm quite excited for this new iteration and to see an updated Trek for our time. I've been re-watching every series (but not every episode) this last year and a half, for the benefit of my girlfriend and, while considering that hindsight is 20-20 and we're in a different time now, both socially and from a TV-production point of view, I've realized a few things:

-There are way too many episodes, both per season and overall, resulting in a lot of repetitive stories. And often, a great scene, dialogue or character is drowned through layers of mediocrity. In the end, it results in way more bad or mediocre episodes than good ones, and the standouts are rare.

-Granted, each series is a product of its time and has aged to varying degrees of quality, but Enterprise stands out, as the most recent show, as strangely regressive in terms of sexism, relative lack of diversity and complete failure in imagination. It had a great premise, but was executed flaw...fully. There are actually many cringe-worthy moments, and it starts with the pilot. I also usually found some of the effects less impressive than they were on Voy. As for continuity, and the temporal cold war, these things are mostly just frustrating and confusing, especially to more casual audiences, not privy to encyclopedic knowledge of Trek like I, and most of you guys can be. Oh and hello races we've never heard of before and/or again!

-Same goes with Voyager. The most promising setting and group of characters by far, and yet, we ended with diet, boring, uneven TNG. I'll say this in defense of most of the cast and crews of Voy and Ent: The producers had become huge morons by then, as often related on behind-the-scene material.

-TNG had good and baaaaaad stuff! Thankfully, it had solid acting and was relatively original at the time.

-T'Pol and Seven's outfits are a teenage fanboy stupid wet dream. It shouldn't had happened. At all. Seven, when shown in other outfits, either when in uniform or in her fantasized holodeck life, always looked better, more relatable, and easier to take seriously.

-DS9 doesn't look as dated as many others and is more serialized, but there's still a lit of filler and unoriginal episodes, especially before it became heavily-serialized.

-Time travel, man. We need to stop going there.

-Same goes with holodecks. Both time-travel and holodecks had very good outings, but both concept are very prone to deux ex machina tropes, and they've been done to death.

-Speaking of making something boring, unimaginative and nonthreatening, the Borg got that treatment in Voy.

So maybe I'm not as much a fan as I thought I was: I hadn't' watch this much Trek in years, but I was somewhat curious to see how it would stand to be revisited. I've introduced my girlfriend to many sci-fi stories and shows and she grew to love the genre, so it just seemed natural. But if I, and she, loved most characters and series settings, there was A LOT of boring stories. Really quickly, it was decided we'd selectively watch most shows (DS9 was almost viewed in its entirety). When we arrived to Enterprise, the first two seasons basically went by in a flash.

In the end, Trek has great potential, but has often been lacking when it comes to execution (And the same can be said, to a lesser degree, of the movie portion). So if there's a chance for Trek to survive the current media age, it needs to find a modern audience with updated story-telling methods, a diverse (and not only at the human level), progressive and even barrier-breaking cast, setting and stories, while remaining the optimistic view of a future we'd hope for humanity. The current state of our world is ripe with good allegories and themes that could be explored, and a shortened season would make sure we'd stay away from formulaic filler.

So yes, I'm excited to see what Discovery has in store, because much of the old Trek doesn't really do it for me anymore: The future shouldn't look so...old and dated!

I think we have similar Trek tastes. I've done a re-watch of TNG and DS9 but I did that years ago when the DVDs came out. I honestly wonder if I will ever sit down and watch an episode of TNG again. I suppose I will but I don't feel compelled. I am currently re-watching TOS for the first time and plan to watch all 79 episodes. 

You raise a good point about too many episodes. But that was a product of the TV business at the time. There were so many because the show's job was to hold an audience every week from September to May. Most shows aren't expected to do that anymore.

Im ready for DISCOVERY to update Trek. But I do fret that the perfect little Trek allegory episode--the gems that appeared like diamonds in the ruff of those 20+ episode seasons--may not happen on the new series.  

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kenman said:

I think the show is going to be different, but I also see that as a benefit. I have plenty of the same, and I believe that the biggest issues that hurt both Voyager and. Enterprise was their sameness. They became predictable and dull and boring, they had their moments, but on the whole the shows struggled to be fresh and new (even the much loved fourth season of Enterprise is mostly loved by fans for how it evoked the original series a bit more. As opposed the then overly-evoked TNG style. 

Time for a new serialized Trek, we got a fresh take in the movies, I can understand that they aren't to everyone's tastes but the movies injected a modern flair into Trek, and they opened up the door for a new show. I don't think the new show will be much like the movies, because to survive in TV you definitely need meatier characters, but the show will be modern and different and it won't be the same ol' song and dance.

Seconded!

However, it must still be recognizable as Star Trek. Arbitrary changes just for the sake of change, changes that don't serve a purpose but are just hollow gimmicks "'cause it's cool", but fly in the face of the show's legacy, might easily destroy the new show for me.

When TNG was new, it was a thorough visual and stylistic update compared to TOS, also in regards to storytelling and tone, but it paid tribute and respect to the original. I expect DSC to do the same. Otherwise? It wouldn't be Star Trek anymore.

I'm looking forward to shorter, serialized seasons, to a visual update, to a different storytelling focus (no longer just bridge crew around the Captain in the middle), and so on ... but please be respectful towards the legacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sim said:

Seconded!

However, it must still be recognizable as Star Trek. Arbitrary changes just for the sake of change, changes that don't serve a purpose but are just hollow gimmicks "'cause it's cool", but fly in the face of the show's legacy, might easily destroy the new show for me.

When TNG was new, it was a thorough visual and stylistic update compared to TOS, also in regards to storytelling and tone, but it paid tribute and respect to the original. I expect DSC to do the same. Otherwise? It wouldn't be Star Trek anymore.

I'm looking forward to shorter, serialized seasons, to a visual update, to a different storytelling focus (no longer just bridge crew around the Captain in the middle), and so on ... but please be respectful towards the legacy.

Based on the folks hired on to be the writing staff?  I don't have much worry of that to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kenman said:

Based on the folks hired on to be the writing staff?  I don't have much worry of that to be honest. 

Maybe Gus infected me with his negativity a little, but I'm slightly worried about Fuller's departure and Goldsman's involvement. I really hope there is not much more behind it than what has been officially told.

But no matter the rumors, I will most definitely watch the new show with an open mind, and I'm determined to like it (and not just "giving it a chance" -- that sounds way too negative already). In the end, what matters more for me than anything else, is whether it's good fiction. When it's a good product regardless of my expectations, it'll be easy to forgive minor disappointments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sim said:

Maybe Gus infected me with his negativity a little, but I'm slightly worried about Fuller's departure and Goldsman's involvement. I really hope there is not much more behind it than what has been officially told.

But no matter the rumors, I will most definitely watch the new show with an open mind, and I'm determined to like it (and not just "giving it a chance" -- that sounds way too negative already). In the end, what matters more for me than anything else, is whether it's good fiction. When it's a good product regardless of my expectations, it'll be easy to forgive minor disappointments.

While Fuller's exit was a major blow, there has been no other big exits from the staff he helped put together, including Trek veterans, people Fuller has long associations with, and important people like Nicolas Meyer.  These people are still involved, and Fuller's supposedly still the writer of the opening episode and holding on to a creator credit.  And Fuller still left the door open for a possibility to return if there is a second season...maybe that was PR to avoid making it look like a dumpster fire, but while being cynical is easy, being optimistic is hard, and I choose to try and be optimistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, kenman said:

While Fuller's exit was a major blow, there has been no other big exits from the staff he helped put together, including Trek veterans, people Fuller has long associations with, and important people like Nicolas Meyer.  These people are still involved, and Fuller's supposedly still the writer of the opening episode and holding on to a creator credit.  And Fuller still left the door open for a possibility to return if there is a second season...maybe that was PR to avoid making it look like a dumpster fire, but while being cynical is easy, being optimistic is hard, and I choose to try and be optimistic.

This, and also, even if CBS has no understanding of Trek, they do understand business, they know the show must not fail for them to make the money they hope they can. So hopefully, they will listen to Fuller, Meyer, Beyer et al, because they know those are people who know how to make the show a success with the fanbase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, GustavoLeao said:

I fully predict that I will gonna hate it or dont care for it and will stop watching after the secomd episode.

Gus

Jeez, please change the record, Gus. We know. You never lose an opportunity to tell us. Over and over again! Dude, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but your friends here already know you feel this way. Until the actual moment that the new show is aired and we have something more to go on, can you please stop hammering us over the head with this? Thanks. 

16 hours ago, kenman said:

I think the show is going to be different, but I also see that as a benefit. I have plenty of the same, and I believe that the biggest issues that hurt both Voyager and. Enterprise was their sameness. They became predictable and dull and boring, they had their moments, but on the whole the shows struggled to be fresh and new (even the much loved fourth season of Enterprise is mostly loved by fans for how it evoked the original series a bit more. As opposed the then overly-evoked TNG style. 

Time for a new serialized Trek, we got a fresh take in the movies, I can understand that they aren't to everyone's tastes but the movies injected a modern flair into Trek, and they opened up the door for a new show. I don't think the new show will be much like the movies, because to survive in TV you definitely need meatier characters, but the show will be modern and different and it won't be the same ol' song and dance. 

 

This, pretty much. 

It'll be different, that's for sure. Updated, prettier, and hopefully a lot smarter than VOY or even ENT. Is it possible to have a version of Star Trek updated for modern audiences? We'll soon know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Robin Bland said:

It'll be different, that's for sure. Updated, prettier, and hopefully a lot smarter than VOY or even ENT. Is it possible to have a version of Star Trek updated for modern audiences? We'll soon know. 

Glad to see there are others that are looking as forward to what a new ST can be, rather than what they fear it won't be. 

To paraphrase Surak, "I'm pleased to see that there are differences..." 

 

To those that want to strangle it in the crib?  Fine.  Don't pay to see it.   It just saddens me to see so many ST fans, who used to be such champions of diversity and inclusivity, being so closed to the possibility of changes to ST itself.   Reminds me of the hate that used to surround TNG's launch 30 years ago; there were a lot of naysayers who thought that if it wasn't Kirk, Spock and Bones it was gonna be garbage.  

TNG stumbled coltishly out of the gate, but soon had many of them eating their own words with a side order of crow.   Now, I'm not saying or guaranteeing that DSC will be another TNG (that's a tall order), but I find this thickening aura of negativity surrounding the new series to be both stifling and even a bit saddening.  Whatever happened to that old ST fan optimism? :confused:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Glad to see there are others that are looking as forward to what a new ST can be, rather than what they fear it won't be. 

To paraphrase Surak, "I'm pleased to see that there are differences..." 

 

To those that want to strangle it in the crib?  Fine.  Don't pay to see it.   It just saddens me to see so many ST fans, who used to be such champions of diversity and inclusivity, being so closed to the possibility of changes to ST itself.   Reminds me of the hate that used to surround TNG's launch 30 years ago; there were a lot of naysayers who thought that if it wasn't Kirk, Spock and Bones it was gonna be garbage.  

TNG stumbled coltishly out of the gate, but soon had many of them eating their own words with a side order of crow.   Now, I'm not saying or guaranteeing that DSC will be another TNG (that's a tall order), but I find this thickening aura of negativity surrounding the new series to be both stifling and even a bit saddening.  Whatever happened to that old ST fan optimism? :confused:

 

The internet happened. I'm pretty sure that, back in the day, TNG had just as many naysayers and haters - they just didn't have a platform. It took time and effort to write a letter and send it to a magazine or fanclub or fanzine, and there was no guarantee they'd print it and that others would read it. There was also no way of directly communicating with actors, producers and whatnot on Twitter. You could send letters, but that also took time and effort and there was no guarantee they'd ever read those. The relics from the time, the old "letters from the readers" sections, show us that the TNG hate sounded just the same as the Discovery hate sounds today ("This isn't Star Trek!", "This is blasphemy" yadda yadda yadda). But there was no real platform for people to unite and spread their opinions. There were "boycott TNG" flyers at conventions (for real), sure, but those weren't as widely spread and they didn't affect the show or harm it eventually because the protest wasn't organized enough. But if the internet had existed back then, TNG would have been chased off the air during or right after its first season. Fans weren't about to give it a chance at first, and their opinions DID change for the most part, but only after the show proved what it could do. These days no one would give it that kind of chance, the internet hate would be so fierce at first that the show wouldn't survive. (This is also what I fear for Discovery. Even Fuller knew this - the show stands and falls with Star Trek fans, and if they don't like what they see, it's gonna get ugly.)

Today we have the internet and social media where everyone can yell about everything and where haters can unite and throw their hate at producers, actors, you name it. But, in essence, nothing has changed. The Star Trek fandom WAS never optimistic, it just SEEMS that way today that it was because back then fans couldn't voice their dislike as loudly as they can today. The Star Trek fandom has never been open-minded to change, the hate was ALWAYS there, with every new series that was announced. Enterprise just seems like as if it was hated on the most, but that's also because the internet was there then, people could bash the show in message boards and the hate was so overwhelming that ENT fans had to found their own message board to be safe from it. I predict that things will be even worse with Discovery because we now have Twitter and Facebook, which are a lot more direct and effective when it comes to communicating. The hate is already going strong there, and the show hasn't even aired its first episode.

Of course the fandom doesn't consist of just haters, that's not what I'm saying - what I'm saying is that the haters have a chance to be much LOUDER today. But they have ALWAYS been there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Robin Bland said:

Jeez, please change the record, Gus. We know. You never lose an opportunity to tell us. Over and over again! Dude, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but your friends here already know you feel this way. Until the actual moment that the new show is aired and we have something more to go on, can you please stop hammering us over the head with this? Thanks.

Indeed, you are quite right, Robin............. I will change my Blu-Ray disc on this. I know I am souding like  a broken record. You are right, enough is enough

Well, I post something positive in the future, promised it.

Gus

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, GustavoLeao said:

Indeed, you are quite right, Robin............. I will change my Blu-Ray disc on this. I know I am souding like  a broken record. You are right, enough is enough

Well, I post something positive in the future, promised it.

Gus

 

:thumbsup2:

10 hours ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Glad to see there are others that are looking as forward to what a new ST can be, rather than what they fear it won't be. 

To paraphrase Surak, "I'm pleased to see that there are differences..." 

 

To those that want to strangle it in the crib?  Fine.  Don't pay to see it.   It just saddens me to see so many ST fans, who used to be such champions of diversity and inclusivity, being so closed to the possibility of changes to ST itself.   Reminds me of the hate that used to surround TNG's launch 30 years ago; there were a lot of naysayers who thought that if it wasn't Kirk, Spock and Bones it was gonna be garbage.  

TNG stumbled coltishly out of the gate, but soon had many of them eating their own words with a side order of crow.   Now, I'm not saying or guaranteeing that DSC will be another TNG (that's a tall order), but I find this thickening aura of negativity surrounding the new series to be both stifling and even a bit saddening.  Whatever happened to that old ST fan optimism? :confused:

 

I catch myself a little, because i always try to remain open-minded but, fearing a replay of Into Darkness, i was a bit negative about Beyond before I saw it. I don't want to make the same mistake about a new TV show, which is what I've wished for since the end of Enterprise.

It's a whole new production team, a whole new iteration of Trek, different from any version that's ever been seen before. So I really want to come to it fresh, open-eyed, take it on its own terms.

Here's hoping!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Robin Bland said:

:thumbsup2:

I catch myself a little, because i always try to remain open-minded but, fearing a replay of Into Darkness, i was a bit negative about Beyond before I saw it. I don't want to make the same mistake about a new TV show, which is what I've wished for since the end of Enterprise.

It's a whole new production team, a whole new iteration of Trek, different from any version that's ever been seen before. So I really want to come to it fresh, open-eyed, take it on its own terms.

Here's hoping!

TNG had a new team once Fontana, Gerrold and Milkis left; Roddenberry was increasingly less involved as his condition deteriorated so basically TNG (from about S2 on) was largely a new crew as well.  And look what happened; it become a phenomenon and eventually both came onto its own AND became a part of the greater ST family.  

Again, I don't want to imply that this WILL happen with DSC, but I see a new team as "young minds, fresh ideas."  I'm hopeful.  I  tend to think that fresh approaches are healthy for a franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sehlat Vie said:

TNG had a new team once Fontana, Gerrold and Milkis left; Roddenberry was increasingly less involved as his condition deteriorated so basically TNG (from about S2 on) was largely a new crew as well.  And look what happened; it become a phenomenon and eventually both came onto its own AND became a part of the greater ST family.  

Again, I don't want to imply that this WILL happen with DSC, but I see a new team as "young minds, fresh ideas."  I'm hopeful.  I  tend to think that fresh approaches are healthy for a franchise.

i wholeheartedly concur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mr.Picard said:

The internet happened. I'm pretty sure that, back in the day, TNG had just as many naysayers and haters - they just didn't have a platform. It took time and effort to write a letter and send it to a magazine or fanclub or fanzine, and there was no guarantee they'd print it and that others would read it. There was also no way of directly communicating with actors, producers and whatnot on Twitter. You could send letters, but that also took time and effort and there was no guarantee they'd ever read those. The relics from the time, the old "letters from the readers" sections, show us that the TNG hate sounded just the same as the Discovery hate sounds today ("This isn't Star Trek!", "This is blasphemy" yadda yadda yadda). But there was no real platform for people to unite and spread their opinions. There were "boycott TNG" flyers at conventions (for real), sure, but those weren't as widely spread and they didn't affect the show or harm it eventually because the protest wasn't organized enough. But if the internet had existed back then, TNG would have been chased off the air during or right after its first season. Fans weren't about to give it a chance at first, and their opinions DID change for the most part, but only after the show proved what it could do. These days no one would give it that kind of chance, the internet hate would be so fierce at first that the show wouldn't survive. (This is also what I fear for Discovery. Even Fuller knew this - the show stands and falls with Star Trek fans, and if they don't like what they see, it's gonna get ugly.)

Today we have the internet and social media where everyone can yell about everything and where haters can unite and throw their hate at producers, actors, you name it. But, in essence, nothing has changed. The Star Trek fandom WAS never optimistic, it just SEEMS that way today that it was because back then fans couldn't voice their dislike as loudly as they can today. The Star Trek fandom has never been open-minded to change, the hate was ALWAYS there, with every new series that was announced. Enterprise just seems like as if it was hated on the most, but that's also because the internet was there then, people could bash the show in message boards and the hate was so overwhelming that ENT fans had to found their own message board to be safe from it. I predict that things will be even worse with Discovery because we now have Twitter and Facebook, which are a lot more direct and effective when it comes to communicating. The hate is already going strong there, and the show hasn't even aired its first episode.

Of course the fandom doesn't consist of just haters, that's not what I'm saying - what I'm saying is that the haters have a chance to be much LOUDER today. But they have ALWAYS been there.

I so much disagree with this interpretation of Trek history. I was only 7 at the time, but even I first saw Picard in a commercial and thought "The new Kirk cannot be an old bald guy!" But by the time the show premiered I was stoked, and never looked back. This is the difference your interpretation misses: back then the unknown quantity of TNG was compared to a beloved and iconic crew and series. It was understandable that some were emotionally opposed, and just as predictable that that opposition evaporated after we got new Trek on TV again. Today, some of us fans can't help think of this new unknown Trek show in relation not to Kirk and Spock but to Janeway, Chakotay, Harry Kim, Neelix, Archer, Tpol and Mayweather. Unlike the disgruntled fans of 1987, the disgruntled fans of 2017 actually have reason to be disgruntled. 

But I for one am not projecting my past disappointments onto the new show. I actually am unabashedly optimistic. 

In any case, I started this thread NOT to explain why DSC is going to suck. I don't think it will! I started this thread to explore how it will be different. In those differences, great meaning can be found. DS9 created a lot of interesting stories and characters in the way it was consciously different from previous Treks. Thinking about these things may actually enhance the viewing experience and allow us to see peek behind the curtain to what the writers are up to. Besides, what else are we going to talk about until September?     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Justin Snead said:

I so much disagree with this interpretation of Trek history. I was only 7 at the time, but even I first saw Picard in a commercial and thought "The new Kirk cannot be an old bald guy!" But by the time the show premiered I was stoked, and never looked back. This is the difference your interpretation misses: back then the unknown quantity of TNG was compared to a beloved and iconic crew and series. It was understandable that some were emotionally opposed, and just as predictable that that opposition evaporated after we got new Trek on TV again. Today, some of us fans can't help think of this new unknown Trek show in relation not to Kirk and Spock but to Janeway, Chakotay, Harry Kim, Neelix, Archer, Tpol and Mayweather. Unlike the disgruntled fans of 1987, the disgruntled fans of 2017 actually have reason to be disgruntled. 

I disagree with their reasons to be disgruntled.

VGR was clearly a product that reflected the symptoms of franchise fatigue (and I don't care for those who say differently, franchise fatigue WAS a thing.. I know, I saw it firsthand in my own circle of fan friends).    Not to mention that it the production team got in the habit of playing it safe (the producers/writers have admitted as much on DVD/BR commentaries and interviews).  And this team worked a long time without a break.   ENT only compounded the problem by coming so closely on the heels of VGR's end.  The franchise, in 18 years, never got a chance to regroup and catch its breath.  It was a machine on autopilot, and it played it safe.  It's also clear that the cogs and wheels of that safe machine were getting creaky and worn out.

But this new show comes after a 12 year break with an all-new team at the helm.   That alone is exciting, IMO.

And Mr. Picard does bring up a good point about the lack of internet in 1987; yes, there were angry fans writing into scifi magazines (like Starlog), but online criticism has taken it to a whole new level; it's almost literally a cloud of negativity hanging over the project....

21 minutes ago, Justin Snead said:

In any case, I started this thread NOT to explain why DSC is going to suck. I don't think it will! I started this thread to explore how it will be different. In those differences, great meaning can be found. 

Well, the headline of your thread is 'helping us cope' with how different the show will be; one generally doesn't need to 'cope' with a positive experience, so it's understandable how some might read that as a naysayer-ish sounding thread.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone recently wrote a good article on the whole hate-for-new-Trek thing, with references to the Discovery hate: The internet would have hated Star Trek: The Next Generation. I'm not exactly making this all up. The comparison between TNG and Discovery is particularly vaild because, just like then, Discovery comes after a longer break TV series wise, just as TNG came after a longer break from TOS (I know the movies were still being made but I'm talking about television series).

I'd also say the TOS fans then certainly felt like as if they had a reason to be disgruntled. ESPECIALLY since the TOS actors back then ALSO actively hated on TNG when it was announced and were like "what are they doing, they want to replace us, never gonna happen". (Never mind that DeForest Kelley, who also added his voice to the naysayers then actually appeared in TNG's pilot episode.)

Just because TNG proved its worth after a while for many fans (NOT all of them, there are STILL rabid TOS fans to this day who will not accept ANY Trek other than TOS) does not mean Discovery will be able to do the same, not in today's climate of "the internet does not want". I look at this from an outsider's point of view, and to me it looks like as if the old fights are back, between those who embrace changes and those who don't. We had this very same fight with Enterprise, and since that one was also a prequel, we're going to hear the same arguments and the same yelling all over again with Discovery, only this time probably even more vicious because this is the SECOND time they're making a prequel without listening to the majority of the fans who keep telling them to GO FORWARD in the timeline.

Every Trek show had its haters. TNG was hated because it wasn't TOS and because Jean-Luc wasn't Kirk, DS9 was hated because it didn't bother too much with exploration, VOY was hated because it was seen as TNG Light, ENT was hated because it was a prequel whose premise wasn't seen as sound by many fans. It's something that re-occurs every single time, the same old thing, only this time it's more vicious because the internet exists.

And Sehlat is right, in order to see how Discovery is going to be different and how to cope with it, some folks choose the negative aspects and say why they find it difficult to cope with it and also try to explain why there is so much hate by referring to the hate that happened whenever a new series was announced. It's a perfectly reasonable approach to the topic. Some folks cope by explaining why the show gets hate already and how this isn't a new phenomenon, and maybe this is even something GOOD - if you get the reasoning behind the hate, you also get a chance to not fall into it, too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Damar: "What kind of state tolerates the murder of innocent women and children?"

Kira: "Yeah, Damar, what kind of people give those orders?"

This quote showed up in my TrekCore twitter feed just now, and it illustrates the point I am making about what you can potentially lose with serialization. It is a scene from one of the episodes in the DS9 finale arc--I could not tell you which one, or exactly what preceded it. I think the Dominion was blowing up cities on Cardassia. It was an incredibly powerful moment. It was also a very poignant Kira moment because it recalled the entire history of her character arc. It was an important moment for the series major theme of the Cardassian occupation, since one of those Cardassians is now forced to experience what the Bajorans had.

The problem was that it was just ONE moment that was quickly swept away by all the other story lines of that arc. If an entire 45-minute episode had been built around that scene, like a 7th season counterpoint to "Duet", THAT would have been a classic episode. It would have been one fans talk about, or long to re-watch. 

As I point out in my blog post at the top, that DS9 arc was 10 hours, 3 less than the DSC season will be. Yes, DSC will be updated TV as it should be. I think it will be great TV, if only because CBS cannot afford for it not to be. It will even be great Trek, I'm sure. But it may MAY be different in this regard: Will DSC have its own "Duet"s, "Inner Light"s, "Devil in the Dark"s and "City on the Edge of Forever"s? Unless they figure out how to merge serialization and stand alone stories, I don't know.  

  

Edited by Justin Snead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, but Walking Dead for example is heavily serialized and yet people still seem to know what happened in which episode. And they can also still both love and hate individual episodes, so I'd say the iconic episodes will still stand out. Trekkies in particular tend to know lines by heart and are extremely good at telling which episode things are from... I wouldn't worry about that one.

In short: The TV landscape has changed drastically, yes, but I'd say the audience has adapted to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much all of TOS is linear storytelling. Most Trek episodes since have at least an A and a B story, and possibly C and occasionally D (maybe just a scene or two) as well. I don't think DSC is going to do completely linear storytelling over a whole season, but rather, episodes where the main story is interleaved with more episode specific scenes, or vice versa. DS9 and Babylon 5 did this really well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now