Spoilers Season 1 episode previews, trailers, and images
- Thread starter Harpsichord
- Start date
I learned at the feet the the master. Sometimes a single word answer is all a comment deserves
But, I'll indulge you. Canon is just a tool. Why not uses it? SNW takes place 6 years prior to TOS (not 11 by the way) close enough that people and events can be referenced. Why should SNW have a hands off policy? So far I haven't found any thing "lazy" about SNW's use of TOS concepts. Most have been clever and added to TOS.
This is what people want. It's been demonstrated time and again that the preference is for more references, not less. More tie ins, not less. More smaller universe not less.
This is not new. And it's not going away because a large enough portion of the audience keeps rewarding it.
As you note, this is what enough people want. It's not what everyone wants.
(saunters off to work on his trekzine).
Being on here (and other forums) has taught me one thing-fans claim they want something, and even a fast majority will say that it would be great to jump in to a new location and start afresh. Except then they actually don't. There is the request for legacy characters, races and a catching up with the powers that are familiar. There is the request for as much familiarity while being new all at the same time.As you note, this is what enough people want. It's not what everyone wants.
(saunters off to work on his trekzine).
It's an impossible balance, and one that Trek struggles with to find the appropriate way through. Please note, this isn't what I want. I would prefer new, unconnected to characters of the past. But, what has been demonstrated to be successful and make money (that evil thing!) is references to Trek's past.
What I have learned is that if I actually want something new in terms of science fiction then by and large I need to go to another franchise such as Stargate, or even Marvel at times. Or, more my preference, just reading books. Star Trek is comfort food. And that's it.
As you note, this is what enough people want. It's not what everyone wants.
(saunters off to work on his trekzine).
No Star Trek is every going to be able to give what everyone wants. Nor should they try.
April: "Council's not happy about it. They're doubling down, renaming "General Order One" to "The Prime Directive".
Pike: "Well, it won't stick".
Me: (as voiced by Flounder in Animal House): "This is great!"
I like tie-ins. Inside jokes. Although I can get annoyed when they go over my head.
Pike: "Well, it won't stick".
Me: (as voiced by Flounder in Animal House): "This is great!"
I like tie-ins. Inside jokes. Although I can get annoyed when they go over my head.
"Lazy" is a meaningless accusation leveled against writers who do things someone doesn't like.
Nope.
There's not a thing wrong with what they're doing. You simply don't like it.
This series is actually improving TOS in a way that none of the other sequel films or series have.
If you want to argue that it's somehow not in continuity with the original series...
So much the worse, then, for TOS and its (ahem) "timeline."
Last edited:
Zing!
There seem to be some members on here that don't like changes and they will always complain."Lazy" is a meaningless accusation leveled against writers who do things someone doesn't like.
Nope.
There's not a thing wrong with what they're doing. You simply don't like it.
This series is actually improving TOS in a way that none of the other sequel films or series have.
If you want to argue that it's somehow not in continuity with the original series...
To me, the writers are doing a great job in bringing in great Star Trek stories.
They're planing to bring back the actor that played Hemmer as another character, but don't know who it going to be. I hope he play Scotty.
There's more to their post on that nope.
He'll probably play another blind character.
Hemmer's twin brother Hummer?
Nothing more substantive. "You don't like it. I do. Therefore, you're wrong." is the gist.
Indeed. SNW has taken the premise of a prequel and actually done what it can set out to do; expand upon previous events and give them new meaning.If you want to argue that it's somehow not in continuity with the original series...
No, he'll be named Hammer. Whenever he has to work a miracle, before he does so he says, "Hammer time!" and gets the engines back online.
(sorry, what? Someone had that phrase in the 1980's? Damn!)
Yup. I'll be honest: I don't want Star Trek that refuses to connect to other Treks. If I wanted crews and captains that never referenced each other, I could go watch literally any other sci-fi show.
Part of the problem is that it's hard to add much substantive to "I hate it". I think season 2 of Picard is absolutely, embarrassingly awful. There's not much for people who don't agree with me to say about it, and no one is going to convince me that I'm wrong (I'm not!
), so what's there to say? I expressed my thoughts, then sort of just bowed out of the conversation.
Yeah. Someone doesn't like the show? Okay; there's no reason I should care why, and I don't.Part of the problem is that it's hard to add much substantive to "I hate it". I think season 2 of Picard is absolutely, embarrassingly awful. There's not much for people who don't agree with me to say about it, and no one is going to convince me that I'm wrong (I'm not!
I watched Ep 1 yesterday and liked it overall. I would have preferred absolutely no connection to Khan whatsoever and had to occasionally remind myself to not get bogged down in minor continuity issues (ex: the fact that genetic modification was used here but never in TOS) but, generally, it was the best Trek series I've seen since TNG. It had that same sense of optimism and exploration that TOS and TNG had and I appreciated that it was more episodic than some of the recent series.