A Decline In Pure Love

[Maddi Hyden]

So as a somewhat younger member to the Trek fandom. My opinions may be different than others, as I didn’t start watching the show till I was older. I should state I’m in my early twenties. I have seen everything but all of the Star Trek Enterprise series so I have a good grasp on the universe. 
 

That being said I have talked to a lot of people that have negative things to say about the newest shows Discovery and Picard. And this is where my discussion begins. As a huge fan of Star Wars for example I see the hatred of the newest movies. I understand some of it was disappointing, but if your a true fan you still find something to love the show/movie by in my honest opinion. So when it come to Discovery I remember the biggest complaint I heard being “It’s just not the Trek I know.”

 

True it wasn’t like the shows from years ago. It had a modern look. Or to quote someone “It looked to advanced.”

 

Uhhh wait I’m sorry, but this is the future and from what I know things are supposed to be advanced. Yes, back in the day the LCARS DisplayFusion was considered futuristic, but now with the graphics they have people say it’s too much? I truly don’t get it. 
 

There’s more reasons I heard such as “Section 31 shouldn’t have been implemented, that ship is ridiculous, the whole story is stupid. Those are just a few reasons I heard. 
 

Picard even more so. I personally found highs and lows about the shows, but that’s the same with the ones everyone knows. 
 

So I guess my real question is why have people lost their love for the show just because things have changed? Some of it to reflect the universe as it should be and of course some that we could live without. 
 

As I stated above though if your a true fan shouldn’t you be able to find something that you love regardless? The shows can’t truly be so bad that it would make you not still love the franchise of old. So why can’t people find things about the new shows to like?

Edited May 14, 2020 by Maddi Hyden

[Wes Greaves]

Let me start off by saying I enjoyed both Picard and Discovery and am eagerly waiting for the next seasons of both!

 

That being said, the frustration I have with both shows is the format. I miss the episodic story telling of TNG, VOY, DS9, and TOS.  Each episode is a new 50 minute adventure with it's own plot.  Occasionally you'd get a to be continued, and sometimes the plot arcs would link together, but most of the time each episode was it's own self-contained plot.  That style of storytelling opened to door for much more character development across the whole cast, and it allowed the writers to explore the universe and current events.  Both Discovery and Picard go with a season wide plot.  It's like watching a 10 hour movie instead of a series of episodes and therefore the writers really only get to tell one big story.  The styling is so different from the episodic style that the feeling of the show is going to be different.  Different isn't bad, it's just different.

 

I love that Picard and Discovery brought the fandom into the modern age and wasn't afraid to show off the dark aspects of the Trek universe. Grittiness is inherent in life. I do long for an episodic format of show though, as I feel like it allows the writers to explore trek as a whole more.

 

My two cents.

[+ Nadeshiko]

Quote

True it wasn’t like the shows from years ago. It had a modern look. Or to quote someone “It looked to advanced.”

 

Uhhh wait I’m sorry, but this is the future and from what I know things are supposed to be advanced. Yes, back in the day the LCARS DisplayFusion was considered futuristic, but now with the graphics they have people say it’s too much? I truly don’t get it. 

Because it's too advanced compared to TNG/DS9/VOY which come after it in the chronological order. It's more advanced than TOS, which occurs chronologically in the same time frame! This is the problem with prequels. (And I do still hold this to a lesser degree against Discovery, but it's not the main reason I don't like it.)

Quote

So I guess my real question is why have people lost their love for the show just because things have changed? Some of it to reflect the universe as it should be and of course some that we could live without. 
 

As I stated above though if your a true fan shouldn’t you be able to find something that you love regardless? The shows can’t truly be so bad that it would make you not still love the franchise of old. So why can’t people find things about the new shows to like?

Because being a fan of something does not mean you have to like everything in the fandom. There's no such thing as a true or false fan of something. If you like something, you're a fan of it, really. 

[Maddi Hyden]

2 hours ago, Tiria Hamasaki said:

Because it's too advanced compared to TNG/DS9/VOY which come after it in the chronological order. It's more advanced than TOS, which occurs chronologically in the same time frame! This is the problem with prequels. (And I do still hold this to a lesser degree against Discovery, but it's not the main reason I don't like it.)

As true as that is when you think about it technically it’s not. Back when those shows were airing the technology and special effects were at the top of their scale, but now that technology can truly reflect that of the future is it really some that should be upsetting. This is the future after all things are supposed to look advanced and hi tech. 
 

I think if they had the technology we have now was around those shows would look just like Discovery or Picard. 

3 hours ago, Tiria Hamasaki said:

Because being a fan of something does not mean you have to like everything in the fandom. There's no such thing as a true or false fan of something. If you like something, you're a fan of it, really. 

That’s a good point and one I can agree with. There are always things that people don’t like, but no one likes everything. Your point is well taken no matter what your a fan and that’s the way it should be. 

[Maddi Hyden]

23 hours ago, Wes Greaves said:

That being said, the frustration I have with both shows is the format. I miss the episodic story telling of TNG, VOY, DS9, and TOS.  Each episode is a new 50 minute adventure with it's own plot.  Occasionally you'd get a to be continued, and sometimes the plot arcs would link together, but most of the time each episode was it's own self-contained plot.  That style of storytelling opened to door for much more character development across the whole cast, and it allowed the writers to explore the universe and current events.  Both Discovery and Picard go with a season wide plot.  It's like watching a 10 hour movie instead of a series of episodes and therefore the writers really only get to tell one big story.  The styling is so different from the episodic style that the feeling of the show is going to be different.  Different isn't bad, it's just different.

Your right the show has definitely taken a different perspective. Episodic story has its plus’s, but it also has its flaws as well.  When you look at each aspect of the show it can have its upsides. 
 

Episodic stories are interesting and if you miss one the whole plot may not be lost, but in the other hand and I think this is why they started doing it this way. Is so that you watch every episode when it releases so you keep with the story no matter what. Though that poses an issue in my opinion, as the episodic stories always have something different and the plot is drawn out, but with the new episodes you have a good idea of what’s coming next. 
 

I’m not saying anything is perfect, but I will say every show has its flaws and as a fan you can embrace them or not, but that doesn’t mean you have to hate the franchise. I wasn’t saying anyone here does I just know some people that all because of the newest shows do not like the franchise anymore, which I find ridiculous. 

[Rahman and Rivi Vataix]

I could have sworn I replied to this yesterday in a way too long post, and now suddenly I can't see any trace of that post... weird.

Anyway, the basic gist of it was that being a fan of Trek since 94 right at the end of TNG, I've seen how every Trek show and movie since gets the same division of many fans liking it, some not sure, and others quite vocal in their dislike. According to the TNG cast, the same happened with them when their show first premiered.

Ultimately, as we continue to get more Trek shows, it'll be okay if not everyone likes every show. Trek has moved beyond just one show and one overall concept of a ship doing it's weekly adventures on a mission of exploration. I compare it to music. It's okay not to like every song out there or even every song of an artist you do like. I think a lot of the negativity though nowadays is from people who get a little too obsessed with the hate-watching, which I think social media and YouTube have really helped feed. To be clear, I don't think that fits anyone here in our community, but we all know it's an issue that isn't just in the Trek fandom but also Star Wars, Doctor Who, and practically anything else these days. And with some "critics" I see online or making videos, you almost wonder if our culture has just shifted to one of making entertainment from bashing other creative works (even tongue in cheek videos that name everything a movie did wrong or how it should have ended, etc.). But I can't help but notice it seems a lot of times, it's just the common theme that the newer stuff since that of childhood (or whatever a person's first entry into a fandom was) doesn't live up to the legacy of their fandom.

[Maddi Hyden]

That is very well put @Roshanara Rahman I have to agree with your assessment. I never made this to upset anyone just trying to see all the different point of views, as this is the things I have been hearing from people. 

[Jo Marshall]

1 hour ago, Roshanara Rahman said:

And with some "critics" I see online or making videos, you almost wonder if our culture has just shifted to one of making entertainment from bashing other creative works (even tongue in cheek videos that name everything a movie did wrong or how it should have ended, etc.).

I had a thought along these lines recently, about how we are judgemental creatures, it's in the nature; an innate, automatic trait. It's not a new thing either; polarising opinions about media have existed since the dawn of media. What critics have now is unprecedented access to millions of minds consuming all the time, barely stopping to form a free-thinking opinion of their own before diving into the next bit of consumption for the masses, and we know about the science of repetition.

One of the first things i heard about the new Star Wars movies were that they didn't fit the genre, they were convoluted, they didn't pass muster for all the Star Wars fans out there. Elitism and gate keeping can be rife in any fandom, and a bit of it has transferred to Trek. 

Ya gotta take a step back, man. Push out that jive. Breathe in the love.

Media is, in it's essence, an art form, and it's designed to make you *feel* something.  You don't have to like all of it. There's no "true fan" for loving one part and disliking another. There's a paradigm shift when you appreciate one another for a difference in opinion, a difference in what someone else feels about a media you enjoy, and appreciate we're all unique. 

This is coming from someone who liked the new Picard, thinks the best Star Trek series in recent years is the Orville (fite me), the best movie was Galaxy Quest, and have not seen all of Disco because that ship looks like a pizza cutter and I can't take spore drive / hurting someone for the sake of using it seriously. 

Also, Section 31 shouldn’t have been implemented.

[Rahman and Rivi Vataix]

15 minutes ago, Jo Marshall said:

Also, Section 31 shouldn’t have been implemented.

Section 31 shouldn't have been introduced at all to Trek. It forever tarnished the dream of a Federation/Trek utopia with its cynical take that such a thing could not possibly exist without someone else watching over and doing the "dirty" work behind the scenes that "needs to be done."

Quote

 

BASHIR: I can't believe the Federation condones this kind of activity.

ODO: Personally, I find it hard to believe they wouldn't. Every other great power has a unit like Section 31. The Romulans have the Tal Shiar, the Cardassians had the Obsidian Order.

 

But that's the point, Odo. The Federation is not like "every other great power." That's what makes Trek unique from plenty of other sci-fi universes and their various factions. Yes, that might make it seem too cheesy or naive to certain folks with certain world views, but it's what makes or made Trek special. In other universes, a vast alliance of star systems with a giant space navy is an empire or just a larger sci-fi equivalent of today's super powers. The idea of the Federation was maybe we could just be good because it's the right thing to do and find other people who thought the same to join us.

Ah well... Section 31 is one of those things I file in the same cabinet as the warp 10 salamanders and Beverly Crusher's love affair with a candle ghost. Yes, canon, but let's just keep them to those episodes, please. 😆

[Maddi Hyden]

1 hour ago, Roshanara Rahman said:

Section 31 shouldn't have been introduced at all to Trek. It forever tarnished the dream of a Federation/Trek utopia with its cynical take that such a thing could not possibly exist without someone else watching over and doing the "dirty" work behind the scenes that "needs to be done."

My opinion on Section 31 has always been torn, but your point is probably the best I have ever heard. As you say the Federation is supposed to be like a utopia. 
 

Section 31 shouldn’t exist I agree. As you say the other factions have something like that, but the Federation is supposed to be the peaceful society. So such a peaceful society should not have an organization that would contradict everything the Federation is for. 
 

I am truly thankful that here we don’t sim Section 31. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Maddi Hyden

[Jo Marshall]

38 minutes ago, Maddi Hyden said:

I am truly thankful that here we do sim Section 31. 

I'm not so sure about that one. It's extremely unlikely any serving officer aside from those heavily entrenched in Intelligence (i.e. upper echelons only) would know about it. Starfleet Officers certainly wouldn't, or have had any interactions with them. 

[Maddi Hyden]

9 minutes ago, Jo Marshall said:

I'm not so sure about that one. It's extremely unlikely any serving officer aside from those heavily entrenched in Intelligence (i.e. upper echelons only) would know about it. Starfleet Officers certainly wouldn't, or have had any interactions with them. 

I mean’t don’t. Sorry

[Jo Marshall]

😂 No worries, dude. Typos be the death.

[Maddi Hyden]

1 minute ago, Jo Marshall said:

😂 No worries, dude. Typos be the death.

That’s the truth of it! Makes one phrase go down the waste tube quick. 

[Jordan aka FltAdmlWolf]

On 5/15/2020 at 6:50 AM, Roshanara Rahman said:

Anyway, the basic gist of it was that being a fan of Trek since 94 right at the end of TNG, I've seen how every Trek show and movie since gets the same division of many fans liking it, some not sure, and others quite vocal in their dislike. According to the TNG cast, the same happened with them when their show first premiered.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too – there was lots of commentary about how people didn't like TNG when it premiered. I think it's just a given that people get attached to their vision of their favorite stories, and only want to see it continue as they knew it previously.

 

On 5/15/2020 at 10:46 AM, Roshanara Rahman said:

Section 31 shouldn't have been introduced at all to Trek. It forever tarnished the dream of a Federation/Trek utopia with its cynical take that such a thing could not possibly exist without someone else watching over and doing the "dirty" work behind the scenes that "needs to be done."

The thing that Discovery muddled a bit to me is that I got the sense in the DS9 era that Section 31 was actually operating "outside" of Starfleet and the Federation control? Like, maybe there was some kind of "top echelon" of Starfleet or the Federation that was still supplying it with resources but that it didn't actually have a mandate anywhere in normal structures and if Federation legislators knew about it they'd disavow or put a stop to it. 

[+ Nadeshiko]

It depends on how far out into the EU you go into. (Section 31 is an extant force being actively worked with in Starfleet Command in quite a few of those books).

Personally, I've always thought that Section 31 existing as a thing is pretty logical, but I didn't really like how Discovery just went all down that hole. (Of course, in Discovery, they were attacking Earth, so I can understand why they'd resort to any-measures thinking. And consider, it's canon that we attempted to blow up Quo'nos.)

But:

I don't really like Section 31 as more than something the heroes have to overcome.

[Maddi Hyden]

I like your thoughts @Tiria Hamasaki and I appreciate everyone chiming in. This conversation has been really good and I appreciate all the people that gave me their opinions. I know everyone is different and the Trek fandom is diverse. I just wanted to hear what everyone else had to say. 
 

After hearing some of what I have heard from people it was refreshing to see so many opinions that point to one thing. We all love Trek in our own way! Not everyone likes everything, but they don’t have too. The love for Trek expands to so much and I’m not only glad to be a part of that fandom but also part of this fleet full of talented writers and true Trek fans. 

[+ Christopher Caldwell]

I know this is an old thread but it's an interesting topic so hope no one minds me chiming in?

My biggest criticism of Star Trek TV shows has been where they haven't fulfilled their potential. I like all of the different Star Trek shows but they are all flawed in their own way, some more than others. I don't 'hate' any of the shows and I think my negative views about them come from a good place, a desire to see them be the best they can be.

Enterprise (wasted premise)
I loved the premise of Enterprise and I really enjoyed the start of the show, I liked the fact that they were clearly new to what they were doing, they didn't have all the procedures and rules in place, they were still developing the technology that's taken for granted in the rest of the Star Trek shows. For me the execs ruined this one, I still enjoyed it but I think they pivoted away from the original premise, far too quickly they basically became TNG-lite with a sprinkling of DS9 for the long season arc with the Xindi. You aren't going to out-TNG TNG and you aren't going to out-DS9 DS9 and as a result Enterprise lost it's uniqueness which was a lot of the appeal to me. I also didn't really like the characters as much, I don't mind flawed characters but things like Archer not being able to say sorry because his dog wasn't well as an example was just infuriating, I'm a dog lover, I've loved my dogs more than most people but come on.

Voyager (wasted premise)
Now I know this is an unpopular opinion. As with Enterprise, great premise, as with Enterprise, premise basically abandoned almost immediately. Two crews with differing agendas, stranded the others ide of the galaxy, no support, finite resources. Outside of Caretaker and Equinox we barely got to see that. There was rarely any drama between the Starfleet and Maquis and whilst they kept going on about having finite resources they actually had infinite resources. How many times did Voyager just give some needy or hostile aliens all their food and all their supplies and it cause them no issues? Occasionally they turned off some of the lights or mentioned rationing, they never seemed to face any really difficult choices because they could always have it both ways. Stargate Universe had it's own flaws but that did a far better job of being stuck far from home with limited resources.

Discovery (designs)
I kinda get the thing about the technology looking too advanced. It's not necessarily that it looks too advanced it's that it doesn't fit stylistically, the design language is way off. This is where Strange New Worlds does a better job, it's clearly inspired by TOS era but a modern and bigger budget interpretation of it. I think there were too many design decisions where people decided let's make our stuff look different from the rest of Trek, I get wanting to make something your own, I get putting your own stamp on things, I have no issue with that but Star Trek fans like continuity and Star Trek features so many iconic designs that changing them, seemingly arbitrarily is just going to upset people. I don't hate the redesigns of the Andorians, Klingons or Tellarites, I get the logic behind the designs and they do make them look far more alien which might be more 'realistic' but I feel they could have just as easily updated the designs to account for more modern effects and a bigger budget without transforming them so much which would have kept more fans onside. This is where I feel Star Wars does a much better job, when you look at something like Rogue One you see a movie that looks incredible and modern yet everything look consistent with the original trilogy, you can have it both ways.

Discovery (writing)
Sorry Discovery. I recently started a re-watch of Discovery. I could probably point to numerous examples but 'People of Earth' from season 3 is a great example. Look I'm not a professional writer the people that write Discovery are, they're better than me at writing, I'm not disputing that but I hate how manufactured some of the drama is and how poor some of the dialogue is. Examples include:

• Burnham and Book stealing the dilithium without telling Saru what they were planning, it wasn't a complex plan they could have conveyed it within seconds.
• Earth and Titan fighting each other because Earth refuse to communicate and Titan never thought to explain their situation.
• The number of times the word 'advanced' is used. "Some kind of advanced sensors." "Some kind of advanced shields." "They're targeting us with advanced phasers", you're about 800 years in the future, I think everyone knows that the tech might have moved on a little. 
• There's also little details, like they jump to outside Earth's scanning range, they're nearly a thousand years more advanced than you how are you going to sneak up on them? I imagine their long range sensors are pretty damn long range. I know it sounds nit-picky but it's the frequency of these little things that all add up.

Picard (tone)
I like me some gritty realism don't get me wrong but I think Picard goes to gritty unrealism. Did everyone forget to pay the electricity bill and why is everyone in the universe just a complete git? I get following the attack on Mars things are a bit different but by the time Picard actually takes place quite some time has passed and Starfleet actually seems to be doing alright for itself (so much so that it can have a giant space parade). I think they could have shown a darker side of Star Trek without everything being so dark all of the time, it just felt draining to watch at times and the pacing further exacerbated this.

Picard (Patrick Stewart)
Sir Patrick Stewart is an incredible actor and I think a genuinely interesting person, I am not trying to take anything away from him. 20 years is a long time and Picard in Encounter at Farpoint was very different to Picard of All Good Things or the movies. I'm sure we're all very different people than we were 20 years ago and I don't mind that he's different and that, after leaving Starfleet, he's lost a step but for so much of the show I don't see Jean-Luc Picard, I see Patrick Stewart and it really takes me out of the show.

Picard (just no)
The Enterprise D should never handle like Tony Hawk. Easy fix, saucer separation! It would still have been crazy but at least a tiny bit more believable and we'd have got to see an awesome saucer separation.