Star Trek: Theurgy

Ok... CBS has my attention, although I have to ask why these klingons look like the new movie klingons and not more traditional to the television series'? 

Ok, so I know it's a lot of rumor, but they were spot on with their reporting of Ghostbusters and it looks like they're spot on again. It does explain a lot about the look and feel of Discovery not matching anything and why we have all these new designs. Not sure, but this could be the reason why Discovery looks so... bad...

Also I wanted this quote from Seth MacFarlane to say why Orville will be a triumph and Discovery will let us down.

Quote

“There is a certain aspirational hopeful optimistic sci-fi that hasn’t really been done in 15-20 years. Star Trek did it for a long time, but then they evolved into something different, so it left open that space for that thing we all used to love so much. That’s what I’m trying to recapture, while at the same time a brand new spin on it with some ingredients that no one has ever seen before.”

Now it seems to me that Star Trek should be the beacon on the hill, a glorious future we could have. I think DS9 showed that we could be human and fail, but in the end it would be that which makes us human that would allow us to triumph. I feel like STD is caught up in this modern method of storytelling in which the world is dark and more brutal. To be honest it feels like the late 60s mind set of dark jaded schlock. But Star Trek when it came out then showed us a future where mankind works together, where compassion is balanced with logic.

Now STD feels like an Anti-Star Trek. It feels like the same bitter schlock Star Trek railed against, at least TOS, and in some regards I feel like even the darkest DS9 got was to show what must be done to protect that beacon, that hope.

Anyway I can't help but compare STD with Orville as both seem to be new Star Trek shows which start this fall. One I am honestly getting excited for, the other I am not.

Quote from: Someone Else

Does this smack of "No True Scotsman"?  Absolutely.  Do I give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut?  Not in the least.

Personally I read this as more of a "Ship of Theseus" kind of thing. Or rather how many parts can be changed without the whole being something different. I think the first time Klingon we're changed it was tolerated because Kirk called them Klingon and if anyone could identify a Klingon it was him.

TNG risked all by changing almost everything, yet right there was a Klingon with the forehead we had come to accept. They spoke in terms and words we had heard before and even had a very early cameo to let us know it was still the same universe.

DS9 launched and had Picard in the Pilot to usher us in. A side character from TNG was promoted to series regular on DS9 to ease us in.

DS9 introduced the Maquis in the pilot of Voyager we got Quark there to say yes, same world.

Enterprise again risked a lot. Cameos couldn't work, but they could use familiar design choices. Terms we knew were once more on full display and we had our old friends the Vulcans there, even if they weren't written quite right  add to that the colors on the jumpsuits so it looked kind of like a step between what we see today and Starfleet uniforms and it works.

And now comes Discovery. Everything is again changed. No cameos to carry us through. All the designs look different. The only Vulcan we see is Sarek, but as he is recast we must also swallow the tough pill of seeing a new Sarek again. New uniforms that don't seem really linked to any uniforms we've seen before in terms of design or color. And a new adopted sister for a character we already know will never speak of this character.

Have they changed so much that now the "Ship of Theseus" is no longer the same ship? Maybe. I think that's what people fear.

And the Orville has the bonus that it looks kind of like the old ship we all knew and liked. Like the parts striped from the ship we knew were collected and built into another ship.

As if there is no true Star Trek show as there can be no true "Ship of Theseus" once you have taken it apart to this extent.

I tend to View the ship of Thesesus very simply. We each have own own definition of the thing, Star Trek and for the most part we agree as to what it is, aside from some squabbles about Enterprise, NuTrek, and a handful of episodes through the years.

However I think every time Star trek changes it loses some of the identity it had. The more it changes the more of that identity is lost, or the more of the the percieved identity is lost. But new pieces are added each time. Thus things change and things remain.

Everyone has a line. A lin at which time it has been changed so much where the ship no longer looks right and can no longer be considered the right thing, But the line is very different for different for a number of people. I suspect (NAME REMOVED) would say after DS9 that line was crossed more and more. For me that line started to be crossed with the reboot. But for some the line has not been crossed and may never be crossed. Star Trek is Star Trek because it says so on the label. To them Orville can only be a pale imitation, while as to me I see more of the real thing in Orville than in what they would see as the real thing. And this is simply because I drew the line somewhere else.

I also think a lot of us who are naysayers of Discovery and think it will "kill the franchise" almost want it to. We want CBS and Paramount to stop making new versions that simply do not seem to understand the universe we love and instead we want the fans who do understand it to make Star Trek. I mean I don't think CBS\Paramount would have given a crap about any fan film if they didn't have a movie and a TV show in the works. So maybe Star Trek needs to die in one sense so it can live in another.

Or maybe stuff like The Orville and Renegades is the directions to go, the idea of Star Trek in all but name.

In my mind the future of Star Trek is not with CBS\Paramount it is with the fans and it will be by their hands that it either lives or dies.