test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Ummm....what the? I guess not saying Lower Decks was inspired by Star Trek 6 is not good marketing
johnmasters
Member Posts: 82 Arc User
This is what drives folks nuts. When you make generalizations and don't actually credit where something comes from. (Flaming, trolling, gatekeeping comments moderated out. - BMR) As a mater of fact it showed up in TOS on 2 occasions(not necessarily on Vulcans), Star Trek 6, and even on Enterprise. (Flaming, trolling, gatekeeping comments moderated out. - BMR)
Post edited by baddmoonrizin on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
In fact, just about everything in Lower Decks comes from, or is inspired by, previous shows - and that is most likely why we love it so much, saluting previous Treks whilst thumbing its nose at them with the other hand!
Yes, implying others should "stop liking what I don't like" by using an insulting version of a show name is not the most welcoming way to open a discussion with its fans.
I don't watch the show, but people keep saying it's better than the other recent trek shows. Discovery was often not my cup of tea so I can believe that.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch
Just because LD is new it's okay to just totally ignore what came before it? This is one of the things that angers vets
Lets just pave over the old...want to be diplomatic to the new guys but who cares at all about the people who have been around for decades
No one is saying to ignore the old stuff at all. However to insult the new and flame the Devs over it is not a good way to start a discussion.
That does not automatically mean, however, that Ensign T'Lyn was not the inspiration for its inclusion in the game.
What I like the TOS inclusion in Lower Decks I've seen is that they still feel organic and not "here's where we praise the older series", of course Kirk's Enterprise would Legendary in the future that makes perfect sense from a in-universe point of view.
DS9 had fun with that when the temporal agents were slagging Kirk for all of his Temporal Prime Directive violations
Sure but that was again another case of things being built organically into the narrative, I can't remember any Trek examples of call out to an older series that seemed out of place in the narrative, but there's been ones in other series I've watched that seemed like they stopped the narrative to wink at the audience.
I think in a way the finale of Enterprise kinda feels out of left field. Then again not many people liked that episode. It was clever in tying into an episode of TNG, but at the same time... probably could have been done better. The problem was that the series was canceled and they had to come up with SOMETHING to end the series on. They were gearing up for the Earth-Romulan War with the Romulan Drone Ship stuff.
And then we got a holodeck episode with Riker and Troi as a finale.
At least they gave the finale itself some context because it was set during the events surrounding the USS Pegasus in TNG. But in relation to the rest of season 4 of Enterprise, it was out of left field. Maybe it could have been better recieved if it was a stand alone episode rather than the series finale.
Forgot about that but yeah it kind of is a good example of bad way of doing a shout out to previous series, instead of celebrating Enterprise thru the eyes of the TNG cast we got an episode where the ENT cast are guest stars with Riker and Troi being the main characters, a very poor way of doing a final episode of a series.
There was such a groundswell of support for the show from fans that the production team thought the mail campaign had a chance to change Moonves's mind, so they came up with a script that used two breaker techniques at once to satisfy Moonves, (the "kill a character vital for the show chemistry" and the "happily ever after"), but they did it in a believably reversable way since a holodeck re-creation would use the "official record" version of events instead of what actually happened in the case of a coverup or deep cover operation.
That is why they had the actors act slightly out of character and put other very subtle clues in the episode to hint to the fans that something wasn't quite what it appeared to be, and they could build on when the series resumed. Unfortunately, they seriously underestimated how much Moonves hated Star Trek and he refused to rescind the cancellation no matter what (in fact he cooked the books statistics-wise to justify killing it in the first place).
Yeah that sounds like after the fact justifications, though it was known that Moonves hated Star Trek (or I think it was Scifi in general I can't recall at moment) it still doesn't really add up.
The ironic thing is that the "love letter to a previous series" could work but in ENT it was done at expense of the current series, I mean Lower Decks and Picard have both stuff that's meant as love letter to the previous series but they did in a way that didn't say "see this other series isn't it way better then one you're watching now" "These are the Voyages..." is less a love letter to TNG and more an "obsessive stalker" letter to TNG.
That's what I meant when I said it was done in at expense of ENT. There was no respect towards the ENT cast and crew in the story and they seemed like guest stars in their own series, it should have been Archer's story with Riker as an outside observer/framing device, instead it ended Riker's story with Archer as the framing device.
If I remember correctly, as it has been years since I saw that episode, the whole reason Riker was doing a holodeck recreation of those events was because of being conflicted over the mission at hand. He is loyal to Picard and wants to tell him about what happened, but he was also loyal to the Admiral who was Captain of the Pegasus and didn't mutiny against him. I think the idea was that by going over the events aboard the NX-01 Enterprise, it might help him with the conflict he's facing over the Pegasus.
But again it basically just serves as an extention of the events of "The Pegasus" rather than the finale of a whole series.
Yes, it is possible that the article interviewed someone from the production team who was trying to justify the episode, it has been a while since I read it and don't recall offhand who the interviewee was. Some of the writing team had anecdotes along the same lines at conventions too though, which makes it likely that it was at least part of what was going on.
There is also talk of the episode being, instead of just a "love letter to TNG", a sort of sendoff for the whole Berman era of Trek (and there were some concerns at the time that it might be the last of Trek altogether), and I am sure that also figured in to what actually happened and why (though with Hollywood being the land of huge egos, false stories, and spin doctoring we will probably never know for sure).
And it is true that Moonves dislikes sci-fi in general (he called it, among other thing, "useless fairy tales") and Star Trek in particular (TOS most of all). About a decade ago I looked up scholarly papers written analyzing ENT's popularity and the abrupt cancellation (the orders came down with only four episodes left unmade for the season, and one was the end of a two-parter) and it turns out that there was a slow but steady upturn in viewership after Coto took over as showrunner, especially in light of the fact that the show was mired in the Friday "death slot" at the time, and that rise was even accelerating a little in anticipation of the Romulan war arc that was hinted at in various points in the last season, that many fans thought could be as soon as the next season or two.
The falling numbers Moonves cited were actually stale ones from the move to the death slot and a few other considerations outside of the show itself, though he glossed that over and falsely claimed it was a chronic sign of franchise fatigue and would only get worse and possibly do permanent damage to it unless they cut the show ASAP. He also used outdated cost figures, not the lower ones from the shift to more digital format usage in the SFX mix (it dropped from around 1.7 million per episode to about 800k).
True, and I didn't say it worked either, (it has to be the worst ending of any of the Treks, and that includes the ones that never had a formal ending, a clear case of sometimes nothing is better than something), just that some of the people involved said that it was supposed to be a sort of sendoff of the whole Berman era. The thing is, it was a big production, big enough for all those reasons to have legitimate roots in it somewhere.