Sfdebris.net

Figured I'd just lay all my feelings on the table. Why do I get the way I do about Trek on these threads? It's simple. Because deep down, I have deep-seated anxieties over where it's heading, even if for the moment, you could argue it's not so bad, since granted, its quality level has fluctuated wildly over the years. But it's out of deep love for something I care about that I'm worried about it suffering any more. Basically what it will look like in the next 50 years. I doubt I'll even recognize it. So far, I can concede it's superficially Star Trek, which is better than some other series were. But the future is not set, and we know how those in charge can make bad decisions. We also know what happens at the start of a long renaissance, and what happens when you crash at the end of the ride. I feel as if Star Trek shouldn't be about "shallow fun" anymore, but holding it to a higher standard. That's quality control, yet some people seem to want it to keep going so badly, they keep giving money to those in charge, even though it should be in the public domain, belong to the fans rather than studios. I dunno, can't stories just end? Take an anime I do love. Dragon Ball Z. To me, that peaked during the Frieza and Cell Sagas. Now it's just become utterly unrecognizable. Good in some ways, worse in others, like the constant retcons and asspulls that are no longer under control because Toriyama doesn't have his editors reining him in and to stop him from acting on his worst impulses. It's less about drama and action anymore than about broad comedy. DBS is a disaster that, despite a thrill ride, is nowhere near as good as Z was, especially with Gohan vs. Cell. Do we really want Trek to become that? A zombie franchise? Hell, one could argue it was that during Enterprise, and yet how is it that it keeps going? Again, shouldn't stories just end? Look at an anime I still love to this day, that did end, and now exists in a perfectly frozen time capsule, untouchable, and that would be Yu Yu Hakusho. No one can butcher it anymore. Why does it have to be this way? Why do these franchises I love always have to suffer at the hands of well-meaning idiots or greedy business suits? Sigh...

To me, what's happened with Trek is symbolic of the larger cultural trend towards both the mining of nostalgia for profit and the domination of entertainment by the mystery box school of hack screenwriting. In both cases, there's a hostility to things like continuity and authenticity.

Star Trek (2009) is most egregious to me because it turns the insecurity that defined the later TNG films (obsession with action and theatrics) up to one hundred and reduced the setting to only its most iconic (market-friendly) components. It's the reason something as minor as Uhura spending the whole film without rank sleeves bothers me so much (it's not meant to feel like a living world, its meant to feel like a rollercoaster).

There are many other examples. JK Rowling has divided her fanbase with the nostalgia-mining incoherent mess that was Cursed Child, followed up by the shallow nostalgia-mining continuity-breaking mess that was Crimes of Grindelwald. Diehard fans have an easy out with "it's magic, it doesn't need to make sense" and I genuinely wonder if they really believe that.

When you say that TLJ didn't make sense, fans say "it's fantasy, it doesn't need to make sense". There's this appeal to total artistic freedom (the idea creators should be free to write whatever they want) that is used to defend things general bereft of artistic vision (things packed full of references, relying so heavily on what came before).

I know that Trek doesn't belong to me. What I don't understand is why it should belong to the rights-holder. I've never been comfortable with the notion of intellectual property outliving its creator and seeing CBS do what it has done to Trek (and how aggressively it's come down on fan projects, simultaneously) has only convinced me further.

The connection between DIS, the Kevlinverse and the rest of Trek just feels arbitrary at this point. DIS gets to be canon but Continues doesn't. Into Darkness gets to be canon but Renegades has to rebrand itself. It feels wrong, in my gut. Whereas there's an argument to be made that I shouldn't be as attached as I am, I'm more interested in the argument that the new creatives should be allowed to have their cake (the brand, the licence, the franchise) and eat it too (gate the content, damage the continuity, pervert the visuals).

I actually had to go through all of this around the release of Star Trek (2009), I hated it, it was the culmination of everything I hated of the TNG movies. The first 5 minutes almost made me leave the cinema, the only reason I stayed was that I was in the middle of the row of seats. Impossible to leave.

The way I got over it was mostly to basically close of my heart completely from anything after that movie and make it hard for anything to enter without a conscious decision and hard work. This has made it possible for me to watch the new stuff completely separate from the old stuff. (*There used to be a useless rant about STD here*). This way the new stuff has same burden as any new movie or series has, convince me to become a fan of it. This way I'll be able to keep my joy of the past and open my heart to the possibility of something new.

I do have to admit that I'm probably the only real Star Trek fan that I know, it has always been "my thing" and as such I don't have any external things that change around me, I don't talk to people that are over the moon about the new stuff and I don't go to conventions where I need to see Christopher Pike impressions. It makes it easier to separate.

And whether stories should end? They did, beautifully, we don't need to invest so much time in the bad fanfiction studios produce nowadays.

"Why does it have to be this way? Why do these franchises I love always have to suffer at the hands of well-meaning idiots or greedy business suits? Sigh..."

This though, is the natural way of the commercial beast. People still write new Sherlock Holmes stories and not every tv show is good, doesn't mean it'll actually take away from the original books.

It's ironic too, because people praise JJ Abrams for bringing viewers back to Trek and bringing in a new generation of young audiences. That new audience? Are not people who likely ever saw TNG or DS9. Or TOS. And a movie always attracts more people than a TV show, sad fact, which is what Voyager and Enterprise were marketed towards, and shedding viewers in droves.

Tbf, that's been there since the beginning. Hermione even said, "Most wizards don't have a lick of logic to them" or words to that effect. And I don't think Harry Potter was some "cultural treasure." It's a fun rollercoaster in its own right, but in many ways, it was like well-written fanfiction. Don't get me wrong, I love all seven books, but you begin to see enormous flaws after a while, that tend to get drowned out by all the good things people say about 'em. And I say this as a nostalgia fanboy. I first checked out Harry Potter like before or around the time of the release of Order of the Phoenix, but before the third movie hit theaters, date's a bit fuzzy in my head, so I'm an old-school fan, but I'm not above criticizing it. And it accumulated a lot of flaws near the end. Animorphs is more seamless, tbh.

More like it's a general shrugging by the dumbed-down newer audiences who are slowly getting stupider and stupider thanks to bad education in late-stage capitalism, both being badly taught and looking for an escape to their woes, so they insist, "It's fiction, don't overthink it." You run into this attitude elsewhere in a beloved franchise.

But the new stuff just... completely disregards the older stuff. I'll keep insisting that, even if it's showing signs of growth. It doesn't have the soul anymore, and I'm terrified to think where it will be in the next five decades. So people who love "the new Trek" are mostly just interested in the superficial fun, not really the continuity or the hard sci-fi aspects. They really should have stuck to their guns and kept it a legit reboot, but no, they decided they wanted to "return" to the Prime Universe without devoting a single of lick of time into investigating what that verse is like. I mean, again, Season 1... just... why? The internet will never let them live that down, and we should just be glad TNG didn't have a mainstream internet presence back in 1987. It might never have survived. Now it's being used to justify the rationale "give it time." I don't know, when there's no respect for continuity, why should I "give it time?" Even TNG Season 1 wasn't blatantly defiling the canon. DS9 started out rough, but still adhered to the structure laid by TNG. Voyager was in another quadrant, so whatever flaws it had, at least it had the excuse of not being in the "same old place." Enterprise is the only weak link in that old truism, but then, that's nothing surprising.

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:47 pm It's ironic too, because people praise JJ Abrams for bringing viewers back to Trek and bringing in a new generation of young audiences. That new audience? Are not people who likely ever saw TNG or DS9. Or TOS.

Which is no different than those who got into Trek because TNG was airing at the time, but hadn't seen TOS until later. It's inevitable that someone's first Trek will be the most recent incarnation, and if they like it enough want to look back on past Trek. It's no different than how there are generations of Bond fans who got into the franchise by seeing the most recent flick that came out at the time before looking back to older films.

When I first got into Trek it was because of the first fix films, but I wouldn't actually see an episode of TOS until sometime after. Does that make me less a real fan than those who got into Trek straight with TOS?

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:47 pm It's ironic too, because people praise JJ Abrams for bringing viewers back to Trek and bringing in a new generation of young audiences. That new audience? Are not people who likely ever saw TNG or DS9. Or TOS. And a movie always attracts more people than a TV show, sad fact, which is what Voyager and Enterprise were marketed towards, and shedding viewers in droves.

That’s sort of the definition of a new audience. There is nothing wrong with Trek ‘09 being the first Star Trek for someone. Many started there and kept exploring.

I think you might also be underestimating how many long time fans enjoyed the new Trek.

Meushell wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2019 3:41 am

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:47 pm It's ironic too, because people praise JJ Abrams for bringing viewers back to Trek and bringing in a new generation of young audiences. That new audience? Are not people who likely ever saw TNG or DS9. Or TOS. And a movie always attracts more people than a TV show, sad fact, which is what Voyager and Enterprise were marketed towards, and shedding viewers in droves.

That’s sort of the definition of a new audience. There is nothing wrong with Trek ‘09 being the first Star Trek for someone. Many started there and kept exploring.

I think you might also be underestimating how many long time fans enjoyed the new Trek.

I've been a fan since the 90's, hell, the first Star Trek series I watched all the way from start to finish was Voyager. It's rather stupid to say who is and is not a true fan of something. Gatekeeping like that never makes anything fun.

On the topic of Trek and other long running franchises being in the public domain... no. I don't want that at all, it sounds like hell. Do I think that fan created projects should be left alone though? Yes. So long as they do not exist to make a profit, then it's fine in my eyes. They should be treated like the novels, comics, and games. An extra branch of the franchise that the main tree can pull from as needed.

LavarosVA wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:18 am On the topic of Trek and other long running franchises being in the public domain... no. I don't want that at all, it sounds like hell.

These are harsh words, why do you think that?

What precludes us from taking any word from either non-canonical products or fan-fiction seriously. While there wouldn't be a pre-built easily consumable package to enjoy, we could pick and choose what we like. We'd disregard the trash and let the little drops of perfection rise to the top. All the while allowing everyone to still enjoy the particular junk they enjoy.

I've never understood this corporate-driven entity of a franchise and their abuse of the word canon to exclude anything that does not fit its profit margin. I've never been a fan of the Star Wars movies, never interested in action flicks and fantasy, but the fleshed out nature of the Old Republic did grab my interest from time to time. Why does a corporate entity get to decide that the one aspect I like isn't "official canon" anymore? It's purely meant for a corporate entity to control what is and isn't licensed to sell. I don't think that should ever be the measure the artistry of something is measured by.

Alasar wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2019 6:55 am

LavarosVA wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:18 am On the topic of Trek and other long running franchises being in the public domain... no. I don't want that at all, it sounds like hell.

These are harsh words, why do you think that?

What precludes us from taking any word from either non-canonical products or fan-fiction seriously. While there wouldn't be a pre-built easily consumable package to enjoy, we could pick and choose what we like. We'd disregard the trash and let the little drops of perfection rise to the top. All the while allowing everyone to still enjoy the particular junk they enjoy.

I've never understood this corporate-driven entity of a franchise and their abuse of the word canon to exclude anything that does not fit its profit margin. I've never been a fan of the Star Wars movies, never interested in action flicks and fantasy, but the fleshed out nature of the Old Republic did grab my interest from time to time. Why does a corporate entity get to decide that the one aspect I like isn't "official canon" anymore? It's purely meant for a corporate entity to control what is and isn't licensed to sell. I don't think that should ever be the measure the artistry of something is measured by.

That’s why we have head canon or fandom. Also I don’t think drops of perfection would raise to the top. The most popular, yes, but that doesn’t mean it’s the best. IMO, it doesn’t even mean good. For example, a great fan fiction I read, one that I made my head canon, wasn’t popular at all.

Canon, to me, gives a base to follow and discuss, and in SFDebris’ case, something to review. Otherwise, you have a bunch of fan fiction. Some of it is just more expensive to make. In the end though, how is that really any different than now? Plenty of people throw out canon for head canon in one manner or another. For Star Wars, many stick with the legends material, or incorporate it into canon. The only time I have ever seen it be an issue is when people insist that their head canon is canon...which comes across as telling others to think the same way as they do.

Well, I think I'm coming to the slow realization that most Star Trek fans are hopelessly superficial, the same way most "Star Wars" fans are, though that crosses over with the general moviegoing public, so I can't call them the same, but point remains, I think I have to accept I'm in the minority here. It's like clearspira said, despite shallow attempts to "paint" being a nerd as popular, it's as unpopular as ever. Hell, I preferred Gohan's Revival of F style haircut and glasses. He FINALLY looked like he should have in the Buu Saga, like he had as a kid after beating Cell... and fan complaints that "it looks too different" and idiots ragging on him, basically because of nostalgia or they just want the "butch" cut back so their "perfect" Gohan was still as "macho" as ever, drove Toei to capitulate to them, and I really miss the hairstyle.