According to whom?
Let's talk about the elephant in the room, this series violates Roddenberry's vision big time
- Thread starter Sci-fi fan
- Start date
According to whom?
Just because YOU think "fans are turning away from this iteration of Star Trek" doesn't mean it's actually happening.
Also, the stuff you're citing as evidence is not nearly as widespread as you think it is, or as pervasive as you're trying to make it seem.
As I said in the edit I just made to my previous post, the stuff you're citing as evidence is not nearly as widespread as you think it is, or as pervasive as you're trying to make it seem.
Those are two very good reasons not to like it.
I don't care about Klingon history or continuity at all and would never criticize the Trek people for dumping all that. I care that the Discovery Klingons are nearly Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda-level creations.
Exactly... TNG, the spinoff show that incorporated Roddenberry's self-important pseudo-philosophical baloney that he promoted on the convention circuit years after the fact of the original Star Trek.
From the 1967 writer's guide to Star Trek:
TOS depicted characters that were heroic, but still flawed and relatable as actual people.
TNG abandoned this concept with its ensemble of preachy, sanctimonious, "can do no wrong" automatons. I'm glad that bogus depiction of humanity is being deconstructed in the latest iteration of Trek.
Kor
...and I saw no elephants in any rooms on Discovery, Shenzhou or the Klingon ship.
That thing they had caged up at the end of the episode? I didn't see any trunk on it.
Last edited:
Gene could have used some glasses, I'd say.
You're living in denial, I get the desire for this show to succeed, but so far it's been less than thrilling specifically for these reasons. They spent a full episode developing a character no one likes.
What about people who like show because of the characters and the Klingons?
I mean taking the views of those not watching without the views of those who are watching is missing a lot of context,
and we all know
Context is for Kings
/cuethewho
^Just spit out tea!
Says the person who openly disavows DSC as being Star Trek.I think you're the one in denial here.
Funny, the Klingons, and the flawed characters, are exactly why I like it. For the first time, Trek feels like real intense drama.
I don't think there's as much dislike for the show as some seem to think. Vocal minority, as usual. Even on this site, the review polls heavily indicate that the show is very much being enjoyed.
Either way, all of that is beside the point. It doesn't matter if this is Gene's vision or not. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Gene hated some of the best Trek, including TWOK.
I don't think there's as much dislike for the show as some seem to think. Vocal minority, as usual. Even on this site, the review polls heavily indicate that the show is very much being enjoyed.
Either way, all of that is beside the point. It doesn't matter if this is Gene's vision or not. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Gene hated some of the best Trek, including TWOK.
Every single negative review maybe. There's plenty of positive ones.
All my Trekkie friends think it's great, so my anecdote cancels out your anecdote. And as for dissatisfaction in the internet, all the episodes so far have scored pretty highly in this particular group of internet, and I can't see any reason this group of fans would be any more likely to be positive than any other. We're usually referenced as a bunch of whingers, actually.
I have a large network of Trek friends and colleagues, and while some don't love it the way I do, nobody hates it. A few have things about it they don't like, a few have misgivings, minor aspects they don't like, but that's no less true about any other Trek series.
Look anywhere-- on social media, even review sites-- while the negative nellies are the loudest, the majority like the show. Every FB post on Trek's page has 90% positive reactions. RT's audience score, even when being spammed with negative reviews, still has more of the audience liking it than not (currently 60%, 2% higher after the 3rd episode).
No matter how much these armchair critics insist the show is reviled, stating it doesn't make it so. All evidence is to the contrary.
Look anywhere-- on social media, even review sites-- while the negative nellies are the loudest, the majority like the show. Every FB post on Trek's page has 90% positive reactions. RT's audience score, even when being spammed with negative reviews, still has more of the audience liking it than not (currently 60%, 2% higher after the 3rd episode).
No matter how much these armchair critics insist the show is reviled, stating it doesn't make it so. All evidence is to the contrary.
This is the internet! I hate therefor I'm right!
