At a very basic level, the concept could work - jump into the future to show how the crew's adventures are remembered. Babylon 5 succeeded at the same kind of idea for their excellent Season 4 finale.

But B5 showed that the characters left a profound and enduring legacy. In These Are The Voyages, Riker consumes the story of Trip's death like it's a mildly engaging episode of a daytime soap - between the scenes of a better episode that works much better without the addition. It's just the worst execution you could imagine.

Does the ringship count? I'm not sure at what point a "spaceship" becomes a "starship".

Absolutely. nuTrek is supposed to be the sex starved one? Commander Riker would have something to say about that, but he’s busy on holodeck four.

I'm talking about situations where my meaning would become clear if I weren't interrupted before I finished what I was saying.

It's fine, though. I'm learning to front-load my main points. Instead of trying to say "Hey, I know we said we'd clean the basement this weekend, but I think it's more important that I spend that time fixing the car," and getting interrupted with thoughts about the basement before I'm able to mention the car, I try to say "I'd like to work on the car this weekend. I think the basement can wait." Takes practice, though.

My partner does this all the time. Unfortunately, they’re often completely wrong about what I was trying to say. Suddenly we’re having two completely different conversations simultaneously.

Strange New Worlds spins off from Discovery and carries on plot elements established there. Section 31 continues Georgiou’s story, and Starfleet Academy is picking up on the 31st century setting and characters. That’s a lot of ongoing influence.

Now see, if they’d had Jokester Data drop that pun right before the credits rolled, I’d have forgiven the whole thing.

I thought the crossover element of Generations really brought it down. The original cast had a far better farewell in Star Trek VI, and I don’t think the writers of Generations had enough to say about Kirk’s character to justify the tortured story logic that brought him in.

Give me a Kirkless cut and I’ll be so much happier. All the pure TNG elements work fine for me, McDowell is great, and the D looks beautiful with cinematic lighting.

I was raised a Trekkie, can’t rightly say what my first contact was. My earliest memory of it was me expressing a preference for “the one with Spock” over TNG, the only other option at the time.

Kirk. Pike’s undershirt ruins the look, and Archer just doesn’t fill it out the same.

You just inspired me to search for the original broadcast as I saw it, live from the Skydome. It was such a huge event:

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiNzW5uoz4_tqNDirrP9rPcDEhp-YHye8&si=XhfmDjqlByOWEK3_

Canon is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Canon is a pretty flower… which smells bad.

That footnote points to an uncredited trekplace article from 2004 that itself has no citations. There was never an “original vision" that Klingons have bumpy heads, that was an idea entirely original to TMP.

Anyway, how do we feel about the Star Trek III redesign? In TMP it was one hairless bump that was supposed to represent a spinal column, running all the way from the back over the cranium. TSFS and onward, suddenly it was a flatter, wider set of ridges that was localized only to the forehead, with a full head of hair behind it. For some reason I’m always seeing people act like those are the same design, but to me the differences are glaringly obvious.

TV and movie productions are collaborative efforts undertaken by a huge number of creative people, and I don't think any of them make their decisions for no reason. The "original creator" of the Klingons was Gene L. Coon, who had nothing to do with their portrayal in TMP.

Because Wesley was a super annoying character, particularly in the first season? https://youtube.com/shorts/TzdnutR02NY?si=H5ihPkhP--hepd4H

Also, the second panel of this meme is just perfectly captured and captioned. It'd be hilarious whoever they were talking about.

Who wanted a visual reboot of the Klingons?

Gene Roddenberry, I guess. IMO the guy really fell off when he turned Trek into a saturday morning cartoon show. But yeah, sweaty orc is right, just look at these monstrosities:

I honestly don't think I've ever noticed "nuTrek" being used to refer to anything more specific than "Trek produced since 2009" until this thread.

Yeah, I’m facetiously comparing the 1979 arguments over bumpy headed Klingons to the 2017 arguments over cone headed Klingons. What’s “new” keeps on changing, but the arguments about it stay eerily familiar.

NuTrek started when they did a full visual reboot, including completely changing the look of the Klingons: TMP.

Then it got worse, when they followed that up with a grimdark shoot-em-up that felt nothing like Trek. These people aren't even fans of the show!

The distinction is lost on me, but cheers.