No I doubt that. Too many shows in the past have been cancelled with cliff hangers.
No I doubt that. Too many shows in the past have been cancelled with cliff hangers.
On the "grifter" label... it is doing a lot of work...
First, it is applying a gatekeeping function regarding who even has standing to apply narrative framing. For years, many posters here have said that the opinions of people that didn't like Kurtzman Trek didn't matter, either because of political ideology, allegations of false consciousness, tone policing, agism, lack of media literacy, etc, etc... some legitimate concerns mixed with illegitimate one, casting a way too wide net...
We also seemed to have hit meta-narrative singularity with SFA in particular. IIRC, one Star Trek novelist basically said the show's writing quality was bad -- but its politics were in the right place, and that was what mattered. Just what you get with audience hyper-fragmentation.
Do some YouTubers take things too far -- like especially excessively fixating on gay characters? Yes. Do some YouTubers present rumors that lack credibility or are outright lies to get money --- yes again.
But at the same time YouTube is a very small-d democratic place. Unmet audience demand will see YouTubers rise... while peddling false rumors will eventually cause an audience stall or decline.
The SFA creatives opened themselves up to being a laughing stock on YouTube with excess amounts of cringe. I made it to episode 6, but couldn't take it anymore with Paul Giamatti character's excess gastroenterological references and the bat-human hybrid cannibals...
If there truly is unmet demand on YouTube for pro-SFA coverage... the audience will find it.
Much as there are YouTube "grifters", there's also the "access media" -- alleged free shills for a production in exchange for access. Trek Culture and the like. Did their SFA videos do that well? So, again, framing labels can easily be thrown out there.
At the end of the day, SFA was just too expensive per episode and too limiting in how many people its content would appeal to in order to be sustainable. Eventually people will notice and say the emperor has no clothes...
First, it is applying a gatekeeping function regarding who even has standing to apply narrative framing. For years, many posters here have said that the opinions of people that didn't like Kurtzman Trek didn't matter, either because of political ideology, allegations of false consciousness, tone policing, agism, lack of media literacy, etc, etc... some legitimate concerns mixed with illegitimate one, casting a way too wide net...
We also seemed to have hit meta-narrative singularity with SFA in particular. IIRC, one Star Trek novelist basically said the show's writing quality was bad -- but its politics were in the right place, and that was what mattered. Just what you get with audience hyper-fragmentation.
Do some YouTubers take things too far -- like especially excessively fixating on gay characters? Yes. Do some YouTubers present rumors that lack credibility or are outright lies to get money --- yes again.
But at the same time YouTube is a very small-d democratic place. Unmet audience demand will see YouTubers rise... while peddling false rumors will eventually cause an audience stall or decline.
The SFA creatives opened themselves up to being a laughing stock on YouTube with excess amounts of cringe. I made it to episode 6, but couldn't take it anymore with Paul Giamatti character's excess gastroenterological references and the bat-human hybrid cannibals...
If there truly is unmet demand on YouTube for pro-SFA coverage... the audience will find it.
Much as there are YouTube "grifters", there's also the "access media" -- alleged free shills for a production in exchange for access. Trek Culture and the like. Did their SFA videos do that well? So, again, framing labels can easily be thrown out there.
At the end of the day, SFA was just too expensive per episode and too limiting in how many people its content would appeal to in order to be sustainable. Eventually people will notice and say the emperor has no clothes...
Yup.
Which is YT videos are useless. One sentence sums up the problems as far as we can know as the audience and the reasonable thing is to move on.
Well said. A lot of people haven't been explaining it especially the ones disappointed with the cancelation. You pretty much hit every point. I also could not stand giamattis character. He compared him to khan. Uh no. Lol
They'd pull a Gotham for the finale, age them up with makeup and have them reunite a decade later and steal the Athena out of the space museum to save the galaxy again from that guy and his Omega bombs.
Maybe, but it doesn't explain why they didn't re-shoot things once they found out they weren't being renewed.
Who'd pay for it? Likely the incoming Skydance executives knew SFA was DOA, but they were on the hook for existing contracts. And the prior executive team signed off on season 2 ending in a cliffhanger, so last minute notes could only go so far.
They'd need to weigh if the library value of SFA on net increases with $3-5 million worth of reshoots? Or, if having already lit circa $200 million on fire, is another few million ultimately throwing good money after bad?
If anything, I'd expect the Skydance execs to warn no more cost overages... Will be interesting to see if post production takes a fall off, especially regarding effects work...
The studio would have to approve money. While Kurtzman is a multi millionaire and could easily have paid for it I dont think he likes star trek that much to offer it. Lol. Seriously though the best the fans of the show will get is a comic book. Those are never that great and for sure not as good as live action but its all that I think kurtzman will be willing to do. He supposedly owns a percentage of his full creations and characters so he probably wouldn't need much permission to do a comic book.
It costs money.
It's hilarious to me to watch the consternation over Academy, demands for it to be cancelled and now it's cancelled and people want them to invest more money in to it.
This is the most nonsensical roller coaster of argumentation.
Those are probably different people mate.
If you're thinking of Una McCormack, you don't recall correctly. She did not say the writing was bad. She expressed her appreciation of the show in a few other bluesky comments.
Last edited:
Not from where I am sitting.
It's like the JFK files all over again.
If anyone's curious about her opinion on the writing.
If it were a charity project (i.e., free), then that downplaying of the importance of (good) writing might be semi-justifiable; however, this is a series on a network that requires a paid subscription. This is not a propaganda piece. Folk should not be automatically grateful for what they receive, simply because "the message" is worthwhile; the world is full of noble sentiments poorly packaged (and vice versa).
Criticism of the big leagues is fair game.
I honestly do not get most of the criticism for the show. People's obsessive hatred of this show is very unhealthy. If you do not like something, then do not watch it. Also, you should stop talking about it. The discourse around SFA really reminds me of the people that loathed Voyager and Enterprise. Spending a decade and a half after those shows ended railing against them, complaining about them, writing negative essays about them and recording lengthy diatribes about them. What good did any of that do? Both shows are now loved by the fans. Same thing with the Star Wars Prequels - overly hated, now loved. It is such a colossal waste of everyone's time & energy. 
At least people back in the day, haters were haters for the love of the game. Now, there is too much money involved. It is difficult to trust what any random Youtuber has to say about anything once they have monetary incentives to say one thing or another.
At least people back in the day, haters were haters for the love of the game. Now, there is too much money involved. It is difficult to trust what any random Youtuber has to say about anything once they have monetary incentives to say one thing or another.
ENT began its fan renaissance as soon as Netflix started streaming it. Barely a decade after cancellation.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
