If you're offended by a TV show, I think you really need to take a step back, as you're taking it way too seriously.
To Mildly Go Hither And Yawn. ;)
- Thread starter Doc Mugatu
- Start date
If you're offended by a TV show, I think you really need to take a step back, as you're taking it way too seriously.
It's a personal curiosity of mine. When people say "I'm offended" I'm curious what they mean by it.You're a lot more patient than I am.
I saw where this was going and basically said, "I'm done with this."
Hey, I was happy to end it with "I'll stop worrying..." but then people kept responding.You're a lot more patient than I am.
I saw where this was going and basically said, "I'm done with this."
The marketing is what was offensive. Instead of saying, "Look, this not the star Trek you remember, and it is not connected to the Star Trek you remember, but it will be a good Star Trek for a new age, so give it a try," They said "Hey look! It's trek in the prime timeline! Yeah! kirk and company are right there, you know, somewhere, so just watch for them! Yeah, cause it may not seem like it now, but if you pay for streaming and sit through a baker's dozen of hours of this it'll all fit in! Honest injun!"
I hate having my intelligence insulted.
(Cue the next fifteen responses containing some version of "Well, you joined a boycott in a boycott thread..."
)
Oh boy. Might not want to leave that feed line lying around like that.
Already ready for it. Check the parentheses.
Last edited:
The only marketing I saw was this was before Kirk. That's the connection I got. I struggle with finding the offense there, though since I don't see TMP as part of the Prime Continuity I guess I could kind of find that on the same level.
Regardless, it's the offense part that mystifies me. I don't regard TNG as the same as I do TOS but I wasn't offended that McCoy appeared in it. It just didn't feel the same, so I don't regard TNG as Trek. But, I'm not offended. It's a product that I don't care for.
Sorry to be repetitive. This is very confusing.
The statement makes implications by inserting the name Kirk.
Think back to when they were first marketing ENT. The tagline for the teaser trailers was along the lines of "Go back in time to meet Kirk's childhood hero." The idea was to set ENT firmly in the same timeline as TOS. By saying STD is "before Kirk," without any other qualifying statements about the universe in the show, its creators essentially tried to do the same thing, but without backing it up with familiar imagery, something ENT tried to do and got better at as its seasons progressed.
The offense comes from the totality of the lie and the expectation I'd buy into it just because Trek continuity as a whole has never been perfect, but there's a difference between comparing the aspects of different apples and painting a kumquat red and asserting it's a Red Delicious. One look is all I need to tell a red kumquat is not an apple, and one episode was all I needed to see to see that STD had nothing to do with the trek I'm a fan of, and its creators insult my intelligence every time they try to explain away the differences.
I would love to know why TMP is your red-painted kumquat, but that's a whole different discussion.
Regardless, it's the offense part that mystifies me. I don't regard TNG as the same as I do TOS but I wasn't offended that McCoy appeared in it. It just didn't feel the same, so I don't regard TNG as Trek. But, I'm not offended. It's a product that I don't care for.
Sorry to be repetitive. This is very confusing.
All I can say is I'm not so much offended by the product of STD as the way it's been presented to me. It's purported to be in the prime timeline when nothing on the screen makes that make sense, and in order to see enough of it to make sense (the creators say) I have to fork over extra media dollars for a streaming service that's not showing anything else I'm remotely interested in paying streaming money for.
So, I got the first red-painted kumquat free, but to get the rest I have to pay for special access to a farmer's market that only sells vegetables I hate. That is not a formula for making me like red-painted kumquats.
And CBS's marketing and presentation of STD is mostly designed to piss me off, not compel me to give the series the old college try.
But they haven’t lied
That it is a part of the Star Trek world...that's about all I read it in it.
Roddenberry did the same with TMP. Was that insulting too?
Secondly, they are not lying to you. I think CBS expects people to watch it and decide, not just go "Oh, Star Trek!" But, I'm sure I'll be corrected for daring to assert that CBS isn't totally malicious in their intent.
It's not designed to piss you off. This is a very impersonal process. Taking it so personally is again, rather odd to me.
I'm not saying like DISCO. Don't. I don't like TNG or TMP-those are my kumquats. And I didn't watch them.
Okay then.That it is a part of the Star Trek world...that's about all I read it in it.
Roddenberry did the same with TMP. Was that insulting too?
Secondly, they are not lying to you. I think CBS expects people to watch it and decide, not just go "Oh, Star Trek!" But, I'm sure I'll be corrected for daring to assert that CBS isn't totally malicious in their intent.
It's not designed to piss you off. This is a very impersonal process. Taking it so personally is again, rather odd to me.
I'm not saying like DISCO. Don't. I don't like TNG or TMP-those are my kumquats. And I didn't watch them.
I have to admit, this has been a sticking point for me. I wish they would've just said "it is Star Trek", and let audiences decide how it all fits together. Instead of constantly telling us it is Prime (it simply doesn't fit for me).
Though they seem to be going for a very niche audience, which is why I think they are pushing the Prime angle so hard. I have a hard time believing they believe it fits with what came before behind-the-scenes.
I'm still struggling to figure out why Discovery needs to be in the Prime Universe from a story point-of-view? Heck, I'm still struggling with why it even needed to be in the 23rd century. You could have changed some names and it would have been indistinguishable from 24th century Trek.
Maybe the Klingon War part? Honestly, if there were a Klingon war in the 24th century/25th century I would be rolling my eyes super hard. The whole Klingon War in DS9 was bad enough.
The same way Ron Moore rebooted Galactica and told the stories he wanted to tell: by being upfront with his audience. He did this by honoring the original but making it clear his series was not going to be the series the classic fans remembered. That's the clarity that STD's creators are deliberately trying to avoid.
Because they want their story to be a part of known continuity.
Bully for them. It's not. The technology's wrong, the visuals are wrong and the aliens are wrong to be in the time period they claim it's in.
The Klingon War? I see nothing about the war that demanded it be prior to TOS. For me, it sticks out like a sore thumb. Something that should've never been done. You need a war prior to TOS? Then you get creative. They got lazy.
I would to have liked to have seen more world building out in the frontier. If they had to go fanservice with it. Which I don't mind. That's the only aspects of Discovery I get a kick out of aside from Sarek's involvement. Maybe start the show at Spacedock which is being constructed at the time of Discovery's launch. A nice little homage to TMP. Heck setting it in the TMP Era would have been cool since the 2270's was an era barely touched upon.
