I don't care that you don't care and that's not really what the point of my comment was.
I'm just wondering what you mean by the change in tone in the forum and I'm still not quite clear on what you mean.
Spoilers Star Trek: Picard 1x05 - "Stardust City Rag"
- Thread starter NCC-73515
- Start date
I don't care that you don't care and that's not really what the point of my comment was.
I'm just wondering what you mean by the change in tone in the forum and I'm still not quite clear on what you mean.
I don't really agree with this but that is just me.
It was all roses before. It felt like a cake-walk and a love-fest. Now it doesn't. Just noting the difference.
You're very generous.
Before there was hope. Now there is just sadness and disappointment.
This has all happened before.
Use of clarifying capitalization and punctuation wouldn't hurt either.
@The Old Mixer
Jeri Ryan liked my GIF
:
https://twitter.com/EHoffFL/status/1230729522812571648?s=20
PARTY!
Sweet!
Nah, that's been going on for at least the last couple of weeks.
Comes from being a Trek fan.
Its quite tiresome
Weakest episode for me so far. It didn't work for me as well as the previous episodes. I was hoping we'd get far more out of Maddox than we did, given his importance in the story to date, but it's like the information just barely dribbled out. And Picard's accent via his disguise was terrible. The whole thing just ended up feeling quite weird to me too in terms of story and pacing.
I think the show maintains very high quality. I have enjoyed every episode and my biggest disappointment has been that I need to wait a week for the next one. I of course have some minor quibbles, but overall this is pretty damn great. My biggest worry is related to the central conspiracy/secret plot, as I'm afraid that they can't resolve it neatly or it will be revealed to be something completely stupid. Though Chabon seems to know what he is doing, so that gives me hope that he might be able to successfully pull it off too.
Perhaps. But at the risk of channeling my inner curmudgeon, it does sometimes seem to me that modern audiences do seem to find recasting more egregious than back in the old days, which I see as part and parcel with the whole modern obsession with "canon" and all that. Is it just me or do modern audiences take this stuff way more literally these days, as opposed to when, say, you could recast Jane in an old Johnny Weissmuller TARZAN movie and nobody lost sleep over whether this meant that we in an "alternate timeline" or whatever.
And I'm not just talking Trek fandom here. I still remember being taken aback when the IRON MAN movies recast Rhodey and the internet howled in as though this had never happened in the history of Hollywood before.
Does nobody else remember Valerie Hobson replacing Mae Clarke as Dr. Frankenstein's fiancee in the original Universal FRANKENSTEIN movies, or Ilona Massey replacing Evelyn Ankers as Dr. Frankenstein's grand-daughter in the sequels?
My point being that recasting has been going on forever, but it does seem to me as though modern audiences are more allergic to it than audiences in the past.
Not sure that's an improvement.
Well I don't care if you don't care that he doesn't care that...woah, vertigo. Hey, Norton...!
Admit it, you were skipping 20 pages at a time, weren't you?
Shhhh!!!!!!!!!!!
Indeed. And any recasting is immediately read has having come about because of hostility or animosity on the part of the production team.
I confess: I alway skip past the pages and pages of pre-episode chatter and speculation and only read the comments posted after we've finally seen the episode.
Get Greg a chair to yell at.Perhaps. But at the risk of channeling my inner curmudgeon, it does sometimes seem to me that modern audiences do seem to find recasting more egregious than back in the old days, which I see as part and parcel with the whole modern obsession with "canon" and all that. Is it just me or do modern audiences take this stuff way more literally these days, as opposed to when, say, you could recast Jane in an old Johnny Weissmuller TARZAN movie and nobody lost sleep over whether this meant that we in an "alternate timeline" or whatever.
And I'm not just talking Trek fandom here. I still remember being taken aback when the IRON MAN movies recast Rhodey and the internet howled in as though this had never happened in the history of Hollywood before.
Does nobody else remember Valerie Hobson replacing Mae Clarke as Dr. Frankenstein's fiancee in the original Universal FRANKENSTEIN movies, or Ilona Massey replacing Evelyn Ankers as Dr. Frankenstein's grand-daughter in the sequels?
My point being that recasting has been going on forever, but it does seem to me as though modern audiences are more allergic to it than audiences in the past.
Not sure that's an improvement.
I think social media helps sustain outrage and discontent. Not just because folks can create echo chambers but because there is a sense of interaction with the content makers. Social media outrage is the radioactive monster the letter writing campaigns of old turned into.
Say, that'd be a nifty-sounding handle: The Inner Curmudgeon
That's understandable. I've tended to do the same in movie threads and such.