Good thing the producers aren't coddling anyone.
My opinion of TMP was shaped by it being a poor follow up to what I liked about TOS. I can revisit it as its own film but apart of TOS? No. TMP fails at that level.
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
My opinion of TMP was shaped by it being a poor follow up to what I liked about TOS. I can revisit it as its own film but apart of TOS? No. TMP fails at that level.
When they are constantly going on about how it is all the same, they are coddling the fan base, to make sure they don't reject the wares they are peddling. Nothing more, nothing less.
Agree to disagree. I don't see it as coddling.
It's pretty much what Trek has always done. So, unless Trek has always done coddling to the audience because the audience is fragile infants then so be it.
I have seen how just being close enough works out. Does this mean the crew is all going to be just like they use to be except having lizard tongues. Also maybe the pond near Pike's earth house now has fishes.
Well, the lizard tongue helps catch the fish. Duh.
A Futurama (or was it simpsons?) and Stargate reference?
I like you.
As I mentioned in another post, it's simple marketing. The logic is that more people will watch your show if you advertise it as being in the same universe as TOS/TNG etc., rather than saying it's a reboot. The thing is, the producers never had any intention of making it all fit together in any kind of cohesive way, despite any BS that they might have spouted about that to coddle the fans, as @BillJ pointed out. Now, five years later, the producers of SNW may be thinking differently, as the show starts to get closer to TOS. But there isn't going to be any kind of seamless transition to TOS or any nonsense like that, because that's not their intention.
I like DSC, and am planning on watching SNW. But I'm not kidding myself (and never have) that this is all part of the same thing. CBS can spout that BS all it wants. But this is all fiction; it's not real. So if people want to think it's all the same, or if they want to think it's a reboot, as far as I'm concerned that's up to them. I personally consider it a reboot; that way I can judge it on its own merits instead of trying to pick it apart.
I like DSC, and am planning on watching SNW. But I'm not kidding myself (and never have) that this is all part of the same thing. CBS can spout that BS all it wants. But this is all fiction; it's not real. So if people want to think it's all the same, or if they want to think it's a reboot, as far as I'm concerned that's up to them. I personally consider it a reboot; that way I can judge it on its own merits instead of trying to pick it apart.
Last edited:
I don't care too much what CBS says or the coddling BS that is getting tossed around. But not engaging with the show as intended by the showrunners is disingenuous at best. And, honestly people treat CBS so poorly it makes taking these opinions seriously even more difficult. CBS is at least making an effort, even if it it feels unconnected. Broadly speaking, what I see is the trend to treat CBS as the evil boogeyman hell bent on destroying TOS and pissing on Roddenberry's grave. It's strange. 
Hey, don’t get me wrong. I like sacred cows.
They’re particularly tasty.
They’re particularly tasty.
That's not how it works.
[Sonny Clemmonds] Yeah, the smooth-headed Klingon boy's right. Let's get that subforum up in here. [/Sonny]
You've never seen/read something that you had a different impression of than what the author intended? Like ST:TMP?
I've never treated CBS or the creative staff poorly. I've paid for the commercial free plan since the start because I believe in Star Trek, even if it is one I don't happen to like. Calling people out for being salesmen/women is not treating them poorly.
That can be dustbinned and only missed by a few hardcore fans.
If I do I work to see it as intended not dismiss it out of hand.
Then I wasn't speaking about you, or any poster here.
Actually that is how it works in most media. Nobody thinks that the Superman that is printed now is in the same universe as Siegel and Shuster's. Nobody thinks that the Batman printed now is in the same universe as Bob Kane's. No one thinks that the current Sherlock Holmes' fare takes place in continuity with the original novels. Heck, most comics, novels and their TV/movie counterparts exist in separate timelines.
Clearly a violation of sacred canon. See also the book scene in TUC.
What can't be dustbinned is that there will never be a Captain Uhura who becomes a contemporary of Captain Kirk because she has to be seated at that communications station as a glorified operator until 2293.
Not in Star Trek.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
