Coming back to THE MOTION PICTURE as an example, there is an obvious and glaring discontinuity between the movie and TOS. All of the technology, uniforms, and the Klingons look radically different, despite an ostensible gap of only a few years between the show and the movie. What, was there some kind of galaxy-wide, technological cataclysm which forced everyone to shift from the clean, slick Matt Jefferies designs to the clunkier and more detailed movie-era look?
But, at the end of the day, that’s all still window-dressing. Maybe they went a little too far in trying to visually update the franchise, and the film overall has its flaws, but, as noted, it was an honest attempt to bring STAR TREK back. It didn’t set out to tear down the characters or repudiate what had come before. It didn’t reinvent the wheel in terms of how that universe worked. It was a TV-to-movie adaptation which was a direct continuation of a show, without recasting the characters or rewriting the rulebook. Instead, it was all about getting the characters back to to where they should be, and priming the franchise for a new series of adventures on the big screen. And it explored themes which are very much in line with what had come before, and with the same high level of intelligence and optimism. The exterior may have changed, but the DNA of STAR TREK was still in there.
What we’re seeing now is one attempt after another to completely rethink and rewrite the franchise— to turn it into something it was never designed or intended to be—and then slap a veneer of familiar names and elements and Easter Eggs on top of it to take the place of continuity, internal logic and organic storytelling. STD is completely impossible to reconcile with TOS in terms of technology, continuity, characterization, and fictional history. This goes well beyond makeup designs, costume changes, and recasting. It’s one thing to move a franchise forward and try new things. It’s quite another to root virtually all of your projects in past shows and movies, and to rewrite and subvert that past in order to try and build up your own product. Mikey Burnham could have been a wholly new character who succeeded or failed on her own merits, but, no, they specifically chose to intimately connect her to Spock, one of the most beloved and iconic characters in the history of pop culture. Standing on the shoulders of giants whilst pissing on them as a shortcut.
Just look at all of the articles and videos examining the new shows, which rattle off lists of Easter Eggs and references to previous episodes and movies. Not articles and reviews which praise how these new shows are a logical and satisfying outgrowth of previous characters and storytelling, but rather lists of, “Hey, ‘Memba this? “. They build on top of the hard work of others so they don’t have to put in the work themselves. Banking on the name-brand recognition factor and passing that off as “homage”.
