yeah. It's just a shame that their first streaming movie, and hopefully not the last, was a swing and a miss
Spoilers STAR TREK: SECTION 31 - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
yeah. It's just a shame that their first streaming movie, and hopefully not the last, was a swing and a miss
Thats the problem. If they didn’t want to bump against canon a full reboot should hsve neen done. No connections to tos or the berman era shows. That or they just could have continued on the tng era with a new ship and cast like tng did years ago following tos.
Had they continued in the TNG era, they would've eventually bumped up against canon.
Disco tried to be a clean break. The fans squawked about canon, so the show brought in Pike and Spock.
Jessie Gender has me really curious now. Enjoyed her review of it.
How's that working out for Stargate? Oh wait, it's been effectivly dead since Stargate: Universe.
A few people on a forum dedicated to startrek are talking about it like they're watching it.
And a number of those have included the words "I stopped watching after XX minutes", which is past a yellow alert and fully into red.
If this was 20 years ago maybe you would have a point.
Now days however the Oscar's are just an excuse for Hollywood to pat themselves on the back.
They would have had to blackbox the movie before releasing it to do that.
Stargate is not like Star Trek. Star Trek endures far worrse and will be fine.
Unless people stop watching all Trek. Unlikely.
I talk Trek on about 4 different sites.
No. They would have moved from 2401 forward. Its harder to wreck past canon when youre moving forward in time.
Except the time wars shit.
Thanks, Daniels.
Thanks, Daniels.
A few things...
Star Trek will never do Harry Potter better than Harry Potter. Star Trek will never do Suicide Squad better than Suicide Squad. Star Trek will never do Guardians of the Galaxy better than Guardians of the Galaxy. Hell, Star Trek will never do Star Wars better than Star Wars. Star Trek has always been more of a niche franchise. A steady and reliable performer that will be profitable assuming budgets are the right size and the creativity exists to work within them.
Sure, NEM was a creative failure. But as Lord Garth has pointed out in the past, NEM's budget was so high (thanks in part to Patrick Stewart's salary demands) that it was facing a no win scenario because it failed to account for the average ceiling on the Star Trek movie box office revenue.
It's said with the current "you need to earn 3X back your budget model" that STID barely (or didn't) break even. STB lost money. The reason there hasn't been an Abramsverse film in production for ten years now is that Abrams and the casts' salary demands exceed the budget that would be required to produce a reasonably profitable film.
Star Trek with a twist might work as a streaming project. But generic sci fi project 447 with a hint of Star Trek didn't work here. The Orville arguably did Star Trek better than some Star Trek projects from the last seven years. The more solid of a foundation Star Trek has, the more space it has to try new things. Instead the formula has been massively misbalanced, with this as the result.
It doesn't help that there are some Star Trek fans that are seemingly so bored with the franchise that they've just become nihilists. There's other genre stuff out there for you guys.
"The Enemy Within" mode for good and evil. Or hell, the filter Armus' people used to dump all their bad shit into one unfortunate...
This is fine in theory. But this project is bound to have a limited appeal, and needs to be budgeted accordingly. The most expensive sets in Star Trek history and actors like Paul Giamatti cost real money. SFA at $2-3 million an episode might work. But rumors are coming in season 1 was $12 million(!) an episode thanks to all the start up costs. Sure, it could just be the usual internet misinformation. For all we know, Holly Hunter and Paul Giamatti are working for scale. But, likely, not.
What's hard is NuTrek far too often relies on existing Star Trek as a crutch while arbitrarily changing things.
Picard S1 had Irish Romulans, English Romulans. Hell, the novels had Welsh Bajorans, and that's literally how they were described in the novel.
That's been the case since 1998.
Which people did during this movie.
All of which I am sure are similarly niche in their subject matter.
Because of the way Time Wars work, all that was set in stone about the Time War was that there was a Time War.
If SFA really cost 12m per episode it's going to be dead on arrival so far as making back it's investment is concerned.
Which is really annoying when you consider that they probably could have done Legacy for less than Picard and it could have been about as if not more successful.
LOL
This is the most deranged and bipolar review of Section 31 I've seen/read.
Example 1:
- OMG OMG OMG It's so cool that they are honoring Michelle Yeoh's Chinese heritage by incorporating Chinese designs into the Terran Empire design.
- OMG It's so problematic that they are incorporating Chinese designs into the Terran Empire design, because it invokes Orientalism.
Example 2:
- OMG OMG OMG It's so cool that Philippa Georgiou is bisexual.
- OMG It's so problematic that Philippa Georgiou is bisexual, because Empress Philippa Georgiou is a depraved character and by making her bisexual, they invoke the "depraved bisexual trope".
Example 3:
- OMG OMG OMG Olatunde Osunsanmi is so cool, because he was pushing for diversity on Discovery.
- Olatunde Osunsanmi is a bad director.
Cinematography and fight choreography are bad. Nothing feels clear or given proper weight by the camera. No sense of spatial relationship or scale. Shots have no impact, they feel weightless. The villain gets introduced with a generic medium shot. Constant moving shots that mimic the kinetic energy of JJ Abrams films. Visual feel unmotivated.
This person is obsessed with "current day California shit".
It's problematic that Bo Yeon Kim and Erika Lippoldt are no longer associated with Section 31 because they are two women and one woman of color?
Yeah right, race and gender identity are the most important thing when it comes to writers.
BTW:
Jessie Gender critiques "biological essentialism" in Star Trek, yet is guilty of exactly that.
Jessie Gender likes that Philippa Georgiou is associated with Chinese culture.
That is arguing for that people of Han ethnic descent, no matter where they are in the universe, no matter their upbringing, are associated with Chinese culture.
That is one core aspect of "biological essentialism". People of a certain ethnicity are associated with a specific culture.
Last edited:
There's nothing wrong with a being a niche product as long as you're popular in that niche. And I've always felt that if a television series or a movie can say it did what it does best in the best way it can creatively, it will eventually find an audience. If you have a ready-made audience that's asking, if not begging, to get something a certain way, give them the best version of that possible.
If you had a market for Coca-Cola, most people would think it malpractice for the executives in charge to say: "Nah, we just can't give them the Coke they're asking for. We gotta create Coke energy drinks that'll appeal to younger people for the future, and give them a version of Coke that tastes more like Pepsi to try to get some of that market too, instead of just giving them Coca-Cola."
It's a much better place being in that niche than trying to be something to appeal to more hypothetical viewers, and doing that in a mediocre way that seems inferior to both its core fans and general audiences. By trying to please everyone, it ends up pleasing no one.
That's something I don't think people understand. I've seen multiple comments rebuke the idea of doing something closer to an old-school Trek show. They'll lament it as being unoriginal and stopping new ideas and experimentation.
But one thing that's not talked about is that within the classic episodic formula there's a lot of flexibility to address different topics, appeal to different audiences, and do different stories that allows for spotlights on an ensemble and explore all the characters. Except for Strange New Worlds, all of the live-action shows on Paramount+ have mostly been series tied down to one serialized story, centered on one character, and if the audience isn't in to it they me be out.
Also, what we've had with the strategy that Paramount has pursued for Star Trek on Paramount+ has been slicing the niche of Star Trek down even further to appeal to a smaller segment of the market with shows targeted to specific demos, instead of something with broad appeal meant to cover all 4 corners of the audience.
I say this all the time.
My protest against classic Trek is not format but the "Where are they now?" style stories suggestions of visiting the Klingons, the Romulans, the Trill, the Dominion, etc.
Orville didn't fail for me because of format; it failed because they sabotaged the captain from the get go. Format is not the issue.
Amazing. Everything you just said is wrong.Star Trek used be an important part of American popular culture. The show was a pinnacle of the entertainment industry in terms of its quality in writing, creativity, direction and general production. I do admit though that sometimes the acting could be something to be desired. Star Trek represented the positive and progressive aspects of American society and culture of the 20th century, yet at the same time giving optimism and inspiration for our entire global community, which is why the show became such a global phenomenon. Star Trek wasn’t always utopian or about trying to be perfect, no world ever is; the writing was about the intention of the betterment of humanity. Star Trek championed things such as social progression and cohesion, shared optimism for the future, showing how humanity can one day come together as one to explore the final frontier. Star Trek inspired scientists and politicians as well as every day folk such as you and I. Star Trek no longer inspires… instead, the show has more often than not become a dark generic sci-fi, written under the banner of Star Trek for brand recognition.
As the entertainment industry has become ever more increasingly saturated with both creatives and content, movies and television series all chasing to push boundaries and stand out has resulted…. Star Trek joined this ‘rat race’. Star Trek’s very concept has been distorted either through lack of understanding of what the show is all about, or by intention. Whatever those intentions were, I do not know.
The problem with trying to appeal to everyone with a single offering is that you end up with a bland, boring mess that appeals to no one.
That's what I'm thinking. If they didn't want to bump against canon, they could've just set DISCO in the 25th or 26th centuries. Doing that would've also cut out some of the initial fandom heartburn. That way Burnham wouldn't have been Spock's sister, and I think there might have been less consternation over the DISCO Klingons and the technology. Heck, they could've also just had Section 31 out in the open with no problem.
