When Gene Roddenberry was in charge, things were better. I guess that’s almost stupid to say b/c of how trivially obvious it is but… there it is. He was the original mind behind it all, and without him, the rest is simply cashing in ca-CHING on what he built. I could barely finish watching Enterprise, and (don’t hate me, at least not too much) haven’t been able to force myself to watch anything newer since. Even at the price of “free”, it isn’t the same return on investment compared to e.g. re-watching old episodes of Babylon 5 or something.
But please, don’t mind me and definitely I hope that nobody deprives themselves of at least checking that stuff out to see if it might be for them.
Oh okay. But peak Trek literally was when Roddenberry was ousted, during the Berman era. As much as Roddenberry is worshipped, his contribution to Star Trek is rather small by now and Star Trek has outgrown his legacy. TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT and the TOS movies all came after Roddenberry.
True, like DS9 was arguably the best of all, but then Enterprise was… not, so while I agree about Berman it’s somehow like the closer to Roddenberry the better while the further away the worse.
TNG, DS9, and VOY really grappled with deeper ethical situations and made you think, much like TOS, so were true to the universe setup and purpose for which Star Trek was originally designed. Enterprise I guess tried to do that for like a hot minute but then just became so boring I could barely stand it even just in the background while I did other things.:-(
For everything after that it’s not really fair for me to speak of what I lack direct knowledge of, except to say why I didn’t bother investigating on my own - bc they too looked the same as in trying to cash in on the franchise, without putting in the effort to fully deserve a place alongside them (or so reviews seemed to suggest). i.e. they weren’t told for the purpose of delighting and amazing the audience - as TOS, TNG, etc. made you feel - but rather simply to exist as yet one more thing to click on. i.e. they were sitting on this cash cow and wanted to find a way to collect from nostalgia of the past rather than make something that truly deserved to exist for its own sake.
It’s wonderful to be creative and make up your own universe that tells whatever story you wanted told - e.g. Farscape, Doctor Who, even Andromeda as controversial as its star may be - and Star Trek was one of if not the best universe… originally, and with some fantastic sequels too, but eventually it’s like what happened when Disney bought out Star Wars, it became all about cranking out that assembly line whimsey.
When Gene Roddenberry was in charge, things were better. I guess that’s almost stupid to say b/c of how trivially obvious it is but… there it is. He was the original mind behind it all, and without him, the rest is simply cashing in ca-CHING on what he built. I could barely finish watching Enterprise, and (don’t hate me, at least not too much) haven’t been able to force myself to watch anything newer since. Even at the price of “free”, it isn’t the same return on investment compared to e.g. re-watching old episodes of Babylon 5 or something.
But please, don’t mind me and definitely I hope that nobody deprives themselves of at least checking that stuff out to see if it might be for them.
Oh okay. But peak Trek literally was when Roddenberry was ousted, during the Berman era. As much as Roddenberry is worshipped, his contribution to Star Trek is rather small by now and Star Trek has outgrown his legacy. TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT and the TOS movies all came after Roddenberry.
True, like DS9 was arguably the best of all, but then Enterprise was… not, so while I agree about Berman it’s somehow like the closer to Roddenberry the better while the further away the worse.
TNG, DS9, and VOY really grappled with deeper ethical situations and made you think, much like TOS, so were true to the universe setup and purpose for which Star Trek was originally designed. Enterprise I guess tried to do that for like a hot minute but then just became so boring I could barely stand it even just in the background while I did other things.:-(
For everything after that it’s not really fair for me to speak of what I lack direct knowledge of, except to say why I didn’t bother investigating on my own - bc they too looked the same as in trying to cash in on the franchise, without putting in the effort to fully deserve a place alongside them (or so reviews seemed to suggest). i.e. they weren’t told for the purpose of delighting and amazing the audience - as TOS, TNG, etc. made you feel - but rather simply to exist as yet one more thing to click on. i.e. they were sitting on this cash cow and wanted to find a way to collect from nostalgia of the past rather than make something that truly deserved to exist for its own sake.
It’s wonderful to be creative and make up your own universe that tells whatever story you wanted told - e.g. Farscape, Doctor Who, even Andromeda as controversial as its star may be - and Star Trek was one of if not the best universe… originally, and with some fantastic sequels too, but eventually it’s like what happened when Disney bought out Star Wars, it became all about cranking out that assembly line whimsey.
I really don’t like the new shows either. They’re too flashy, it’s all about the spectacle.
Try the Orville though. It’s what TNG was but modern and with a bit more humour. I think it’s amazing.