With that kind of thinking, why would it really matter anyway?
Spoilers Star Trek: Picard General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
If I'm bored by it, then I begin to look deeper into the setting and how it plays. It was what sunk their claims of Discovery being Prime to me. But if the stories are entertaining, then I tend to not care.
Yeah, I actually kind of agree. Compare ST09 and STID. Pretty similar movies, actually. Both feature a big baddie hellbent on destroying the Federation, plenty of canon violations and fan service. While hardly perfect, ST09 is interesting and compelling, so I’m less bothered by the trams warp beaming and all that none sense. On the other hand, STID just made me cringe for two hours and I’m much more bothered by the various details there. (Of course, STID is also just the absolute worst Star Trek even, so maybe this isn’t fair.)
Most often, when I'm bored with something I'm attempting to watch (including Trek), I turn it off and go looking for something else to entertain myself..
It's just me I know, but I don't continue to watch it just to find ways to depreciate the creators efforts.
Nor do I go exploring ways to ruin it for others.
But again, that's just me.
That may also be why I'm attune to how bad conservative thinking/values seem to be now-a-days.
It's not good enough to just to disapprove of something, one has to also make so other's who might approve can't employ their values.
It's just me I know, but I don't continue to watch it just to find ways to depreciate the creators efforts.
Nor do I go exploring ways to ruin it for others.
But again, that's just me.
That may also be why I'm attune to how bad conservative thinking/values seem to be now-a-days.
It's not good enough to just to disapprove of something, one has to also make so other's who might approve can't employ their values.
Last edited:
Most often, when I'm bored with something I'm attempting to watch (including Trek), I turn it off and go looking for something else to entertain myself..
It's just me I know, but I don't continue to watch it just to find ways to depreciate the creators efforts.
Nor do I go exploring ways to ruin it for others.
But again, that's just me.
So you go to see a movie, start disliking it 30 minutes in, and leave? In essence, you give nothing a fair shake, and that’s somehow supposed to be more enlightened than watching it all the way through and offering criticism?
I don't go to movies I'm already aware of in advance I won't probably enjoy.So you go to see a movie, start disliking it 30 minutes in, and leave? In essence, you give nothing a fair shake, and that’s somehow supposed to be more enlightened than watching it all the way through and offering criticism?
(that is just a waste of money)
And yes, my EGO doesn't need to be stroked by expressing in a constant manner what I don't like or disapprove of, to the detriment of others.
I'm a bit of a completionist where Trek is concerned. Which is good news for CBS.
I don't use it as a way to depreciate their efforts. I'm still there watching and paying for the service.
I guess we differ in that with the 50+ years of my watching Star Trek I have never seen an episode/movie that I didn't enjoy in some manner, even if it was something akin to "Spock's Brain" or "Sub Rosa".
(or the last five minutes of "These Are The Voyages...")
I enjoy it all to some degree. Discovery probably has the best cast to date on a Trek show, and I enjoy watching them perform. The writing on the other hand, a great cast can only carry it so far.
I guess we differ in that with the 50+ years of my watching Star Trek I have never seen an episode/movie that I didn't enjoy in some manner, even if it was something akin to "Spock's Brain" or "Sub Rosa".
(or the last five minutes of "These Are The Voyages...")
But of course, we all enjoy it all to some degree. But likewise there's nothing "detrimental", as you put it, about expressing criticism. There are good books and bad books, good movies and bad movies, good music and bad music, etc. All of it is subjective, obviously. This is a Star Trek forum, and discussing those subjective impressions is one of its main purposes. If I ever met JJ Abrams I would obviously not start off by saying, "Hi, nice to meet you, I think you really fucked up our franchise."
That would be pretty tactless, and hardly the right time or place for that kind of thing. But again, a very different situation exists here, or on other Star Trek discussion platforms. So I'm not exactly sure I get your point.
As I stated above, I'm speaking mostly about folks who find no redeeming value in something they've taken the time (or not) to watch completely (even though it may not be enjoyable for them) and then publicly rip it completely to shreds.
As well as express their ideas in a manner that completely depreciates and/or belittles any opposing opinion.
(it feels like they enjoy being a miser, rather than being a supposed Fan)
I find that kind of behavior to be quite bizarre.
Fortunately, that doesn't happen very often around here anymore (though there was a time)
As well as express their ideas in a manner that completely depreciates and/or belittles any opposing opinion.
(it feels like they enjoy being a miser, rather than being a supposed Fan)
I find that kind of behavior to be quite bizarre.
Fortunately, that doesn't happen very often around here anymore (though there was a time)
Right, because in Star Trek lore Romulans didn't originally come from Vulcan; and this is the first time we had Romulans that looked similar to Spock...oh, wait....
Right, because in Star Trek lore Romulans didn't originally come from Vulcan; and this is the first time we had Romulans that looked similar to Spock...oh, wait....
I like the idea of seeing more Vulcan-like Romulans on PIC, provided they also show us the kind we saw on TNG. It's plausible that the Romulans we saw on TOS were, by some chance, were all of a particular race or ethnicity, and that those we saw on the other shows were of another. Hell, we know there's an all-Vulcan Starfleet ship, so why not something like this? But if these are refugee camps, it would be good to see all kinds of Romulans there—the "purebred" Vulcan ones, and those who are descendant from Vulcans who interbred with other species (such as whoever the native inhabitants of the Mintakan homeward were).
I really wish they had gone more this route in Discovery in S2. Clearly, they tried to save face and retcon the Klingons back, but intermixing other Klingon ethnicities would have made a lot more sense than the whole shaving of the hair business.
^^^
Bah - this old TOS fan would have been fine with 'Human' type Klingons being shown on the series "Enterprise" - as the 'updated Klingon look' didn't hit until 1979 with ST: TMP. The crazier thing to me is all these 'upset' Star Trek (and mostly TNG era) fans claiming:
"WTF with the new Klingon look...Klingons always looked like Worf..." which HASA NEVER been true.
- Their first new look was in ST:TMP
- When they appeared in STIII:TSFS - they again looked different then the way they were portrayed in ST:TMP
- Same with STV:TFF and STVI:TUC - The klingon makeup (particularly in ST:VI) looked different from the other films and even from TNG which was airing on TV at the time.
So, yeah, count me as one who says the Klingon look has never been consistent - but TNG standardized it more because they had to make it work for TV production where they can't spend a lot of time applying or removing it - and they used the same overall makeup technique for the 18 years that Rick Berman was in charge of the Trek TV franchise.
But this is a pretty tired old discussion, isn't it? I agree that Klingons never looked the same, but budgetary differences between 1960s and 1980s/1990s/2000s TV production aren't quite the same as changing things solely for artistic reasons. Enterprise made an attempt to reconcile the differences in the looks, and even though it wasn't perfect, I can appreciate the effort. If Discovery had featured only human-looking Klingons, it would have been consistent with TOS and the Enterprise explanation. If Discovery had featured some TNG-style Klingons, too, perhaps descendants of Klingons who didn't contract the virus, that would have been fine, too. For that matter, it could also have featured some more bizarre-looking Fuller-type Klingons, with an understanding that these were individuals whose ancestors were affected by the virus in different, less predicable ways. All of this could have been done very easily, with a small bit of dialogue. What bothers a lot of us about the Klingon look on Discovery is just that—that little to no effort was made to reconcile the looks—not the look itself or the mere fact that there is a different look. There is a big difference between that, and claiming that all Klingons need to look like they did in TNG and that that's how they always looked (an equally stupid opinion).
^^^^
But - it was the exact same situation with ST:TMP - and the majority of us just went with it. IMO - that's what I've always tried to do with Star Trek for the most part because contrary to what a lot of fans like to believe Star Trek has NEVER been wholly consistent internally from day one - and there's never been an overarching 'plan' all the Star Trek productions from the original to TNG to the current batch have had ZERO issues ignoring established 'continuity' if it interferes with the story they're telling at the moment.
probably region locked. sorry.
here's a cap of the shot i was referring to (blurry because it's a tracking shot with the ships moving in the opposite direction of the camera):
Similar threads
- Poll
