One thing I've seen bandied about often when talking about Star Trek in particular, is the assumption that a show like TNG or DS9 would not work today because it would not be interesting or popular to any current generation of viewers. It's treated as a forgone conclusion that 26 episodes of low-budget/mediocre effects TV about ideas that's mostly people standing in a room talking just would not appeal to anyone who isn't old, so there's no sense in even trying to make that anymore. I don't see anyone questioning that premise, only accepting it as true and then arguing that something new has to be attempted. Even if one is on the side that hates things like nuTrek, Disney Star Wars, etc, I only see people starting with 'well we simply can't do what they did 30 years ago. It could not work. We have to make something modern, they just haven't done it the right way yet'.
And I find myself wondering why this is assumed to be true. Are people not people anymore? Did human beings and their brains evolve in some way over the past 30 years that basics of storytelling that have worked across all mediums for thousands of years simply broke, and the only way anyone knows how to even try to understand a story is if it's an 8 hour movie cut into a dozen segments telling exactly one interconnected linear story? If a 13yo boy watched TNG in the 90s and found it entertaining, why is it assumed a 13yo boy in 2026 would just absolutely hate it?
It's treated as a natural inevitable evolution from 24-26 episode serialized TV shows to "prestige TV" seasons of half a dozen episodes telling one big single story because that's just what happened. But I content it was never proven that's what had to happened, or that the old model would fail. I don't believe that only the binge streaming cut-up-movie design can work. That's just all they make now, and so that's all people watch. And then they use the fact that's all people watch as evidence why it's the only thing that works. The whole argument is circular and the underlying premise relies on assumptions being true that have never been proven.
Mate I'd say the OPPOSITE is true. I have an 11 year old nephew who despite talking in 'zoomer brainrot' (he's a good kid but man is that annoying at times) is mostly playing Team fortress 2. There are A LOT of the younger generation turned off by 'new' things and turning to vintage games and music.
The 'they wouldn't be interested in the old stuff' is just a talking point for ideologues to justify changing and tampering franchises for the MODERN AUDIENCE, despite it failing EVERY time. Just look at Doctor Who, Starfleet Academy, the new Star Wars film, no one cares because these new things lack the authenticity of the old media. I bet I could get zoomers hooked on Farscape if I showed them the first 5 episodes over ANYTHING currently released.
How is he playing TF2? I quit playing years ago because every server was 90% bots and it seemed like humans quit playing.
I got no clue, think he was on custom servers as I swear he server searched before he started to play.
He's very much into VR games though so there's a difference I can't tell if it's unique to him or a prominent thing of younger generations that people my age prefer the analogue of a controller or keyboard and mouse more whereas younger are into VR more.
Same, my son had a huge TF2 phase. Most of the "modern" stuff he plays is because other friends are playing it and even then it's usually 5-10 years old.
There is a common theme in media that is specifically aimed at the younger generations: constant stimulus. You see it in the Mario movies, the Minions movies, and especially in their games. If there isn't a dopamine payoff every 10 seconds, the younger generations get bored.
The average Gen Alpha could never sit through Star Trek or even the original Star Wars, their brains are too fried.
SpongeBob after the first movie is just spastic autism
The first season is slow, metered, thoughtful
Engineered. Phones, screens, short form content, even speech itself is designed to either degrade your intelligence or to make sure you never develop it.
By design. They can't focus on anything longer than a 5-second short form bit so they make ideal drones, able to live in the moment but never think long-term. Otherwise they'd develop the critical and analytic skills to realize things like you can't gas six million bodies with Zyklon B in five years then magically disappear the bodies.
As an absolute rule, no. My kids love older stuff, even if it's low res. They listen to 80s music with me, they play old or retro games, etc.
As a general rule, younger generations can barely even read. Half of my teenager's sophmore class are functionally or literally illiterate morons.
Public or private school? And not being critical here, just genuinely curious. How do you ensure your kids don't end up like the retarded majority? Supplemental education at home? Or just sending them in with a great foundation?
Been trying to reflect on my own experiences and those of others to understand how to go about teaching my kids when the time comes. I went to public school but by grade 1 (age 6) I could already tell most of my classmates were retards. Some of that is likely innate/genetic but a good chunk is likely home environment.
Yes, education at home. By and large their actual education has been homeschooled, and the younger ones will be completely homeschooled.
One thing I notice is that, even though I know my kids can read, they rarely do.
When I was young I used to read a lot, even when TV or games were an option. But my kids, despite my best efforts, have never shown an interest in recreational reading.
Mine do read, thankfully. My wife reads as well.
I see. Thanks for the response.
I see a lot of younger ppl who seem to like older stuff. Tons of reactor channels on YouTube of younger people enjoying classic stuff
If anything, zoomers are more impressive than their predecessors, especially the younger male ones. They were born into this mess and are making the most of it despite everything. Millennials deserve love too because theyve eaten a shit economic sandwich at every single would-be milestone and are very hard working.
I think this assumption started as something reasonable and morphed into something that really isn't. Episodic TV works just as well now as it always did, but there's much much more competition for a potential viewers' time now than there was in the 90s. Making it more serialized is a viewer retention strategy.
Viewer watches a couple episodes of an episodic show. Comes back if they want more of the same.
Viewer watches a couple of episodes of a serialized show. If you managed to hook them with a mystery box or whatever they keep coming back to see what happens next.
Instead of every episode increasing the chance a viewer burns out, it increases the chance they become too invested to walk away.
Compare TNG vs. DS9. The Dominion war and ongoing politics provided a level of, "what's going to happen next week," that TNG never had with the exception of some specific multi-episode stories. After a focus on serial plot threads, I think really was a natural evolution. It's a tiny step from execs thinking of it as a retention bonus to thinking it's a retention requirement. Then, if the focus of your show becomes the serialized plot thread, the episodic content starts to get viewed as filler. It might be entertaining but it gets in the way of the next anticipated story beat. Take too long and the people who are only there to see what happens next give up. Trim that part down and it's obvious you don't need 24 eps to tell the story anymore.
tl;dr: It's not a question of age of the media. Or even the quality. It's the format. Continuing plot threads is a way to keep people invested in a crowded media landscape.
i'm rewatching tng right now and i'm mad at how good it is
Each generation just has completely different relevant issues of the time and older media has themes that don't always resonate with what's currently a priority in a person's life.
My kids don't really watch anything. If they do, it's youtube. I watch my older stuff with them so if they do watch anything produced, it's usually 20+ years old.