I've been watching a lot of old Treks on the Horror Channel the last couple of months as they have copious re-runs of entire series every morning (I say watching. I tend to have it on in the background).
Now I dare say it's an age thing (and I'm no Trekkie), but it strikes me that watching the original series, it's actually aged really well, whereas The Next Generation seems incredibly dated.

I think it is an age thing Gman. Its when you first discovered Star Trek. I'm the TNG age group, after school on bbc2. Others are DS9 or Voyager. I felt old when talking to a young guy at work and he said he remembered voyager as a kid. That was Star Trek to him. Tbh TOS is the only trek ive never seen in its entirety. The 60s vibe puts me off.

Dinostar77 wrote:

I think it is an age thing Gman. Its when you first discovered Star Trek. I'm the TNG age group, after school on bbc2. Others are DS9 or Voyager. I felt old when talking to a young guy at work and he said he remembered voyager as a kid. That was Star Trek to him. Tbh TOS is the only trek ive never seen in its entirety. The 60s vibe puts me off.

Do give it another try, it's a lot better than it should be. Thing is, I remember watching the original series on sky before the next generation (I think they ran a load of 60's shows at 5pm or something back in the day because I remember watching original Batman and Green Hornet in the same time slot.) Some stuff wont age well but I think it holds up pretty good all things considered.

Watched the movies loads of times over the years. Saw the original series as a kid. Just never been bothered to sit down and watch it through from start to finish as an adult

ChopperByrne wrote:

The first Trek movie is a bit shit.

The trilogy of 2, 3, and 4 are all good though. 5 is dirt. 6 is great.

Wrath of Khan is definitely the best, followed by Undiscovered Country, and Voyage Home.

I'd put country over khan. Apart from kirks speech at the end which is rocky iv levels of silly, it's excellent. There would not be much between either and both are the exceptions to the star trek movie quality level. (assuming we are going from motion picture up to nemisis)

And to start shit proper - I'd rate both over any of the star wars movies.

Yup, first Trek movie is legit.

First one was fine on a recent rewatch. The quality of it compared to a lot of sci-fi at the time is amazing. Some of the FX inside V'ger I have no idea how they did them, probably because I only think about CGI and how easy it all is now.

Khan is ok and mates all cite it as the toppest of the films, but not me.

I really have a soft spot for Undiscovered Country. Great plot, on the nail culturally at the time and Christoper Plummer was just fucking great as a Klingon, inspired casting.

b0r1s wrote:

I really have a soft spot for Undiscovered Country. Great plot, on the nail culturally at the time and Christoper Plummer was just fucking great as a Klingon, inspired casting.

My man. Great Trek movie that, probably the best.

The director's cut of the first one is apparently genuinely good. Unfortunately as they only mastered the CGI effects for SD DVD it isn't widely available now though.

Raiziel wrote:

It’s nice to see at least some mild positivity towards the first Trek film here.  It’s the most Star Trek film of them all, in my opinion.  It is a bit languorous, but I love it all the same.  Top bit of sci-fi.

I'd disagree. Not that its not a good sci-fi film but more because I dont think it really represents TOS. Wrath of Khan probably represents TOS best - sci fi concept as background but personalities are the main thing. My view of it anyway.

Diluted Dante wrote:

VI is an absolute all timer.

Plummers role was apparantly written specifically for him. He's absolutely brilliant in it.

Watching it now. Still great.

I watched season 1 of this and then skipped season 2 due to the general vibe here that it was a hot mess is it worth a watch over , even with trashy low expectations?

I didn't make it through picard either.

RedDave2 wrote:

I watched season 1 of this and then skipped season 2 due to the general vibe here that it was a hot mess is it worth a watch over , even with trashy low expectations?

I didn't make it through picard either.

Its Star Trek and I've enjoyed all of Discovery. Its better than Picard for sure. TV has moved on from the early 80s and 90s syndicated 24 epsiodes a season "alien of the week" premise and some folk struggle to get over that.

I think my problem with it is it’s so full on, all the time. Lots of EMOTIONS and zero down time, chilling episodes where it’s not about the everyday desperate struggle to survive against overwhelming blah blah

It’s something other shows (including DS9) were much better at - letting characters breathe and become actual personalities with growth and learning etc, rather than “action lady” and “clever guy” and “gruff alien” stereotypes

I get that people like serialisation, mystery box plotting, exciting action but Star Trek really is supposed to be about characters, isn’t it?. In ds9, they spent like two seasons setting up the main conflict by which time the characters were well established, providing understandable reactions, conflicts, opportunities to change etc much more compelling for me

Then again it’s all just TV innit

I expect we won't hear much about the temporal wars, I think they were just referring to the events of Star Trek: Enterprise and explaining why there's no time travel in the 31st Century when Voyager and Enterprise established it was commonplace by the 29th Century.