Case dismissed! Discovery and Tardigrade game "not similar"

[Spaceship Jo]

I think, "largely liked on some level, if not gangbusters, and hated by a vocal minority" is a fair assessment.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5171438/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt

I didn't rate many DSC episodes highly, but you're definitely correct: those pile of 1 votes at the bottom really jump out, and not in the "there are lots of 1s and 2s and it's just a polarizing show" kind of way.

I'm pretty solidly in the camp of not taking seriously anyone who gives much of anything a 1 or a 10, and I'd say the 2-9 distribution in that graph pretty accurately represents the majority of viewer response to DSC.

 

[gblews]

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.

No, that isn't what I wrote nor meant to convey. That is your "loose" and decidedly negative interpretation of what I wrote from the standpoint of a DSC fan who hate watches the show.

This is one reason the show's writing is so lousy -

No, you're quite incorrect. DSC's writing is definitely one of the show's strengths. In fact, DSC, along with The Expanse, are the two best written sci-fi shows currently running on TV. The Expanse however, is about to get a boost from...streaming!

they don't really need to compete for the time and money of people who have to be wooed by worthwhile content.

Depending on how it's done, how it affects a show, that "competition" of which you speak, that drive for those all important ratings, have been the undoing of many a network show. But you know that as well as I.

What you seem to be saying is that because a show is on a network, and needs to attract the casual fan, that automatically means that show will be better written. I think we both know this isn't true.

However, just to reiterate, because you actually distorted part of what I wrote, streaming doesn't mean that DSC won't include elements that would attract a more general audience, it is that streaming means they aren't obligated to include elements that might be more attractive to broad audiences. One of the positive things it means is that a streaming show doesn't have to dumb itself down or include other elements such as ill fitting jokes and comedy bits.

BTW, I also think this applies to parts of the Trek fandom, many of whom (perhaps even you), seem to think that Trek should never present anything that strays from the 'tone" we saw in the 90's and early 00's. DSC can now go dark if they want, darker than even Ent went, or even lighthearted if they want.

Streaming doesn't close the door on shifting tone or great writing. On the contrary, what it does is, give the production staff, actors, etc. much more freedom than a network show is generally given to pursue a vision.

That freedom would be of great value to so many network shows currently on, don't you think?

 

[CorporalClegg]

After the uniforms, the writing is probably the worst part of the show. The most glaring evidence of this is all the most popular/highest rated episodes are the ones where the plotting and conceptual development are kept to a minimum. Whenever the show attempts a complex narrative, the whole thing completely falls apart. See: Tthe Red Angel.

 

[Lord Garth]

I also think this applies to parts of the Trek fandom, many of whom (perhaps even you), seem to think that Trek should never present anything that strays from the 'tone" we saw in the 90's and early 00's.

It seems as if these days he's not interested in any Star Trek that doesn't remind him of TOS Season 1 or the Abrams Films.

 

[Spaceship Jo]

I know many threads shift away from their given topics, but do we really need another "why DSC is or isn't good / why fandom is or isn't toxic" thread?

No word on the court case, eh?

 

[Rahul]

After the uniforms, the writing is probably the worst part of the show. The most glaring evidence of this is all the most popular/highest rated episodes are the ones where the plotting and conceptual development are kept to a minimum. Whenever the show attempts a complex narrative, the whole thing completely falls apart. See: Tthe Red Angel.

I think you're mixing up two different types of writing: Actual dialogue writing, and plotting.

Now both do have some serious issues, but IMO for very different reasons. I think that the dialogue writing on the show is actually really quite good - the characters sound like believable human beings, the bickering is fun, but honest, emotional (though maybe sometimes a bit too melodramatic), and generally I think extremely good. This dialogue writing only feels problematic, because individual elements - Burnham's speeches - stick out like a sore thumb, and most characters besides Burnham don't even get much scenes.

The other part - the plotting - surely is the worst. But that is stuff that is decided upon from the writing staff up to the bosses - sometimes, the writer who, say, writes the finally HAS to write the dumbest plot possible, simply because that's what was planned in the writing room, and he only has to put it in dialogue, but can't change the whole thing. In this case, all the behind-the-scenes scrambles/changing of plans & chefs certainly didn't help. But yeah - that's their biggest fault IMO: It's okay if a 45 minutes plot-of-the-week doesn't make perfect sense at every turn, but if a major story arc - over many episodes, in-between which fan discussions and theories are encourages - then doesn't work out and has stupid logic leaps - that's a bigger problem.

 

[Lord Garth]

I know many threads shift away from their given topics, but do we really need another "why DSC is or isn't good / why fandom is or isn't toxic" thread?

No word on the court case, eh?

I think it either won't go anywhere or a settlement will be reached. Whichever happens, it'll drag out for years and those early episodes of DSC will still exist as is.

 

[seigezunt]

I think it either won't go anywhere or a settlement will be reached. Whichever happens, it'll drag out for years and those early episodes of DSC will still exist as is.

And if it ever reaches a solid conclusion, we'll start seeing tardigrades in every series. Data's boxed head will be married to one in the Picard show, and the musical series will star one.

 

[Lord Garth]

Data's boxed head will be married to one in the Picard show

Hopefully by the 25th Century the Federation will legalize AI Marriage.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I think you're mixing up two different types of writing: Actual dialogue writing, and plotting.

Um. No?

I think that the dialogue writing on the show is actually really quite good

No it isn't. The dialog in The West Wing is really quite good. Disco has its moments, but for the most part, it's pretty average.

 

[Rahul]

No it isn't. The dialog in The West Wing is really quite good. Disco has its moments, but for the most part, it's pretty average.

The dialogue is way above average. Of course it's not Arrin Sorkin, or Joss Whedon clever. But it's very much "prestige genre tv show clever". When they writers actually have two different characters in a room - say Stamets and Reno, or Saru and Pike, or literally every other combination possible - they deliver some grade A television.

It's only that literally 90% of scenes include Michael Burnham, and there is only so much you can do with a single character, even if she interacts with many different characters, that it seemed so repetitive - because at this point everyone of us can come up with a stern dramatic Burnham speech in our sleep.

But yeah, watch a generic dialogue scene from DIS, and then a generic dialogue scene from "The Orville". Now I really like the Orville. But it's obvious there's a shitton of craft behind DIS. They just aren't getting the best use out of it.

 

[BillJ]

No, you're quite incorrect. DSC's writing is definitely one of the show's strengths. In fact, DSC, along with The Expanse, are the two best written sci-fi shows currently running on TV. The Expanse however, is about to get a boost from...streaming!

I don't know? Most complaints I see about the show are about the writing. Personally, I find it dull and unimaginative, relying far too much on TOS as a crutch.

Which is why I am hoping they do head off to the 33rd century. Gives them the chance to do the show without the crutch.

 

[seigezunt]

Seems a pretty subjective judgement call on the writing. Is it clever? Is it humorous? Does it serve the characters well? Does the plot move along well? Does it make sense in terms of X? Expectations vary among viewers and genre IMO.

 

[DaveyNY]

I know many threads shift away from their given topics, but do we really need another "why DSC is or isn't good / why fandom is or isn't toxic" thread?

No word on the court case, eh?

Nope, nothing yet in the Court site I monitor.
They update about twice a day, so nothing as of noon today.

 

[Ovation]

Nothing new?

 

[Krandor]

Nothing new?

Nope. nothing since march 12.

 

[DaveyNY]

It's beginning to seem like the Judge is hoping someone will blink so she doesn't have to make a decision.

Perhaps she doesn't want the wrath of the Trek fandom descending on her either way.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Ripper should be the judge in this case.

 

[Krandor]

It's beginning to seem like the Judge is hoping someone will blink so she doesn't have to make a decision.

Perhaps she doesn't want the wrath of the Trek fandom descending on her either way.

I really doubt she cares about the wrath of the trek fans.

 

[fireproof78]

It's beginning to seem like the Judge is hoping someone will blink so she doesn't have to make a decision.

Perhaps she doesn't want the wrath of the Trek fandom descending on her either way.

I don't think it is high up on her priority list.