Jason Isaacs speaks about Star Trek

[Phoenix219]

This brings up a memory from a DC Comics letter column back when TNG was gearing up. They were going to do a story with Harry Mudd where the Enterprise finds a cryonics pod with him frozen inside. Unfortunately, Roger C. Carmel passed before they were able to do it.

Would be a neat story for either Picard or Discovery to rework using Rain Wilson.

They could have easily worked that into "The Neutral Zone" instead of the the 20th century businessman.

 

[BillJ]

They could have easily worked that into "The Neutral Zone" instead of the the 20th century businessman.

I believe "The Neutral Zone" may have been reworked from that premise.

 

[ichab]

Few things..

I agree that a lot of non-fans latched onto this show early as a part of the ongoing culture war that is inescapably smothering all entertainment industries. It had nothing to do with the show though, but had everything to do with the twitter pic the cast posted of them all "taking a knee" with professional victim Colin Kaepernick. I never really cared about these people, and just dismissed them as idealouges. They have long since lost interest, and moved on to whatever the current topic is in pop culture (probably star wars).

That being said, those people are a feint whisper of the scrutiny given to STD. You cannot apply the boogeyman defense on this show, when a large part of the actual star trek fanbase hates the show for legitimate reasons. (Storytelling, character development, continuity, casting, etc.) I personally enjoyed the first season, some episodes way more than others, but I will also admit that it's the worst star trek series.

I actually enjoyed the first season. I thought it had a very DS9 vibe where I didn't always know where things were going. But as soon as the second season came and they go forward to Captain Pike and "safe" TOS era ground, I lost interest.

Now the thing that really bugs me about Jason Issac's gatekeeper attitude is his assertion (and it's an assertion shared by a portion of the fanbase) that Star Trek has always been "SJW". Yes, but NO. Civil Rights activists from the 1960s DO NOT EQUAL wealthy white suburbanites that virtue signal over pronouns. There is no comparison between women fighting for the right to vote and the campaign to stop "manspreading" and "mansplaining" on twitter.

The term, "SJW", specifically indicates virtue-signalling and speaking for others you perceive to be lesser in society and therefore in need of your strong voice to support them. This is why most people outraged about borderline racial comments or other trivial "problematic speech" on twitter are not actually the race/group in question, but a wealthy middle-aged white woman who wants more social currency in her friend group.

So what I'm trying to say here, is for the love of god, stop comparing the civil rights movement and first-wave feminism with the modern SJW. They aren't on the same planet, they aren't in the same solar system... They probably aren't even in the same galaxy.

I'm beyond over this crap.

 

[DEWLine]

Still in error. There are still battles worth fighting in the here and now, and I see Isaacs - among many others - taking them on as needed.

And I do hope we see Isaacs back in uniform on DSC at some point.

 

[Yistaan]

Still in error. There are still battles worth fighting in the here and now, and I see Isaacs - among many others - taking them on as needed.

And I do hope we see Isaacs back in uniform on DSC at some point.

Jason Isaacs and Patrick Stewart are fighting for Trek values outside their acting roles in the real world, and it's admirable. Especially Sir Patrick lived and breathed Picard for so many years, and I don't think he'd return to the role if he didn't realize that Picard and him are on the same page regarding their beliefs and values.

 

[Tuskin38]

when a large part of the actual star trek fanbase

Large? No. Vocal? Yes.

 

[Alan Roi]

Do you remember when we used to like things?

Yes. But that was before people started deciding they own things just because they watch them.

 

[Alan Roi]

Few things..

I agree that a lot of non-fans latched onto this show early as a part of the ongoing culture war that is inescapably smothering all entertainment industries. It had nothing to do with the show though, but had everything to do with the twitter pic the cast posted of them all "taking a knee" with professional victim Colin Kaepernick. I never really cared about these people, and just dismissed them as idealouges. They have long since lost interest, and moved on to whatever the current topic is in pop culture (probably star wars).

That being said, those people are a feint whisper of the scrutiny given to STD. You cannot apply the boogeyman defense on this show, when a large part of the actual star trek fanbase hates the show for legitimate reasons. (Storytelling, character development, continuity, casting, etc.) I personally enjoyed the first season, some episodes way more than others, but I will also admit that it's the worst star trek series.

Now the thing that really bugs me about Jason Issac's gatekeeper attitude is his assertion (and it's an assertion shared by a portion of the fanbase) that Star Trek has always been "SJW". Yes, but NO. Civil Rights activists from the 1960s DO NOT EQUAL wealthy white suburbanites that virtue signal over pronouns. There is no comparison between women fighting for the right to vote and the campaign to stop "manspreading" and "mansplaining" on twitter.

The term, "SJW", specifically indicates virtue-signalling and speaking for others you perceive to be lesser in society and therefore in need of your strong voice to support them. This is why most people outraged about borderline racial comments or other trivial "problematic speech" on twitter are not actually the race/group in question, but a wealthy middle-aged white woman who wants more social currency in her friend group.

So what I'm trying to say here, is for the love of god, stop comparing the civil rights movement and first-wave feminism with the modern SJW. They aren't on the same planet, they aren't in the same solar system... They probably aren't even in the same galaxy.

In my experience the terms SJW and virtue-signalling are hypocritical perjoratives used snidely for the purpose of belittling.

 

[Yistaan]

In my experience the terms SJW and virtue-signalling are hypocritical perjoratives used snidely for the purpose of belittling.

That's my experience as well.

 

[Jayson1]

Do you remember when we used to like things?

Yes. I hated it! Jason

 

[Jayson1]

In my experience the terms SJW and virtue-signalling are hypocritical perjoratives used snidely for the purpose of belittling.

I feel they are both slurs and labels depending on the context in how they are used. The words, like alot of modern labels also kind of undefined because people are not always on the same page as to what they are. Jason

 

[fireproof78]

Yes. I hated it! Jason

Well, I'm going to like it! That will show you!

 

[The Spectre]

Great actor, but don't take those in the Hollywood microcosm seriously when it comes to politics. They are clueless. This was especially evident three years ago.

 

[Yistaan]

Great actor, but don't take those in the Hollywood microcosm seriously when it comes to politics. They are clueless. This was especially evident three years ago.

Well I'm not sure what you mean about "three years ago", but when you have judges, lawyers, government experts, and millions of people saying basically the same thing as Isaacs is saying, I have no problem with hearing what Mr. Isaacs has to say because I know it's a reflection of what a lot of people, including myself, feel.

 

[The Spectre]

Naming racism as the reason that audiences are divided on Discovery is rather shortsighted.

Jason does not want to acknowledge the actual flaws with the series, understandable.

Star Trek fans have rallied behind and supported a series with an African-American lead before. Even in today's world, that series is held up as the best of the franchise.

 

[Alan Roi]

Naming racism as the reason that audiences are divided on Discovery is rather shortsighted.

Jason does not want to acknowledge the actual flaws with the series, understandable.

Star Trek fans have rallied behind and supported a series with an African-American lead before. Even in today's world, that series is held up as the best of the franchise.

So what do you think is the reason that so many people attacked Disco for having an SJW agenda? I certainly recall that being a big complaint around when the series was launched.

 

[BillJ]

...but don't take those in the Hollywood microcosm seriously when it comes to politics. They are clueless.

When they disagree with you.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't take politics in Hollywood seriously.

 

[BillJ]

I don't take politics in Hollywood seriously.

Meh. They probably don't take us seriously either. But they have the right to espouse their beliefs just like any one else.

 

[fireproof78]

Meh. They probably don't take us seriously either. But they have the right to espouse their beliefs just like any one else.

Yup.