The Official Star Trek Thread

[Middle-aged Europe]

Prefer TNG/DS9 myself, although "Dark Frontier" wasn't that bad compared to your average Voyager episode.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Seasons 3 and 4 of TNG were the high point of the entire Star Trek franchise IMHO.

Everything that immediately followed was far from being crap, but this is certainly were Trek peaked in terms of having a consistent streak of high-quality writing and storytelling.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Seasons 3 and 4 of TNG were the high point of the entire Star Trek franchise IMHO.

Everything that immediately followed was far from being crap, but this is certainly were Trek peaked in terms of having a consistent streak of high-quality writing and storytelling.

I really cannot understand how a person would think this when DS9 exists. Hell, Enterprise told better long-running stories than TNG did. By virtue of telling them at all.

I wasn't even talking about story arcs.

I was talking about the quality of writing of the individual episodes, which in case of TNG's 3rd and 4th season has been consistently high and has been in fact higher than during any other season of Star Trek IMO.

This has nothing to do whether they belong to story arcs or are standalone stories, unless you'd argue that the fact that an episode is part of a story arc alone makes it a better episode. A view I would contest since a lot of crappy episodes can also be found in story arcs.

For instance, I consider the 5th and 6th season of DS9 the high point of that particular show. Still, these seasons include examples of truly horrendous episodes like "Let He Who Is Without Sin...", "Ferengi Love Songs", "Resurrection", "Profit and Lace", or "Time's Orphan"...

Seasons 3 and 4 of TNG never manged to drop to the level of true stinkfests like "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." or "Profit and Lace". The worst contributions to the Trek lore from those seasons are probably "The Price" and "The Loss". But these could be considered boring rather than an insult to the intelligence of the viewers. Granted, "The Price" comes awfully close to crossing the event horizon here.

Anyway, I think during seasons 3 and 4 of TNG, Star Trek actually came closest to a non-SciFi drama series in terms of quality. Season 3 deserved an Emmy IMO. (TNG was - somewhat late - nominated for an Emmy as Best Drama Series after Season 7 had aired, but lost to Picket Fences that year.)

[Middle-aged Europe]

I think if you're going to watch DS9, you can still skip the majority of the arcs and see some great episodes. "Duet," "Far Beyond the Stars," "Past Tense," "The Visitor," and "In the Pale Moonlight" work completely fine without background on the Dominion War.

With the possible exception of "In the Pale Moonlight", of course.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Picture of Jonathan Frakes directing a recent episode of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.:



It's probably the beard, but he actually reminds a bit of George Lucas.

[Middle-aged Europe]

When 62 years old you reach, look as good, you will not.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I was expecting much worse from a teen in a somewhat goofy 80s show - in fact, he often contributes a good deal to the plot and is rarely acting immaturely or being clueless about everything.

Wasn't a frequent criticism of Wesley that he seemed a bit too perfect (/lacked any flaws) and happened to save the day while the rest of the crew looked incompetent?

Of course, that only applied to Season 1 & 2 Wesley, because he was increasingly depicted as a flawed character, starting with the Season 3 opener ("Evolution"). Not to mention what happened with him after he entered the Academy...

[Middle-aged Europe]

Was there any other TV that was nearly as pro-gay as "The Outcast" in the late 1980s? I'm assuming no.

"The Outcast" aired in 1992.

L.A. Law was known for regularly doing gay-themed episodes during the late 80s and early 90s, with a total of 11 gay-related episodes, according to these lists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_1980s_American_television_episodes_with_LGBT_themes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_television_episodes_with_LGBT_themes,_1990-1997

[Middle-aged Europe]

And there were a few other gems throughout the season, like "Far Beyond the Stars" and especially "In the Pale Moonlight", but there were also an awful lot of clunkers, like "Time's Orphan", "The Magnificent Ferengi", and the absolute worst episode of the series, "Profit and Lace".

Personally, I thought that "The Magnificent Ferengi" was hilarious.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Season 1 - and Season 2 to a lesser extent as well - of TNG were served with a big block of cheese and some corn too. They have their entertainment value for that reason alone ("Justice", "Angel One" anyone? ).

It was with Season 3 that the show suddenly become a serious drama... sort of L.A. Law... in Space!, to compare it with a contemporary non-SF show which was also critically acclaimed at the time due to its strong writing and exploration of social issues.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Does anyone here collect starship models?  I have since I was 12.

I did when I was 12.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Personally, I've only seen three Star Trek moves (the TNG movies except Generations). I've always figured that it's be better to see the TOS movies after actually watching TOS. I haven't reached that point yet.

I don't plan on watching TOS, tbh. I might try out one or two episodes some days, but it just strikes me as too "old" and corny to take seriously. Even with TNG, the corniness is just barely tame enough to be enjoyable and not distract me from the substance of the episode.

As for TOS movies, I've now seen all the "good" ones (2, 4 and 6). They're pretty good overall, with Wrath of Khan definitely having the most well-conceived plot and some really memorable scenes ("KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!" aside ). I also enjoyed The Undiscovered Country, a nice parallel to the events that were occurring at the same time in real-life.

Originally, I had a similar opinion of TOS. But the show kind of grew on me over time and now I like it as much as TNG or DS9.

Despite the much cited appearance of a female "Number One" in the original pilot episode, TOS often conveyed a horrible view of women (which really could only be prevented when D.C. Fontana or Margaret Armen had written the script ). But other than that, the show stands the test of time reasonably well, especially compared to other TV series from the same time period. Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are truly iconic and (most of the time) well-written characters. The aforementioned "special edition" with updated special effects is definitely worth to check out.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Option 2.

I'm certainly more interested in it than the Abramsverse films, but in the end it could still suck. Let's wait and see.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Is he Garth of Izar?

No, he's "Captain Lorca".

[Middle-aged Europe]

Discovery explores a previously mentioned event from the history of Star Trek while following the crew of the USS Discovery.

It might be the Sheliak and the Grizzellas:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://redshirtsalwaysdie.com/2017/03/30/star-trek-discovery-treaty-armens

I'm a big fan of the Sheliak.

If it were about the Sheliak, what are all those Klingon warrior characters (three, at the last count) doing on the show?


In any case, Rainn Wilson ("The Office") has been cast as Harry Mudd:
http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/star-trek-discovery-rainn-wilson-harry-mudd-1202019986/

After Sarek, this is the second previously established character from TOS who will appear on "Discovery".

[Middle-aged Europe]

The Alt-Right has overlooked that there already had been two Star Trek shows back in the 90s with a black captain, and then a woman captain.

So, it's time to say to them: Welcome to the 20th century!!

(Since they haven't arrived to the 20th century yet, we have to welcome them to it first before we can welcome them to the 21st.)

[Middle-aged Europe]

Plot and story was kind of meh, mainly because of the overused and clichéd Klingon shenanigans. But considering that most Trek shows had a terrible first season and got much, much better later on I'm willing to give Discovery the benefit of a doubt.

Party of me was wondering why they even bothered to make it a prequel though. The uniforms, the ship's design and technology (especially that holocommunicator), the look of the Klingons... nothing resembled the TOS era even in the remotest sense. This could have easily been the 25th century instead of the 23rd, and much of the plot doesn't really require a setting in the TOS era anway.

(SPOILER for the second episode in the next paragraph)

The things I liked was when they really made an effort to do something new and different. You quickly notice that this show isn't about a starship and its crew (at least so far) as we are used to, but the personal journey of a single character. It's also unsual that in the second episode of a Star Trek show, the main protagonist is stripped of her rank and sentenced to prison. It was at this junction that it came apparent that our hero's story resembles a bit that of Ro Laren from TNG, except that everything is told from her point of view. It was of course also highly unusual for a Trek show that neither the titular ship nor its captain appeared in the first two episodes (even though Jason Isaacs is credited as a main cast member). The promo for next week revealed that this is in fact going to happen in the third episode.

[Middle-aged Europe]

That third episode was a definite improvement over the first two, although I'm starting to get the feeling that they're trying to turn this into Star Trek: Battlestar Galactica.

Not sure if the ship's captain's "moral ambiguity" is a bit of a red hering or if they try to set him up as the Big Bad in the end. He could go both ways. I enjoy Jason Isaacs' acting though... he's a pretty dark character, but in some way also wickedly funny.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Discovery is still kind of Meh. Not totally bad, but not that good either.

They're trying very hard to do a "dark" Trek show, but this attempt often comes across as lame and clichéd. "Dark" Trek was done before by DS9 (and to some lesser exrent ENT), so there really wasn't a necessity to do it a third time now. Especially since the show is titled Discovery which implied a return to a more exploration-oriented Star Trek.

Another weakness is that the main protagonist Michael Burnham is too bland and uninteresting. The characters of Lt. Stamets, Cadet Tilly, and Captain Lorca (even though they have to be careful that they're not overdoing it with the "is the captain actually a bad guy or isn't he?" angle) all overshine Burnham in my opinion. Ash Tyler on the other hand is as bland as Burnham, and Saru is mostly useless too.

What I do appreciate in the new show is a willingness to embrace some weirder ideas like the "spore drive" or the "space whale" (which is protected under the Endangered Species Act *lol*) from last episode.

But as I previously said... the first seasons of The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise were all crap too. Usually, it was no earlier than during the third or fourth season those shows actually become good. But they were given that opportunity to grow because they happened to have Star Trek in their title. If TNG hadn't been a Star Trek show it probably would have been cancelled after its second season IMO.

Question is, will Discovery be given that same chance?

[Middle-aged Europe]

It's still a bit silly, and hardcore Star Trek purists probably have many reasons to hate it, but so far I'd  consider Season 1.5 a definite improvement over Season 1.0.

It's fully serialized now and recently we had a whole barrage of plot twists and reveals which answered some important question from the first half of the season. Surprisngly, the current story arc also serves as kind of a sequel to a prominent two-part episode from Star Trek: Enterprise.

Especially in the second half of the season, Discovery has definitely become the darkest, bleakest, and bloodiest Star Trek show ever. Right now it succeeds in making the Dominion War arc from Deep Speace Nine look like the very embodiment of fluffiness and cheerfulness. Which is why can understand if some hardcore Trekkies may despise this show. Exploring strange new worlds, an optimistic vision of the future, a more "evolved" mankind... that's all deader than dead right now. This is the Breaking Bad / Walking Dead / Handmaid's Tale / etc. of Star Trek shows.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Yeah, Season 2 seems to be an improvement over Season 1 so far (I found the first half of Season particularly weak). I atrribute to the fact that they actually try to be Star Trek now, instead of some silly nuBSG rip-off. Anson Mount's likeable portrayal of Pike is also a nice addition.

Btw, in addition to the aforementioned Captain Picard series (and the Star Trek: Short Treks  short film companion show to Discovery which is already available with its first four installments) there are a couple more Trek show in the works at CBS right now.

There's an upcoming Section 31 show, starring Michelle Yeoh as former Terran Emperor Philippa Georgiou:
https://deadline.com/2019/01/star-trek-spinoff-michelle-yeoh-philippa-georgiou-series-development-1202534747/

And an animated comedy show titled Lower Decks, focusing "on the support crew serving on one of Starfleet’s least important ships":
https://deadline.com/2018/10/star-trek-lower-decks-animated-series-rick-and-morty-mike-mcmahan-alex-kurtzman-cbs-all-access-1202489207/

[Middle-aged Europe]

The inclusion of well-known (for the Trek fandom anyway) actors is not by any means a guarantee that this show won't suck. If the writing is weak then the show is bad. That being said, the inclusion of Michael Chabon as writer/showrunner makes me cautiously optimistic. At least more optimistic than with a hack like Alex Kurtzman at the helm (Kurtzman ist still involved in the production, but in a less significant capacity). Oh, and yes, it will be sure nice to see Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, Marina Sirtis, and Jeri Ryan again. Although it's still unclear if they will appear only in cameos or will have larger roles.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Fun fact: Patrick Stewart will have portrayed the character of Jean-Luc Picard over a longer period of time than the 28-year era in which William Shatner had portrayed James T. Kirk.

Weird... makes ones feel old. The first time I watched TNG was when the show had been on TV for only three years.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Does the prominent inclusion of Jeri Ryan in the show's promotional posters mean that - unlike Spiner, Frakes, and Sirtis - she's gonna be a member of the main cast alongside Patrick Stewart, with the other three being only (one-shot?) guest stars?

[Middle-aged Europe]

Whoopi Goldberg is probably going to appear as Guinan in Season 2: https://www.trektoday.com/content/2020/01/goldberg-to-appear-in-star-trek-picard/