If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

[BillJ]

It's complicated because there is an apparent delineation between the 'insular' fans and those of who who simple 'like' it with no apparent explanation.

There is no such delineation between people who watch the majority of sitcoms. Obviously in order for such a delineation to subsist the medium must be presenting something to forge the separation between you and I.

Not as simple as you seem to be painting it.

Seriously? There has to be a reason?

Why are you so hellbent on defining who should or shouldn't be a fan? Do you not want the unclean, dumber masses enjoying your TV show?

It's a TV show. It's there for entertainment. And as luck would have it, it entertains many of us here. Stop overthinking this, cupcake.

But none of this explains why you are putting so much effort into explaining that it is simple entertainment and nothing of value beyond this. In fact, your efforts belie your claims.

There's just something about blatant idiocy that brings out our inner nerd.

 

[RoJoHen]

It's complicated because there is an apparent delineation between the 'insular' fans and those of who who simple 'like' it with no apparent explanation.

Okay...

I like Star Trek because I enjoy the actors and the characters. I enjoy the stories. I enjoy the space battles. I enjoy the humor. I enjoy a lot of things about Star Trek. I've been watching Star Trek since I was a little kid. I also like that it explores the human condition and attempts to show the hope of the future. I like all of those things.

Okay

Did I just win?

 

[trek_futurist]

Seriously? There has to be a reason?

Why are you so hellbent on defining who should or shouldn't be a fan? Do you not want the unclean, dumber masses enjoying your TV show?

It's a TV show. It's there for entertainment. And as luck would have it, it entertains many of us here. Stop overthinking this, cupcake.

But none of this explains why you are putting so much effort into explaining that it is simple entertainment and nothing of value beyond this. In fact, your efforts belie your claims.

Nobody has said that is has no value beyond entertainment. You're putting words in people's mouths again.

It's a TV show. It's main purpose is to provide entertainment and make money. But it can also explore science and morality and the human condition. You do get that it's possible to have both, right?

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Can't that be done with much less effort? jersey shore entertains people.

 

[RoJoHen]

But none of this explains why you are putting so much effort into explaining that it is simple entertainment and nothing of value beyond this. In fact, your efforts belie your claims.

Nobody has said that is has no value beyond entertainment. You're putting words in people's mouths again.

It's a TV show. It's main purpose is to provide entertainment and make money. But it can also explore science and morality and the human condition. You do get that it's possible to have both, right?

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Because the people in charge wouldn't make it if they didn't think it would be profitable. The same is true of every TV show.

 

[MasuPu'a]

If this is your reasoning, why not watch anything else that is generally considered 'entertaining'? Why star trek? I don't get it. Especially if its 'insular' fan base annoys most of you.

I don't watch Star Trek because the masses tell me it's entertaining. I watch Star Trek because I find it entertaining. Why do YOU watch Star Trek?

TV and movies are meant to entertain. Entertainment is entirely subjective. Different people are entertained by different things. If a TV show also happens to teach morals or life lessons, great, but that's not the reason I watch them.

Star Trek is just a TV show. You seem intent on elevating into something more. Just because you get more out of it doesn't make it anything other than a TV show.

If your view of it is this simplistic, what are you here to discuss? Anything?

Honestly, I'm wondering what exactly you are here to discuss. You started a thread constructed out of fallacious arguments formed solely from opinion, seemingly tailored specifically to piss people off as you also leave no room for disagreement and start everything off with an imaginary label of 'real' Trek fans. Your stance seems to be a rather self-righteous "I'm right and everyone who disagrees are fake Trek fans who are too stupid to understand real sci-fi." Even when people point out the flaws in your reasoning, you continue to argue with more opinion-based arguments. When that doesn't work you fall back to throwing out red herrings that muddle up this pointless debate even further.

What are you here to discuss? Because so far I haven't seen you 'discuss' anything.

 

[trek_futurist]

Nobody has said that is has no value beyond entertainment. You're putting words in people's mouths again.

It's a TV show. It's main purpose is to provide entertainment and make money. But it can also explore science and morality and the human condition. You do get that it's possible to have both, right?

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Because the people in charge wouldn't make it if they didn't think it would be profitable. The same is true of every TV show.

Profit can be had with much less effort and financial sacrifice. Day time talk shows entertain people.

 

[trek_futurist]

I don't watch Star Trek because the masses tell me it's entertaining. I watch Star Trek because I find it entertaining. Why do YOU watch Star Trek?

TV and movies are meant to entertain. Entertainment is entirely subjective. Different people are entertained by different things. If a TV show also happens to teach morals or life lessons, great, but that's not the reason I watch them.

Star Trek is just a TV show. You seem intent on elevating into something more. Just because you get more out of it doesn't make it anything other than a TV show.

If your view of it is this simplistic, what are you here to discuss? Anything?

Honestly, I'm wondering what exactly you are here to discuss. You started a thread constructed out of fallacious arguments formed solely from opinion, seemingly tailored specifically to piss people off as you also leave no room for disagreement and start everything off with an imaginary label of 'real' Trek fans. Your stance seems to be a rather self-righteous "I'm right and everyone who disagrees are fake Trek fans who are too stupid to understand real sci-fi." Even when people point out the flaws in your reasoning, you continue to argue with more opinion-based arguments. When that doesn't work you fall back to throwing out red herrings that muddle up this pointless debate even further.

What are you here to discuss? Because so far I haven't seen you 'discuss' anything.

Sorry that you are philosophically illiterate.

 

[archeryguy1701]

But none of this explains why you are putting so much effort into explaining that it is simple entertainment and nothing of value beyond this. In fact, your efforts belie your claims.

Nobody has said that is has no value beyond entertainment. You're putting words in people's mouths again.

It's a TV show. It's main purpose is to provide entertainment and make money. But it can also explore science and morality and the human condition. You do get that it's possible to have both, right?

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Can't that be done with much less effort? jersey shore entertains people.

Oh for crying out loud.... If Jersey Shore entertained me, I would be watching that. It doesn't. Star Trek does.

I can not seriously believe you're now arguing that entertainment value and discussion of "higher" topics are mutually exclusive.

No wonder us Trekkies have such a horrible reputation in the real world.

 

[BillJ]

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Because the people in charge wouldn't make it if they didn't think it would be profitable. The same is true of every TV show.

Profit can be had with much less effort and financial sacrifice. Day time talk shows entertain people.

Not all people. This seems to be your biggest problem, you think people should be this soulless, homogenized group. Imagine a world where all that aired were talk shows. Pretty dull.

 

[MasuPu'a]

If your view of it is this simplistic, what are you here to discuss? Anything?

Honestly, I'm wondering what exactly you are here to discuss. You started a thread constructed out of fallacious arguments formed solely from opinion, seemingly tailored specifically to piss people off as you also leave no room for disagreement and start everything off with an imaginary label of 'real' Trek fans. Your stance seems to be a rather self-righteous "I'm right and everyone who disagrees are fake Trek fans who are too stupid to understand real sci-fi." Even when people point out the flaws in your reasoning, you continue to argue with more opinion-based arguments. When that doesn't work you fall back to throwing out red herrings that muddle up this pointless debate even further.

What are you here to discuss? Because so far I haven't seen you 'discuss' anything.

Sorry that you are philosophically illiterate.

Considering that you ignored everything I said and decided to retort with an insult; I guess you just proved my point.

 

[BillJ]

This ones headed for a shut down

 

[trek_futurist]

Nobody has said that is has no value beyond entertainment. You're putting words in people's mouths again.

It's a TV show. It's main purpose is to provide entertainment and make money. But it can also explore science and morality and the human condition. You do get that it's possible to have both, right?

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Can't that be done with much less effort? jersey shore entertains people.

Oh for crying out loud.... If Jersey Shore entertained me, I would be watching that. It doesn't. Star Trek does.

I can not seriously believe you're now arguing that entertainment value and discussion of "higher" topics are mutually exclusive.

No wonder us Trekkies have such a horrible reputation in the real world.

If it is merely a matter of entertainment, as a few of you suggest, why not promote something that leads to the path of least resistance for ratings? Such as another cop show. Another forensics show. Another day time talk show. These garner much higher ratings than star trek ever has (hence the longevity of shows like jerry springer). With the exception of the 2009 namesake, of course. *raises eyebrow*

 

[trek_futurist]

Because the people in charge wouldn't make it if they didn't think it would be profitable. The same is true of every TV show.

Profit can be had with much less effort and financial sacrifice. Day time talk shows entertain people.

Not all people. This seems to be your biggest problem, you think people should be this soulless, homogenized group. Imagine a world where all that aired were talk shows. Pretty dull.

Would you care to describe the differences between star trek and day time talk shows, since they are both merely for 'entertainment' and nothing more?

 

[BillJ]

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Can't that be done with much less effort? jersey shore entertains people.

Oh for crying out loud.... If Jersey Shore entertained me, I would be watching that. It doesn't. Star Trek does.

I can not seriously believe you're now arguing that entertainment value and discussion of "higher" topics are mutually exclusive.

No wonder us Trekkies have such a horrible reputation in the real world.

If it is merely a matter of entertainment, as a few of you suggest, why not promote something that leads to the path of least resistance for ratings? Such as another cop show. Another forensics show. Another day time talk show. These garner much higher ratings than star trek ever has (hence the longevity of shows lie jerry springer). With the exception of the 2009 namesake, of course. *raises eyebrow*

Sometimes being unique can be enough to keep you on the air.

 

[RoJoHen]

If it's possible to have both, then how is its main purpose to provide entertainment?

Can't that be done with much less effort? jersey shore entertains people.

Oh for crying out loud.... If Jersey Shore entertained me, I would be watching that. It doesn't. Star Trek does.

I can not seriously believe you're now arguing that entertainment value and discussion of "higher" topics are mutually exclusive.

No wonder us Trekkies have such a horrible reputation in the real world.

If it is merely a matter of entertainment, as a few of you suggest, why not promote something that leads to the path of least resistance for ratings? Such as another cop show. Another forensics show. Another day time talk show. These garner much higher ratings than star trek ever has (hence the longevity of shows lie jerry springer). With the exception of the 2009 namesake, of course. *raises eyebrow*

You're absolutely right. And that's exactly why there is no Trek on TV right now and why there probably won't be for a very long time.

Trek used to be popular and make money, and then it got less popular with each subsequent TV series. It is no longer worth the investment to make more Trek shows.

 

[archeryguy1701]

I'm ashamed to admit that I think we've fallen into this trap:

There is no way this guy is for real. He has to be fucking with us. Absolutely no way this can be serious. I'm grabbing another glass of Baileys and going to bed.

 

[BillJ]

Profit can be had with much less effort and financial sacrifice. Day time talk shows entertain people.

Not all people. This seems to be your biggest problem, you think people should be this soulless, homogenized group. Imagine a world where all that aired were talk shows. Pretty dull.

Would you care to describe the differences between star trek and day time talk shows, since they are both merely for 'entertainment' and nothing more?

I'm sorry but your simply trolling at this point. If you don't know the difference between daytime talk and sci-fi action adventure you're not as smart as you think you are.

 

[RoJoHen]

I'm ashamed to admit that I think we've fallen into this trap:

There is no way this guy is for real. He has to be fucking with us. Absolutely no way this can be serious. I'm grabbing another glass of Baileys and going to bed.

I relocated from my living (where I was watching an episode of Voyager, btw) to my bed. Sometimes I wish I didn't have a laptop. I would just walk away.

 

[BillJ]

I'm ashamed to admit that I think we've fallen into this trap:

There is no way this guy is for real. He has to be fucking with us. Absolutely no way this can be serious. I'm grabbing another glass of Baileys and going to bed.

I passed up sex with the misses to continue this circle-jerk. Off to bed.

 

[RoJoHen]

Congratulations, trek_futurist. You have succeeded in losing all credibility. I honestly can't believe it took this long.