Early Criticism: What’s Unfounded and What Isn’t

[CT_Phipps]

I admit I was very naughty and dipped my toe back into toxic social media. One of the posts was about how Star Trek women were sexier than the current ones ST:SFA and used Sam as a negative.

I said, "Why are you wanting to creep on a hologram meant to be a six month old presenting as seventeen?"

 

[SatrianiRules]

I don't think that is disputable To be honest....TOS and TNG women were insanely sexy, and beautiful in most cases...

 

[fireproof78]

I'm not very interested in attractiveness of actors or actresses in media.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I'm not very interested in attractiveness of actors or actresses in media.

The only thing that matters is how well they play the role, and the SFA cast has been stellar so far.

 

[SatrianiRules]

yes, but...nothing wrong with eye candy

 

[fireproof78]

There are many things wrong with eye candy.

 

[Set Harth]

For one thing, eye cavities.

 

[Starflight]

The SFA cast all look comically gorgeous to me, I think it's something about modern cameras or makeup techniques. Same for Strange New Worlds, everyone looks like an Instagram model.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The SFA cast all look comically gorgeous to me, I think it's something about modern cameras or makeup techniques. Same for Strange New Worlds, everyone looks like an Instagram model.

No clue what "Instagram model" implies. Is that good???? (Not a Social Media user)
Casting attractive people doesn't seem odd to me. Most Treks have done this.

 

[Starflight]

No clue what "Instagram model" implies. Is that good???? (Not a Social Media user)

It's a good thing, I mean it as a compliment, but I guess it also describes an on-screen look that's perhaps a bit eerily perfect - again I'd bet it's down to modern cameras, filters, and makeup artistry, which make already-attractive people look absolutely flawless, whereas older cameras seemed to always show skin imperfections, sweat, and dodgy makeup up much more sharply, and often in way harsher lighting.

All the actors look great IRL of course.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I'm not very interested in attractiveness of actors or actresses in media.

What about their characters and whatever role that plays in the perception of the characters?

 

[Fateor]

There are many things wrong with eye candy.

Not inherently.

There can be problems associated with how it's handled, but that's true for pretty much anything.

 

[fireproof78]

What about their characters and whatever role that plays in the perception of the characters?

I don't follow? My perception of an actor is purely on performance not looks

Not inherently.

There can be problems associated with how it's handled, but that's true for pretty much anything.

I disagree.

 

[Fateor]

I disagree.

You disagreeing doesn't really change the reality of it.

Because the effectivness of eye candy is well documented.

 

[fireproof78]

You disagreeing doesn't really change the reality of it.

Because the effectivness of eye candy is well documented.

I didn't say it wasn't effective; you're reading in to my statement an argument not present in the text.

I said there are many problems with it. And I stand by it.

 

[SatrianiRules]

You disagreeing doesn't really change the reality of it.

Because the effectivness of eye candy is well documented.

It appeals to anyone, whether it's Gal Gadot looking stunning in her WW costume or a naked and jacked Chris Hemsworth in Thor Love and Thunder..everyone has their thing

 

[bdub76]

There is an X-Files episode called Humbug, where the writer makes fun of the fact that the two leads are attractive. The self-awareness makes this episode shine. The Darin Morgan episodes really stands out for that series.

Humbug (The X-Files) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Having good looking leads isn't really a complaint. The show still needs good stories.

The last YA science fiction show I watched was The 100, so it can be done well.

 

[CT_Phipps]

I'm not very interested in attractiveness of actors or actresses in media.

I am. I love looking at pretty people as does my wife.

The cast of Starfleet Academy is also as attractive as any other, it just has a bigger focus on the male eye candy.

 

[bdub76]

The cast of Starfleet Academy is also as attractive as any other, it just has a bigger focus on the male eye candy.

I heard this bit criticized on YouTube today. The idea was that young women don't watch science fiction. Now, I do see a lot of women at Doctor Who conventions once the series restarted in 2004. However, I know a lot of women that avoid science fiction books. It's possible that this show is going for a small demographic on P+, but I have no idea how much of the target demographic is P+ subscribers.

What I like about The 100 was that you had both attractive women and men. There wasn't an emphasis one gender being more attractive than the other.

 

[CT_Phipps]

I heard this bit criticized on YouTube today. The idea was that young women don't watch science fiction. Now, I do see a lot of women at Doctor Who conventions once the series restarted in 2004. However, I know a lot of women that avoid science fiction books. It's possible that this show is going for a small demographic on P+, but I have no idea how much of the target demographic is P+ subscribers.

What I like about The 100 was that you had both attractive women and men. There wasn't an emphasis one gender being more attractive than the other.

On the reunion documentary of Gilligan's Island, Russell Johnson (The Professor) said his interview for the show consisted of taking his shirt off.

That always amused me.