"You wanna see the pole?"
"Don't show him the pole."
"He's gonna see the pole. It's been visually rebooted."
"Don't show him the pole."
"He's gonna see the pole. It's been visually rebooted."
There was no choice they could make without criticism.TPTB opened themselves up to criticism when they made the choice they made.
There was no choice they could make without criticism.
Honestly, the biggest thing I see is simply that Discovery doesn't treat the familiar pieces as sacred. Spock struggling with a learning disability? Sacrilegious!100% absolutely true. The "time period" it's set in is meaningless in terms of "fan criticism" factors. It was just an easy thing for people to latch ahold of and bitch about. If it wasn't that, it would have been something else.
Bottom line- they wanted their main character to be a contemporary "adopted sibling" of Spock (for better or worse). That's not nearly as effective if it's set in a different timeframe than they put it in (pre-TOS)
I'm beginning to think that even in some bizarro world where the studio did consult with fans on making the Perfect Star Trek series, you'd only end up with fans bitching about the Stupid Studio Suits relying on amateur consultants.There was no choice they could make without criticism.
Which fans would they consult with, though? The ones who need consistent starship sizes and just want to see 42 minutes of technical specifications scroll up the screen? The ones who want maximum pewpew and to see who'd win a fight between 111 Jem'Hadar fighters and 2 Borg cubes? The ones who want a TRUE sequel to TNG? The ones who want Enterprise back? The ones who want whole new episodes of TOS using Deepfake tech?I'm beginning to think that even in some bizarro world where the studio did consult with fans on making the Perfect Star Trek series, you'd only end up with fans bitching about the Stupid Studio Suits relying on amateur consultants.
I'm beginning to think that even in some bizarro world where the studio did consult with fans on making the Perfect Star Trek series, you'd only end up with fans bitching about the Stupid Studio Suits relying on amateur consultants.
This is largely what my experience as been. Or, in other words, what Star Trek should be according to head canon.The headcanon just did not match with what was produced onscreen
There's some legitimate major problems with DISCO, but I also think there's some people who will automatically hate any Trek that's too dark, main characters who are too emotional, or in any way not conforming to their prescriptive expectation for Trek.
Game design, much like CG effects in movies is a nightmare sweatshop dictated by deadlines. Leading to cheap-looking effects in movies like Black Panther and awful unfinished buggy messes like, well, too many games to count.Even with video games, I see the amateurs upstage the professionals with better graphics
DS9 was accused of being too dark, sisko accused of being too emotional, and the show said to be something that would go against what roddenberry wanted. Yet I rate ds9 not only the best trek of the lot but one of my all time ever favorite shows.
I did not like discovery because I do not think its a good show.
I am sure plenty others feel that way and not because its dark etc.
"I would like to talk about a secret passion of mine, the exquisite art of Japanese Origam..."And the people who go out of their way to crap on it in every thread or news article where it comes up aren't the ones with legitimate criticisms of it. People who reasonably dislike DISCO are the ones who are fine letting other people enjoy it. The ones who hate bomb every mention of it they see are not.
But I think a lot of those who feel negatively toward it for legitimate reasons have those negative feelings amplified by those kinds of things, and are harder on it than they would be if the same show wasn't called Star Trek.
I tend to agree. Star Trek carries with it a huge amount of weight of expectations. Those negative feelings get build up further because the expectations are so much higher and therefor further to fall when it doesn't go as desire for "Star Trek's sacred canon" (trademark pending).Of course, there's legitimate problems with it.
But I think a lot of those who feel negatively toward it for legitimate reasons have those negative feelings amplified by those kinds of things, and are harder on it than they would be if the same show wasn't called Star Trek.
And the people who go out of their way to crap on it in every thread or news article where it comes up aren't the ones with legitimate criticisms of it. People who reasonably dislike DISCO are the ones who are fine letting other people enjoy it. The ones who hate bomb every mention of it they see are not.
I don't think it's so much that people are harder on Discovery because it's a Star Trek show. If Discovery was an independent IP, most "Disovery critical" people either never would have watched it, or would have dropped the show after just a few episodes. But because it has the Trek name, it captured a lot of eyes, along with the hardcore element of the fanbase which has to watch everything Trek.
Now, does Discovery have its problems? Um, yeah, a whole lot and that is owing largely to BTS troubles and not anything on the production values side or even the writing. I think Discovery started out as one thing, and that got completely abandoned at Fuller's firing/separation. But, his shadow loomed long due to how much money was put in to the production design.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.