Case dismissed! Discovery and Tardigrade game "not similar"

That’s human nature. A tenet of Star Trek that many fans tout is that we overcome fear in the future presented in the series.

Kinda ironic, isn’t it?

 

There's no reason to believe that. The problems with Discovery are probably unique to Discovery and stem from how it was made, its concept changing, Bryan Fuller leaving as showrunner etc. The Picard series on the other hand seems to have more certainty in this regard and won't be as action orientated as Discovery so will be quite different.

 

Pretty much, yes. It fascinates me on a deep and profound level that a fan base that asserts IDIC and optimism around human growth as its foundational components can still be so driven by fear of something different.

 

Trek got different, better is a matter of opinion.

 

I'll always take different over the same when it comes to entertainment.

 

I'll always take good (or great) over different that's different just for the sake of being different.

If two things are similarly good but one is more different, I'll probably take that one.

 

Well, sadly, with the Internet fanbacklash reigns everywhere.
From Avengers:Endgame, to Star Wars, to the latest episode of Game of Thrones. The difficult part is to decide which parts of fan-reactions to adress, and which to ignore.

I've always been of the opinion that it should be adressed as cosmetic changes - but never dictate the gist of the story.

When they gave the Klingons hair and the D7, and the Enterprise the brightly colored uniforms in season 2, that was cosmetic changes. That was great! That was well done, didn't distract, and as a fan, I felt appreciated because the most common concerns were respectfully addressed, yet at the same time it felt like a natural progression of the universe itself. OTOH when they jumped to the far future, classified everything, or when they build-in a timetravel-reboot for ST09 to adress canon/continuity concerns - that was IMO unnecessary. The story didn't get any better for it. And to adress out-ot-universe stuff in-universe even hurt the illusion of the story at times.

 

If Discovery was a wreck, why was it renewed TWICE?

 

The trouble is, honestly, that Hollywood doesn't do small measures.

 

Kurtzman courted Patrick Stewart right around the time of the original Discovery backlash. Stewart didn't want to do it until somehow he was given an offer he couldn't refuse, aka a lot of money and ex producer credit. My opinion is that Kurtzman wanted a Picard show in the hopes of pacifying long-term fans and take some of the heat off his team for the blowback. Same sort of pandering that went into bringing in Pike and Spock. This is, of course, off-topic from the lawsuit thread, but you want my logic--there it is.

The same reason the US stayed in Vietnam so long. Too heavily invested and their pride would take too much of a hit to suddenly back out.

 

It is dangerous to use political logic with Hollywood decisions. Businesses are driven by money. Governments are not.

 

That's a matter of dispute, of which I'm on record as being an agnostic. My point was that in the eyes of some fans, Star Trek is viewed as the sole production of one Great Man and a succeeding conga line of heretics.

 

You're just spouting nonsense with no proof.

 

I don’t think you understand how Hollywood works. If this was true, then Universal would still be pushing their Dark Universe cinematic universe. Instead it’s dead and they’re trying a different direction. It’s a business, it’s about making money not wasting money out of spite.

 

If this were sound logic, Manimal would've been renewed for at least 2 more seasons, with at least 3 spin-off shows, amounting to Manimalmania.

 

One of the reasons I'm so glad DSC is on CBSAA is because the show doesn't have to cater to the casual fan that gave TNG such great numbers. DSC is freer to pursue it's own identity without having the same burdens that network shows have on them with respect to appealing to a "broader" audience.

Because of the groundwork laid by DSC, we may at some point get a 90's style Trek show, but the great thing about a streaming service is that 90's Trek is not mandated in order to get a show greenlighted. .

For the record, Spock broke into one of the widest, toothiest, grins in all of Trek in Amok Time when he found out he hadn't actually killed Jim.

 

And the Tron cinematic universe would be on it's 20th film by now. Some guy at Disney, Jeff Bridges and I would be the only people to pay to see them.

 

Remember Lawyers hate to loose, and when they do, they like to get vocal. As for the one court staff comment, sounds like a JA who floated in for a couple days and didn't like how she ran her room (which is why she's still floating and doesn't have a permanent assignment.)

 

In other words, they get to preach to the choir - no need to take Into consideration what makes stories good as stories - just shovel what a small number of presold viewers want to see.

This is one reason the show's writing is so lousy - they don't really need to compete for the time and money of people who have to be wooed by worthwhile content.