Comment by tomrod | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tomrod | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> I don't understand why they insist on calling it Star Trek when it's nothing like the show.

Here are some of the elements off the top of my head

1. Takes place in the same universe

2. The characters belong to Starfleet

3. Spock

4. Based on Star Trek created by Gene Roddenberry

5. *spoiler* Cardassian Federation President in Season 4

6. Trills

7. Warp drives

8. Replicators

9. Romulans merging with Vulcans to reunify

10. Synthetic humanoid modeled after Data, Lore, etc.

11. New stuff like Tardigrades

12. Mirror universe

13. Unified earth

14. Klingons

15. Ferengi

I mean, I get it, original Star Trek is super campy, but like all the ST since ST:TOS, ST:D is inclusive, prioritizes working together to solve monumental challenges, and breaks cultural barriers many people don't even realize exist unless they are marginalized.

And damn, they got amazing Tardigrades. Such a cool run at the concept. I really enjoy the show for what it is, not to satisfy some deep longing for legacy Star Trek. Picard satisfies the legacy urges nicely.

Since they retconned basically everything in the old universe out of existence, ... no. It's not the same universe.

The old show was about professional people working together to do their job, the new show is about a team of people acting like a bunch of immature teenagers, completely driven by whatever emotion happens to come over them this episode, always acting short sighted and having arguments and panic attacks. It's exactly the sort of junk psychology that made Space: 1999 such an awful show. Like, how are these people allowed aboard a space ship. Wouldn't calm-under-pressure be the first thing you look in when you recruit someone for a position like that?

I've been working my way slowly through season 4. It's so creative. I love it.

I just finished a rewatch of Star Trek the original series and wow professionals working together to do their job is... So not what that show is. I don't like Discovery but TOS is absolutely people acting emotional and unprofessionally in basically every single episode. It is hilarious.

Watching TOS in full was very eye opening to how much current cultural memory of what that show was doesn't match what was actually in the show.

I've learned that people get *really* tied up in cultural kitsch they experienced as children. Given syndication, this means we get kids absolutely adoring movies and television shows that are awful.

Personal example I believe is representative. I grew up with three movies we'd watch in this hacked-together Frankenstein of a travel van with a tiny TV: Dantes Peak, The Cowboy Way, and Mac and Me. I'm 100% sure these were picked up in the bargain bin sale.

I loved them all at the time, because at the time they represented all the excitement of a vacation -- none were great, and Mac and Me is objectively TERRIBLE!!!

I keep an ear out for these kinds of things. ST:TOS definitely hits this note, long and loud (there was a reason there were few seasons). So does ST:TNG, but its actually really good.

Absolutely, we form such weird attachments to things we saw as kids that we don't really remember well at all.

ST:TOS I highly recommend because it remains engaging/entertaining and is fascinating to see as a lens into the late 60s, but "good" it is not.

ST:TNG I love and I think is the better show but it shocked me too when I tried to rewatch in order after ST:TOS. The first seasons are not great! I really had erased a lot of it from my memory. I realize now that it's not until a couple seasons in that it became the show I remember, that show was lucky to hang in there long enough to hit its stride.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com