How would you fix Star Trek?

[Admiral X]

I'd love to see something set some time after STVI. It could be a bit different by being set on an old ship instead of a brand new, top-of-the-line one, say the last of the Constitution class ships.

[MrL1992]

Make the shows look like they're from the 1990s, no not really but I swear that's the only way some people will be happy.

I wouldn't be so dramatic as 'fix' given its actually been making money in the past few years which is better than 'practically dead' as it was. They do need to get away from prequels though. It seems pretty ridiculous that the past three incantations in live action' media, Enterprise, the Kelvin timeline movies and now Discovery. I'll still watch and rate those things for what they are and not hold their prequel nature against them but I understand the frustrations. Thankfully, they are now working on a series that moves forward so that's a good start.

[Darth Wedgius]

I'd love to see something set some time after STVI. It could be a bit different by being set on an old ship instead of a brand new, top-of-the-line one, say the last of the Constitution class ships.

I thought it might be a nice way to have modern-looking sets while avoiding the almost magical technology from the later TNG era.

There's a lot of fan films for the TOS movie era in the YouTube channel Potemkin1711

[Deledrius]

I'll still watch and rate those things for what they are and not hold their prequel nature against them but I understand the frustrations

But... why? Being a prequel is "what they are". That wasn't some accident or byproduct, it's a central part of the decision made in developing and telling the show.

I mean, I get what you're saying. I can judge an episode of Voyager, and ignore how a particular episode completely goes against the premise of it being a lone ship lost and searching for a way home. Many episodes benefit greatly from doing this. But is it really fair to do that?

As an extreme analogy: you can prepare and cook a meal flawlessly, which is worth of praise, but if you started with rotten & moldy ingredients not fit for consumption how far does that flawless execution matter?

I thought it might be a nice way to have modern-looking sets while avoiding the almost magical technology from the later TNG era.

I'd like to see that, too. The Orville really nails a modern-1980s mashup, but I'd like to see something actually contemporary in a new Trek show. Discovery would probably look alright (at least, I think so. Turning on the lights would help) as a post-Nemesis ship interior. I certainly don't care for or want the magical pseudoscience from late-TNG and Voyager. I barely tolerated it then as lazy writing, but these days I also see it as part of the larger fabric of lazy anti-intellectualism and inability to tell reality from fiction in the public discourse. I don't need rock-hard SciFi in my Trek, but I'd appreciate a lot less discredited quack science. There's plenty of cool stuff that legit people and organizations are working on that would be fun to extrapolate from. Also, it would be nice to finally have a Trek show not get evolution completely and entirely wrong. One can hope.

There's a lot of fan films for the TOS movie era in the YouTube channel Potemkin1711

IMO, the show that really gets the retro aesthetic perfectly is Star Trek: Continues. The sets, the lighting, the cinematography, direction, music, all of it. The actors are hit-or-miss (though most are generally good), but even the body language sells the retro setting pretty well.

[MrL1992]

I'll still watch and rate those things for what they are and not hold their prequel nature against them but I understand the frustrations

But... why? Being a prequel is "what they are". That wasn't some accident or byproduct, it's a central part of the decision made in developing and telling the show.

I mean, I get what you're saying. I can judge an episode of Voyager, and ignore how a particular episode completely goes against the premise of it being a lone ship lost and searching for a way home. Many episodes benefit greatly from doing this. But is it really fair to do that?

As an extreme analogy: you can prepare and cook a meal flawlessly, which is worth of praise, but if you started with rotten & moldy ingredients not fit for consumption how far does that flawless execution matter?

I thought it might be a nice way to have modern-looking sets while avoiding the almost magical technology from the later TNG era.

I mean that I'm not automatically predisposed against them for being prequel (or alternate universe for one of them). I'

[chaos42]

i think what star trek needs is to look at all the different sci fi series and how they have evolved and apply the lessons learned form that to their current story telling method.

1st is the nature of your episodes. Series use to be just one episode mainly because you could jump in at any point and watch any episodes with out having to have seen the previous one because no ability to record this is no longer an issue. Now we have a lot more complex serial story telling, you can do a bottle show but a lot more is going on and more character interactions and dynamics. Developing people and their own stories and also have more than just characters who are just a stereotype.

2 is what kind of stories ds9 in many of its stories had long running plot lines the maquie the cardassian government and the dominion. Those are good things to have
but also what they didn't have was things like political drama like on babylon 5 those intermixed with the main series would make it great as would undercurrents and plots taking place over several season like other tv shows that are set up for multiple seasons.

3 stop using the same old bloodly formula or if you are make it a joke or reinvigorate it with something fresh don't do another shuttle crashed episode with out something like orvilles having the kids of a single mother along and an alien not knowing how to deal with them. that was interesting and a good twist on the old shuttle crash episode because its more about the characters.

4 lets see consequences of actions i don't think i really need to explain this but voyager is a good example of no consequences of actions with only afew exceptions like the horogan holodeck issues.

over those plus something that isn't a prequel could be great, the thing is we need to go FORWARD NOT BACKWARDS

[Nealithi]

How would I fix Star Trek. I would not go with the yet another dimension thing. It begs comparison without being sufficiently justified. I think if you want to do another Trek you need to select an era. My preference is TOS but I grew up with it. And make a parallel show. TOS was the voyages of the USS Enterprise. Make one the Voyages of the USS Saratoga. We can use Chuck's joke as Saratoga does not get the glory jobs. No transporting diplomats or parading over diplomatic functions. No it hunts down Orion pirates near Corridan, and has to tow the hulk of neutronium of former doomsday weapons back for evaluation. It hears of the epic adventures of her famous sister ship while doing other work in the federation. We know the ship will eventually be wrecked so it can be replaced with a Miranda class vessel. But for now we see why they had the name reused as a dedicated crew limps along in a ship that maybe for part of a season is forgotten about in the bureaucratic shuffle and has to make do as often as not. Kind of Voyager's Year of Hell, but in Federation space as they barter for supplies so they can continue their mission to keep the fragile peace in the era of pirates, and hostile Klingons and Romulans.

[Beastro]

Continue Star Trek from the end of the Dominion War, maybe give it a few decades, see how the war altered perceptions, especially in the Federation.

I'd like to see the Federation taken down a few notches given that it is effectively the hegemon of the Alpha Quadrant after the Dominion War. Have a large amount of people, especially humans, be disillusioned with the Fed societies promises, the Federation leadership worn out by its position in the AQ and caught too much reacting and not acting as forces like Romulans, now bent on revenge towards them for Spock costing them their home system are actively working to align races against them motivated in a way they never were before.

I'd also would like to see things from the perspective that isn't one from the Federation, but I think having a cast centered around aliens wouldn't work. The framework I've laid out, though, would be perfect for the disillusioned faction in the Fed having formed their own secessionist nation that more realpolitik and ruthless, but one that still maintains an outlook very akin to their mother nation echoing the similarities between the US and Britain despite the bad blood over the War of Independence.

Last bit too, would be to see other things play out that could be revisited, like the Founders maintaining a strong reluctance to change their outlook with Odo becoming something of the leader of a minority reform faction that had a very uphill battle, the Ferengi being pushed to take on more of a political role in the AQ as nations grow suspicious of Federation dominance leading to the establishment of a military and them having to go outside of their element getting a taste for why other races act nasty in ways they don't understand. Also have more activity of lesser AQ races and revisiting many like Enterprise should have, such as what the Tholians are up to and how they might look on things.

Finally, break up the Borg. Have an arch be about the protagonists introducing, or helping introduce, something to the Collective that would unleash rival collective personalities that have always existed within the Collective, but have been restrained. That would fragment the Borg into effectively what are nations and lead them into infighting as the each collective battles for dominion of the whole. That would allow them to remain a threat, but allow their always looming galaxy wide threatening posture they've had since TNG to finally be resolved.

[Yukaphile]

Well, you may have your chance with STG, but I doubt Patrick Stewart will care that much about the continuity of a show he didn't star in.

[clearspira]

Well, you may have your chance with STG, but I doubt Patrick Stewart will care that much about the continuity of a show he didn't star in.

Its made by the same people that made STD and we simply do not know how much creative control Stewart has. This whole thing is a propaganda exercise to try and prop up this struggling franchise because in many ways it is worse off now than it was in the aftermath of Enterprise and Nemesis. At least we had no fan civil war then.
Did you hear that STD officially has the lowest viewing figures of any Trek series to date? If it was on TV it would have Neilsons between 1 and 2 whereas Enterprise was cancelled with a 5 and a half. Part of that is the fact that not everyone is willing to pay for a subscription true, but they CHOSE that format, it is on their heads.