Are you trying to be reasonable and fair here? Is that even allowed?

Are you trying to be reasonable and fair here? Is that even allowed?
Nothing to fix, it is Star Trek... in name only. I doubt GR would recognize prequels that doesn't resemble a pilot he personally, admittedly loved "The Cage". Re-imagined in the future? Of course, but you're distorting it such, GR reimagined Star Trek with TNG, and moving forward was the passion. Disco is re-writing it retroactively as a prequel and it disrespects the hard work done on TOS. If Disco was set after TNG I could accept their bullsh*t with Red Angels and other gimmicks they're working tirelessly to provide.Fixed that for you.
Even GR recognize that Star Trek would be reimagined in the future.
You realize Gene's son Eugene Roddenberry is an executive producer of DISCO, and has been from the beginning, right?Nothing to fix, it is Star Trek... in name only. I doubt GR would recognize prequels that doesn't resemble a pilot he personally, admittedly loved "The Cage". Re-imagined in the future? Of course, but you're distorting it such, GR reimagined Star Trek with TNG, and moving forward was the passion. Disco is re-writing it retroactively as a prequel and it disrespects the hard work done on TOS. If Disco was set after TNG I could accept their bullsh*t with Red Angels and other gimmicks they're working tirelessly to provide.
Then this misses the point and misses the point of GR's attitude.Nothing to fix, it is Star Trek... in name only. I doubt GR would recognize prequels that doesn't resemble a pilot he personally, admittedly loved "The Cage". Re-imagined in the future? Of course, but you're distorting it such, GR reimagined Star Trek with TNG, and moving forward was the passion. Disco is re-writing it retroactively as a prequel and it disrespects the hard work done on TOS. If Disco was set after TNG I could accept their bullsh*t with Red Angels and other gimmicks they're working tirelessly to provide.
Wrong. The only show Kurtzman will be taking a direct hand in is Discovery, because of all the BS that's gone on behind the scenes. He's going to stay at "30,000 feet" (his words, not mine) in regard to the other productions.Kurtzman is developing this Picard series, how can you not expect something similar to Disco??? It's not as if Ronald D. Moore is writing and producing it or better yet Executive Producing it???
Yes I do, and judging from your comment Eugene is talking to GR in the spiritual word. FYI I was referring to Gene not Eugene.You realize Gene's son Eugene Roddenberry is an executive producer of DISCO, and has been from the beginning, right?
Yeah, but are you saying that Gene wouldn't be supportive of a project his own son is attached to? Okay....Yes I do, and judging from your comment Eugene is talking to GR in the spiritual word. FYI I was referring to Gene not Eugene.
Nothing to fix, it is Star Trek... in name only. I doubt GR would recognize prequels that doesn't resemble a pilot he personally, admittedly loved "The Cage". Re-imagined in the future? Of course, but you're distorting it such, GR reimagined Star Trek with TNG, and moving forward was the passion. Disco is re-writing it retroactively as a prequel and it disrespects the hard work done on TOS. If Disco was set after TNG I could accept their bullsh*t with Red Angels and other gimmicks they're working tirelessly to provide.
While I agree they've reimagined Disco too much to be anything other than a reboot, Kirk met the Greek god Apollo himself. They did a Haloween episode with space witches. If you include the cartoons, Kirk met Lucifer. How is all that okay but magical red angels "bullshit"?Nothing to fix, it is Star Trek... in name only. I doubt GR would recognize prequels that doesn't resemble a pilot he personally, admittedly loved "The Cage". Re-imagined in the future? Of course, but you're distorting it such, GR reimagined Star Trek with TNG, and moving forward was the passion. Disco is re-writing it retroactively as a prequel and it disrespects the hard work done on TOS. If Disco was set after TNG I could accept their bullsh*t with Red Angels and other gimmicks they're working tirelessly to provide.
And that's ok.VOY and ENT were decent, but it's been 20 years since I loved anything this franchise has put out meanwhile there have been numerous sci-fi shows that were better than Trek.
You mean the way a majority of original Star Trek fans saw TNG in 1987?Nothing to fix, it is Star Trek... in name only.
And that's ok.
HA! Idk. I wasn't born back when, but I've gotten some insight from my dad and my older brother, and from what I learned from them, the friends they associated with loved it from the start. Went to the Creations conventions, I think, and the fans there embraced it. There was a steady increase in the syndicated market for it all across the nation, but what I was told the hate was not coming from the fans but from the old guard themselves.You mean the way a majority of original Star Trek fans saw TNG in 1987?![]()
Supportive of his son re-writing his vision??? God, I would hope not! I would like to think he would be supportive of Eugene making Star Trek which would be a follow up to TNG and beyond but not this--speaking of Discovery-- but for the Picard series? I would like think Yes, provisionally.Yeah, but are you saying that Gene wouldn't be supportive of a project his own son is attached to? Okay....
While I agree they've reimagined Disco too much to be anything other than a reboot, Kirk met the Greek god Apollo himself. They did a Haloween episode with space witches. If you include the cartoons, Kirk met Lucifer. How is all that okay but magical red angels "bullshit"?
You and I clearly have different ideas regarding what constitutes a healthy relationship between parent and child.Supportive of his son re-writing his vision??? God, I would hope not!
Lol I thought it was the stupidest thing is ever heardYou mean the way a majority of original Star Trek fans saw TNG in 1987?![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.