When people say the reasons I'm not enjoying something aren't even valid, then I'm going to speak up about that.
They are valid for you. Same time, it would seem that time would be better spent on things you enjoy or maybe are ambivalent about versus logging the same complaints over and over.
No Star Trek I’ve seen in my lifetime has been perfect. The other end of the spectrum is that no Star Trek I’ve seen in my lifetime has been completely without value on some level. Even Section 31 had Michelle Yeoh chewing scenery, which is entertaining in its own right.
That much is fair. If I'm annoying people then I've clearly expressed my opinions enough for now.
As someone who's been watching since STAR TREK was first run on NBC; your take/analysis of the Kurtzman era is laughably wrong.
Last edited:
Even if this is the case. Who is it actually hurting? What exactly is wrong with trying to find the positives in a product or situation?
It is confusing why people enjoying something seems to be so upsetting and enraging to some. The level of fragility and insecurity to internally justify such a thing is quite worrying.
So, considered and measured opinions that evaluate the material on its own terms rather than having to tear down thing A in order to lift up thing B.
What a novel concept.
Art is subjective in many cases. There is not one standard by which one can say it is good, and that's repeated throughout human history. The video below offers some interesting arguments towards and objective standard of art but even if I agree it's objectively well done that does not make it enjoyable.
And, to @BillJ point, what is the harm? If the peak of Trek was the 90s then we will never return to it again. That's impossible. "Time is a companion to remind us to treasure each moment, because it will never come again." (Picard quote from memory.).
I'm frequently befuddled by the lack of willingness to allow various forms of Trek to exist and appeal to others rather than subject them to derision.
Isn't it interesting how the dumb shit that came baked into Star Trek when you came to it is so easily accepted, but the equally dumb shit that came along once you were already a fan and became critical of it, is not?
It's like the good stuff is codified and the bad stuff is minimised. But the new stuff hits all at once with an adult perspective and you have to process it live.
What I'm saying is, if you were an adult for the dumb shit in TOS and onwards and saw it all live, would you even still be a fan?
I can't reply because I said I'd go away and stop annoying people with my opinions.
To change the subject entirely, here's a list of some classic episodes I couldn't stand even on my first watch as a kid:
TNG: Genesis (the one with the DNA craziness).
Voy: Threshold (the other one with the DNA craziness).
Voy: Cathexis (Chakotay's consciousness is possessing people, WTF?)
DS9: Rivals (probability doesn't work that way).
They came and went pretty fast so I'm still a fan, but I wasn't shocked when I still disliked them on my big rewatch. I'm just glad Braga never made a Threshold TV series.
Last edited:
I actually liked many of those episodes, specifically because they were totally insane
And Braga DID make a TV series called Threshold, but thankfully not about Tom and Kathryn's children
Threshold (TV series) - Wikipedia
I may have been aware of this
Consciousness is movable in Star Trek.
Spock wouldn't have been reborn were they not!
Well, also the stuff with Sargon.
Yep. My problem with "Cathexis" stems from it being a painfully dull Chakotay episode, not the "science."
My problem's the science.
Then Star Trek might not be for a lot of us.
It is though, that's what I'm saying. I've been a fan all through the 90s and 2000s. It's not just a series I like, it's my all-time top five most favouritist series ever. If I'm not liking it, that's a sign the universe itself is broken.Then Star Trek might not be for a lot of us.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
