Whereas I find that to be a garbage answer. No one is seriously saying that the sets should look cheap, but there's a huge difference between updating it and abandoning the aesthetic. They obviously know this to be true, as much of the show does keep a vague aesthetic connection to previous Treks. But any time something is called out for looking totally different it's the "TOS was cheap shit" excuse to the rescue.
The aesthetic looks cheap.
Yes they absolutely do. They're a perfect example of the look should be updated while being true to the original.
No they look like something made in the 21st century, not the 1960s.
That's kinda the point of updating. But they retain the original style.
But it's not the 60s anymore.............
Here is the response to Ted's comment from a poster who apparently thinks the way you do:
Here is Ted's most appropriate response to this:
And to continue bludgeoning this dead horse, much of what is considered to be the TOS "asthetic" was based on the show's being produced in the 60's, including the color pallet, designed to attract color TV viewers, and the Fx, cause that was the best (60's) tech and budget allowed.
