[TV] New Star Trek Show in Development?

[Sudy]

I realize it means something different for everyone. To me the hopefulness seems a little too forced. I guess what I want is something that's more tightly plotted and less action oriented. Season three reminded me a lot of what I can vaguely recall about Enterprise's last season. More watchable than what came before, but often incohesive. It was nice to visit fresh settings and open up the world. And I'm glad they're exploring new ground in the future, even if it's initially been claustrophobic by design. But I feel like any attempts to make it feel like like classic Star Trek come off as a cheap facsimile. It can and should be its own thing, but it just feels so unrecognizable to me.

It feels like the difference between TNG at it's best and First Contact. First Contact had all the characters I loved, and I definitely enjoyed it as a kid. But it transformed them into action heroes. Everyone may not be an action hero in Discovery, but they frequently perform their role equivalent, whether it's "science magic" or emotional wizardry. TNG definitely wasn't perfect and I openly admit to being biased by nostalgia and my youthful inability to form insightful criticism when I first saw and bonded with some of its more mediocre episodes. Similarly, I much prefer the modern serial format and how characters are written to grow. But it really seems pushed into overdrive on Discovery.

[hepcat]

I realize it means something different for everyone. To me the hopefulness seems a little too forced. I guess what I want is something that's more tightly plotted and less action oriented. Season three reminded me a lot of what I can vaguely recall about Enterprise's last season. More watchable than what came before, but often incohesive. It was nice to visit fresh settings and open up the world. And I'm glad they're exploring new ground in the future, even if it's initially been claustrophobic by design. But I feel like any attempts to make it feel like like classic Star Trek come off as a cheap facsimile. It can and should be its own thing, but it just feels so unrecognizable to me.

Which classic Star Trek though? Classic TOS, classic TNG, classic DS9 or classic Voyager? Because they all had different approaches. I truly feel Discovery is, for the most part, capturing bits and pieces of all of them and I like it for that. To me, it’s Star Trek.

I would say that between Picard and Discovery, this last season of Discovery was more Star Trek on the whole. I loved Picard, don’t get me wrong, But it was so bleak most of the time.

[Kraken]

I should get No Access and watch this the next time they have a free month promo. I liked the first 2 seasons, and I'd sorta like to see Below Decks too.

[Isgrimnur]

Go watch The Empath from TOS S3. I'll pay the mental health deductible.

[Sudy]

Which classic Star Trek though? Classic TOS, classic TNG, classic DS9 or classic Voyager? Because they all had different approaches.

TOS was considerably different, yes. TNG came 20 years later at a much different time, culturally. However outside of tone, structure, and a few mechanics, I don't consider there to be much difference between TNG, DS9, and Voyager. (And that's coming from someone who barely tolerates Voyager.) Sure, TNG might be a Big Mac and DS9's a Whopper. But that makes Discovery a freezer-burned cheeseburger Hot Pocket.

Discovery comes nearly 30 years after the launch of TNG, so I definitely believe it deserves room to breathe. Television structure may have changed a lot in that period, but I don't think the language of storytelling has. Culturally and technologically there have been huge changes, but I don't think we're moving by leaps and bounds anymore.

I struggle to express myself fully on this topic; others have done it far better. I also try to be conscious of whether I'm just subconsciously aping tired opinions we've been hearing ever since the series launched. But I think I've given this series fair consideration, and it just continues to feel foreign to me in most regards. I don't know that I have an ideal comparison. I never saw the original BSG, but there was a similar time difference between those series. However, that was a reimagining rather than an in-universe soft reboot/continuation.

I feel like Discovery constantly pushes only adventure and grim politics rather than leave room for the other tones and topics found on TNG. I know if I re-watched the whole thing I'd find some levels of nuance that I'm forgetting right now, but the point is that only the bombastic stuff has left an impression.

I should get No Access and watch this the next time they have a free month promo. I liked the first 2 seasons, and I'd sorta like to see Below Decks too.

Soon you'll have to get Paramount+. I hear Netflix+ is coming next. They send you VHS tapes in the mail.

Below Decks is great. I was a bit uncertain before I understood what the show was, but it's completely worthwhile. Some of the jokes are less hilarious than amusing, but it's always creative. It might have too many callbacks to classic Trek, but that's the fun of it.

[hepcat]

Oof, Below Decks was a big swing and a miss. I could barely make it through any episodes of that one. Talk about sloppy writing.

And I disagree wholeheartedly about Discovery being politically grim. This last season was all about reminding everyone what made the Federation inspirational to so many. It really captured the essence of what TNG brought to the table while also bringing the action oriented TOS approach. Picard on the other hand gave us a Federation that has stopped caring in many ways, and I’m still struggling to understand why. But I still love that one too because Picard himself embodies the Federation I want. It’s my hope the show eventually lets him also remind everyone around him.

We’ll agree to disagree I guess. I think Discovery has grown into a worthy Star Trek over the last 3 years. Is it perfect? Of course not. But no Star Trek ever has been.

[$iljanus]

Oof, Below Decks was a big swing and a miss home run! I could barely make it through any wait for episodes of that one. Talk about sloppy awesome writing.

I fixed a few things for you...

I also enjoyed Discovery a lot but Saru should have kept his captaincy and Tilly needs to be promoted to Lieutenant. I’m hoping that after Saru’s leave of absence perhaps he’ll take back the captain’s chair and Michael was just keeping it warm for a bit.

[El Guapo]

Oof, Below Decks was a big swing and a miss home run! I could barely make it through any wait for episodes of that one. Talk about sloppy awesome writing.

I fixed a few things for you...

I also enjoyed Discovery a lot but Saru should have kept his captaincy and Tilly needs to be promoted to Lieutenant. I’m hoping that after Saru’s leave of absence perhaps he’ll take back the captain’s chair and Michael was just keeping it warm for a bit.

I agree (except about Below Decks, since I've seen almost none of it). Discovery's core strength is its characters - whereas sometimes Trek shows devolve characters into "starfleet officer who is logical", "starfleet officer who is horny", etc., Discovery has really strong fleshed out characters (and Saru and Tilly are among the best characters).

What holds Discovery back a bit is some of the overarching plot choices are a little thin and a little weird. Like the deus ex machina ending to the Klingon war at the end of season 1, for example.

[hepcat]

I watched two or three episodes of Below Deck, hoping I'd have a Harley Quinn moment in which I realize the show is subversively hilarious...but it never arrived. It felt like a high school kid telling dirty jokes on a Star Trek fan fiction board (is there such a thing? can we put one up if not? could we get Lord Mortis to head it up?).

And yeah, I did note that Michael isn't my favorite character. She's progressively gotten less and less sympathetic for me. I love Saru though, and Tilly (while a bit TOO silly at times) is just fun. But more importantly, I want my Stamets and Reno spin off. I could watch those two argue for hours.

Speaking of Stamets, Star Trek has a rich history of bringing equality to the screen, and I think they handled Stamets' domestic life perfectly. It just is. It isn't accompanied by fan fare or self aggrandizing. It's just a matter of fact. That's the way to do it, methinks. Another reason I consider Discovery a true entry in the franchise.

What holds Discovery back a bit is some of the overarching plot choices are a little thin and a little weird. Like the deus ex machina ending to the Klingon war at the end of season 1, for example.

I agree to some extent. But I remember the shaky start to DS9 and that became my favorite Star Trek show, so I cut it some slack. However, it still hasn't risen to that level of story telling yet in season 3, so I hope season 4 they drop some of the glitz and focus more on the humanity that drives this show (and to be fair, much of Star Trek).

Okay, back on topic: I imagine Stamets and Reno have opened a bistro on Rigel IV and they get into various antics each week. We'll give Stamets a catch phrase. Something like "Oh, hold your phaser!" or "Are you having a laugh?!".

[Blackhawk]

You know, part of the appeal of Star Trek to me was the optimistic view it had of humanity. That eventually we'd move beyond our worst impulses. That we could be better than we are. It was idealist, possibly unrealistic, but it gave me hope when I watched it. It was inspirational to me, especially at a time when I was forming a lot of the ideas about what kind of person I wanted to be. A lot of the more recent Star Trek, despite possibly being being better written, lost that element. I still enjoy it (and am really looking forward to more Picard - and yes, Lower Decks), but it doesn't leave me with that same feeling.

It's sort of like watching Man of Steel after Donner's Superman. Same setting, different feeling.

[hepcat]

As I mentioned earlier, I have that same feeling about Star Trek and its sense of hope and optimism being its best trait. And Discovery has that. This entire last season was about building up the Federation after a universal tragedy, and what it means to all the races. But even the first season kept the ideas of the Federation right out in front. Maybe not in neon letters on a 100 foot sign, but it was definitely there.

Picard not so much. I still love that show. But after I completed it and had some time to digest it, I realized something. I think what I saw was a reboot of Firefly set in the Star Trek universe. That's great. But now the Federation is kind of murky in its morality..if not downright sinister at times. And this is coming from someone who loved the idea of Section 31.

[Sudy]

And I disagree wholeheartedly about Discovery being politically grim. This last season was all about reminding everyone what made the Federation inspirational to so many.

You're definitely right about much of season 3. I'm referring to the series as a whole. Starfleet felt like a much more morally ambiguous and controlling entity in portions of the first two seasons, in the original time period. I think there were similar elements with the future's survivalist-Starfleet at least until "it's a utopia again!" at the very end. The hope and optimism are all manufactured by the crew, which I found a bit cloying.

Anyway, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I appreciate the conversation regardless. I'd probably revise some opinions on a re-watch, but I'm not going to take the time to do that lol. The show's just not working for me, and the end of season 3 was my own "discovery" that I should stop expecting it to. I do enjoy it for what it is, however. There are parts of it I've loved even though others have criticized them as being specifically un-Trek, such as Isaacs's Lorca.

[hepcat]

I'm curious, did you think Picard was the kind of Star Trek you wanted?

[Sudy]

Absolutely not, and I'm distressed by how they felt the need to dredge up Data's digital remains. Again, I loved elements of the show and am eager to see it continue, but it felt like a completely different universe. On one hand it's interesting to see how the Federation evolved, and to spend time in non-Federation settings. But this isn't anything like what most of us expected. And I've made grudging peace with that. Except I haven't. So frustrating! It's like putting the cast of House M.D. on a WW2 German submarine. One might consider it might be better set on a Starfleet vessel, but then I'm pretty sure we'd just have another Discovery.

I don't necessarily have a problem exploring the darkness and moral ambiguity, but everything just feels so inconsistent with the established universe, top to bottom.

[hepcat]

I just want REAL Star Trek the TOS way. Weekly episodes consisting almost entirely of a Starfleet captain having sex with anything he makes eye contact with, and getting into bare knuckle fights every 15 minutes.

[Rumpy]

Discovery comes nearly 30 years after the launch of TNG, so I definitely believe it deserves room to breathe. Television structure may have changed a lot in that period, but I don't think the language of storytelling has. Culturally and technologically there have been huge changes, but I don't think we're moving by leaps and bounds anymore.

I think TV in general has only become more quickly paced than ever. Ironically, I feel that the serialized nature of something like Discovery, and even Picard, has only made it prone to being less about exploration and discovery. It's the need to keep moving it forward that IMHO has hampered the ability to tell really great stories within the world they have. And that's frustrating to me, because while I like great characters and stories, the serialized nature of a series means that everything else is only ever as good as the story driving it forward, so you're stuck with it for an entire season if it ends up being something you're not buying into. That epitomizes Discovery for me. I want to like it because I like Star Trek, or did, but I really don't like its direction and I found myself completely disinterested in what it was trying to do.

A similar thing is happening to me with Picard. The whole thing just seems painted with broad brush strokes, with hints of what made it great, but with a story that just seems like it's forgotten where it's been while it was gone. There's so much potential for seeing how his world has changed , only they don't seem to be interested in really discussing it, and only are interested in getting a 'gang' together, which feels quite hollow to me. It's more character-driven than the concepts they were built upon, if that makes any sense, which leaves it feeling discordant. So, I see some familiar parts to it, but when I look at the world, it doesn't even look like they cared about it. It just felt incredibly dull and generic rather than a thoughtful and creative version of Picard's future.

[Daehawk]

I just want REAL Star Trek the TOS way. Weekly episodes consisting almost entirely of a Starfleet captain having sex with anything he makes eye contact with, and getting into bare knuckle fights every 15 minutes.

Captain Picard killed that off.

Did you guys realize that yesterday was 6 years since Leonard Nimoy died? 6 years! More than half a decade. I remember where I was...I was with my wife at her hair salon and her hair dresser mentioned it. Heck I still remember where we were in 1991 when we heard on the radio Freddie Mercury had died.

[Isgrimnur]

[Sudy]

There's definitely a titanic change in television between 1988 and 2017, and the seeds were planted in the late 90s and early 00s. You can credit Babylon 5 or Sopranos or the whole paradigm changing. Most series have been emulating the premium cable/pay tv prestige model for a while now. But many of them seem to do serialization and dynamic changes merely for the sake of it. It's poorly planned and/or rushed. The character arcs don't stand up to repeat viewings. And I guess that's the same with any medium in any period... the trendsetters and refiners do it well. The majority are mediocre knockoffs. Though a show isn't necessarily bad in all elements.

In my initial comment I was thinking the differences in television's appearance and conventions were more profound between between '66 and '88 than between '88 and '17. Sure, some aspects of TNG feel very dated when viewed now--especially the early seasons. But watching TOS, as timeless as much of it is, felt like looking through a portal into a completely different era, socially and technologically, even when I saw most of it for the first time as a kid thirty years ago.

So I think it's unfair to expect Discovery to feel like a new series launched right after the end of DS9, Voyager, or Nemesis; certainly. Television is different and the world is different. The vast majority of personnel involved are different. But I think it could do a much better job of it if the writers and producers wanted it to. Again, I'm more talking about tone, pacing, and plotting. There are a lot of elements of modern TV I want to see in today's Trek. Just not employed as sloppily or at such an accelerated pace.

[Grifman]

I just want REAL Star Trek the TOS way. Weekly episodes consisting almost entirely of a Starfleet captain having sex with anything he makes eye contact with, and getting into bare knuckle fights every 15 minutes.

Here's the closest you're going to get:

[hepcat]

I was being somewhat silly as folks forget that TOS had a lot of the stuff they complain newer Star Trek shows have, but I seriously am looking forward to that new show and its Captain Pike. Anson Mount did a great job on Discovery with that character.

By the way, not sure if this has been mentioned before elsewhere (or here) but until Wednesday you can get 50 percent off an annual subscription . I just grabbed one for giggles. 50 bucks for a year of no commercials isn’t bad.

[Daehawk]

Here's the closest you're going to get:

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
Top

That Spock actor could play Tom Selleck in a Magnum PI movie. Lets just forget that remake tv show.

[El Guapo]

And I disagree wholeheartedly about Discovery being politically grim. This last season was all about reminding everyone what made the Federation inspirational to so many.

You're definitely right about much of season 3. I'm referring to the series as a whole. Starfleet felt like a much more morally ambiguous and controlling entity in portions of the first two seasons, in the original time period. I think there were similar elements with the future's survivalist-Starfleet at least until "it's a utopia again!" at the very end. The hope and optimism are all manufactured by the crew, which I found a bit cloying.

Anyway, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. I appreciate the conversation regardless. I'd probably revise some opinions on a re-watch, but I'm not going to take the time to do that lol. The show's just not working for me, and the end of season 3 was my own "discovery" that I should stop expecting it to. I do enjoy it for what it is, however. There are parts of it I've loved even though others have criticized them as being specifically un-Trek, such as Isaacs's Lorca.

I dunno, I feel like Discovery has more of the Star Trek idealism / federation ethos than maybe any other Trek show. A core part of season 1 was Michael dealing with her cynicism and trying to do things her own way, and then coming around to the ideals of the Federation, which she largely evangelizes in season 3. My favorite part of the show is combining that with actual lived-in characters (like showing them having parties and whatnot).

At the same time I feel like to me the best Star Trek ever is DS9's Dominion War arc. To some degree I feel like I wind up comparing all other Trek unfavorably to that.

[hepcat]

In my fan fiction, Ted Lasso is a Starfleet Captain.

[El Guapo]

In my fan fiction, Ted Lasso is a Starfleet Captain.

Has any studio bit yet on your Ted Lasso / Saru rom com script?

[hepcat]

No, but my 50 Shades of Grey script is on a lot of desks right now.

[Eel Snave]

At the same time I feel like to me the best Star Trek ever is DS9's Dominion War arc. To some degree I feel like I wind up comparing all other Trek unfavorably to that.

QFT. It's funny, they got to do that arc because the network wasn't paying attention to them, so they got to do whatever they wanted.

[hepcat]

Viacom was paying attention, unfortunately. And apparently they didn't like the idea.

At the time, Ira Steven Behr had to fight with Viacom over making the show so serialized.

Memory Alpha has some interesting info on story arcs in Star Trek.

Honestly, with a space station as your setting, I find it hard to see how they could pull off two dozen or so stand alone episodes each season. That setting almost begs for a serialized approach that focuses on the ever changing dynamics of a war.

[Sudy]

Well... sounds like many of us are getting our wish. John de Lancie will return in season 2 of Picard.

*don'tfuckitupdon'tfuckitupdon'tfuckitup*

If it's more than a cameo, this has to tie in with Goldberg's Guinan also making an appearance, right?


Unfortunately, I'm not sure you can have a better conclusion than this:




His acting as he goes to whisper in Stewart's ear and then changes his mind still gives me chills. Perfect synchronization with the score.


There's no way they don't fuck this up, right?

[hepcat]

I was never a big fan of Q. He started off fine, but eventually he became their version of Gladys Kravitz from Bewitched. The annoying neighbor who keeps popping up as the goofy villain.

[Sudy]

I think Q probably shouldn't have appeared outside of TNG. And some of the goofiness was too much. But as the beginning and ending antagonist of the series, the cause for the Borg's introduction, and arguably Picard's most important rival, I think his effect on the series is immeasurable.

Deja Q is a great comedy episode with some real heart. Tapestry is one of my favourite episodes of all time. And then of course, the finale.

[Rumpy]

Q I think was meant for some comic relief. He was Next-Gen's version of Trelane. Heck, there's even a book which supposes that they're both the same species, but that Trelane was a young immature version of one, who needed to be babysat.

[hepcat]

As opposed to older, more mature Q?

[Rumpy]

Not that Q was more mature, no, but in context as a whole between Q and Trelane. Trelane was like a kid having tantrums in comparison while Q absolutely had control of his powers.

[Defiant]

[Blackhawk]

I always saw Q as more than comic relief. Q was a trickster god (Coyote, Iktome, Loki, Anansi, etc.) In myth, trickster gods serve a couple of important purposes. First, they teach through mischief. More importantly, they promote advancement when things get stagnant by causing deliberate trouble that requires progress to overcome, and that's something Q actually did. He pushed Picard, the Enterprise, and Humanity past their comfort zone in order to advance them to where they needed to be. Unfortunately, the fully episodic nature of the TNG prevented that from really showing most of the time, with the exception of 'Q Who?' and the Borg, which simultaneously set up a new villain, taught the Federation that they aren't the top of the food chain, and likely saved the Federation at the same time by forcing them to prepare for a threat they didn't know existed.

The classic trickster god steps in when things are too comfortable, does something that appears foolish or cruel, and causes the targets suffer, but grow. That's Q at his best.

[hepcat]

Two things were always guaranteed to cause me to zone out while watching an episode of TNG back in the day: anything set entirely on the holodeck, and a Q episode.

Side note: I want to congratulate all of us for surviving the Eugenics Wars. I had completely forgotten they were waged between 1992 and 1996 until I was looking up something else on the Memory Alpha site.

[Sudy]

And those were all my favourite episodes, at least when I was a kid. Maybe not so much the ones that were exclusively set on the holodeck and that was their way of justifying the setting, but rather the ones that dealt with the holodeck in interesting ways or something went wrong with it. It's like an endless opportunity for creativity, and fueled my imagination before I had access to computers and video games.

E.g. Emergence (with David Huddleston!).

[hepcat]

Except the majority of those holodeck episodes were "AI goes bad, tries to kill/subjugate everyone". At some point, they really should have called a holodeck repairman.

[El Guapo]

I did enjoy Picard, but I'm really not looking forward to a season 2 of it. This is probably partly falling into a fan trap of knocking something for not being how I would have written it, but I just really didn't like the ultimate resolution of season 1 as to Picard himself in terms of

Spoiler:

him becoming an android.

Maybe they'll handle that in season 2 better than I expect, but I doubt it.

Also I just really like the emerging Marvel model of basically doing a series of mini-series centered on different characters. There's just so much potential from having a season centered on Picard, then a season centered on Seven, then Riker, etc. Oh well - it'll probably ultimately be at least decent.