The STAR TREK Superthread

[Myradin]

Whenever I hear the phrase "Prime Directive" I cringe inside. It's one of the dumbest things TNG did to the franchise.

Indeed. I rather enjoyed when the orville debunked its rhetoric.

[Zorachus]

Grew up watching Next Gen on Saturday nights, with my Dad and two older brothers, pizza night and Star Trek. So for me Captain Picard and the Enterprise D and E are STAR TREK.

Was so happy when CBS brought Star Trek back few years ago, but Discovery is just ok to mediocre bad. Only good season was Season 2 with Captain Pike, he was so good, and even the Spock actor did a different take on the character, was actually pretty good as well. So I have hopes Strange New Worlds hopefully is the Trek I have been looking for.

Picard new show, ugh. Not at all what I was expecting. I love Patrick Stewart, don't blame him, but the show is just not what I was thinking we'd get.

[Myradin]

Picard new show, ugh. Not at all what I was expecting. I love Patrick Stewart, don't blame him, but the show is just not what I was thinking we'd get.

Given how much they like to boast that he influenced the show's tone and direction, you might want to blame him.

[Zorachus]

Long reply here, so please stick with this.

One thing I think newer Trek does not understand or get right whatsoever, is the future setting they in. These shows aren't set just 75 or 100 years in the future, they are set like 300 to 400 years in the future, which is pretty far ahead with tech that would be unbelievable and super crazy cool.

My point it seems these new shows, have the star ships and tech with the touchscreen tablet like interface or even the waving of the hands and screens in the air, as something in my mind isn't too far away from reality, I don't think we'll that kind of interface stuff in 5 years from now, no, but in like 50 years or 75 years yeah absolutely. But if these shows are set 300+ years in the future, that kind of tech would be old fashioned and outdated already, they would be way beyond that kind of stuff. It would really be like neural-net brain connected directly to the ships computer interface or some far out stuff. Humans certainly wouldn't be tapping on a screen type of device anymore, like a big iPad interface, no freaking way, they'd be way way beyond that kind of stuff, to some strange new way of human to computer direct connection, or A.I. running everything 100% which would be faster and smarter in controlling and running the ship, than any human ever possibly could by tapping on some screen, like a woodpecker tapping a tree, LOL.

And then the human character themselves. Today in the 2020's we have pace makers and artificial limbs, and basic bionic parts for humans, and bio tech stuff is getting better every year, and medical science smarter. Imagine what medicine and improvements for humans will be like 100 years from now? People will live much longer, and have nano-byte bots swimming in their blood to combat diseases, etc.. We would be sort of part bionic man in the next 22nd century.

Now take that to Star Trek time, in the year 2400, holy cow, medical tech will be insane, humans could be like the Terminator T800 in a good way, with a strong exoskeleton, and the aging gene turned off, everyone would look like they were 30 years old forever, and be almost super human, and safe from most known diseases, we would in 400 years from now, be very much half Android / half human type species then, but still look human, again like the Terminator or something equivalent.

That's what the future would be like in 300 to 400 years. It seems these Star Trek shows, look like they are only 100 to 150 years in the future.

[Myradin]

Long reply here, so please stick with this.

One thing I think newer Trek does not understand or get right whatsoever, is the future setting they in. These shows aren't set just 75 or 100 years in the future, they are set like 300 to 400 years in the future, which is pretty far ahead with tech that would be unbelievable and super crazy cool.

My point it seems these new shows, have the star ships and tech with the touchscreen tablet like interface or even the waving of the hands and screens in the air, as something in my mind isn't too far away from reality, I don't think we'll that kind of interface stuff in 5 years from now, no, but in like 50 years or 75 years yeah absolutely. But if these shows are set 300+ years in the future, that kind of tech would be old fashioned and outdated already, they would be way beyond that kind of stuff. It would really be like neural-net brain connected directly to the ships computer interface or some far out stuff.

To be fair, most of old trek's interface stuff did come out within 50 years of its airing. Most of new trek has also been set in and around a similar time period as prior shows, which already caused backlash due to drastic tech changes from what was shown before.

As for neural control and such, that also isn't terribly far off given recent studies. The star trek universe however is generally opposed to extensive genetic or cybernetic augmentation. That said, some of the stuff with the badges and displays in discovery seem to be controlled with little to no direct input, so could be neural.

That said, Discovery season 3 did feel really...backward in certain places tech wise.

[Tyris Flare]

Part of ST lore is that the world is completely trashed by WW3, but also the shows had small budgets and a lot of limitations.

Anyway DS9 3-7 is the best Trek imo (though of course it still has plenty of bad episodes in there).

Trek needs a "Mandalorian" style injection to get the IP back on track. Just not sure who could pull that off.

[Zorachus]

I want a Star Trek show, that really shows what's it's like to live in the 25th century. With crazy tech that's almost unimaginable today, not tapping big screens and stuff, that would be cavemen stuff to them in the year 2400. The human crew would be all T-800 Terminator types, everyone would look young and in the best shape possible and be almost super human. The ships inside would be controlled by insanely smart A.I. with just your thoughts telling it what to do. You almost couldn't die in that period, with having a backup of your mind ready to download into a new bio-tech type cyborg body for you, always available.

Seriously that's what it will be like in 400 years from now. Wish Star Trek would hire writers that think out of the box, and really go wild on what a great but crazy future world we could have in the next few hundred years. Stop with the large iPad tablet type interface they tap to control the ship, come on, that's weak sauce writing. Go big, go 400 years in the future thinking. But they seem stuck in like the 100 to 150 years in the future.

[rogueMatthias]

Lower Decks is easily the best of all the current Trek shows. Sorry not sorry.

[Sunseeker]

Long reply here, so please stick with this.

One thing I think newer Trek does not understand or get right whatsoever, is the future setting they in. These shows aren't set just 75 or 100 years in the future, they are set like 300 to 400 years in the future, which is pretty far ahead with tech that would be unbelievable and super crazy cool.

My point it seems these new shows, have the star ships and tech with the touchscreen tablet like interface or even the waving of the hands and screens in the air, as something in my mind isn't too far away from reality, I don't think we'll that kind of interface stuff in 5 years from now, no, but in like 50 years or 75 years yeah absolutely. But if these shows are set 300+ years in the future, that kind of tech would be old fashioned and outdated already, they would be way beyond that kind of stuff. It would really be like neural-net brain connected directly to the ships computer interface or some far out stuff. Humans certainly wouldn't be tapping on a screen type of device anymore, like a big iPad interface, no freaking way, they'd be way way beyond that kind of stuff, to some strange new way of human to computer direct connection, or A.I. running everything 100% which would be faster and smarter in controlling and running the ship, than any human ever possibly could by tapping on some screen, like a woodpecker tapping a tree, LOL.

And then the human character themselves. Today in the 2020's we have pace makers and artificial limbs, and basic bionic parts for humans, and bio tech stuff is getting better every year, and medical science smarter. Imagine what medicine and improvements for humans will be like 100 years from now? People will live much longer, and have nano-byte bots swimming in their blood to combat diseases, etc.. We would be sort of part bionic man in the next 22nd century.

Now take that to Star Trek time, in the year 2400, holy cow, medical tech will be insane, humans could be like the Terminator T800 in a good way, with a strong exoskeleton, and the aging gene turned off, everyone would look like they were 30 years old forever, and be almost super human, and safe from most known diseases, we would in 400 years from now, be very much half Android / half human type species then, but still look human, again like the Terminator or something equivalent.

That's what the future would be like in 300 to 400 years. It seems these Star Trek shows, look like they are only 100 to 150 years in the future.

Star Trek isn't that far in the future, not within our timeline and less so within its own.

Zefram Cochran and the "first flight" takes place in 2061 some time after a massive war decimated much of the Earth.
Star Trek: Enterprise doesn't take place till nearly 100 years later and its clearly shown that much of Earth's time and energy has been spent on unifying and rebuilding, while space exploration has taken a relatively side-note.
TOS jumps about 100 years after that (2265) after the Earth has stabilized and was ready to engage in a new "age of exploration".
TNG again jumps about 100 years(2364), after the Federation has explored much of the local galaxy and has established itself as a major player over the course of multiple wars (Klingon/Federation, Romulan/Federation, Cardassian/Federation). DS9 and Voyager both overlap this latter timeline.

Functionally, The whole of TV-Trek only takes place over about 300 years (2060-2360), with the timeline following a fairly standard "recovery", "expansion", "establishment" pattern that is common throughout history.

Further, your suggestion flies in the face of the ongoing Trek narrative, which is about the accomplishment of humans in the face of adversity. Not the accomplishments of immortal terminator-cyborg juggernauts in the face of adversity. Trek is a story about what humanity can accomplish if we get our shit together. And sure, we probably could turn ourselves into immortal cyborg juggernauts....but that sort of power-gaming really misses the point. The narrative even goes on to pretty bold-face show that those who do or have (such as the Borg, the Jem'Hadar & other Dominion races, Khan and the GMO humans, even The Q) are often lesser for it. Sacrificing culture (the Borg), ambition (Jem'Hadar/Vorta), peace (Khan), creativity (Q) in favor of technological advancement, power, violence and maintaining the status quo.

So, yeah, Star Trek is pretty clear why the future doesn't look like you suggest. And I feel like a lot of folks (because I see this argument often enough) really miss that.

[Ivanstone]

Trek needs a "Mandalorian" style injection to get the IP back on track. Just not sure who could pull that off.

An overly nostalgic action adventure set in space? That was DSC S1.

It was not such a hot idea. At least it course corrected somewhat with later seasons although it still needs to kick the Star Wars people from production.

[Myradin]

An overly nostalgic action adventure set in space? That was DSC S1.

It was not such a hot idea. At least it course corrected somewhat with later seasons although it still needs to kick the Star Wars people from production.

The Mandalorian was an intelligent blend of familiar elements while introducing new ones, also introducing movie only fans to stuff that'd normally been in games/books/comics/cartoons without making them feel left out for not having experienced them. A show that cares about the universe.

DSC S1 just threw random nastalgia references while not even feeling like it was in the same time period.

In some ways I think Lower Decks and the Orville are closer to being Star Trek's Mandalorian. The problem is the Orville isn't in the same universe and Lower Decks being a cartoon will inherently drive some fans away. They also both lean a bit more heavily on comedy. But their soul feels closer to what fans enjoyed in the past.

I think Strange New Worlds has potential to be the 'mandalorian' of star trek, but time will tell.

[Ivanstone]

The Mandalorian was an intelligent blend of familiar elements while introducing new ones, also introducing movie only fans to stuff that'd normally been in games/books/comics/cartoons without making them feel left out for not having experienced them. A show that cares about the universe.

DSC S1 just threw random nastalgia references while not even feeling like it was in the same time period.

In some ways I think Lower Decks and the Orville are closer to being Star Trek's Mandalorian. The problem is the Orville isn't in the same universe and Lower Decks being a cartoon will inherently drive some fans away. They also both lean a bit more heavily on comedy. But their soul feels closer to what fans enjoyed in the past.

I think Strange New Worlds has potential to be the 'mandalorian' of star trek, but time will tell.

None of them are the Mandalorian of Star Trek because the Mandalorian is an overly nostalgic action adventure set in space. This is neither a compliment or a criticism. Its simply an accurate description of what it is and that's absolutely fine. For the most part I enjoy Mandalorian more than Discovery but its still not what you want in a Star Trek series.

Lower Decks was generally better Trek than DSC. Its absolutely unrelenting in its enthusiasm for exploration and unity. Yeah because its an animated comedy that enthusiasm is amped all the way up to 11. I'm fine with that. Some people aren't but they're boring, so poop on them.

[Weeps]

I want a Star Trek that has nothing to do with the OG characters (Original, TNG, DS9, etc).

Mandolorian hit this successfully. There's a whole federation of planets out there. You mean to tell me you can't start up a new story line based on a DIFFERENT race from a different planet within the federation?

There's so much exploration. Cultural clashes. Things to learn from.

Going planet to planet trying to explore is getting a bit old. It is ok to stay in one new planet for a while. Assimilate to a degree, learn their dialect/language, etc. It is so easy. Hire me

[Tyris Flare]

An overly nostalgic action adventure set in space? That was DSC S1.

It was not such a hot idea. At least it course corrected somewhat with later seasons although it still needs to kick the Star Wars people from production.

I don't know, I thought DSC s1 was unwatchable trash. Did not seem at all like old Trek.

Mando goes out of its way to get costuming/sets/makeup and little stuff right. DSC changes klingons and tons of other things. This isnt what you do if you are trying to win old fans back

[Ivanstone]

I don't know, I thought DSC s1 was unwatchable trash. Did not seem at all like old Trek.

Mando goes out of its way to get costuming/sets/makeup and little stuff right. DSC changes klingons and tons of other things. This isnt what you do if you are trying to win old fans back

It was not like old Trek. Old Trek was about exploration, science and diplomacy. It had some occasional action stuff here and there but it wasn't the focus of the show.

DSC S1 tried to evoke nostalgia for TOS but mostly dispensed with the exploration, science and diplomacy in favour of fight scenes and indulging in some of the more over-the-top elements of TOS. It literally was a Trek show for Star Wars fans. I get why they wanted to introduce Mirror Georgiou into the show but past mirror universe episodes tended to be over the top. It was fun watching your regulars chew scenery with wild abandon* but DSC took that an extreme because it yielded better fight scenes.

I liked DSC S1 but in the same way I liked Kelvin Movie 3. Sure it looks nice, the action is good and the actors are decent but where is my investigation of weird shit?

Mandalorian is still an overly nostalgic action adventure in space. Its a well-done overly nostalgic action adventure in space but its pretty far from most Trek except for DSC (and early ENT).



*Exceptions and kudos to Jeffrey Combs for his soulful portrayal of Mirror Brunt. A nuanced performance of a moral Ferengi who wanted love in a disorderly universe.

[Myradin]

It was not like old Trek. Old Trek was about exploration, science and diplomacy. It had some occasional action stuff here and there but it wasn't the focus of the show.

DSC S1 tried to evoke nostalgia for TOS but mostly dispensed with the exploration, science and diplomacy in favour of fight scenes and indulging in some of the more over-the-top elements of TOS. It literally was a Trek show for Star Wars fans. I get why they wanted to introduce Mirror Georgiou into the show but past mirror universe episodes tended to be over the top. It was fun watching your regulars chew scenery with wild abandon* but DSC took that an extreme because it yielded better fight scenes.

I liked DSC S1 but in the same way I liked Kelvin Movie 3. Sure it looks nice, the action is good and the actors are decent but where is my investigation of weird shit?

Mandalorian is still an overly nostalgic action adventure in space. Its a well-done overly nostalgic action adventure in space but its pretty far from most Trek except for DSC (and early ENT).



*Exceptions and kudos to Jeffrey Combs for his soulful portrayal of Mirror Brunt. A nuanced performance of a moral Ferengi who wanted love in a disorderly universe.

I think you're missing what people mean when they say ST needs a mandalorian.

Mandalorian was a show that won back the fans to a franchise whose fanbase had groan excessively negative. It made star wars cool again.

Discovery is more like the sequel trilogy. The JJ movies were easily locked off in their own universe, but Discovery did something more impactful to the fandom. Just like the disney sequels liked to reference nastalgia, but does it in a way that seems to ruin more memories than cherish them, discovery trounces all over everything.

I don't think anyone saying ST needs a mandalorian is saying we need a sci-fi action story, that's precisely the problem that's happened to Star Trek

[draynay]

Mandalorian is made by people who actually understand why the franchise is popular and successful, they don't have to make an effort to cater to fans because they are fans themselves.

That's what Star Trek needs, the current show runners don't understand Star Trek at all, with the exception of Lower Decks.

[Ivanstone]

I think you're missing what people mean when they say ST needs a mandalorian.

Mandalorian was a show that won back the fans to a franchise whose fanbase had groan excessively negative. It made star wars cool again.

Discovery is more like the sequel trilogy. The JJ movies were easily locked off in their own universe, but Discovery did something more impactful to the fandom. Just like the disney sequels liked to reference nastalgia, but does it in a way that seems to ruin more memories than cherish them, discovery trounces all over everything.

I don't think anyone saying ST needs a mandalorian is saying we need a sci-fi action story, that's precisely the problem that's happened to Star Trek

The Star Wars sequel trilogy is just poorly done Star Wars. So was the prequel trilogy. All of Star Wars is overly nostalgic action adventure in space. That latter part's fine. Mandalorin just demonstrated that you can still make good quality live action Star Wars. It wasn't treading new ground.

DSC S1 had interesting elements that makes it Trek. Saru is the first distinctly non-human crew ever as a main cast (Klingons and Bajorans don't count). A ship with experimental technology. A unique look into the Federation's criminal justice system. Better production to bring it all to life.

And they used it all to have over-the-top fight scenes. Sigh.

[rogueMatthias]

Mandalorian is made by people who actually understand why the franchise is popular and successful, they don't have to make an effort to cater to fans because they are fans themselves.

That's what Star Trek needs, the current show runners don't understand Star Trek at all, with the exception of Lower Decks.

I put off watching Lower Decks for ages because after the trailer I assumed I'd hate it. It is actually solid Trek though. Some of the humour does try too hard (especially in the first episode) but I really think it finds its stride and feels a lot more like StarTrek than other current Trek. It embraces what Starfleet is and ideals, while also heavily criticising it and its inconsistencies. When they just let the jokes roll off Trek cannon then it's a blast. (Finale was great especially).

[Myradin]

The Star Wars sequel trilogy is just poorly done Star Wars. So was the prequel trilogy. All of Star Wars is overly nostalgic action adventure in space. That latter part's fine. Mandalorin just demonstrated that you can still make good quality live action Star Wars. It wasn't treading new ground.

DSC S1 had interesting elements that makes it Trek. Saru is the first distinctly non-human crew ever as a main cast (Klingons and Bajorans don't count). A ship with experimental technology. A unique look into the Federation's criminal justice system. Better production to bring it all to life.

And they used it all to have over-the-top fight scenes. Sigh.

"Mandalorin just demonstrated that you can still make good quality live action Star Wars."

That is precisely what people are meaning when they say Star Wars needs a mandalorian. There needs to be a show that can prove you can still make good star trek.

STD has a number of good ideas, but its execution has left the fanbase feeling disinterested and spiteful to the franchise.