Seems like a pretty pathetic waste of time to me. Dwelling on something you hate can't be good for you.
“Jean-Luc Picard is back”: will new Picard show eclipse Discovery?
- Thread starter Groppler Zorn
- Start date
But the Internet thrives on hate.
And the internet is a toxic place where hate turns into death threats and actual violence. Personally I'd like to talk about the show itself without having to wade through a ton of shit about how it's not in the prime universe or every other complaint that boils down to "I don't like how it looks because it's different". I hate that "being a fan" now requires you to just hate the product, no one is forcing to watch it. You're literally paying to see something you claim to hate. You wouldn't pay to make yourself throw up, why do this?But the Internet thrives on hate.
The look of the Klingons has changed constantly ever since the first movie, IOW there's no standard look for the Klingons!
Same applies to the Cardassians, the Trill, the Andorians... etc..
They appear different each time there's a new movie or a new series featuring them!
Same applies to the Cardassians, the Trill, the Andorians... etc..
They appear different each time there's a new movie or a new series featuring them!
It’s the fact with how bad the new design is rather than the change to it.
It’s also a shame with all the work Enterprise did to explain the differences that they just ignored it for no apparent reason.
It’s a shame the rumour of them being ancient Klingons wasn’t true.
It’s also a shame with all the work Enterprise did to explain the differences that they just ignored it for no apparent reason.
It’s a shame the rumour of them being ancient Klingons wasn’t true.
I think there wouldn't be as much complaining about the klingon re-design if what the klingons did on the show was actually any kind of interesting.
Instead, it was one of the most clichèd presentations of klingons in the entire franchise: Doofuses using the word "honour" every second sentence, hell-bent on doing the most obvious, aggressive "warriour" stuff whenever possible, wether it made sense or not. Nothing nuanced, no variety in portrayal, no internal arguments. It was the most shallow look at klingons imaginable.
The re-design really is the only thing the show added to the klingons. And it was fucking horrible. That's why that so quickly turns into the main point in so many arguments.
Last edited:
Those two things are about the show though. It’s look and feel. To not expect fans to discuss the continuity and design of a Trek show is...unrealistic.
And is the world so polarised That having a negative view of these things is now hate? Hate and violence?
Hyperbole.
A person can hold different views to another, and disagree with another, without it being hate, or justify hate against them for holding those views. Sure..sometimes it’s gonna, sometimes opinions are repellant and need to be challenged in the hope of change. Buts there’s ways of challenging. But every time someone holds a different view? Humbug.
New Klingon stuff is overall rubbish. It’s ok for me to think that. It doesn’t mean I hate the show, or that it’s ok to berate me for that.
Michael Burnham, overall, is a bit rubbish. It’s ok for me to think that. It doesn’t mean I hate the show, or am some crazy misogynist racist dude, and it doesn’t mean it’s ok to berate me for the opinion.
You might love the Klingon redesign, this doesn’t mean you love everything about the show, it doesn’t mean I can attack you for liking it.
You might love Burnham, this doesn’t mean you love everything about the show, etc etc.
It’s Trek. Fans will have opinions based on Trek.
This!!!
Be careful, you may get a trolling warning for presenting a rational argument..
I probably will for just saying that. So sensitive these days on here. So hyperbolic when sensibilities are challenged. Fan interest isn't down just from the lackluster and divisive show, its also due to toxic defenders of it, in media, boards, and blogs. Same is true now for Star Wars and Doctor Who. EA Battlefield 4, Marvel comics sales, DC's Legends of Tomorrow, Supergirl, and more. Its like the entertainment industry as a whole said, lets screw with the genre, put out a product only a fraction want to see, then attack the fans for not liking it, and double down on it..
then they're (modern studios) like "wait? Where are you fans going? Bah! You're just Misogynist, racist, bigots anyways, the show isn't made for you, You're a horrible person, you should like what we're doing! Hey Vox, Vice, comic book websites, blogs, NYT, The mary sue,Twitter, YouTube, yahoo news, back us up here, call those fans out!"
Attacking the fans, we'll shame them back! Oh wait, why are sales down? Why are traditional fans losing interest?
IDK, could it be the constant attacks for voicing an opinion? Maybe...?
This is the side of the argument, they never acknowledge or like to bring up. Attacking the fans, drives them further away.
By simply referring to fans they disagree with as "haters" they then don't have to address real fans concerns, and argue on the merits. A common tactic it seems now to be.
Last edited:
But isn't writing every bit as much of an art as design? Why are some folks so hung up on the look being okay for revision because it is "art", but not the story?
You’d be wrong.
The rumour was that they followed older traditions, which was partly true for T’Kuvma’s group.
I'll probably get a trolling warning just for trolling. Well predicted, Carnac.This!!!
Be careful, you may get a trolling warning for presenting a rational argument..
I probably will for just saying that. So sensitive these days on here. So hyperbolic when sensibilities are challenged. Fan interest isn't down just from the lackluster and divisive show, its also due to toxic defenders of it, in media, boards, and blogs. Same is true now for Star Wars and Doctor Who. EA Battlefield 4, Marvel comics sales, DC's Legends of Tomorrow, Supergirl, and more. Its like the entertainment industry as a whole said, lets screw with the genre, put out a product only a fraction want to see, then attack the fans for not liking it, and double down on it..
then they're (modern studios) like "wait? Where are you fans going? Bah! You're just Misogynist, racist, bigots anyways, the show isn't made for you, You're a horrible person, you should like what we're doing! Hey Vox, Vice, comic book websites, blogs, NYT, The mary sue,Twitter, YouTube, yahoo news, back us up here, call those fans out!"
Attacking the fans, we'll shame them back! Oh wait, why are sales down? Why are traditional fans losing interest?
IDK, could it be the constant attacks for voicing an opinion? Maybe...?
This is the side of the argument, they never acknowledge or like to bring up. Attacking the fans, drives them further away.
By simply referring to fans they disagree with as "haters" they then don't have to address real fans concerns, and argue on the merits. A common tactic it seems now to be.
Infraction for trolling. Comments to PM.
By the way, numerous people have addressed your arguments on their merits or lack thereof, and found them wanting on facts but heavy on the actual misogyny, racism, and homophobia which you seem to be continually in denial about. You can either continue whining about it or make better arguments.
You'd have to ask them.
Totally agree with this. The producers of DSC were clearly aware of this going in as well as I seem to remember (although I’m happy to be corrected) that they discussed canon issues and that they would deal with them quite early on - around the time they announced it as a prequel.
Sadly the word “hate” seems to have become so diluted now that it has semantically expanded to include ‘a comment that is negative in any way or that contradicts the popular and/or prevailing opinion in any given situation’. I don’t think this definition has made it into the OED yet, but language change is determined by mass use.
Totally agree with this. Incidentally I was accused of preferring a cis white male over a female poc as a lead in a Star Trek show earlier in this thread because I made the innocuous suggestion that Picard was a more popular character than Michael. The leap in logic from what I said to what that person inferred was enormous. That poster didn’t want to debate me, discuss why I thought Picard was more popular than Michael, or challenge my ideas in any way - other than to imply that I was a sexist racist. Even the defence of my post (which came from some other posters as well I was happy to see) was met with silence from the original poster and I think the moderators too. There’s a massive difference between legitimate criticism of a character - like Michael, and I’m happy to provide criticism of her character for anyone who actually wants to debate it with me, but it will all be based on my own opinions which stem from watching DSC - and saying that they hate Michael (and by extension DSC) because she’s female or because she’s a particular ethnicity. Criticising Michael or DSC does not automatically constitute “hate”. I completely agree that it’s *not* ok to berate someone for expressing the opinion that Michael is a bit rubbish. I also think she’s a bit rubbish. I still hope she gets on my nerves less in s2.
But "Star Trek" is not a fixed target. There are many different flavors of Trek these days and what "Star Trek" is is constantly evolving and mutating. As it should . . .
Remember all those speeches Kirk used to make about "stagnant" civilizations that never changed or evolved? The same applies to franchises.
Sometime you have to blow up the computer-god or holy book to get things moving again.
I definitely agree the "Prime" holy book needs to be blown up.
Sometime you have to blow up the computer-god or holy book to get things moving again.
Setting off a firecracker to make noise and then continuing with business as usual doesn't count, which is pretty much what we've seen so far.
This is still a very old-fashioned, stodgy production. It's just more expensive looking.
Heh ...Quite. I was saying in another thread recently (I think it was that crazy Size Argument™ one, of all places, but the discussions here bleed together a lot, I find) that it reminds me of watching Bob Ross on PBS when I was a kid. He would get to a point where I would think: "That looks fine just the way it is." And then he would slap some whopping great smear or gob of dark paint right smack in the middle of it that would cover up some part I liked. And I'd for a brief moment think: "WTF? He just ruined it!" But then he'd add something else, and then more, and gradually but surely it became beautiful once again, even though it was now a rather different image than what I had anticipated at the outset, and one that I might not have chosen to paint over the initial "early draft" version, had I been the painter myself. And he would frequently address this explicitly as being part of the whole point—and indeed the whole joy—of the exercise. I'm paraphrasing here, but he would basically say: "Don't be afraid of ruining it...there are no mistakes; it can be whatever you want it to be."
Just go with it, say I. Let them follow whatever artistic vision or ad hoc course they may choose, and try to relax and enjoy the ride, seeing where it all goes. You may like the picture when it's done, or you may not. But do give them a chance to paint it first before judging, eh? And as Yoda might say, don't be afraid to unlearn what you have learned in the process.
-MMoM
I'm so hooked on BOB ...
Watched for years on PBS and now I watch him on Netflix at least a couple of times a week.
I think writing is much of an art as design (I do both)
But when working in an existing field (in this case Trek) you know where the lines are, where you can bend them, and where to never break them. This is especially true for a paid gig.
I understand the perspective of working on products licensed by CBS. They are bound to toe the company line. I'm more intrigued by the decision making to make this "Prime" to begin with (I have a feeling it has to do with the backlash against the Abrams films by a small but loud crowd) and why fans are so set that it has to be "Prime"? For some, it seems like they are offended by anyone that questions the decrees of CBS.
Similar threads
