A kilt is a type of skirt.
Early Criticism: What’s Unfounded and What Isn’t
- Thread starter trekfan_1
- Start date
There is very rarely constructive criticism. They're rarely an observation of what could be improved, or praising what was successful.
It mind if reminds me of the relationship between Quark and Ishka.
The scene you are referring to was Bond working undercover. It was not a part of his regular dress.
Isn't he a Scotsman? I imagine there were times when Bond wore a kilt as part of his regular dress.
Father Andrew Bond, Scottish, Mother Monique Delacroix of the Canton of Vaude in Switzerland.
I believe this was an after the fact retconning of the character by Ian Fleming after Sean Connery's casting. I could be mistaken on that however.
Yep, Bond is a Scot because Fleming liked Connery in the role. Though he had misgivings at first.
I watched it through, I'd have to agree with you, I did not find it "hating" in any way, if anything it was more of a synopsis video as to why dislike for the show exists, and the rationale for that.
Now if there is objection/disagreement to that rationale, that's fine, but that doesn't qualify as 'hating'.
It's important to absorb information from different sources, different perspectives as that it where knowledge come from and the ability to parse out incorrect information. Otherwise people will stay in their echo chambers and refuse to come out, and we have a culture of that now...dismissing the message (or the messenger) without knowing (or listening to) the message.
Last edited:
Exactly.
I freely admit the show was always going to be a tough sell for me because of the premise. I've never been a fan of shows like Saved By The Bell, Beverly Hills 90210, Party of Five, Dawson Creek, etc. They've never been my cup of tea even when I was in that targeted demographic. In fact, I watched Star Trek to get AWAY from that brain dead type of television. But I wanted to give it a fair shot and I really wish I hadn't. It's soooooo bad.
Most Star Trek shows had characters I could relate to and looked forward to seeing every week. SFA has none of that. There isn't a single character I can identify with, none that I care to see what happens next week and the writing is so piss poor that I'm curious how much of it came from AI. The lead character, who is suppose to be a Commandant, has no military bearing of any kind and is completely unbelievable in her role. No cadet would ever take her seriously and someone that unsat would have been kicked out of the service a long time ago. This is suppose to be a military academy, the best of the best, but the way so many of these cadets are portrayed, they would never pass a military boot camp. I don't blame the actors, they are let down by writers who care more about the cheap laugh than character integrity.
I could go on and on. The show clearly isn't for me and that's fine. But reading some of the comments here from people trying to quash criticism is just plain sad. Sticking their fingers in their ear, pretending that all the complaints against the show aren't valid is just living in a fantasy world.
That about wraps up this topic, then.
based on his synopsis above , that' s not the "hill" in question
Countless posts about what is and isn't a skirt says otherwise.
I think you touched upon a good point in that ST in general was what peopled turned to when the other stuff on was so formulaic...
however when ST starts to incorporate the same tropes that all other shows incorporate, well what then differentiates it from everything else, aside from the name badge....again this is nothing new....
it's just wrapped in euphemisms: "Fresh Take", "Modern Audience" read as: we're using the name but doing something completely different.
Imagine if TOS had Sherwood Schwartz type pranks like the Brady Bunch and Gilligan's Island, popular shows in the mid and late 60s, early 70s.
(Trying to picture Spock getting hit in the head with a Football and then screaming "Oh, My Ears!!!"
)
but not his synopsis
What would count as acceptable to you in terms of how much your views need to be accepted for you to feel like criticism isn't quashed? I mostly see people just disagreeing.
So? Does that somehow disprove my statement?
in his post (being referenced) he mentioned nothing about skirts, he mentions the series proper and his discontentment with it.
You'll note I didn't quote that post. That's because I was referring to more that just that.
It‘s honestly kind of baffling (if not totally surprising) how much discussion a male character wearing a skirt can generate. These producers are playing certain parts of the audience like a fiddle. 
This can only come from someone who I‘m certain has never watched even a single episode of that show. I‘m sorry, but this is just some prejudice you have towards it, because it‘s actually some well-written coming of age drama with solid character work and intelligent dialogue. The protagonists being young people and the topic often being their adolescent love lives doesn‘t make it “brain dead television”.
Similar threads
- Poll
