They would still bitch........that's what they enjoy doing.
If This Series Took Place In The Early 2200s......
- Thread starter Kane_Steel
- Start date
Yes I do! The problem IMO, like I have mentioned before isn't how advanced it looks but how close it is to "TOS." 40 years before "TOS" and you simply have a "TOS" to "TNG" time diference only in reverse but the reverse doesn't matter because those 40 extra years gives people more freedom to imagine drastic changes in looks happening in some kind of in-universe way that we simply will never see.
PLus people would be more open if they just said reboot instead of prime universe. When you say prime universe it gives old school fans hopes of seeing a return to something more familiar and when it looks really different it feels like you have been lied to. If you go with reboot it might be sad for people who wanted a return to the prime universe but who really ever thought they would even go back to it after the Kelvin Universe? I think most fans had already accepted new Trek would no longer be connected to the old shows and thus when it wasn't connected it wouldn't be a surprise.
Jason
Trekkies love to complain no matter what. Changing the fictional timeframe would not have changed that, I'm afraid. And yeah, it tells a lot about someone if they're complaining about a perceived “SJW agenda”.
I'm not echoing anyone's sentiments on either side of that issue.
I just mentioned it's one of the biggest complaints about the series. Go to any YT comment section where the dislike ratio for STD is high and the 'forced diversity' comments and 'anti-Trump agenda' comments are prevalent.
It's not surprising, STD has made some divisive decisions.
Who was that Trek BBS member who used to consider Forbidden Planet to be a prequel to TOS (and was rather vehement about the idea)? I'm not judging here, but just wondering if that member is still around.
What divisive decisions have they made? It is the 21st century. A male dominated, homogenized cast would have been far more divisive, to the point of chasing a fair number of viewers away.
People need to grow up.
I listen to "Young Turks" as well but it's 2017. Hasn't it been learned by now to never go into the comment sections on anything, especially a place that is about news. It's like, Mos Eisley in those places.
Jason
I think the biggest problem is that we know what the Trek universe should look like at this point in time, thanks to The Cage and The Menagerie.
STD is so out of place in comparison.
What is concerning is that they are using this 'Prime Timeline' label just as a marketing tool to sell the series to the fans, but really they want to go their own direction with it.
IMO, either set this series in a time where it would NOT conflict with existing Trek canon (like I suggested), OR it should be a reboot in it's own universe.
I generally hate fanfilms, but Axanar did a fair job modernizing the April/Pike era stuff on a shoestring budget. Imagine a multi-million dollar stylized version that kept the aesthetics and tone of what Axanar was aiming for.
I think fans would have loved it.
Exactly. Any reasonable person should not have a problem with the diversity of the characters we have seen thus far, or the manner by which that diversity id being displayed (from what we know so far). A reasonable person should have more of a problem if DSC (from what we know of it so far) showed less diversity than it does.
If you're talking about the rogue admiral that tries to provoke the Klingons and drag his polity into possibly unnecessary war, and misappropriates funds to build a massive superweapon for his own personal use, then I'd kind of have to think that those would be things that both "liberals" AND "conservatives" would be able to get behind being against. But maybe I'm out of touch.
I typed all of that, pressed post, and only THEN realized that *that* is why the abbreviation for the show needs to be DIS. Ne-ver-mind. 
I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.
I listen to "Young Turks" as well but it's 2017. Hasn't it been learned by now to never go into the comment sections on anything, especially a place that is about news. It's like, Mos Eisley in those places.
Jason
It's a decent way to get a fair handle on general audience perceptions. Trekbbs is more of an isolated microcosm.
Youtube comments were notoriously very telling that Ghostbusters 2016 would be a massive flop.
I respect your viewpoint and even wanted a complete reboot with no connection to prime or kelvin, BUT, that’s not what we’re getting. And we can accept that or move on. The show IS a visual reboot. They could have recreated the look of The Cage to a T, sure. It doesn’t matter what they could have done visually, a part of fandom would have whined. They chose to create a world that extrapolates from 2017 as opposed to 1964. I am sorry people are disappointed with that. I think it’s the right call.
I wouldn’t have. Prelude, while an entertaining idea with a great format, was an overly fannish view of the Star Trek universe. The script for Axanar is shit. I’m glad this has completely flamed out.
Would it? The first two Abrams Trek films were quite successful despite male leads. Beyond underperformed due to poor marketing.
As far as divisive decisions, I'm not going to list them all... but surf the web and it won't take you long to find many who have valid concerns about the series.
It was an adaptation of a prior work. One heck of a huge difference, one that elevated a minority female into Big Three status. Ever wonder why Beyond stumbled at the box office as badly as it did? Could be they went back to being all white dudes at the center of the story.
You brought it up, it is up to you to provide all these divisive decisions that have been made.
That's if you can trust what people are saying is true. I think many people just like to say mean or terrible things because they think it is fun. Basically being Trolls. As for "Ghostbusters" being a flop it kind of had 3 things going against it. Bigots,it was a bad movie and it was a remake of a classic movie and that almost always fails. Duplicating the greatness of Billy Murray alone is hard to do no matter how talented your cast is and the new movie had a very talented cast. Maybe if they do a sequel they should go out of New York and try and do a movie that feels very different from the first and the classic so it can at least stand on it's own.
Jason
It's not up to me because I assume the majority of you are informed on the concerns about STD.
It's evident by the threads on this board itself.
And 'three White dudes' weren't part of the marketing. Heck, they even placed 'Jaylah' in Uhura's place in a lot of the marketing for Beyond.
Plenty of male-led tentpole properties are massive successes today.
Also, one could argue that STD is also an adaptation of prior work. It's still using the 'Star Trek' name and branding.
You made the claim. Back it up.
A character no one knew. Once again, which film of the three did the worst?
So Star Trek can only be white dudes in perpetuity until the end of time?
I was just referring to the aesthetics, not the script. But like I said, Axanar had a small budget. USS Kelvin looks like Axanar on a budget IMO.
I could buy Kelvin as a prequel to TOS Trek;
STD, however, does not look like it belongs alongside the Pike era of Trek.
If they ever met the Enterprise, it would be beyond awkward.
Similar threads
