Why the hate for Disco?

[fireproof78]

Here, where most people can actually back up their issues with DSC with legitimate examples (and can accept it when people point out similar flaws in the other shows), there's much less of that,* but I suspect that the carryover from Facebook and such makes people more defensive than they might otherwise be.

For me the effect has multiple folds. One is the sheer amount of anger directed at Abrams, so much so that the Abrams' films pretty much were treated as not Trek across multiple sites I was on. So, that sets a sour tone for me with regarding any new Trek. In essence, it has to earn the privilege of being called "Star Trek" rather than just being Star Trek and worth discussing, the good, the bad and everything in between.

The second part is common complains regarding Discovery that I feel are already a part of Star Trek, i.e. darker tones, war stories, humans reacting badly. To me it is hard to get upset at a Trek show for doing Trek things.

Finally, I am prone to hyperbole so a lot of the times in discussion I overreact which doesn't read well in text form. In person I'm pretty hilarious

Overall, it comes down to the fact that for me the Trek I like has always been a fight with friends. I liked TOS throughout middle and high school and my friends preferred TNG/DS/VOY. I liked ST 09 and was told that it wasn't real Trek. I like Discovery and it's an abomination. It grows rather reputative being told what you like is not real Trek.

That one in general makes me laugh (not for Star Trek specifically but in general). I remember when I first heard that the PS4 was getting a Pro version and the first thing I thought was "So does that make the base model the N00b variant in gamer parlance? Or the PS4 Amateur?".

That's why I can't take pronouns seriously.

 

[Bad Robot]

For me the effect has multiple folds. One is the sheer amount of anger directed at Abrams, so much so that the Abrams' films pretty much were treated as not Trek across multiple sites I was on. So, that sets a sour tone for me with regarding any new Trek. In essence, it has to earn the privilege of being called "Star Trek" rather than just being Star Trek and worth discussing, the good, the bad and everything in between.

Think I have a similar soft spot for the Kelvin movies. Especially the first one, which I still regard as being among the "great" ST films.

 

[fireproof78]

Think I have a similar soft spot for the Kelvin movies. Especially the first one, which I still regard as being among the "great" ST films.

ST 2009 is definitely one of the greats for me (top 3). It hit me at just right time, at just the right moment in terms of themes and style, as well as having Nimoy in it. Just hit all the right buttons for me.

 

[cooleddie74]

I wish the producers would invest some of those millions in production costs in brighter set lighting.

 

[SITZKRIEG!]

For me the effect has multiple folds. One is the sheer amount of anger directed at Abrams, so much so that the Abrams' films pretty much were treated as not Trek across multiple sites I was on. So, that sets a sour tone for me with regarding any new Trek. In essence, it has to earn the privilege of being called "Star Trek" rather than just being Star Trek and worth discussing, the good, the bad and everything in between.

Yeah, they got a bad wrap. I think I said this already but I liked the first one as a general scifi action romp through space movie but not as a Trek film since that's not what they traditionally were. That said... I respected the creative team for being honest and simply saying from the getgo that is was its own thing instead of a direct continuation. Simply by saying that, alot of things visually and tonally can reasonably change and I personally was fine with the different connie, pearly apple store bridge, and lens flares everywhere blinding the crew... ok, well, maybe not that last one but they didn't seem to notice/mind in universe!

Overall, it comes down to the fact that for me the Trek I like has always been a fight with friends. I liked TOS throughout middle and high school and my friends preferred TNG/DS/VOY. I liked ST 09 and was told that it wasn't real Trek. I like Discovery and it's an abomination. It grows rather reputative being told what you like is not real Trek.

Now imagine the flip side of that where the insult isn't directed towards a fictional TV show with no possibility of emotions but rather the person (digitally) in front of you. Too frequently in the past, I've criticized a show and the response here is to criticize me personally in response. The response isn't proportional to the "insult" if you can even call it that since it assumes both intent and effect. Even criticizing a character isn't the same thing as criticizing an actor or worse yet an entire demographic group yet its typically treated as such since DISCO premiered. I'll give you personally credit in that I haven't seen you yourself engaging in that in our discussions (something of a rarity on this board unfortunately). I simply don't like something and it's ok if you do. And it's ok if I make likehearted (and, yes, childish) jokes at the show's expense but not so if I did it at your's. I like some things that others actively dislike and thing helped ruin a franchise (like the first AVP movie... it's a diamond in the rough and no one will convince me otherwise!). I don't insult people who hold the more mainstream view (not that liking DISCO is necessarily the more mainstream view since we don't have actual viewership numbers on that).

 

[SITZKRIEG!]

I wish the producers would invest some of those millions in production costs in brighter set lighting.

JJ spent all the money on lenses for flares over on the movie side. Season One's set was probably lit with a single solar powered car battery.

 

[cooleddie74]

It looked like it.

 

[fireproof78]

ok, well, maybe not that last one but they didn't seem to notice/mind in universe!

Those updated contacts work wonders.

Now imagine the flip side of that where the insult isn't directed towards a fictional TV show with no possibility of emotions but rather the person (digitally) in front of you. Too frequently in the past, I've criticized a show and the response here is to criticize me personally in response. The response isn't proportional to the "insult" if you can even call it that since it assumes both intent and effect. Even criticizing a character isn't the same thing as criticizing an actor yet its typically treated as such since DISCO premiered. I'll give you personally credit in that I haven't seen you yourself engaging in that in our discussions (something of a rarity on this board unfortunately). I simply don't like something and it's ok if you do. And it's ok if I make likehearted (and, yes, childish) jokes at the show's expense but not so if I did it at your's. I like some things that others actively dislike and thing helped ruin a franchise (like the first AVP movie... it's a diamond in the rough and no one will convince me otherwise!). I don't insult people who hold the more mainstream view (not that liking DISCO is necessarily the more mainstream view since we don't have actual viewership numbers on that).

Honestly I try but no doubt have failed somewhere. Honestly, you are correct but passion gets in my way. But, you are quite right that criticizing the shown isn't necessarily a personal attack. My frustration is more the tendency to insult the writing team who are not hear to defend themselves. Not saying you do so, but that can lead to more passionate responses.

I don't understand the need to make jokes at a show's expense but you do you

 

[SITZKRIEG!]

Those updated contacts work wonders.

Only for those allergic to the all new Retinax VI, now with lens flare protection!

But, you are quite right that criticizing the shown isn't necessarily a personal attack. My frustration is more the tendency to insult the writing team who are not hear to defend themselves. Not saying you do so, but that can lead to more passionate responses.

I don't understand the need to make jokes at a show's expense but you do you

Well, if I were a Vulcan, I'd argue that there is never a "need" to make a joke ever. As for the writing team, they're supposedly professionals who are supposed to have thicker skin even if social media, interviews, and the product might occasionally indicate otherwise. That said, there literally isn't anything stopping them from defending their work here if they're allowed to actively engage with fans elsewhere like twitter.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, if I were a Vulcan, I'd argue that there is never a "need" to make a joke ever. As for the writing team, they're supposedly professionals who are supposed to have thicker skin even if social media, interviews, and the product might occasionally indicate otherwise. That said, there literally isn't anything stopping them from defending their work here if they're allowed to actively engage with fans elsewhere like twitter.

Excellent point. I fell prey to one of my own pet peeves...

I would love if they did, honestly. It would be nice to have a discussion of how they view Star Trek.

 

[Vger23]

I wish the producers would invest some of those millions in production costs in brighter set lighting.

I'm sure it's just them being environmentally conscious about unnecessary energy expenditures.

 

[SITZKRIEG!]

Excellent point. I fell prey to one of my own pet peeves...

I would love if they did, honestly. It would be nice to have a discussion of how they view Star Trek.

I like the idea in theory but in practice it doesn't tend to end well for fans from what I've heard. Once "insiders" start frequenting a fan board (whether devs in videogames or writers/actors/whatever in comics or pop culture), anything that offends them tends to get clamped down on progressively more until anything that simply disagrees with them somewhat isn't tolerated. There is already a definite leaning on trek bbs overall that you pick up on if you're not in lockstep with it and I'd be worried about seeing that here even if I'm only typically a casual occasional poster. Mostly, I've tended to stick to the Axanar thread for updates on that mess of a project during my trips here. I think I've posted more outside of that thread in the past week or two than I ever had previously in the same timespan due to the type of negative experiences I've had mentioned above.

 

[fireproof78]

I like the idea in theory but in practice it doesn't tend to end well for fans from what I've heard. Once "insiders" start frequenting a fan board (whether devs in videogames or writers/actors/whatever in comics or pop culture), anything that offends them tends to get clamped down on progressively more until anything that simply disagrees with them somewhat isn't tolerated. There is already a definite leaning on trek bbs overall that you pick up on if you're not in lockstep with it and I'd be worried about seeing that here even if I'm only typically a casual occasional poster. Mostly, I've tended to stick to the Axanar thread for updates on that mess of a project during my trips here. I think I've posted more outside of that thread in the past week or two than I ever had previously in the same timespan due to the type of negative experiences I've had mentioned above.

I agree regarding how it could turn in to a mess. And that's why I know it won't happen but it would be nice to hear their own vision of Trek, largely because I love hearing how people view Trek.

And Axanar is a whole other train wreck of a discussion. That went south quickly in the comments.

 

[cooleddie74]

I'm sure it's just them being environmentally conscious about unnecessary energy expenditures.

 

[JeffOakland]

I don't hate it. I don't like how urgent everything is all the time. I'd like for the show to slow down, tell a coherent story and develop the characters.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, DSC just feels like it has to tell an entire story in thirty-five to fifty-five minutes and rush it. Ironic considering it's serialized viewing and doesn't need to cram as much into one episode to the point of sensory overload.

 

[Jarvisimo]

I like the idea in theory but in practice it doesn't tend to end well for fans from what I've heard. Once "insiders" start frequenting a fan board (whether devs in videogames or writers/actors/whatever in comics or pop culture), anything that offends them tends to get clamped down on progressively more until anything that simply disagrees with them somewhat isn't tolerated. There is already a definite leaning on trek bbs overall that you pick up on if you're not in lockstep with it and I'd be worried about seeing that here even if I'm only typically a casual occasional poster. Mostly, I've tended to stick to the Axanar thread for updates on that mess of a project during my trips here. I think I've posted more outside of that thread in the past week or two than I ever had previously in the same timespan due to the type of negative experiences I've had mentioned above.

But I don't think this is the case on the treklit forum where many authors post; there has been good criticism of many works there, and really open debate. Worth checking out!

 

[Vger23]

I don't hate it. I don't like how urgent everything is all the time. I'd like for the show to slow down, tell a coherent story and develop the characters.

I like the show a lot, but I think this is an extremely fair criticism. Agreed.

 

[Robert April]

TOS, TNG, DS9, I guess that worked until VOY and ENT. I used to abbreviate standard as STD, so DIS could be taken as a negative, so DISCO seems better unless maybe you hated the '70s?

ST09 probably wasn't that bad of a story - mostly - I had issues with the engineering set and a lesser degree the Apple store bridge. Into Darkness had issues with the reactor room, Beyond had issues I think with making the ship look way too large. However, if you compare them to The Final Frontier, there were plenty of embarrassing / disappointing blunders there.

 

[Robert April]

I really hate that CBS has chosen DSC as the official abbreviation for Discovery. I use DIS instead.

I mean, there are basically two naming conventions. Series with multi-word names after Star Trek: have the first letter of each of the words after Star Trek (TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9). Series with single word names have the first three letters of the first word following Star Trek (VOY, ENT).

Picard does it right, with PIC. Lower Decks kinda messes up the system with a two-word name. Arguably it should just be LD, but LDS at least has a funny in-joke in it, so it's admissable.

Discovery should absolutely be DIS though, not DSC.

Considering Lower Decks is comedy or an attempt at it anyway - I like the LDS reference. It works for me!