Hacker News Reader

Comment by TeMPOraL | Hacker News Reader

Makes me think about Gene Roddenberry, too. The more I learn about history of Star Trek, the more it seems that Roddenberry was a bit over-the-top with his ideas. If he got his way with everything, the show would be quite cheesy (the way Andromeda is). Star Trek's golden era (TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT) is the result of other producers pushing back on Roddenberry's influence, and after his death, increasingly subverting some of his ideas.

(Of course over time things strayed too far from the original vision, and the result is the post-ENT crapfest that carries the official "Star Trek" name, but is otherwise a generic action movie franchise. A strange situation, in which the only work still sticking to the deep and hopeful vision of the future is the little animated show that everyone thought will be a joke.)

View on HN

Lower Decks is good, it is done by people that really liked the old ST series. Sometimes, I am not sure if it is mocking some of the ST tropes, like the two-hand punch, space anomalies and so on. Still light years better then Discovery (which is totally not cannon in my mind).

I love Lower Decks. It's definitely mocking and lampshading plenty of Star Trek tropes, but it does that in a playful and positive way. It laughs, but doesn't trivialize - and unlike the other new shows (Discovery, Picard), it doesn't paint the future as grimdark and everyone as untrustworthy and bloodthirsty.

Picard wasn't too bad actually, I think. Maybe a tad to gritty / realistic when compared to TNG. It did offer a plausible universe development so, incl. Picard sacrificing his career for principle.

Picard was aimed at people who were teenagers or twentysomethings at the time of TNG, and 30 years later are now disillusioned adults. It had to be "all grown up and shit". I found it pretty good, if occasionally predictable.

So I am the target audiance then. Especially since I consideres TNG to be too optimistic already as a teenager.

And you didn't hate it, so - job done :)

Yeah, funny isn't it? Not that I'll complain, so. Give me more content like that!

I guess I'm not the target audience then - I was a kid when TNG was created, and on the lower end of teenage years when it aired in my country. I bought the optimism wholesale - hook, line and sinker. It had significant influence on my development as a person. As much as I'm disillusioned about the real world, TNG is in my heart a reminder that we could do better. And I feel the first step to do better is for the idea to be out there.

So here's me hoping that in 5-10 years time, I'll fall into their "target audience" window and they'll make an inspiring, positive show for people like me.

I am also a Star Wars fan, and Battletech. Star Wars wise, I loved TIE Fighter. So I guess I always had a leaning towards darker, less otimistic SiFi. Still watch TNG, DS9 and ENT so. Even VOY from time to time. Not sure I'll do that with PIC once I've seen the episodes once. Not sure if that is due to the episodic story telling of the former or nostalgia.

I feel DS9 pulled off realism better - Picard seems to me to fly past realism and straight into dystopian stereotypes. And there was too much meaningless killing.

I'm also pissed about the Borg subplot - in the trailer and initial episodes, they set up the scene for some amazing drama and deep storytelling, and then they just literally crashed it into a planet and discarded like space trash. It was a huge letdown to me.

I honestly believed that the AI-gods were the creators / origin if the Borg. DS9 is quite a high bar to be measured against, so. Just shy of Babylon 5 for that period in my mind.

Right. B5 is a masterpiece.

> Picard seems to me to fly past realism and straight into dystopian stereotypes

The “dystopian stereotypes” in Picard seem to me to be classic Trek with a very slight change of focus (largely in dwelling in aspects of the setting and social contexts which were indicated in other parts of the franchise but only briefly or tangentially interacted with.)

Kind of like what Lower Decks does, but in a different direction (and played for drama rather than laughs.)

Orville is also in that vein, IMO.

It tries to be a comedy, a parody, but you can also tell it's a love-letter to old-school Star Trek.

And better Star Trek then Discovery.

I've pulled Ceti eels from my ear that had parasites who wrote better Star Trek than Discovery.

My pet theory is that they went over the top with comedy aspects in S1 only to establish The Orville as a parody, to avoid being accused of IP misuse/plagiarism. S2 toned down the jokes a lot, and it feels more like a lighter TNG, which I believe was the goal all along.

Yeah, I got the same impression -- they really wanted to make Star Trek, and were like, "Exactly how much parody do we need to include to make a lawsuit unprofitable?".

Basically it seems like having a strong inventor with a good original idea, then mixing it with other peoples influences even AGAISNT that original inventor’s intent, is a good way to get cool stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com