this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
36 points (83.3% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

10679 readers
425 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll busmittions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"
12-12 LD 5x09 "Fissure Quest"
12-19 LD 5x10 "The New Next Generation"
01-24 Film "Section 31"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (TBA)

Section 31 (2025-01-24)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)


In Development

Untitled theatrical film

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.

Allied Discord Server


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I wasn't even aware of Lemmy when I wrote this. I only joined yesterday, but not for the intent of promoting my pieces. I don't monetize them, so there's that. Aside from book work, this is one of the longest pieces I've ever written, and I write about a range of subjects. I hope you all like it :)

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jaccident@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Heads up OP. It could be my app but I don’t see a link in your post.

[–] tkn@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago

Sorry about that! My first time with Lemmy :D

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Seldom has so many words been used to say so little.

[–] troglodytis@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This dude doesn't know a damn thing

[–] tkn@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

[–] USSBurritoTruck@startrek.website 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

JJ’s Trek films and Kelvin timeline would inject a cancer throughout Paramount’s Trek productions, namely Discovery.

JFC, this is pathetic.

Disco might not be to everyone's taste, but to claim it's a "cancer" is a tad bit dramatic, isn't it. Especially when the writer goes on to praise most of the series which we never would have had if not for the success of Disco.

Not to mention the childish oversimplification of the spore drive, which has been explained on screen. Sci-fi fans really out here still complaining about "magic" mushrooms facilitating travel, but perfectly cool when it's crystals like dilithium.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dude magic crystals are real. Everyone knows that. I'll PM you a URL.

[–] heygooberman@lemmy.today 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] tkn@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago

Ah! Thanks!! I'll update the post.

[–] Teal@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Nice find, thanks!

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] tkn@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago

Thanks and sorry! I'm getting it fixed now :D

[–] astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I found myself nodding along to a lot that was said in this article. I also would trace a lot of recent issues to JJ Abrams' take. What I said then is still (I think) true today: "They are good movies, but they aren't good Star Trek movies." Discovery and Picard suffered for it, but I think that the ills are being corrected. My hope is that Paramount greenlights "Legacy" as the TNG-spiritually-successor as SNW is the TOS-spiritual-successor.

Where I will disagree, though, is that Star Trek isn't broken. Five-ish years ago, I would have said that, but after SNW, Lower Decks, and Picard season 3, I think the powers that be have a better understanding of what is needed. We were in a bit of a "dark-ages" from 2006-2020, but I think we're back on the upswing. We may not be quite at 1990s golden age Trek, but we can get close.

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

Well said, good sir. I'd sign that.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Welcome to lemmy!

And great article!

Discovery can sometimes be a touchy topic around here, as it prompts some arguably toxic negativity, but I thought it was important to try to outline, as you did, what the whole JJ reboot thing was about and how it has been problematic for Trek, Discovery being ground zero. Thanks!

[–] Bonehead@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The thing that people have to remember is that Discovery gave us Anson Mount and Ethan Peck. That alone should make up for any problems with pacing or character development.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

It’s kind of a cursed defence though isn’t it?

The thing that redeems a new trek show, which has traditionally always been about doing new and interesting things within the values of the franchise IMO …

is the longish cameo of essentially rebooted characters that in many people’s view salvaged the franchise through their own successful spin off. Where, in my view, despite liking SNW a lot, it’s biggest problem as a contribution to the franchise is that it’s very close to being a reboot of TOS^1^ (though it’s not quite there yet and I hope it stays away) … which means we’re talking about a prequel giving birth to another prequel that verges on a reboot.

All of that, for me, connects Discovery+SNW to the JJ/Kelvin legacy of what new and compelling Trek has to look like in a way that feels very distant from the legacies and approaches of TOS/TNG/DS9.


  1. Since and including the finale of season 1, either Kirk or Scotty have played major non-cameo roles in a majority of SNW episodes while taking air time from the other SNW characters. For me, this is unnecessary and is clearly toying with TOS reboot/prequel territory, while the interesting promise of SNW was to simply continue from the first pilot, doing what is technically a prequel but really filling in a missing gap of TOS era trek with its own premise and characters and so allowing a re-imagining of TOS trek without reverting to old (and tired IMO) characters.
[–] Lilnino@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I'm so happy to see someone else hate Discovery and love lower decks and SNW. I have no idea why people like Discovery, so many plot holes in my opinion, I hate it.

[–] tkn@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hmm. I can't see any comments, though I seem to be able to comment myself.

[–] tkn@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

Aha! I figured it out. Comments are sequestered to the instance the user is commenting from. Federation :)