It was given a lot of slack because it was trying but was very much a space western. Space 1999 was constantly trashed despite trying harder to be serious science. Captain Kirk definitely helped with that charisma.
@@newtpondskipper The moon drifting out of Earth's orbit and then traveling across the solar system fast enough to meet other civilizations is trying to be serious about science? Star Trek needed to be sold to a studio and have an audience. Roddenberry and his fellow writers had to create a series that balanced adventure and science. Space: 1999 aired in 1975 and and UFO, an earlier series aired in 1970, a year after Star Trek was canceled. These series would not exist without Star Trek. In addition, scientists and engineers through decades after Star Trek the original series and all other series, TNG etc., tell how they were inspired to become a scientists or engineers because of Star Trek. I think it succeeded to inspire far more than other science-fiction TV shows.
For me, great Star Trek is when they develop both sides of a complex, real-world jubject equally and let it solve for itself (or leave it unsolved), without predetermined judgment. This dynamic already started to crumble way back in TNG days. When it got to DS9, it was completely destroyed.
I remember being made fun of back in '09 for not liking the JJ Abrams Star Trek film because I said it wasn't real Trek. Those same people said Star Trek was boring and nobody wanted to watch a bunch of people sit around and talk diplomacy. Well, here we are now with nobody showing up. Bravo Abrams and all the other hacks, you ruined Star Trek.
And its those same people who refuse to consider diplomacy but think they can just vote. Sure the other side will just fall in line because. Insert eye roll.
Talking about stuff is part of ST. Look at DS9, lots of great dialogues like the Rootbeer topic, Peace being like a sale or Pale Moonlight. Re-watching DS9 in on my waiting list.
It’s interesting to me how the universe of Trek can accommodate TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, and all the related movies, some of which are good and others of which are pretty bad, but despite how much leeway there is for new characters and stories, JJ Abrams and Kurtzman broke the universe. All I’ve got is that Kurtzman Trek doesn’t feel like Star Trek. Orville, which isn’t even Trek, does. What is the secret sauce?
This started with comics--the idea of replacing the current fan base and 'subverting expectations'. It's been like a cancer that's been upgraded to turbo-cancer.
Comics for sure, as they did this stuff over a decade ago now. Then it started popping up in movies and shows and then video games. But yeah, Marvel did this almost right after Disney acquired them and it hasn’t been the same since
@gavsmi6452 It was the idea that the original base wasn't going to grow, it was going to get old, etc. So build a new base, and if if the old fans complain we'll screw 'em (attack the fans).
Classic Trek appeals to everyone; they didn't need space hippies to attract the 60's generation. As a young teen in the 90's I was immediately drawn to TOS and TNG.
But they did have space hippies. Even as a little kid during the original run, watching Trek with my dad, I enjoyed that hippy episode. "I reach you, man." Even at that age, I thought they were mocking these hippies. I still think they were. But it still made me think. Even as a little kid, Trek made me think about how different "people" might have a different view of things.
@@dbf1dware I get it, but they didn't need a continued hippie presence the same way modern Drek needs their they/thems, constant melodramatic tears and hugs, or lens flares.
Exactly, they weren't so reliant on their time when making episodes. I was born in 1975, Trek was already over but I could sit back and enjoy the episodes because they were well done stories. Like you said, you didn't need the space hippies all the time because it was a 60's show. You look at modern Trek, that's not the case anymore. The identity politics that they push in that show is 100% reflective of today and that is why the episodes are not enjoyable now, won't be in 10 years.
I had a professional script-agent tell me in 1997 that the entire Industry's #1 task is to keep "regular" people like me OUT of the Industry, regardless of talent. They hire their own kids to do remakes & reboots now.
The Cage was rejected as a pilot because it was "too cerebral" by the network. Section 31 SHOULD HAVE BEEN REJECTED because it was "TOO STUPID" to be passed off as legitimate Star Trek.
The real Star Trek is iconic, it influenced alot of young people to get into real science. The phone in your hand your home computer and your personal PC is proof of it.
@@leonidfro8302 That may be, but it has had a lot of influence in technology design and innovation over the years. NASA named a space shuttle "Enterprise" and the "flip phone" cell phone design (which resembles the communication devices) both took their inspiration from Star Trek. Those are only two examples, but there are MANY more.
@@leonidfro8302 Perhaps you didn't understand what I was saying. Flip phones get their DESIGN from Star Trek. In TOS, their communication devices flipped open and then they talked. This functionality did not exist in the 1960s, at least as a mass-produced consumer product. And while there were other (sea) ships named Enterprise in the past, NASA has flat-out states that they got the name Enterprise from Star Trek. There were no space ships named Enterprise prior to the show, You can have an opinion on the relative quality of the show, but it doesn't change how influential it was on culture and technology.
@@nathanshaw9688 See, I do understand. As an American, you vastly overestimate influence of sci-fi. >> Flip phones get their DESIGN from Star Trek Nonsense. ALL phones get their design from engineering constraints and physiology of human head. >> they got the name Enterprise from Star Trek So? USSR's ships were named "Dawn" and "Sunrise". Does it mean anything? >> how influential it was on culture and technology Sci-fi have zero influence on technology. Science, economy and necessity drive technological development, not fairy tales.
Been a Star Trek fan since I was 10, (1990), and I can comfortably say Star Trek is the ultimate example of that idea that the classic stuff, (including the original series, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT), are the Mona Lisa and modern Star Trek is that piece of poster board with the banana taped to it, and they're trying to say it's as good as it ever was.
A quadrant is literally a quarter pie slice of the galaxy, drawn out from the core to the rim. A slice with two sides 90° apart, each about 60 thousand light years long, with a curve 95 thousand light years long. It would be about 10 thousand light years thick. An explosion at the geographic center of it would not be detected by the furthest part of it for over 30 thousand years. But the writers know none of these basic facts and could not do the math, either.
@@Jeff-cn9up In Abrams’s first Trek movie, Klingon was destroyed by a supernova, and then Spock watched Vulcan implode with his naked eyes from another planet. They probably can’t do the math, but the bigger issue is that they don’t care.
@@rjs617 From what I understand, JJ Abrams wanted the characters to see the destruction of the planet Vulcan. Because he thought his audience are dumb and they would not understand what they are seeing without the characters reacting to it. He did the same thing in his first Star Wars movie, where the main characters see from their spaceship, the 3 planets, in 3 different star systems, get blown up by the Star Killer base.
@@pyorre2441 It says something about the quality of these writers that they have this awesome visual effect they want to show the audience, yet they are too incompetent to get an important character into a position they could reasonably observe it with the audience. Or introduce a one-scene wonder to observe (and probably die by) it. It's roughly the equivalent of having the protagonist look out the windows of the Sears Tower and watch the Golden Gate Bridge collapse into the bay.
There is a group of fans who will watch anything related to the IP, no matter if it is good or not. Kurtzam Trek, last 6 years of Doctor Who, War o Rohirrim, Halo, Disney Star Wars/Marvel
Used to know a Star Wars fan of that nature. I kept trying to see if I could get him to say something bad about new stuff and I never could. But it was also true that if I asked him what he would watch from his entire collection if he had a couple hours on a Saturday afternoon, he NEVER answered the new stuff. He refused to put one and one together, though.
I "discovered" Bond towards the end of my high school career, sometime between 1996 - 1998. I was aware that Bond films existed, but I'd never actually watched one. The first Bond film I watched was _Goldeneye,_ on VHS, and I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. Then a buddy in college introduced me to Connery's Bond, and I immediately decided he was the best Bond. My opinion hasn't changed.
Watched season 1 - 2 of STD and season 1 of STPicard. I was done. Rewatched TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT and had mostly smiles. Like Star Wars I will stick with the REAL versions.
100% I have enough original movies/series in Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Firefly, Farscape, X-Files, J*A*G, Magnum P.I., Buffy, Angel,... in DVD/Blu-Ray to last me the rest of my life. Would I love good new shows in these IPs?! Of course. Having said that, I am just fine re-watching what I have and never watching anything "new" again.
Never been a big Trek person, but I loved DS9 back in its day. Couple years back, decided to show it to the girlfriend as she had never watched it. She loved it and I fell in love with all over again. Rather than a few episodes we ended up watching the whole series
Tbf, no one wants a “Starfleet 90210” show. But I can also say that even though Roddenberry created this franchise that I love he was not a very good writer or that he should held up as some god-like person that should be held up on a pedestal. Roddenberry wrote TMP, it was trash. The movies or tv shows (aside from TOS which was great, mostly) didn’t get awesome till he was pushed out and others took over. Don’t get me wrong EVERYTHING jar jar Abrams and klutzman did to this franchise (and Star Wars for that matter) has been complete garbage, they are both completely talentless hacks. Picard S3 was enjoyable because for the most part it FELT and looked like Trek, but it did have flaws and had to spend time cleaning up previous seasons. Don’t even get me started on the completely stupid “Enterprise-G” fiasco.
@@tarn1135 My biggest grips with _Picard's_ third season is the cliffhangers they added in to try to convince you it was episodic. They wasted the last five minutes of an episode to introduce a new complication that changed everything... and then wasted the first five minutes of the next episode to solve the problem. And 'wasted' was chosen with malice, because they betray just how last-second these cliffhangers are since a few of them break the show's (kind of stupid) plot. Or would if they continued to be in continuity after they were 'resolved.'
I’m a Trekkie. Been one since the reruns of the original Star Trek in the early Sixties when I was 13. My favorite is ST:TNG. The cast was perfect. The scripts were brilliant. The production was so good that I sometimes forgot I was watching TV. It was that engrossing. The franchise hasn’t always struck gold, most most did up until the WOKE virus struck. ALL the new Trek shows really suck. Badly. My guess: Studios got rid of their White employees & hired only queer people, specifically Trans or flamboyant gays. I assume they thought “anybody can do it”. Wrong. I’m still a huge fan (I once had a small room where I put all my Star Trek memorabilia. I had 4 huge posters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy & Bones. They will always be “my guys”.
McCoy _and_ Bones. A true fan! Sorry. I'm betting that last one was likely supposed to be Scotty and the wrong name came out. Mind, _TNG_ wasn't perfect. But most of my substantive, long term problems have to do with the fact that it was a TV show, not a space forces simulator. For a prestige posting, there was remarkably little turnover in the senior staff. Riker is probably the worst here, since he's ostensibly on the command track, yet he keeps refusing commands of his own, and then Starfleet allows him to camp in the valuable role of _Enterprise_ XO. But, as I said, TV show. They're not going to break up a well-liked cast that works well together just because their characters ought to be subject to 'up or out.'
The funniest part is that they pretty much lost both audiences, the modern audience are not into Star Trek, or Star Wars or Doctor Who. The only people that are still watching are the older audiences who still believe those series can come back to being good again.
I think it was precisely the goal. Money wasn’t it, this is way more than just about money, if it was they would fixed it fast a long time ago. But nobody wants to talk about this “it would be too weird”
They had a formula that has always yielded moderate success at worst, and at best some of the greatest TV and films ever. They just had to follow it but their depravity won't allow it.
This is not depravity it’s very carefully calculated and being funded by none other than ⚫️🪨, when are you going to finally accept this? You think this is all an accident? It’s why we are right now if that’s the case.
Look, Trek is owned by people who don't understand the property so they hire mostly people that don't understand the property. This isn't rocket science.
@ Yeah I think historically it's overwhelmingly the norm. We were very fortunate that Roddenberry came back for TNG and that he chose his successor well, Berman. Trek under Berman started to get stale but that was mainly due to the studio not giving it any time off.
Robert Meyer Burnett is so eloquent in how he breaks this down. It makes me happy so many others feel the pain I've felt over the death of the franchise I spent my life loving.
I been in the industry for a bit, How they get heired? Easy: Step 1 - Lie on your resume. Add 2 or 3 more years on experience and so on. Step 2 - While in the industry, have a "friend" to hook you up. Get that nepotism goodness going. Step 3 - Get lucky. Being in right place, saying the right joke might do it. Step 4 - Play the game. Know how to play the social status game, and by manipulating people's perception and with rhetoric skills and acted confidence you can go pretty far.
Lately, you didn't even have to do that. You just had to have the right check marks on your victim card. As Gary has said most writers/directors etc. are cast not hired.
A 'quadrant' in Star Trek is literally one quarter (quad) of the milky way galaxy, thats why theres only four of them... Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta. Alpha quadrant is home to Earth, the Federation, Vulcan and others... Beta is partially Romulans and Klingons iirc. Delta is where voyager was lost and spent years traversing. Much of it is borg controlled. Gamma is the Dominion's turf and explored in DS9 through the wormhole. How tf do you destroy a quarter of a galaxy?!
@@leonidfro8302 And you've watched _all_ of 1970s media? You're making the argument that _Palworld_ is bad because you've played _Concord, Dustborn,_ and _Veilguard._
The biggest problem with Star Trek productions now Is that they’ve gotten away from the original formula. To explore strange new worlds to seek out new life and new civilizations, etc. If Star Trek isn’t doing that, it’s not Star Trek. The space adventure happens when evil interrupts this formula. There’s conflict, sacrifice and victory. Then we get back to work, exploring, strange, new worlds, etc..
Im thinking any successful new Trek should start directly after enterprise, or after nemesis. Continuity being strictly observed, and tell a new story. Not that hard.
I think there was mileage in another few seasons of ENT to properly tell the story of the founding of the Federation, but now I think it would be a mistake to go back. An ENT movie _might_ work, but I'm not sure even that would work now. I'd rather roll forward another 50 or 100 years from Voyager and see what Starfleet is up to. No doubt they'd be charting more and more of the Gamma and Delta Quadrants, so there could be lots of new species to encounter. No doubt the Borg are still out there, as would be the Dominion, but maybe there's another threat looming that challenges the dominance of all these powers. There are always great stories to tell in the ST universe. I just think we need a bit of distance again, after "real" Trek has been off the air for 20 years.
Robert's breakdown was a masterclass on what's gone wrong in Hollywood and IPs. He makes such strong arguments - "shouldn't our entertainment be getting exponentially better?" backed up by continuing conversation with you all that make catching your episode drops so worth it. Thank you.
Out of all the channels on TV I can watch, i watch the digital subchannel Heroes and Icons, which shows all the Star Trek series from TOS to Enterprise every evening. Never watched the newer stuff, and never will.
"The Harry Potter of Star Trek". That's funny. When the first pitch of "Starlet Academy" came around in the early 2000s, it was described as "Star Trek 90210".
@@James_Bee ironically, the people that I've heard use the "why do you care" argument often get very offended by all sorts of things. They can't see the irony.
Almost all the writers who get hired for these franchise killing reboots are utter hacks and frauds. They just copy and paste superficial elements of the original work, add some DEI propaganda and voila, flop completed. Takes zero skill. Actual good creatives would mostly rather be doing something original.
There's a category of movie and TV watcher which I call "Shit Film Liker". They get turned on by the hype, the SFX or the fact that something is the next instalment of a franchise they've been watching for years and they have to watch it all. They care less about story, characters or whether anything is making sense as long as every few minutes there's some kind of "wow" moment for them, and they're easily satisfied by a low bar of wow. They're the people that got excited for the teaser trailer for Kraven The Hunter. You've seen them on social media: "I've just seen the trailer and this looks awesome, OK the first 3 episodes are a bit slow as they're setting up the new characters and the situation but it's different and I don't mind the swearing and gore and stick with it because episode 4 is AWESOME and a game-changer for the series."
My aunt is/was a big trek fan as she used to watch the 1960's star trek before it was cancelled (she loves Shatner) and then the motion picture came in 79' (i was 9 years old), went to see the movie, became a fan a never looked back, but i recall watching the very first episode of TNG (after watching the entire TOS over and over beforehand) and thought, "well, this sucks", but i stuck with it and was rewarded for my patience with much better seasons of TNG then DS9 and then Voyager, and that's where it all ended for me at Voyager. RIP Star Trek.
Star Trek could tell stories with a moral base without beating you over the head with it. People always say Star Trek has always been political, it's always been woke. Star Trek made you think, it didn't force a single view on you and bludgeon you with it. Same with the old 60s Twilight Zone. The Key and Peele version of the Zone had a single view it wanted to force on you.
And progressive from sixty years ago is considered far right now. The idea of a Federation that doesn't allow everyone in? Officers that have authority over their subordinates? Leftists today cannot comprehend how that works.
Aside from that I've always thought the real draw for most wasn't actually the watered down liberalism, it's that it was essentially a tight character based military drama that was family friendly.
Too many female writers with the science version of girlmath brain, in the writing staff They need a nerd tech splainer and a nerd, lore dictator in the writing staff..
That's just incompetence and nepotism, not a writer's biological sex. Take the Penguin - the showrunner, half of the writers and some of the directors are female, and no one noticed.
I started watching Star Trek Voyager when I was four years old. I was enthralled. I’ve loved Star Trek my whole life. It’s something I hold so close to my heart that I don’t really talk about it to other people. I can’t stand the new shows. They infuriate me in ways I can’t even express.
it just isn't wholesome anymore. it isn't something you watch as a kid, to learn about tolerating or learning to understand people different than you. it isn't about working together to solve a problem, or even working on a strategy to beat an enemy. it's just dumb action bullshit and social politics. Star Trek has ALWAYS been diverse, and representative of a progressive future, until they came along.
they're not just hiring the wrong people for these projects, they're hiring the wrong people to hire people, and they're being managed and owned (shareholders) by the wrong people.
Alan Dean Foster wrote the novelizations of the original "Star Trek Logs"... Wonderful author, He must be absolutely ROLLIN' at the current state of SF... And I very much hope he has been treated well by the studios and creditors for his work over the decades! Cheers!
"Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is, and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely; and pined his loss." sums it up for how Star trek has fallen from grace...
We have the absolute worst management private and public now of at least the last 80 years. Seriously, how rare is it to see someone in a leadership position that is actually capable of their role and willing to do the job versus pass the buck and kick the can down the road in order to pad out their pockets now? The future and the fallout of poor leadership decisions is someone else's problem. It's just become more and more apparent over the past 40 years. It's depressing, because we aren't degrading due to some real threat so much as bureaucratic indifference.
My love for Star Wars was different than my love for Star Trek. Star Wars was gritty and realistic feeling, there was dirt and grease on the vehicles. It felt lived in and not as antiseptic as Trek. Trek was sci-fi and was about what we could be. It was a different kind of inspiration and overall felt more hopeful. Now both series are about miserable, horrible people that seem to only inspire self absorbed narcissistic behavior. Sadly neither of these are even close to how horrible Dr Who has become.
Do you know why there is so much comedy in Marvel, Star Wars and Trek? Women would watch us enjoying these franchises and when they gave it a chance, they thought it was silly. They thought we enjoyed it Because it was "silly." So when these diversity hires enter the industry and are put in charge of creating She-Hulk or The Last Jedi or Lower Decks, etc, they think they can succeed by making them these silly comedies because that's how they interpreted them. Star Wars was just a bunch of laser swords and pew pew. Star Trek was people wearing pajamas and pretending to be smart in a room. Marvel is grown men wearing their underpants on the outside. They were unable to see past the surface level presentation. Where I saw a giant monster destroying Tokyo, my Mom and sisters saw a man in a rubber suit.
Like I said Gary. I watched the Wrath of Khan again to refresh my memory of how good Trek used to be. That movie still rocks all these years later. All the franchises we loved as kids are dead now sadly.
9:37 - Point of order, Robert. Boba Fett was introduced in the _Star Wars Holiday Special,_ in 1978. The first Boba Fett action figure was available via mail order in 1979. Yes, his first appearance was in _The Empire Strikes Back_ so that's when many people were introduced to him, but that's not when he was actually introduced.
Bizarre, but there are for profit business who have no will to make money. Once I had a fender bender in a 10 year old car at the worst possible time (just signed up for an overseas job...everything but luggage and limited storage had to go NOW). Fender rubbed the tire so it was immobile, but all the parts were in excellent shape. Called some junk yards, "Look, I'll give it to you. You just come over and tow it.I can't leave it in the apartment parking lot". The first two said, "Well...if you drive it over here we'd consider taking it." Third gave an immediate, "where do you live? We'll be there in an hour." They left with a free car (with registration) they could part out if they didn't want to pull the fender and replace the tire. Some businesses have no will to make money.
Oh please the first Bad Robot Star Trek movie wasn't Star Trek. It was Star Wars in badly made Star Trek cosplay , so JJ could show that he could make that. Star Wars the Audition Tape.
Pretty much everything is wrong with Star Trek post enterprise with chief issue being the writing….however also the question must be asked: who is in charge of the production design? Production design is extremely important as well and the overall aesthetic for Star Trek for the past 16 years has been abominable.
One thing you DO have to give the Jurassic Park franchise is they said, "despite the discovery that some dinosaurs were feathered, we have established our universe and we're staying with that".
And to think we were all pissed at Rick Berman for how Trek was being handled when both Nemesis and the Enterprise series finale came out. At this point I would prefer Berman Trek over JJ/Kurtzman Trek any day of the week. What's really sad is the fan productions pre-JJ were pretty damn good for the most part like New Voyages and especially Star Trek Continues. Glad to hear nobody likes the shitty Section 31 movie.
Its executives "targeting" what kills one franchise after another. Targeting is thing, but it has to go from creative side, not before it. Its not even matter of writting. Writters are writting show they were told to write.
These people must be actually trying to destroy Star Trek. That must be their goal, right? It can't just be ignorance because it seems like every detail has been flipped. This stuff is the opposite of Star Trek.
I know someone whose first Star Trek show was Voyager who somehow thought that Section 31 was actually a decent movie, but it should have been a series. 🤷♂
I grew up watching Gene Roddenberry's "Andromeda" and later on 2003's Battlestar Galactica. I've rewatched Andromeda about 8 years ago and have recently finished rewatching BSG for the 4th time. The question is very on-point - how is it that shows made over 20 years ago, that ALSO had political themes mirroring current events of their respective times, are leaps and bounds better in every conceivable metric than the shows made today? I understand the greed of maximizing profits at the expense of quality, I understand politics, and yet both these things require a repeat audience. Where's the repeat audience?
There is a great series of books by Greg Cox about the eugenics wars happening in the 1990s without the wider public being aware of what was happening. They read like a James Bond story.
I was born in 86 and started to watch TNG in 91 till the end of the series later on. I watched DS9 the first two seasons. Then when 95 hit i watched Voyager religiously till the series final. I tried to watch Enterprise but during that time a series called Battlestar Galactica came out with a reboot that took my attention. I eventually came back to Enterprise a few years ago and enjoyed it. I grew up loving Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who and many IPs from the 90s and 80s, looking at what they have become is like losing a part of you, something you love and enjoy just to be used and abused by posers who have no right to have jobs making products they dont care about
My retail bosses assured me that giving Angry Karens free services and merchandise will increase sales from Modern Consumers. They soon became ex-bosses.
When Robert mentioned the Quadrant being destroyed at 4:37 and the star trek writers not knowing how big a quadrant is. Really sums up the mess Star Trek is in. In Voyager it was going to take 70+ years at max warp for them to get home from another quadrant, before the Borg transit MacGuffin that is lol
I watched the AFC championship game on CBS. Correct me if I am wrong I didn't see one commercial about section 31. Paramount Plus is a part of CBS right, so why didn't they advertise section 31?
Well, technically Roddenberry added Chekov in an attempt to pander to youngers. Likely Wesley was in part created for this purpose too, though I've never seen that explicitly confirmed. Of course, we know how poorly Wesley was received and both shows still prominently had an adult cast. Shows are *much* better when they don't pander. The Six Million Dollar Man and The Incredible Hulk featured stars in their 30s to 40s and were generally written for adult audience and elementary school kids like me loved them.
They cancelled Lower decks, the only fun show (however feminist woke) that really cared about the Lore. The rest of them, Discovery being the worst offender, are happy to destroy it if It gets in the way.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Orginal Star Trek was based on Scientific fact & Scientific Theories. Star Trek for the Modern Audience is based on Tik Tok.
Best comment 🖖💯
And Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Lucifer, and a few other things that don't belong in Star Trek
It was given a lot of slack because it was trying but was very much a space western. Space 1999 was constantly trashed despite trying harder to be serious science. Captain Kirk definitely helped with that charisma.
@@newtpondskipper The moon drifting out of Earth's orbit and then traveling across the solar system fast enough to meet other civilizations is trying to be serious about science? Star Trek needed to be sold to a studio and have an audience. Roddenberry and his fellow writers had to create a series that balanced adventure and science. Space: 1999 aired in 1975 and and UFO, an earlier series aired in 1970, a year after Star Trek was canceled. These series would not exist without Star Trek. In addition, scientists and engineers through decades after Star Trek the original series and all other series, TNG etc., tell how they were inspired to become a scientists or engineers because of Star Trek. I think it succeeded to inspire far more than other science-fiction TV shows.
For me, great Star Trek is when they develop both sides of a complex, real-world jubject equally and let it solve for itself (or leave it unsolved), without predetermined judgment. This dynamic already started to crumble way back in TNG days. When it got to DS9, it was completely destroyed.
I remember being made fun of back in '09 for not liking the JJ Abrams Star Trek film because I said it wasn't real Trek. Those same people said Star Trek was boring and nobody wanted to watch a bunch of people sit around and talk diplomacy. Well, here we are now with nobody showing up. Bravo Abrams and all the other hacks, you ruined Star Trek.
And its those same people who refuse to consider diplomacy but think they can just vote. Sure the other side will just fall in line because. Insert eye roll.
Yep. Me too. Now all those people are pretending they hated JJ Trek all along.
Talking about stuff is part of ST. Look at DS9, lots of great dialogues like the Rootbeer topic, Peace being like a sale or Pale Moonlight.
Re-watching DS9 in on my waiting list.
It’s interesting to me how the universe of Trek can accommodate TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, and all the related movies, some of which are good and others of which are pretty bad, but despite how much leeway there is for new characters and stories, JJ Abrams and Kurtzman broke the universe. All I’ve got is that Kurtzman Trek doesn’t feel like Star Trek. Orville, which isn’t even Trek, does. What is the secret sauce?
I liked the first one, the characters were slightly flanderised and there was a lot of action, but it was better than Insurrection.
Hated the rest
This started with comics--the idea of replacing the current fan base and 'subverting expectations'. It's been like a cancer that's been upgraded to turbo-cancer.
Comics for sure, as they did this stuff over a decade ago now. Then it started popping up in movies and shows and then video games. But yeah, Marvel did this almost right after Disney acquired them and it hasn’t been the same since
It’s a Jewish ideal
So weird that so many franchises now hate their original fans.
@@gavsmi6452its not the franchise. Its the new owners. They're morons.
@gavsmi6452 It was the idea that the original base wasn't going to grow, it was going to get old, etc. So build a new base, and if if the old fans complain we'll screw 'em (attack the fans).
Set phasers to stunning and brave
You won the internet today
LMAO!!
Increase Settings To Fabulous
Increase settings to Slay Queen!
YAZ QWEEN
Let Star Trek, Dr Who and 007 rest in peace.
RIP Star Wars
And Indiana Jones
In my humble opinion , Star Trek and 007 Might possibly be resurrected - the rest are goners .
fingers crosses AZ will be RIP soon...
@@andrewbird7364 thats not very pleasant. I don't have a problem with him.
Show is made by assholes who would bully you for liking Star Trek. It's the ultimate insult.
AZ is the biggest insult...The guys sucks....
They're bully victims, not the bully.
@@DCunn_82cry bullies
@@DCunn_82 No, the people making current Trek are bullies. Plain and simple.
@@andrewbird7364 And yet, here you are clicking away lol
Anyone who says that gatekeeping is bad is probably trying to ruin your franchise.
Yep. Tell that to Disney, Paramount, and Netflix.
Those gates are there for a reason.
They already ruined all of them, the only one's that survived have been dormant for years
That's why gates in ancient fortifications are so damned important that being in charge of one or a gatekeeper is an honor.
Classic Trek appeals to everyone; they didn't need space hippies to attract the 60's generation. As a young teen in the 90's I was immediately drawn to TOS and TNG.
But they did have space hippies. Even as a little kid during the original run, watching Trek with my dad, I enjoyed that hippy episode. "I reach you, man." Even at that age, I thought they were mocking these hippies. I still think they were. But it still made me think. Even as a little kid, Trek made me think about how different "people" might have a different view of things.
Recently watched both shows for the first time, I’m 26. Definitely appeals to every generation
@@dbf1dware I get it, but they didn't need a continued hippie presence the same way modern Drek needs their they/thems, constant melodramatic tears and hugs, or lens flares.
@matthewgerwing6520 oh, I agree. I just thought the hippy episode was hilarious even as a little kid.
Exactly, they weren't so reliant on their time when making episodes. I was born in 1975, Trek was already over but I could sit back and enjoy the episodes because they were well done stories. Like you said, you didn't need the space hippies all the time because it was a 60's show. You look at modern Trek, that's not the case anymore. The identity politics that they push in that show is 100% reflective of today and that is why the episodes are not enjoyable now, won't be in 10 years.
I had a professional script-agent tell me in 1997 that the entire Industry's #1 task is to keep "regular" people like me OUT of the Industry, regardless of talent. They hire their own kids to do remakes & reboots now.
Yeah nepotism and activism has ran Hollywood to the ground
And now we see the results
If not directly related, they at least attend the same synagogue.
A "professional script agent," huh? Sounds legit.
@@AntillesFilms There's the anti-semitism! Thanks for letting us know
I can still enjoy all the OG series. I’ve ripped them all for convenience and watch them when I’m bored or just get an itch for episodic comfort food.
i need to do the same thing
classic trek up to Enterprise and the movies 1-6 are still watchable....the new garbage belongs in a dumpster....and set on fire 🔥
Same. Well, what I call the pre-"Bad Hideout" era anyways.
2004 is when star trek ended, anything after that is a nightmare
The Cage was rejected as a pilot because it was "too cerebral" by the network.
Section 31 SHOULD HAVE BEEN REJECTED because it was "TOO STUPID" to be passed off as legitimate Star Trek.
Thank DS9. It introduced section 13. Hated the idea of it then, even more now.
The real Star Trek is iconic, it influenced alot of young people to get into real science. The phone in your hand your home computer and your personal PC is proof of it.
FFS, it's soap opera in space.
@@leonidfro8302 That may be, but it has had a lot of influence in technology design and innovation over the years. NASA named a space shuttle "Enterprise" and the "flip phone" cell phone design (which resembles the communication devices) both took their inspiration from Star Trek. Those are only two examples, but there are MANY more.
@@nathanshaw9688 Wireless phone existed before just like “USS Enterprise”. It was “a ok” show back then but that’s about it.
@@leonidfro8302 Perhaps you didn't understand what I was saying. Flip phones get their DESIGN from Star Trek. In TOS, their communication devices flipped open and then they talked. This functionality did not exist in the 1960s, at least as a mass-produced consumer product. And while there were other (sea) ships named Enterprise in the past, NASA has flat-out states that they got the name Enterprise from Star Trek. There were no space ships named Enterprise prior to the show, You can have an opinion on the relative quality of the show, but it doesn't change how influential it was on culture and technology.
@@nathanshaw9688 See, I do understand. As an American, you vastly overestimate influence of sci-fi.
>> Flip phones get their DESIGN from Star Trek
Nonsense. ALL phones get their design from engineering constraints and physiology of human head.
>> they got the name Enterprise from Star Trek
So? USSR's ships were named "Dawn" and "Sunrise". Does it mean anything?
>> how influential it was on culture and technology
Sci-fi have zero influence on technology. Science, economy and necessity drive technological development, not fairy tales.
Been a Star Trek fan since I was 10, (1990), and I can comfortably say Star Trek is the ultimate example of that idea that the classic stuff, (including the original series, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT), are the Mona Lisa and modern Star Trek is that piece of poster board with the banana taped to it, and they're trying to say it's as good as it ever was.
Well said.
Gary will never live that first few seconds of the video down. that will haunt him forever
The funny thing is this is his channel and he editted that lol.
Why? “Ship porn” is a commonly used phrase among people who like ships. There are many lovers of “ship porn” out there.
A quadrant is literally a quarter pie slice of the galaxy, drawn out from the core to the rim.
A slice with two sides 90° apart, each about 60 thousand light years long, with a curve 95 thousand light years long. It would be about 10 thousand light years thick.
An explosion at the geographic center of it would not be detected by the furthest part of it for over 30 thousand years.
But the writers know none of these basic facts and could not do the math, either.
@@Jeff-cn9up In Abrams’s first Trek movie, Klingon was destroyed by a supernova, and then Spock watched Vulcan implode with his naked eyes from another planet. They probably can’t do the math, but the bigger issue is that they don’t care.
@@rjs617 From what I understand, JJ Abrams wanted the characters to see the destruction of the planet Vulcan. Because he thought his audience are dumb and they would not understand what they are seeing without the characters reacting to it. He did the same thing in his first Star Wars movie, where the main characters see from their spaceship, the 3 planets, in 3 different star systems, get blown up by the Star Killer base.
@@pyorre2441 It says something about the quality of these writers that they have this awesome visual effect they want to show the audience, yet they are too incompetent to get an important character into a position they could reasonably observe it with the audience. Or introduce a one-scene wonder to observe (and probably die by) it.
It's roughly the equivalent of having the protagonist look out the windows of the Sears Tower and watch the Golden Gate Bridge collapse into the bay.
There is a group of fans who will watch anything related to the IP, no matter if it is good or not.
Kurtzam Trek, last 6 years of Doctor Who, War o Rohirrim, Halo, Disney Star Wars/Marvel
And they're delisional.
Drones
They just turn their brains off and consume media and good for them but I can’t do that I need the connection and for fictional science to make sense😂
Consumers, they dont think they just consume.
Used to know a Star Wars fan of that nature. I kept trying to see if I could get him to say something bad about new stuff and I never could. But it was also true that if I asked him what he would watch from his entire collection if he had a couple hours on a Saturday afternoon, he NEVER answered the new stuff. He refused to put one and one together, though.
"is our civilization devolving?" :looks at California: YES.
Idiocracy.
But coudn't you send a singal through a wormhole and thererfore without time delay? Wouldn't that make beacons turning on simultaneously possible.
@@EbonyPope The theory of quantum entanglement supports this, actually. Fascinating stuff.
@@EbonyPope possibly? I'm not the guy to ask lol
The band Devo is entirely based on this concept. Devo is short for "deevolution" and all their music has been about this since the 1970s.
I "discovered" Bond towards the end of my high school career, sometime between 1996 - 1998. I was aware that Bond films existed, but I'd never actually watched one. The first Bond film I watched was _Goldeneye,_ on VHS, and I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. Then a buddy in college introduced me to Connery's Bond, and I immediately decided he was the best Bond. My opinion hasn't changed.
Shart Trek: exploring worlds never had to be this messy
To poo and pee where no xer has gone before
Don't you mean, "Shart Drek"? 😂
Watched season 1 - 2 of STD and season 1 of STPicard. I was done. Rewatched TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT and had mostly smiles. Like Star Wars I will stick with the REAL versions.
100%
I have enough original movies/series in Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Firefly, Farscape, X-Files, J*A*G, Magnum P.I., Buffy, Angel,... in DVD/Blu-Ray to last me the rest of my life. Would I love good new shows in these IPs?! Of course. Having said that, I am just fine re-watching what I have and never watching anything "new" again.
Careful Gary may tell you Puke-Hard S3 was "good."
Never been a big Trek person, but I loved DS9 back in its day. Couple years back, decided to show it to the girlfriend as she had never watched it.
She loved it and I fell in love with all over again. Rather than a few episodes we ended up watching the whole series
Roddenberry categorically stated that he did not ever want there to be a show about Starfleet Academy.
Tbf, no one wants a “Starfleet 90210” show. But I can also say that even though Roddenberry created this franchise that I love he was not a very good writer or that he should held up as some god-like person that should be held up on a pedestal. Roddenberry wrote TMP, it was trash. The movies or tv shows (aside from TOS which was great, mostly) didn’t get awesome till he was pushed out and others took over. Don’t get me wrong EVERYTHING jar jar Abrams and klutzman did to this franchise (and Star Wars for that matter) has been complete garbage, they are both completely talentless hacks. Picard S3 was enjoyable because for the most part it FELT and looked like Trek, but it did have flaws and had to spend time cleaning up previous seasons. Don’t even get me started on the completely stupid “Enterprise-G” fiasco.
@@tarn1135 My biggest grips with _Picard's_ third season is the cliffhangers they added in to try to convince you it was episodic. They wasted the last five minutes of an episode to introduce a new complication that changed everything... and then wasted the first five minutes of the next episode to solve the problem. And 'wasted' was chosen with malice, because they betray just how last-second these cliffhangers are since a few of them break the show's (kind of stupid) plot. Or would if they continued to be in continuity after they were 'resolved.'
I’m a Trekkie. Been one since the reruns of the original Star Trek in the early Sixties when I was 13. My favorite is ST:TNG. The cast was perfect. The scripts were brilliant. The production was so good that I sometimes forgot I was watching TV. It was that engrossing. The franchise hasn’t always struck gold, most most did up until the WOKE virus struck. ALL the new Trek shows really suck. Badly. My guess: Studios got rid of their White employees & hired only queer people, specifically Trans or flamboyant gays. I assume they thought “anybody can do it”. Wrong. I’m still a huge fan (I once had a small room where I put all my Star Trek memorabilia. I had 4 huge posters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy & Bones. They will always be “my guys”.
they hired masons with a satanic social agenda to push...dont blame us gays for this crap
McCoy _and_ Bones. A true fan!
Sorry. I'm betting that last one was likely supposed to be Scotty and the wrong name came out.
Mind, _TNG_ wasn't perfect. But most of my substantive, long term problems have to do with the fact that it was a TV show, not a space forces simulator. For a prestige posting, there was remarkably little turnover in the senior staff. Riker is probably the worst here, since he's ostensibly on the command track, yet he keeps refusing commands of his own, and then Starfleet allows him to camp in the valuable role of _Enterprise_ XO.
But, as I said, TV show. They're not going to break up a well-liked cast that works well together just because their characters ought to be subject to 'up or out.'
Star Trek Continues series is the most faithful to the Star Trek source material.
Change my mind.
it's flawless
💯
New Voyages was pretty good too.
It should be cannon.
The funniest part is that they pretty much lost both audiences, the modern audience are not into Star Trek, or Star Wars or Doctor Who. The only people that are still watching are the older audiences who still believe those series can come back to being good again.
That and people who make fun of it on YT
I think it was precisely the goal. Money wasn’t it, this is way more than just about money, if it was they would fixed it fast a long time ago. But nobody wants to talk about this “it would be too weird”
@@Ihavehadmanynames7779 Yep, they are not ready for that conversartion yet.
They had a formula that has always yielded moderate success at worst, and at best some of the greatest TV and films ever. They just had to follow it but their depravity won't allow it.
This is not depravity it’s very carefully calculated and being funded by none other than ⚫️🪨, when are you going to finally accept this? You think this is all an accident? It’s why we are right now if that’s the case.
Look, Trek is owned by people who don't understand the property so they hire mostly people that don't understand the property. This isn't rocket science.
Its a very common situation apparently
Star trek, star wars, LOTR, Dr who, etc
@ Yeah I think historically it's overwhelmingly the norm. We were very fortunate that Roddenberry came back for TNG and that he chose his successor well, Berman. Trek under Berman started to get stale but that was mainly due to the studio not giving it any time off.
They should make a crossover with Snow White. I am sure Zegler can be a captain.😂😂
You shouldn't give them idea. 😉
Robert Meyer Burnett is so eloquent in how he breaks this down. It makes me happy so many others feel the pain I've felt over the death of the franchise I spent my life loving.
Misery loves company
I been in the industry for a bit, How they get heired? Easy:
Step 1 - Lie on your resume. Add 2 or 3 more years on experience and so on.
Step 2 - While in the industry, have a "friend" to hook you up. Get that nepotism goodness going.
Step 3 - Get lucky. Being in right place, saying the right joke might do it.
Step 4 - Play the game. Know how to play the social status game, and by manipulating people's perception and with rhetoric skills and acted confidence you can go pretty far.
And be a certain faith.
Lately, you didn't even have to do that. You just had to have the right check marks on your victim card. As Gary has said most writers/directors etc. are cast not hired.
A 'quadrant' in Star Trek is literally one quarter (quad) of the milky way galaxy, thats why theres only four of them... Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta.
Alpha quadrant is home to Earth, the Federation, Vulcan and others...
Beta is partially Romulans and Klingons iirc.
Delta is where voyager was lost and spent years traversing. Much of it is borg controlled.
Gamma is the Dominion's turf and explored in DS9 through the wormhole.
How tf do you destroy a quarter of a galaxy?!
Actually, many sources place Earth in between Alpha & Beta Quadrant.
@@vegeta50024 Yeah, usually the Alpha and Beta quadrants are defined on whether you're immediately spinward or anti-spinward of Sol.
I just watched Classic Dr. Who from 1970. A 7-part one called 'Inferno' - it was staggeringly good.
Riight. Nothing from 1970 is "staggeringly good".
@@leonidfro8302 "brigitte bardot 1970 in bathtub"
@@leonidfro8302 As someone who lived through 1970, I reject your baseless comment.
@@pappabunny As someone who didn't, I find your opinion irrelevant. My comment based on my own observation of stuff from 70s.
@@leonidfro8302 And you've watched _all_ of 1970s media? You're making the argument that _Palworld_ is bad because you've played _Concord, Dustborn,_ and _Veilguard._
The biggest problem with Star Trek productions now Is that they’ve gotten away from the original formula. To explore strange new worlds to seek out new life and new civilizations, etc. If Star Trek isn’t doing that, it’s not Star Trek. The space adventure happens when evil interrupts this formula. There’s conflict, sacrifice and victory. Then we get back to work, exploring, strange, new worlds, etc..
Always great to have Robert on.
Im thinking any successful new Trek should start directly after enterprise, or after nemesis. Continuity being strictly observed, and tell a new story. Not that hard.
I think there was mileage in another few seasons of ENT to properly tell the story of the founding of the Federation, but now I think it would be a mistake to go back. An ENT movie _might_ work, but I'm not sure even that would work now. I'd rather roll forward another 50 or 100 years from Voyager and see what Starfleet is up to. No doubt they'd be charting more and more of the Gamma and Delta Quadrants, so there could be lots of new species to encounter. No doubt the Borg are still out there, as would be the Dominion, but maybe there's another threat looming that challenges the dominance of all these powers. There are always great stories to tell in the ST universe. I just think we need a bit of distance again, after "real" Trek has been off the air for 20 years.
I've been thinking that for 16 years
@@XKenny77Sure. They may as well ruin those time periods too.
Robert's breakdown was a masterclass on what's gone wrong in Hollywood and IPs. He makes such strong arguments - "shouldn't our entertainment be getting exponentially better?" backed up by continuing conversation with you all that make catching your episode drops so worth it. Thank you.
That opening response. I can't see who it was but his response to Gary was so damn good. So eloquently stated so easy to follow well done sir.
Out of all the channels on TV I can watch, i watch the digital subchannel Heroes and Icons, which shows all the Star Trek series from TOS to Enterprise every evening. Never watched the newer stuff, and never will.
Except on Saturday nights but yeah 👍🏾.
"The Harry Potter of Star Trek". That's funny. When the first pitch of "Starlet Academy" came around in the early 2000s, it was described as "Star Trek 90210".
For me Star Trek ended after Deep Space 9. I honestly doubt they'll ever make another series worth watching.
100% agree.
8:06 the whole "why do you care" argument that idiots use really grinds my gears.
The best response to "why do you care?" is "why do you?".
@@James_Bee ironically, the people that I've heard use the "why do you care" argument often get very offended by all sorts of things. They can't see the irony.
All the screen shots you're showing the background look way more like Star Wars than Star Trek.
I would say looks more like FarScape or maybe Lexx (not to criticize either of those shows, both are good for different reasons but neither is Trek)
I would say looks more like FarScape or maybe Lexx (not to criticize either of those shows, both are good for different reasons but neither is Trek)
Star Trek died. And I wish they would let the corps rot.
Almost all the writers who get hired for these franchise killing reboots are utter hacks and frauds. They just copy and paste superficial elements of the original work, add some DEI propaganda and voila, flop completed. Takes zero skill.
Actual good creatives would mostly rather be doing something original.
You forgot that they simply take entire scenes from other recent works and pass it off as their own.
OMG, Robert Meyer Burnett throws out Torchwood-Chikdren of Earth...what a f'n story. Thank you!!!
To me, Star Trek ended with Enterprise, the last great show.
Ended too soon. Needed at least one more season.
The 2016 Me2 put the pendulum swing into hyperdrive. It overcorrected and cannot be salvaged. Tragic.
There's a category of movie and TV watcher which I call "Shit Film Liker". They get turned on by the hype, the SFX or the fact that something is the next instalment of a franchise they've been watching for years and they have to watch it all. They care less about story, characters or whether anything is making sense as long as every few minutes there's some kind of "wow" moment for them, and they're easily satisfied by a low bar of wow. They're the people that got excited for the teaser trailer for Kraven The Hunter.
You've seen them on social media: "I've just seen the trailer and this looks awesome, OK the first 3 episodes are a bit slow as they're setting up the new characters and the situation but it's different and I don't mind the swearing and gore and stick with it because episode 4 is AWESOME and a game-changer for the series."
My aunt is/was a big trek fan as she used to watch the 1960's star trek before it was cancelled (she loves Shatner) and then the motion picture came in 79' (i was 9 years old), went to see the movie, became a fan a never looked back, but i recall watching the very first episode of TNG (after watching the entire TOS over and over beforehand) and thought, "well, this sucks", but i stuck with it and was rewarded for my patience with much better seasons of TNG then DS9 and then Voyager, and that's where it all ended for me at Voyager. RIP Star Trek.
That opener was (checks notes) 'peak fire FR FR'.
"But Admiral Gary, that's where my shuttles launch from!"
Star Trek could tell stories with a moral base without beating you over the head with it. People always say Star Trek has always been political, it's always been woke. Star Trek made you think, it didn't force a single view on you and bludgeon you with it. Same with the old 60s Twilight Zone. The Key and Peele version of the Zone had a single view it wanted to force on you.
Progressive but not woke.
And progressive from sixty years ago is considered far right now. The idea of a Federation that doesn't allow everyone in? Officers that have authority over their subordinates? Leftists today cannot comprehend how that works.
Aside from that I've always thought the real draw for most wasn't actually the watered down liberalism, it's that it was essentially a tight character based military drama that was family friendly.
It is because most of the time they presented both sides of the issue/argument and let you decide for yourself.
@@aleksander8497 True. Big difference. This is why OG Trek still works today unlike current Trek.
Too many female writers with the science version of girlmath brain, in the writing staff They need a nerd tech splainer and a nerd, lore dictator in the writing staff..
That's just incompetence and nepotism, not a writer's biological sex. Take the Penguin - the showrunner, half of the writers and some of the directors are female, and no one noticed.
"Canon" is a bad word now, I have seen people claim that adhering to canon is gatekeeping.
Of course, canon is racist.
You say that as if that's an argument. If you can't adhere to the setting's rules, you have no business pretending it is part of the IP.
I started watching Star Trek Voyager when I was four years old. I was enthralled. I’ve loved Star Trek my whole life. It’s something I hold so close to my heart that I don’t really talk about it to other people. I can’t stand the new shows. They infuriate me in ways I can’t even express.
watching the Enterprise sail into orbit in 1966 was one of the most exciting thing things of a lifetime.
Gary watches videos like Two Ensigns, One replicator.
Data does Deep Space Nine
all I could hear Robert saying at :51 was "Look ST debuted in 1966...and quite evidently so.."😂
it just isn't wholesome anymore. it isn't something you watch as a kid, to learn about tolerating or learning to understand people different than you. it isn't about working together to solve a problem, or even working on a strategy to beat an enemy. it's just dumb action bullshit and social politics. Star Trek has ALWAYS been diverse, and representative of a progressive future, until they came along.
pandering to an audience that doesn't exist, to the detriment of the pre-existing audience .... hmm, why does that sound so familiar?
they're not just hiring the wrong people for these projects, they're hiring the wrong people to hire people, and they're being managed and owned (shareholders) by the wrong people.
I strongly suspect Secret Hideout has AI write their season arcs. It would explain all the borrowing from previously made SF productions.
Alan Dean Foster wrote the novelizations of the original "Star Trek Logs"... Wonderful author, He must be absolutely ROLLIN' at the current state of SF... And I very much hope he has been treated well by the studios and creditors for his work over the decades! Cheers!
"Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is, and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely; and pined his loss." sums it up for how Star trek has fallen from grace...
We have the absolute worst management private and public now of at least the last 80 years. Seriously, how rare is it to see someone in a leadership position that is actually capable of their role and willing to do the job versus pass the buck and kick the can down the road in order to pad out their pockets now? The future and the fallout of poor leadership decisions is someone else's problem. It's just become more and more apparent over the past 40 years. It's depressing, because we aren't degrading due to some real threat so much as bureaucratic indifference.
My love for Star Wars was different than my love for Star Trek. Star Wars was gritty and realistic feeling, there was dirt and grease on the vehicles. It felt lived in and not as antiseptic as Trek. Trek was sci-fi and was about what we could be. It was a different kind of inspiration and overall felt more hopeful. Now both series are about miserable, horrible people that seem to only inspire self absorbed narcissistic behavior. Sadly neither of these are even close to how horrible Dr Who has become.
Do you know why there is so much comedy in Marvel, Star Wars and Trek? Women would watch us enjoying these franchises and when they gave it a chance, they thought it was silly. They thought we enjoyed it Because it was "silly." So when these diversity hires enter the industry and are put in charge of creating She-Hulk or The Last Jedi or Lower Decks, etc, they think they can succeed by making them these silly comedies because that's how they interpreted them. Star Wars was just a bunch of laser swords and pew pew. Star Trek was people wearing pajamas and pretending to be smart in a room. Marvel is grown men wearing their underpants on the outside. They were unable to see past the surface level presentation. Where I saw a giant monster destroying Tokyo, my Mom and sisters saw a man in a rubber suit.
Like I said Gary. I watched the Wrath of Khan again to refresh my memory of how good Trek used to be. That movie still rocks all these years later. All the franchises we loved as kids are dead now sadly.
Our society is devolving.
They saw the fire beacons from LotR and decided they would steal that for space beacons.
9:37 - Point of order, Robert. Boba Fett was introduced in the _Star Wars Holiday Special,_ in 1978. The first Boba Fett action figure was available via mail order in 1979. Yes, his first appearance was in _The Empire Strikes Back_ so that's when many people were introduced to him, but that's not when he was actually introduced.
Bizarre, but there are for profit business who have no will to make money. Once I had a fender bender in a 10 year old car at the worst possible time (just signed up for an overseas job...everything but luggage and limited storage had to go NOW). Fender rubbed the tire so it was immobile, but all the parts were in excellent shape. Called some junk yards, "Look, I'll give it to you. You just come over and tow it.I can't leave it in the apartment parking lot". The first two said, "Well...if you drive it over here we'd consider taking it." Third gave an immediate, "where do you live? We'll be there in an hour." They left with a free car (with registration) they could part out if they didn't want to pull the fender and replace the tire. Some businesses have no will to make money.
Meanwhile, William Shatner shared a fake naz7 salute of Himself with Elon Musk today on X, and Elon laughed out loud. 🤣🤣🤣
Oh please the first Bad Robot Star Trek movie wasn't Star Trek. It was Star Wars in badly made Star Trek cosplay , so JJ could show that he could make that. Star Wars the Audition Tape.
Part of the problem is we had less choice back in the STNG days. The market is now saturated with poor "content"!
Pretty much everything is wrong with Star Trek post enterprise with chief issue being the writing….however also the question must be asked: who is in charge of the production design? Production design is extremely important as well and the overall aesthetic for Star Trek for the past 16 years has been abominable.
One thing you DO have to give the Jurassic Park franchise is they said, "despite the discovery that some dinosaurs were feathered, we have established our universe and we're staying with that".
Gary loves the Enterprise "D" 😂😂
And to think we were all pissed at Rick Berman for how Trek was being handled when both Nemesis and the Enterprise series finale came out. At this point I would prefer Berman Trek over JJ/Kurtzman Trek any day of the week. What's really sad is the fan productions pre-JJ were pretty damn good for the most part like New Voyages and especially Star Trek Continues.
Glad to hear nobody likes the shitty Section 31 movie.
Shooting stars in space was another Discovery piece of scientific excellence
Its executives "targeting" what kills one franchise after another. Targeting is thing, but it has to go from creative side, not before it.
Its not even matter of writting. Writters are writting show they were told to write.
"At this point, who is still watching Star Trek?"
Me.
Just the old, DECENT stuff, that is.
I'll never forget Abrams going on Jon Stewart to plug the new star trek in 09 and said he never liked star trek and Stewart was genuinely confused
To boldly go where no man has gone before - just like a public restroom stall.
They collectivised culture around DEI and woke dogma. Collectivastion only ever spreads the failures and smothers success.
These people must be actually trying to destroy Star Trek. That must be their goal, right? It can't just be ignorance because it seems like every detail has been flipped. This stuff is the opposite of Star Trek.
The title killed me😂😂
I know someone whose first Star Trek show was Voyager who somehow thought that Section 31 was actually a decent movie, but it should have been a series. 🤷♂
"Back to the future" makes perfect sense as Biff Tannen won the white house using his almanach ... and "High castle" hum wait
I grew up watching Gene Roddenberry's "Andromeda" and later on 2003's Battlestar Galactica.
I've rewatched Andromeda about 8 years ago and have recently finished rewatching BSG for the 4th time.
The question is very on-point - how is it that shows made over 20 years ago, that ALSO had political themes mirroring current events of their respective times, are leaps and bounds better in every conceivable metric than the shows made today?
I understand the greed of maximizing profits at the expense of quality, I understand politics, and yet both these things require a repeat audience.
Where's the repeat audience?
Some of the people who wrote these shows are the same people who went on strike not that long ago demanding more money.
I thought he said “💩 corn*”
Tbf, each to their own…but I’ll never get those people!
One big issue is that the “people” making modern “entertainment” can’t tell reality from fiction. This they assume the audience can’t either.
There is a great series of books by Greg Cox about the eugenics wars happening in the 1990s without the wider public being aware of what was happening.
They read like a James Bond story.
I was born in 86 and started to watch TNG in 91 till the end of the series later on. I watched DS9 the first two seasons. Then when 95 hit i watched Voyager religiously till the series final. I tried to watch Enterprise but during that time a series called Battlestar Galactica came out with a reboot that took my attention. I eventually came back to Enterprise a few years ago and enjoyed it.
I grew up loving Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who and many IPs from the 90s and 80s, looking at what they have become is like losing a part of you, something you love and enjoy just to be used and abused by posers who have no right to have jobs making products they dont care about
My retail bosses assured me that giving Angry Karens free services and merchandise will increase sales from Modern Consumers. They soon became ex-bosses.
"But I did eat breakfast this morning."
When Robert mentioned the Quadrant being destroyed at 4:37 and the star trek writers not knowing how big a quadrant is. Really sums up the mess Star Trek is in. In Voyager it was going to take 70+ years at max warp for them to get home from another quadrant, before the Borg transit MacGuffin that is lol
Great point - I was a kid in the 80s and didn’t need TOS repackaged for me in order to enjoy it.
I watched the AFC championship game on CBS. Correct me if I am wrong I didn't see one commercial about section 31. Paramount Plus is a part of CBS right, so why didn't they advertise section 31?
I knew the "Ship porn" wasn't going to go well as soon as he said it. It was like "wut?"
Well, technically Roddenberry added Chekov in an attempt to pander to youngers. Likely Wesley was in part created for this purpose too, though I've never seen that explicitly confirmed.
Of course, we know how poorly Wesley was received and both shows still prominently had an adult cast. Shows are *much* better when they don't pander. The Six Million Dollar Man and The Incredible Hulk featured stars in their 30s to 40s and were generally written for adult audience and elementary school kids like me loved them.
Shut up Wesley. Get off my bridge Wesley. I hated Wesley.
They cancelled Lower decks, the only fun show (however feminist woke) that really cared about the Lore. The rest of them, Discovery being the worst offender, are happy to destroy it if It gets in the way.