Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Star Trek: Alpha to Delta Quadrants & Everything In Between
- Thread starter Scepticalscribe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agreed.
Season One of TNG is considered by most as overall being very boring and a fair part of that is said to be because Gene mandated that there would be no interpersonal conflicts amongst the crew. Season Two relaxed this mandate a bit, but it really did not get kicked to the curb until Season Three, which is when the general consensus is the show "became good".
My point was Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek was about humans who have overcome their baser instincts. Humans who are nobler, more enlightened than us today. If Starfleet is filled with the morally bankrupt humans of today, Star Trek would be just another Sci-Fi.
What made Star Trek unique was the ideal that "the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few or the one." Humans stop being a species of selfish pricks. Yes, there were throwbacks even in TOS (Lt. Stiles) and TNG (Adm. Satie), but they were the exception rather than the rule.
Star Trek, old Star Trek, gave us hope for a better humanity. New Trek shows us that humans are destined to be self servincg pricks for many centuries to come. The same old prejudices, the same selfishness. The same old story, all over again.
What made Star Trek unique was the ideal that "the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few or the one." Humans stop being a species of selfish pricks. Yes, there were throwbacks even in TOS (Lt. Stiles) and TNG (Adm. Satie), but they were the exception rather than the rule.
Star Trek, old Star Trek, gave us hope for a better humanity. New Trek shows us that humans are destined to be self servincg pricks for many centuries to come. The same old prejudices, the same selfishness. The same old story, all over again.
I still see hope and positive human aspiration in at least Star Fleet and the Federation in new Trek, which is where we generally saw it in old Trek.
I think we tend to remember the better aspects of shows, especially as time goes on, and forget the less better stuff. But even TOS had their share of selfish pricks.
Kirk, arming the people on that primitive planet, against the Klingons arming the other side. Decker and his obsession with the Doomsday machine, That woman who "switched bodies" with Kirk, out of revenge. Harry Mudd. The Federation plot to steal a Klingon cloaking device. Kirk's obsession with destroying that cloud creature that injured him years ago. Kirk's desire to bang every space chick he meets. And as I mentioned earlier, McCoy's seudo-racism against Spock.
These people were just as flawed as anyone else in the ST universe.
Has anyone noticed how the role of first officer changed from the TOS to TNG eras? In the 23rd century, First Officer appeared to be a side job in addition to the person's regular position such as navigator or science officer. And first officers held the rank of lieutenant commander or even lieutenant.
But in the 24th century, first officer became a dedicated role with the rank of commander. For several months after TNG premiered, I was puzzled by what Riker's actual job was. It seemed to me that he just ordered people around.
But in the 24th century, first officer became a dedicated role with the rank of commander. For several months after TNG premiered, I was puzzled by what Riker's actual job was. It seemed to me that he just ordered people around.
The first officer became landing party leader. That was their job, while the captain stayed on the ship. I guess the reasoning is, the first officer made a lot of high level decisions on their own as landing party leader, so you wanted a very senior officer, while captains were too valuable to risk to lead off ship missions.
It is possible "First Officer" was more a title than a role in the TOS era - they were a senior officer that the Captain delegated authority as their adjutant to and was the next senior officer in the Chain of Command (in the case of the Captain becoming incapacitated or otherwise unable to exercise their duties).
By the TNG era, it was a dedicated role. Rhykker was in charge of Crew Management (he handled crew evaluations, crew scheduling, crew concerns, etc.). That level of admin probably meant that they could no longer "dual class" like Una or Spock did in the TOS days so it became a formal position with formal duties and requirements.
By the TNG era, it was a dedicated role. Rhykker was in charge of Crew Management (he handled crew evaluations, crew scheduling, crew concerns, etc.). That level of admin probably meant that they could no longer "dual class" like Una or Spock did in the TOS days so it became a formal position with formal duties and requirements.
Perhaps because Starfleet went from a militia/policing organization to a full fledged military organization. This is just a supposition on my part.
Lax discipline on Enterprise was on full blown display in Balance of Terror when Lt. Stiles not only disrespects a superior officer, Cmd Spock, but was openly implied Spock was a spy throughout the ordeal. All Kirk did was verbally reprimanded the LT once, no punishment.
Discipline was a big deal on Enterprise-D as seen when Picard gave orders to his crew with just a glance in TNG: Allegiance.
During Kirk's time, only redshirts and a select few carried or had access to hand phasers. Almost every time, Kirk would have everyone "set phasers on stun." Picard rarely tells his crew to "set phasers on stun."
When an explorer/pioneer dies, it's a tragedy. But when a soldier dies, it's his duty.😒
In TOS, when a redshirt dies to show the audience our hero is in a dangerous situtation...
In TNG/DS9/Voyager, when a minor character dies to show the audience our hero is in a dangerous situtation...
Isn't it just possible that you don't get to be a Starfleet captain without knowing whether it's safe to beam down or not?
Last edited:
Isn't it just possible that you don't get to be a Starfleet captain without knowing whether it's safe to beam down or not?
Starfleet captains will always think its safe to beam down. Sometimes captains need to be protected from themselves.
I found "new trek" impossible to watch because of this. I realize we don't want to start a old trek vs new trek war but I have to say I side with Mousse on this... it flies in the face of Roddenberry Trek.
We humans are supposed to evolve for the better, we try to help others (and ourselves). Old Trek was about the betterment of humanity and dealing with our flaws. New trek is an entirely different organism that doesn't feel like Star Trek - it feels like a marvel video with very flawed negative humans who treat each other (and others) horribly.
As far as the woke stuff - I usually stay away from this... but to me it seemed that TOS was a lot less "in your face" on a per episode basis imo. First few episodes of Discovery (and a chunk of Picard) and you're dealing with obvious symbolisms to current day earth of racism, gender, etc.
What really bothered me was the fact that it felt like whoever wrote this didn't even try to keep it in line with previous Trek. I think first episode of Discovery, I've heard more Klingon than all of TOS/TNG/VOY/DS9. A first officer somehow was with the captain for 5? years but can't take an order without sarcasm, questioning every decision, and mutinying? Don't get me started on Picard (until the last season when they finally listened to the fanbase).
I don't mean to harp on anything - I smile with the new Trekkies and I'm glad Trek is getting more focus after a long long period of nothing (between VOY/DS9 and the latest movies). Guess I'm a cranky old fart now.
Something that always made me raise my eyebrow. You don't see admirals or ship captains leaving their boats in the current day Navy lol. I can't imagine any universe where it would be acceptable that a captain of a Federation flagship would leave their ship to risk life on a planet lol. But always made for good TV I guess lol.
As a child of the 90s, never really noticed this till you mentioned it. Good point.
I grew up in CA so seeing people who aren't my same skin color doesn't bother me or strike me as anything to notice. But someone in the 60s - very different story I guess.
Still seems less "in your face" than some of the stuff I see in Picard/Discovery. What do you think?
I've been rewatching Enterprise lately and man Season 2 is a struggle. It's not that the episodes were bad, it's that they were just boring. Despite that though, I rank ENT my third favorite series because of the last 2 seasons and Season 1 had more hits than misses. Still, Season 2 is probably my least favorite season in Trek, or it's close to the bottom.
I never watched Enterprise when it came out despite a lot of my Trekkie friends liking it (especially the later seasons). Figured I'd save it for a rainy day.
Glad I did because after Discovery/Picard - at least Enterprise feels like Trek.
Of course, now Netflix doesn't have Star Trek on it anymore... Only got through season 1 before that went away.
I would enjoy it if--IF-- it didn't carry the Star Trek branding. A lot of the Star Wars heroes have questionable morals (Lando) to down right seedy (Han), but I really enjoyed the Episode 4-6 and a few of the EU stuff too. In Firefly, most of the crew were hard boiled, even the preacher man. I loved that series. BSG, both the original and new series...🥰
Yep. It ain't the pew-pew that's off putting; I like pew-pew action. It's the disregard for the dogma of the franchise that bugs me with New Trek. The old series set the rules for the ST universe, New Trek throws all that out the window.
Yarp. If there are fans of New Trek, more power to 'em. I not going to gatekeep. I just hate that the writers have sullied a lot of the Star Trek characters--turning them from archtypical ubermensh to patrons of Mos Eisley spaceport. Just don't bring Picard Picard because Jean-Luc will always be TNG Picard to me. Same with Doc Crusher.
The TNG Worf having a completely different set of ideals from DS9 Worf bugged the hail out of me too. TNG Worf: honor is everything. DS9 Worf: I will sacrifice my honor to live, to let my brother live, to keep my friends safe, etc. I consider TNG Worf, the real Worf.
That the way it was and we liked it.👴and I'm glad Trek is getting more focus after a long long period of nothing (between VOY/DS9 and the latest movies). Guess I'm a cranky old fart now.
TOS was very much in your face - for the period. Don't forget, that wasn't now, that was the 1960s, where an interreacial kiss was still shocking. In fact, TOS was probably far more "woke" for its time than the stuff we see now.
Age (and experiences) change one's perspective. Characters need to grow. No one stays the same for decades.
Last edited:
Maybe because that is the default setting by that time.
Don't forget that in TOS the captain acted like an older gentleman on a "sight seeing" tour through SE Asia, so sometimes even the obvious needed to be spelled out just to make sure...
I have no facts, but in the back of my mind it was because the Enterprise D was just a much larger ship. The Captain was the guy with experience making the decisions. First officer did the implementation.
That makes sense from a reality perspective. But from a TV show perspective, it was more simple. I think they said that Picard was seen as the older statesman and they wanted a younger handsome action hero type doing the fighting.
Sort of like how they brought 7 of 9 to Voyager to be the hot chick and bump up ratings. It worked. Riker was the dude version of that.
I think we do so much analysis of these shows, we tend to forget its still entertainment and often they do stuff to get ratings.