YESSSSSSSSSSSSS

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    That’s a dumb comparison but I’m all for longer seasons. TNG had like 20 something episodes per. I’m even okay if they aren’t all JJ Abrahms cinematic quality. Bring back cheap TV!

    • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Thats the problem with modern trek, that need to be “cinematic”. Star Trek doesnt need it, it never did. Some of the best episodes were done on a shoe string budget. Like The Drumhead and Its only a paper moon for example. Its only a paper moon didnt even feature any of the main cast. Thats how good DS9s writing was. Even the side characters got the love from the writers.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 days ago

        Exactly. A lot of those episodes were like little stage plays. Imagine entertaining your audience with just a good story! Those were the days.

      • Kushan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        It used to be 26, so you could plan shows covering half a calendar year, then over the years it got cut down more and more. And it was probably not a bad thing because you typically had the same budget but meant you didn’t have to do a cheap clip show to pad out the numbers.

        That’s also why you see a lot of shows with 13 episodes, that seemingly arbitrary number is “half” a traditional season. Even Netflix, despite not traditionally caring too much about seasonal stuff or drip feeding week to week, has a lot of 13 episode seasons.

        I guess at some point people wanted even numbers (10) as 13 does feel a bit arbitrary even if there’s a reason for it.

        Personally for me I’d rather have 10 great quality episodes than 26 episodes where maybe 8 of them are great, 10 are okay and the rest are utter dogshit. The problem is that even (what I consider) great shows like Strange New Worlds, despite only having those 10 episodes per season, still has the odd naff episode.

        • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          First, name one of these shows that fits that description. Seasons have a few stinkers, but a lot ot of them have great B plots.

          Plus it leaves so much more room for the most important part. Characters. And their development.

          The biggest problem with the new shows is there will never be another DS9 level of characters changing over the show’s run.

          • Kushan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            I mean if we’re being honest then pretty much all 90’s trek fits the description I’ve given.

            Don’t get me wrong, in principle I completely agree that more episodes can mean more character development and that’s a good thing, but it’s not as simple as “more episodes = better”, there has to be intent and desire there to make good things rather than a specific number of things.

            • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              I would say SNW, Lower Decks, and Prodigy, all have a clear desire to do that. And Id say the same for the Orville, which honestly may be my favorite, and I feel like SNW took a lot of notes from them.