How did Trek Become Such a Phenomenon?

[Umbran]

This is why Enterprise, Voyager, and Next Gen all ultimately failed to achieve the greatness of the original.

I think you have to work to argue that Next Gen didn't reach the greatness of the original. It was still Roddenberry's work, updated slightly for its era. And it certainly wasn't influenced by the network mindset - Next Gen was syndicated.

 

[trancejeremy]

The funny thing about the original Star Trek is that it's an extremely blatant copy of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.

The only major difference is cosmetic. You have a starship in space as opposed to a submarine, and a more multinational crew. But the same plotlines - mysteries, aliens, monsters, espsionage stuff (only not with Klingons or Romulans, but earthly countries)

And T:NG steals even more from that show. The split command structure, the separation ability.

But TOS was re-run a heck of a lot, while Voyage wasn't.

 

[Umbran]

The funny thing about the original Star Trek is that it's an extremely blatant copy of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.

Well, many of the writers for Voyage also did work on ToS, if I recall correctly.

The only major difference is cosmetic. You have a starship in space as opposed to a submarine, and a more multinational crew. But the same plotlines - mysteries, aliens, monsters, espsionage stuff (only not with Klingons or Romulans, but earthly countries)

Yes. But both Voyage and ToS were doing what loads of science fiction was doing at the time - it was the Cold War, for example, so that sort of episode would be topical.

And T:NG steals even more from that show. The split command structure, the separation ability.

The ship separation for Trek was put forth in the tech manuals for ToS, long before Next Gen.

 

[sabrinathecat]

The big difference, though, was saucer separation was originally an emergency survival system--the saucer would be the lifeboat and could enter an atmosphere to land. But it took a starbase to reunite saucer and stardrive until the Galaxy class.
I disagree: TNG never reached the heights of ToS. And largely this is because it didn't have the trio of characters working off one another. Nothing even close. ToS had 2 really good movies, and two that were OK. TNG had 4 or 5 movies that were at best 'meh' attempts to copy Trek 2.

 

[Jhaelen]

I disagree: TNG never reached the heights of ToS.

I disagree with your disagreement. And pretty much all of the movies were disappointing compared to the TV show. Imho, TNG was definitely the highlight of the franchise.

 

[MarkB]

When I said "present" I meant more "present era" . I should have made it more clear that I was including the near future. I would like to see a show that relates a positive idea of what we could do in the next thirty or fourty years. It does not have to take place during that time, but it does have to say something about it. I do not know if Babylon 5 is quite what I would be looking for in that regard. And while popular in its time, I do not think Babylon 5 really spawned a mainstream following. A new show needs to shoot again for a mainstream following.

Looking at the shows that do gain mainstream popularity, I wonder if that's even possible at this point. The current break-out genre show is Game of Thrones, and that's a series which actively punishes characters who show any signs of conventional heroism.

 

[Umbran]

I disagree: TNG never reached the heights of ToS. And largely this is because it didn't have the trio of characters working off one another. Nothing even close.

I think that we cannot continue debating this one unless you define what you mean by "heights". Heights of what?

 

[ggroy]

When I said "present" I meant more "present era" . I should have made it more clear that I was including the near future. I would like to see a show that relates a positive idea of what we could do in the next thirty or fourty years. It does not have to take place during that time, but it does have to say something about it.

Person of Interest

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_Interest_(TV_series)

(This show is probably more a "neutral" outlook on the future, than generally a "positive" outlook).

 

[Kaodi]

Looking at the shows that do gain mainstream popularity, I wonder if that's even possible at this point. The current break-out genre show is Game of Thrones, and that's a series which actively punishes characters who show any signs of conventional heroism.

Maybe. But I am not sure that the success of one type of show necessarily precludes the success of a show that takes the opposite tack. I mean, ruthlessly murdering main characters is hardly the only reason Game of Thrones does well. In fact, if you look at the Red Wedding episode I think that that almost turned a lot of people off the show, judging from some reactions I saw.

 

[Umbran]

I would like to see a show that relates a positive idea of what we could do in the next thirty or fourty years.

You're unlikely to see one that makes it to the "mainstream" following you'd like to see. Trek managed to make it work by jumping over current events of the time. If you want to discuss what good we can do by 30 or 40 years from now, you have to address current problems - and that makes your show political. Probably very political.