I wasn't meaning you in particular, just an overall statement of a trend.
Ah, okay.

I wasn't meaning you in particular, just an overall statement of a trend.
I never said it was lazy, stupid, or braindead. I was saying it feels like mixed messages when you have Detmer and co. getting names and some dialogue along with 'get to know...' specials and there not being much done with them afterward.
I’m going to do what I don’t normally do and suggest a podcast. I’ve suggested it before in regards to Picard season 3 and I feel after the conversation here the past few days, I think it’s very relevant. Mission Log Live: A Roddenberry Podcast took a look at the entire season in their latest episode. They’ve looked at each episode individually and have been a little critical but in this episode, right around the 1 hour mark, there’s a caller who does in fact call out the season for exactly what a lot of us have been saying here. One of the hosts basically say that they have every right to feel that way and express their opinions. Not sure if the caller (or the host) is one of us (I doubt it but it could be) but it’s nice to see some not 100% with this season opinions validated. Listen. Maybe you’ll learn something.
I have to laugh because maybe my experience is way different but I grew up with trading cards and then the huge media push for various characters in the Phantom Menace, and almost every character got a special shout out and whatnot to promote the movie, even if they were there for 5 minutes with two lines. So, seeing things on a website I consider of lesser importance.
I've never seen THE WEST WING, so I have no way of knowing.
Not everyone is worthy of the same respect.
You understand a joke? Sorry, maybe I should put lol after everything.
I’m sarcastic. Pretty much chronically. How I roll. If you can’t pick that up from most of my posts, I don’t know what to tell you.
Your Cult of Lord Terry Matalas posts certainly exemplify that.
Alright... I'll remember you said that the next time I post something similar.
I'm on a Star Trek board, have done conventions, costumes and fan films. If someone calls me cool the lighting was bad.I’m sure you will. But I won’t get upset if someone calls me not cool. Already know that I’m not.
I’m sure you will. But I won’t get upset if someone calls me not cool. Already know that I’m not.
I'm on a Star Trek board, have done conventions, costumes and fan films. If someone calls me cool the lighting was bad.
Not really.That's actually interesting.
You must have missed my laughing emoji earlier.
I'm on a Star Trek board, have done conventions, costumes and fan films. If someone calls me cool the lighting was bad.
So basically, my point in bringing up all this talk of The West Wing is that a workplace drama can star characters from a variety of positions in the workplace hierarchy, without that meaning it's a badly-written show. In short: Television workplace dramas do not have a creative obligation to center everyone who's higher up in the hierarchy. The Vice President on The West Wing is a recurring guest star but has a minor narrative role, for instance. And characters can be present without being developed without that meaning that the show is violating some principle of good writing.
I see your point, and while I don't think it's always in good faith, I will speak up and share what I think might be the psychology around it. For many, watching a Star Trek show is pretty standard behavior, even if it isn't their favorite. But, when they really don't like it there is always a need to resolve the cognitive dissonance for why they don't like it. It's like the thought process is, "It's a Star Trek show; I'm a Star Trek fan. I should be loving this. But I'm not." So they try to find the possible reasons even though it just comes down to personal preference for entertainment.I feel like people are really reaching with their nitpicks about the bridge crew at this point and they just don't want to like the show. Now, there are valid reasons to not like the show but when you're complaining that you don't like it, in part, because minor characters have names and speaking roles I think it's a bad faith argument.
I feel like people are really reaching with their nitpicks about the bridge crew at this point and they just don't want to like the show. Now, there are valid reasons to not like the show but when you're complaining that you don't like it, in part, because minor characters have names and speaking roles I think it's a bad faith argument.
Or...It seems like the same tired talking point that if every single character that we see on screen with a name doesn't get a comprehensive and complete backstory its "lazy and stupid writing" filled with plot holes.
Its a tired, braindead criticism that has no connection to reality
The inability to give even the shallowest of depth to minor characters is indicative of how the writing has been unable to get a significant swath of the potential audience to connect with the protagonist of Discovery.
That maybe the reason the main character of the show has become a meme for being an over-emotional whispering character might be because they've based their plotting in bad cliches.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.