My first fan film easily could have been either Stargate or Star Wars based on our location establishing shots.Much like nearly every planet in all the Stargate series looked like the Pacific Northwest. At least they were consistent...
Tawny Newsome and Justin Simien developing new live-action Trek series
- Thread starter Precious Tritium
- Start date
Is it the domed adobe hovels in the desert?The show skimped on set design (it was as if they transplanted houses from Stranger Things and plopped them into the SW universe.)
SW has had its own design vocabulary for nearly half a century now. How about ACTING like it?
The Neo-futurist art deco cityscapes?
The wooden rustic huts nestled high up in trees?
The towering gothic castles in Not Alaska?
The Mediterranean Roman Classical palaces?
This is the most ridiculous argument to make about production design in Star Wars, which has always been good at developing varying looks for the variety of planets we've seen over the years.The show skimped on set design (it was as if they transplanted houses from Stranger Things and plopped them into the SW universe.)
SW has had its own design vocabulary for nearly half a century now. How about ACTING like it?
It's also weird to argue when any given state in the US varies from built-up urban sprawl, to suburb, to farms, fields, deserts, and so on. Are you also going to complain that you can replicate much of the scenery of the world in California alone? Is the state not consistent enough its natural set design for you?
Et tu, Brute'?
It's the latter. I don't want to watch Star Trek because somebody decided that they want to turn it into a sitcom. That's mainly the reason why I never liked Lower Decks, although I watched it. I found the humor mostly unfunny, the characters silly and the f-bomb bleeping annoying, which just got worse over time. I understand that some people like the show. That's fine. I watched it because I was trying to give it a chance, because I think a really good show was buried there under all the stupid humor and annoying crew. But that good show just never came out. Unlike, say, The Orville, which got really good once McFarlane wasn't constrained by FOX's mandate that the show needed to be Family Guy in space.
Sure, I suppose that's possible, considering the Orville example I gave above. But I really don't think so. Because Tawny isn't McFarlane. From what I understand, she's not trying to make a serious show that happens to have humorous overtones. She's just making a sitcom. And I have no interest in that, at least not enough to pay for a Paramount+ subscription to see it.
Most sitcoms these days have their serious moments. No idea what the ratio will be.
Well if you watch it, feel free to let me know how many serious moments there are.
will do!
That's just most sitcoms. My wife and I are rewatching the original Night Court and it had one of the best serious takes on unconditional love and attachment that I have seen in a show. If I ever teach on attachment theory I'll be using that clip.
Which episode? (I love Night Court)
"Married Alive," from Season 2. Dan describing how he is able to just be himself with a woman he falls in love with is a beautiful description. The episode ends on a bit of a down note, and despite the comedic trapping is very touching.
I'm not sure I understand why, knowing the entire premise of the show beforehand (which you just described), you watched it expecting it to be something else...?
That's kind of a strange way of thinking.
They also watched sci-fi sitcom The Orville, which did turn out to be their kind of thing, so you never 100% know unless you try watching a show yourself.
Personally I loved Lower Decks and disliked The Orville, because of its focus on people in relationships, and I would've had no idea about that if I hadn't seen it myself because no one talks about it.
Personally I loved Lower Decks and disliked The Orville, because of its focus on people in relationships, and I would've had no idea about that if I hadn't seen it myself because no one talks about it.
I'm pretty sure that folks were discussing that Other Show quite extensively in the specific threads that deal with it all over the internet prior to its launch.
Just like Lower Decks was thoroughly discussed and speculated about here and other web places before it premiered.
Both were well known entities by those that cared, even before the first episodes hit the airwaves.
So, your premise just indicates to me that a bit of laziness about something that one supposedly is interested in was involved.
Just like Lower Decks was thoroughly discussed and speculated about here and other web places before it premiered.
Both were well known entities by those that cared, even before the first episodes hit the airwaves.
So, your premise just indicates to me that a bit of laziness about something that one supposedly is interested in was involved.
You can't know what a show will eventually turn into before the first episode airs and episode discussions tend to spoil what happens in the episodes.
I'm always willing to give a Star Trek show a chance, and that all Trek shows tend to change over time. And if I decide that I don't like it after a certain period of time, I stop watching it. That's what happened with ENT and DSC. With LDS, I felt that it was stupid at first but that it would get better later, just like The Orville did. And as I mentioned before, I could see some good things coming to the surface (the episode wej' duj', or however it's spelled, was an example of this.) Unfortunately, it never seemed to grow beyond that for me. I'm pretty sure that if it got renewed for a 6th season, I would have stopped watching it.
That makes sense. Lower Decks was a lot like the '90s Trek shows, except hyperactive and played for comedy. Make it less absurd and comedic (and animated) and you get a really good '90s Trek show.
"Turning Star Trek into a sitcom" is not exactly accurate. When you say Star Trek, I assume you mean the general franchise. They are not turning the general franchise into a sitcom. Just one show.
It's obvious from Kurtzman"s comments in the past that this is an intentional strategy . He often says certain shows will resonate with some and certain shows with others.
So it's obvious they want to mix in concepts using traditional Trek formulas and some that are not for multiple shows. . He wants to throw the biggest net possible to reach Trek fans and non Trek fans.
Is this a good methodology/is it working? I have my doubts. But that is what they are trying to do.. Think they want a corner of the Star Trek universe to be a comedy, not the entirety of the franchise.
Lower Decks is one of my favorite Trek shows so I'm happy to see more comedy in the Star Trek universe personally...there's so much unintentionally hilarious stuff in every iteration of the franchise that there's plenty to mine for laughs. I wouldn't want the franchise to become all comedy at the expense of normal drama but I think it's fine for not every show to be for everyone, especially in an era where so many different things are being produced.
Last edited:
I'm not a fan of office comedy shows or live action sitcoms, so I really don't think it'll be for me. I will of course try it out, though.
It'll be just my luck that it's a huge hit and becomes the only kind of Trek they make for decades to come
It'll be just my luck that it's a huge hit and becomes the only kind of Trek they make for decades to come
