Follow up question (not that it will be answered because no one cares to answer it): why are these more egregious than past Treks? What makes these canon violations worthy of commentary vs. other series violations?
SNW truly respects TOS continuity!
- Thread starter C.E. Evans
- Start date
Quiet, we do not speak of this.
That's my feeling on Avatar. It's the most successful movie ever and I thought it was nothing more than a well polished turd. Sure my opinion is the minority but...so what? I'm still not buying the blu-ray nor will I bother with the sequals, but if others like it...enjoy.
I've never understood some people's fascination with having to "prove" how good their favorite movie or T.V show is or how bad their most hated movie or show is. If you like it, enjoy. If you don't, ignore it and watch something else. Pulling up data from Canada to prove popularity is so childish. I don't like every Trek show but I don't go on those forums to troll the people that do.
And canon violations? Every Trek show in existence has violated canon at some point. The TOS violated canon the moment Spock turned from an emotional Vulcan in the Cage to a calm, logical Vulcan who never smiled and Kirk's middle initial changed from an R to a T. Yet somehow Star Trek has continued to survive.
Get a life Char Kais
Last edited:
Because his mother locked him in the basement a few years back.
She tosses Hot Pockets & bottles of DEW down every once in awhile so as to avoid child endangerment laws.
Thank you for proving my point
I want to know what the end game is? What do we hope to prove? And, in a franchise that uses Spock and Data has example characters I would challenge this quest with "Where's the logic in that?"
My guess would be to make themselves feel better because there is no way to prove an opinion. This seems to happen with every new series or movie in the Trek Universe. Some Trekkies will tie themselves in knots over trying to prove how bad the new show is.Thank you for proving my point
I want to know what the end game is? What do we hope to prove? And, in a franchise that uses Spock and Data has example characters I would challenge this quest with "Where's the logic in that?"
How so?
Worth it?
When I don't like a show I either don't watch or stop watching. I don't think about it, obsess about it in message boards, post about it, follow the ratings of it, etc..I watch and do stuff I do enjoy. It just seems so bizarre to me. And he conveniently ignored my posts again showing the popularity of Disco on Paramount Plus and asking why he obsesses about this. I guess the ratings number in canada are more important than Discovery being number 1 or 2 on Paramount Plus to him LOL!!!
Not just here. He obsesses about hating the new Trek shows on social media and trying to show how they are failures and it's pretty much the only thing he posts about.
You should take a look at the DS9, VOY, and ENT some time. Huge decline in ratings..ENT was the 150th rated show on network television in the USA (and ahem cancelled with less seasons than DISCO now). VOY was consistently around the 90th place. By the end of DS9's first season the show had already lost half the viewers that tuned in for the pilot...so yea most Trek shows have had a decline in viewership (at a greater percentage than the Canada numbers you posted)..and??? Does that mean those older shows are failures by your logic?
So... charts about Canadian TV ratings are being used to prove that SNW does/does not respect TOS continuity?
Okay cool whatever floats your boats.
Okay cool whatever floats your boats.
T'Pring, Chapel, and M'Benga. the use of them in SNW doesn't make much sense. Chapel had a career in Bio Research and gave it up to serve on a Starship in search of Roger Corby. She signed on the Enterprise after his death (or his Robot copy's death). M'Benga as CMO makes no sense when he is a Vulcan medicine specialist. It would be weird for him to come back on board and not be CMO again. These are not actual violations of canon because they can be explained away, but this is the sort of thing you do in a reboot when you want to mix things up a bit. The don't feel canon. They feel like a reboot which goes with all the visuals and all the canon violations in Discovery.
They show a decline in viewership of NuTrek shows, countering the narrative that these are popular shows, which is an argument used to counter criticisms of narrative issues, plot holes, canon violations, inconsistencies, ETC. (Which is the root of discussion: https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/snw-truly-respects-tos-continuity.311582/page-2#post-14177062)
What are you talking about?
These are two examples of my original data source (Numeris) that I use to compile this overview:
I chose these two examples to show that these are broadcast viewership numbers, that include CTV Sci-Fi, and not the "Crave" numbers. What is so hard to understand about that? Read the thread, not just one post.
Yes, I do have a list, because I compiled that list from Numeris data.
No, they don't. I did that. I compiled that list from Numeris data.
And no, it's not a lot of work.
People here seem to have an obscure notion that is a hugely time-consuming task. It's not.
It's not hard to go to a website, download a PDF and write down a number in a text file.
Ok, so now I'm also accused of fabricating data. LOL!
It's the wrong data!
It's incomplete data!
It's irrelevant data!
It's fabricated data!
LOL!
Any more accusations? You people are throwing the kitchen sink at me, just to avoid acknowledging that these shows are not hits and waning in popularity.
My source for these numbers is Numeris. https://numeris.ca/
I go to the website, download the PDF with the weekly overview, and write down the viewership number in a text file.
None of this means anything. Star Trek has been a ratings disaster since it's inception. The only series that rated remotely well was TNG. DS9, VOY and ENT all haemorraghed viewers each season. Here in Australia, 90's trek rated so badly it was continually placed in a week night 12am slot. The overall lack of viewership in the U.S is why Worf joined DS9, why Voyager got Seven of Nine and why Enterprise had the Xindi arc. However, having low ratings doesn't mean that a franchise isn't successful. Star Trek by all degrees is a successful franchise, but it's not because of it's TV ratings.
Which version? Because both are wearing starfleet uniforms. That means in both TOS and STN she is in starfleet and acting as a medical officer on the Enterprise (chief nurse in both cases I believe). That has nothing to do with a Bio Research career, though they did include more of that background in SNW.
Last edited:
I'll answer.
Previous canon violations have been from honest mistakes and inattention to detail. Discovery was a deliberate reset without even trying to follow what had been established. TOS through Enterprise tried and sometimes failed. Discovery didn't try. Strange New Worlds and Picard are trying within the limits imposed on them by the association with Discovery.
Or just changes made for the sake of change.
I don't see the difference at this point. The only difference is somehow this breaks continuity and therefore is bad.
Numbers? What numbers? The "demand score" BS?
Here are some numbers:
Strange New Worlds is the first live-action NuTrek show that is not in the Top 30. Even the season premier of Lower Decks was in the Top 30.
And speaking of "demand":
You can't even see Strange New Worlds or any NuTrek show when you compare them to really popular shows.
"Huge" "demand". That's not what a "hit" looks like.
I feel very sad for you.
I hope one day you can find a way to use your time a way that is both intelligent and constructive.
Similar threads
