Exactly. Toxic fans are more likely to vote in an RT audience score, and acknowledging that isn't a statement about people who don't like DIS for unobjectionable reasons.
RT audience ranking of modern Trek
- Thread starter Falconer
- Start date
Exactly. Toxic fans are more likely to vote in an RT audience score, and acknowledging that isn't a statement about people who don't like DIS for unobjectionable reasons.
For the record: I know there are several people here who don't like DSC for legitimate reasons. I don't even have to dig very far to cite an example. Here's what I said the other day.
1001001, your read of my views are completely wrong. I know there are people who honestly don't like DSC for and I even said in an earlier post here that are there are people here who I can trust to give thought-out critiques. I wouldn't say that if I didn't think it.
I can separate those people who have legitimate critiques from the toxic fans, but I'm also not going to deny those toxic fans are out there review-bombing things.
1001001, your read of my views are completely wrong. I know there are people who honestly don't like DSC for and I even said in an earlier post here that are there are people here who I can trust to give thought-out critiques. I wouldn't say that if I didn't think it.
I can separate those people who have legitimate critiques from the toxic fans, but I'm also not going to deny those toxic fans are out there review-bombing things.
Start an "Orville is True Trek and Better Than Discovery" thread without actually saying Orville is True Trek and better than Discovery:
Nobody preemptively stops me from typing paragraph after paragraph, dammit!
With respect to 1001001, since I don't want to derail his thread any further and give him a headache.Of course you weren't talking about me personally. That was never in doubt. I just used myself as an example in my sarcastic response because you were painting with a broad brush in your assumptions, even with the Joe Six-Pack entry. But are you really going to tell me you weren't throwing shade at all the fans of The Orville and Star Trek: Into Darkness with the 'Macho Asshole Star Trek' and 'Off-Brand Dudebro "Star Trek"' comments? That wasn't just directed at a subset, that was targeting everyone, and therefore cast doubt on the limited scope of your earlier comments. And you would no more allow that kind of commentary about Discovery fans to go unchecked.
Yes, I'm well-aware of what a "wife-beater" / tank-top is, thank you. They got that name for a reason, which was that every time someone was arrested for beating their wife on Cops the white tank top seemed like their uniform. But that works in reverse too where if you're talking about a certain group of fans you can subtly accuse them of being the type of people who would beat their wives by using the slang term instead of just calling it a tank-top.
You're critique doesn't even hold up since the same people who have been making videos about "Discovery failing" are the same people who were making videos about "Jar Jar Abrams" and the "failure of nuTrek", so why would they be fans of "Into Darkness" and have their comment minions vote for it on IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes? Their whole brand is getting views off of predicting doom(cock) and gloom for popular franchises. There is undeniably some down-voting going on, but that can not account for everything, and it's not wrapped up with a dude-bro bow the way you've sold it.
There are a lot of fans of Discovery who are also fans of The Orville, and you're making it this either / or "you are with us or your are against us" unnecessary divisiveness and hostility thing that's just not called for under the circumstances. At the end of the day, it's website ratings, it's not worth all this stress and anger.
You're a good guy, and I don't want to be at odds with you, so I'm done.
Last edited:
There's something to that. It's the same with things like store and restaurant reviews. People have more incentive to write and submit a review if they've had a bad experience.
But - you still see plenty of positive reviews of stores and restaurants. Same with Rotten Tomatoes audience scores. Lots of people leave positive reviews too.
And even if it were the case that Discovery haters posted negative reviews disproportionately, you would still expect this to be counterbalanced to some extent by TOS haters and TNG haters and DS9 haters, etc.
I just think it's too easy to say, "Oh, all these bad reviews were probably left by bigots," and that way you don't have to their opinions and criticisms seriously.
(I don't think that's what you're saying, @fireproof78, but it's pretty much what @Sci said.)
Again, not necessarily. There is a certain affect of those shows being older that they get almost free pass of sorts. In addition, at least from my experience in retail, it takes about 10 positive experiences to make up for one negative experience. So, even if people have a positive experience with Discovery it still might not be enough to right a review.
Writing positive reviews is not as easy to do it seems as negative.
Right, that's probably true. How many people would go on Rotten Tomatoes to post reviews of TOS?
That's definitely true in my experience. I do book and movie reviews for Never Was, and I often find it difficult to write reviews of something I simply enjoyed.
I thought you meant 'ratings' as in 'user scores', not 'viewing figures' for a minute and I was very confused.
The Orville and Star Trek 2009 aren't the same either seeing as one is a television show and the other is a movie.
If the point of the thread was modern science fiction shows then you could have named the thread "RT audience of modern Sci Fi" and add in shows like Resident Alien, Invasion , Another Life etc. Alas, you call it "RT audience of modern Trek" and put a non-Trek show in it.
You're correct they are very different: One is a cheap knockoff parody of an established franchise and the other is an epic trilogy that will be remembered far long after the other is gone.
The truth is very likely somewhere between the extremes. The people who really like it, probably are not going to write reviews, but be participating in the larger community. The people who actively hate it are far more likely to post because of the dissatisfaction with the overall product. I would guess that most people go and watch, end it, and move on. In other words, it's a TV show.
The high ranking of Into Darkness invalidates both websites. Discovery/Picard and gee whiz I guess Lower Decks hate is not a surprise. As hot button as the Bad Robot movies have been, the Kurtzman streaming series have been bastions of revolt by the fanbase. I've found it particularly among those who grew up with the 2nd coming of TV series (TNG/DS9/VOY). Yeah yeah the series are a bit overly dramatic, but what's really shocked me is the total head exploding madness over what is considered "woke-Trek." I mean, did these fans not understand how controversial much of TOS was 50 years ago?
Rick Berman played it too safe for too long, and a whole generation of fans grew up watching a much more conservative Star Trek, where homosexuality was only part of the "evil" universe (and even then, only lesbians to appeal to teenage boys) and the genderqueer alien was reprogrammed by her people.
Oh yeah, and women were objectified in even sillier costumes than the men. Even Jadzia Dax had to wear a havily padded bra.
That 's a plausible hypothesis, but empirically it's the opposite: the recency bias on rating/review sites tends to be positive.
IMDB is the ur-example, the ratings of recent movies and series are initially inflated and progressively go down over time. They've even included it in their FAQ.
To be fair, every uniform was padded, even the men's. Per Wil Wheaton, "We all wore those muscle suits, but I think I was the most traumatized by it."
(7 of 9 and other examples, however, support your case).
They did not.
