They're not making these series to entertain themselves, they actually do research to try to understand what people want and why they may have lost interest.
They are? What research? Is it here?
TV market research has been a thing forever. There are companies who specialise in this stuff.
No this is a message board for people to share their opinions and discuss topics, which includes reasons why they're not watching something.
Start with reading a book month. And start with a short book. Otherwise, short story collections and novellas is another way to get back reading. Finally, there is always audio books.
Which is fine until those same reasons are repeated dozens of times. Until those reasons compel someone to celebrate a shows cancellation and to repeat mutliple times that it 'deserves' to be cancelled. Until people can overlook personal attacks made by the toxic elements of the franchise because it targets something they don't like and they take on a world view not of "personal attacks are never okay" but "personal attacks are okay depending on what was said" and attacks on actors' weight for example is just normal internet behaviour for them.
There reaches a point where it serves no productive purpose anymore and it's time for some people to just shut up and move on.
You're absolutely right. Too bad the writing was atrocious and canon was thrown out the window.
No. It wasn’t. This has never happened. Not once. Onscreen? Canon. Every time.
Continuity? That’s another matter.
Remember when a new episode would come out and Trekkies would accept it being a new part of the tapestry and not scream canon violation like spoiled children?
Pepperidge Farms remembers.
I blame Richard Arnold. I honestly don’t remember “canon” being talked about much if at all before he started doing his “Gene says TAS isn’t canon, Gene says the books and comics aren’t canon, Gene says some parts of TOS aren’t canon, Gene says your Mom’s not canon,” etc routine.
Blame Sherlock Holmes.
Was that back when things fit into the tapestry and didn't blatantly contradict things?
I went to seminary and didn't hear about canon this much.
My mom wasn't canon, as it turns out.
You mean how "The Enemy Within" was completely contradicted by introducing shuttlecrafts a few episodes later?
Or James R. Kirk?
Or "Vulcanian?"
Irrelevant. It's either consistent or it's not.
Early Installment Weirdness is still inconsistencies.
The term "YATI" (Yet Another Trek Inconsistency) was not invented only ten years ago.
Vulcan: conquered or not conquered?
Klingons: Federation members or not?
Eugenics Wars/WW3: A 90s or 2000s conflict?
What century did TOS take place in?
Yes, they're still inconsistencies, but there's a big difference between something no one knows or cares anything about being contradicted while the writers are still figuring out basic details, and something that everyone knows and cares about being contradicted years into its run. Like how Enterprise contradicted Balance of Terror by introducing cloaking technology a hundred or so years too early, and annoyed a lot of people. Did Pepperidge remember that? Noticing inconsistencies is not a new fad, it's just getting easier.
It's not a lack of care that leads to inconsistencies.
Otherwise ENTERPRISE should remain firmly outside continuity.
James R Kirk on a tombstone vs Spock and Chapel having a relationship just before the 5 year mission and once we see them in the 5 year its like they hardly know each other. James R Kirk vs pikes Enterprise being mych larger and more advanced than Kirk and even Picards. James R. Kirk vs Picard somehow hiding his mothers suicide from himself for 80 years. Theres more but I conclusion I would take a mistake on a tombstone vs all the others canon/contradiction issues that kurtzman trek has created. If we get lucky the kurtzman shows will be reclassified as an alternate universe.
Similar threads
