Not even remotely angry. And it's a joke that somebody with a trolling avatar and trolling name, inspired by a high profile troll, is lecturing me about trolling. Double standards. Congrats.
News Netflix not airing Short Treks, deal future questioned
- Thread starter Red Panda
- Start date
It's a joke username he has for Halloween. Everyone's doing it this month. Well, not me. But lots of people are changing up their username in October for the fun of it. Locutus of Bored (which is The Great Trumpkin's real username) couldn't be more Anti-Trump if he tried.
He can be pro Trump or anti Trump all he wants. But he can practice what he preaches, if he is going to direct message me about being "angry" and a "troll". Not with that avatar...
Too bad Netflix isn't airing Short Treks but not a surprise. Not only from a red-tape sense, but also from the sense that Netflix views itself as like Comcast's On Demand. Meaning like Cable TV... except they're online. And their model probably doesn't take episodes exclusively for the web into account. Legalese and bureaucracy are always at least two steps behind technical innovation.
Last edited:
And there's another infraction for arguing the warning in the thread and accusing me of trolling after just receiving an infraction for doing exactly that. COMMENTS TO PM. Is this really worth all this angst?
And the warning PM messages are auto-generated by the board software based on the content of the infraction. It wasn't a personalized message I sent to you.
Last edited:
It's not plot armor to let them get through a single season without killing one off. We barely even got to see the relationship before they threw them in the meat grinder. The comparison to every other major relationship in franchise history is not flattering.
And if it had actually been a well thought out, well handled storyline that had an actual point to it and left the door open for him to come back, most people would've been ok with that, but it really, really wasn't.
They killed him off for shock value at the end of an episode, then did an episode where they blamed Stamets for his death - a 'twist' which really achieved nothing and went nowhere - then brought him back as a ghost and forced him to be exposition guy the whole episode because god forbid they even try to let the pair have any kind of closure, then Stamets finally wakes up and basically instantly gets over him (pushing through the pain/doing your duty is one thing, but Stamets is just smiling and happy and full of camaraderie through the entire final arc) except for one scene where he confronts Tyler (which was well done, but totally incongruous with the entire story around it).
One main character couple in trek's history ended in a death, and that was forced by actor departure, so it's not 'plot armour' to not kill off the couple, it's standard operating procedure.
Is anyone else laughing their ass off at Pandas ban?
A
Amaris
Guest
Exactly. It was a moment of "Star Trek recognizes you, LGBT community, and has created characters you can identify with that show a normal, loving same sex couple who-"
No. You know better than to make comments like this, and have been given several infractions for trolling before. Infraction for trolling. Comments to PM.
Everyone needs to stick to the topic.
Last edited:
Given none of us have seen what they're going to do WRT the situation (and I don't think the idea of 'bringing him back' for the second season was due to any outcry per se - it seems to have been part of the plan in the same way they were certain they were going to bring in the 1701 Enterprise at the end of the Season.
As for Star Trek being 'Hack' writing, come on have you actually watched what they've done overall in the past 52 years? The majority of it is pulp based tropes and 'hack writing'. I've been a first ruin Star Trek fan since 1969 (I was 6); and while I love it, I'll freely admit the majority of it ain't that well written. Yes, they do occasionally put out a real gem; but I'll never understand the folks who believe the vast majority of Star Trek is somehow akin to Shakesphere or some altogether honestly great literary work.
In the end, it's just a TV show (or occasionally a film); and PRIMARILY designed as light entertainment.
Last edited:
A
Amaris
Guest
People have fought for years to have representation on television, which is more than just light entertainment. It is a reflection of who we are as a society, and Star Trek is an example of a scenario where humanity pushes past the petty, short sighted squabbles of the present to give us a more hopeful future. You might find that silly, but ask just about any engineer, astronaut, physicist, or most any other scientist just what inspired them to look towards something better than where we are right now. It's more than just entertainment, especially if you have so little hope as it is.Given none of us have seen what they're going to do WRT the situation (and I don't think the idea of 'bringing him back' for the second season was due to any outcry per se - it seems to have been part of the plan in the same way they were certain they were going to bring in the 1701 Enterprise at the end of the Season.
As for Star Trek being 'Hack' writing, come on have you actually watched what they've done overall in the past 52 years? The majority of it is pulp based tropes and 'hack writing'. I've been a first ruin Star Trek fan since 1969 (I was 6); and while I love it, I'll freely admit the majority of it ain't that well written. Yes, they do occasionally put out a real gem; but I'll never understand the folks who believe the vast majority of Star Trek is somehow akin to Shakesphere or some altogether honestly great literary work.
In the end, it's just a TV show (or occasionally a film); and PRIMARILY designed as light entertainment.
The LGBT+ community has been pushing for years to have representation. Decades. Please let us be in this future, where we know we haven't been wiped out, or oppressed. Where the idea of a man being denied food because he's gay simply doesn't exist, and IF YOU DO depict us on your show, please do so without stereotyping us, without killing us, without using us as comedic fodder. I don't think that's too much to ask.
Also, yes, hack writing. I'm just waiting for the rape episode, because I'm putting dollars down that it happens with this series. We already saw one half of the first gay married couple on Star Trek be murdered inside of the first season. I figure the second might pull some drama by having a crew member be sexually assaulted. Gotta stay edgy!
I like the actor, think he is top notch. But, for me to get excited about the character being resurrected, he has to have had an interesting part to begin with beyond being Stamets' mate.
There's just nothing there that makes me go, "cool, he's coming back". He was barely there to begin with.
There's just nothing there that makes me go, "cool, he's coming back". He was barely there to begin with.
A
Amaris
Guest
Primarily because they didn't give him any time to develop. Hell, Tasha Yar got 23 episodes. Poor ol' Hugh Culber barely managed 10.
Beyond being a doctor, and Stamets' mate (and the stuff where they met), I don't think he had any real development. Heck, I think I knew more about Chekov after the second season of TOS.
A
Amaris
Guest
Wasn't it a great idea to have him murdered? We got such a rich story and great character development from... <mumble> <mumble>
Was he in ten? Must have been some pretty lean episodes in that mix? I can't remember him in more than five or six.
A
Amaris
Guest
True, I was being rather generous by counting the ones where he was still alive.
He was in seven; eight if you count his dead body's apperance in "The Wolf Inside"...
I wasn't too upset about his death because of the GLAAD statement and it seemed to me like this is still part of some plan that involved him being not dead at some point. That being said, if they screw this up I'll be retroactively mad at them. So they better not screw this up.
Or, they could... Y'know... Introduce some other prominent gay characters... Please?
I wasn't too upset about his death because of the GLAAD statement and it seemed to me like this is still part of some plan that involved him being not dead at some point. That being said, if they screw this up I'll be retroactively mad at them. So they better not screw this up.
Or, they could... Y'know... Introduce some other prominent gay characters... Please?
A
Amaris
Guest
Tilly. I want Tilly to fall in love with Burnham. I've wanted that since I first saw their interactions together. I just like the two of them as a pair, and would love to see them turn a friendship into a deep, abiding romantic relationship.