‘Project Hail Mary’ Author Andy Weir Says Paramount Rejected His ‘Star Trek’ Pitch: Their “Shows Are Sh**”
The author of the blockbuster film says Paramount turned down his 'Star Trek' idea and suggested that modern 'Trek' shows have lost their way.
www.hollywoodreporter.com
They sound like a pair of right twatwaffles.
Anybody remember Mister Broccoli? When, after Picard put his foot down, he was the one who let it slip to Barclay's face? Gods, Starfleet officers were so much more normal, mature, composed, and professional back in the TNG era, of all eras.
Anybody remember Mister Broccoli? When, after Picard put his foot down, he was the one who let it slip to Barclay's face? Gods, Starfleet officers were so much more normal, mature, composed, and professional back in the TNG era, of all eras.
Hmm let's see Picard calling Barclay, Broccoli or the unprofessional PA announcer at SFA???.....I will choose Picard's broccoli slip any day of the week over the SFA silliness....
No one ever said that TNG was 100% serious. No one ever said that SFA had to be 100% serious. The difference is SFA/SNW has less episodes but a higher percentage of goofy Episodes, which go to an even greater extreme....glitter
anyone....????I think Disco was on the more serious side though.
The host does, and is some kind of twatwaffle in any event.
What Weir says is fair enough.
Anybody remember Mister Broccoli? When, after Picard put his foot down, he was the one who let it slip to Barclay's face? Gods, Starfleet officers were so much more normal, mature, composed, and professional back in the TNG era, of all eras.
Excellent observation in bringing up the TNG crew's bad behavior... However the point of depicting them that way wasn't to normalize their behavior, it was to admonish it, and to deliver a message that people could be and should be better. SFA (and almost all post-2009 Star Trek) misses that point entirely.
In that vein, I'm reminded of the depictions of Finnegan in "Shore Leave" and Nova Squadron in "The First Duty". In these examples, bad behavior was never excused, but it was established that even in the Star Trek universe, youths are frequently guilty of it. In "Hollow Pursuits", Wesley was stated to have started the Broccoli moniker.
I'm having a hard time finding SFA guilty of excusing bad behavior when the characters who broke the rules were explicitly punished on screen for it.
How far are we supposed to take the criticism that Star Trek is bad because it normalizes bad behavior in the main characters? Can we also say that Kirk didn't deserve command of another starship after he stole in the Enterprise in TSFS? Strictly speaking, that invalidates STV, TUC, and GEN (as if a disgraced captain drummed out of the service would even be invited to the launch of the Ent-B), and that's just at a minimum (really any reference to Kirk thereafter, "Relics", etc.). Kids might not know better, but admirals certainly should, or do they have too much brass to fail?
Kirk does not. Should have been drummed out of the service.
How many NFL ballers have been caught and/or found guilty of assault, robbery, fraud, and a myriad other major and minor offenses, only to get a slap on the wrist or a 5-digit monetary fine that would be easily paid off once they sold a single diamond/gold earring on eBay? A lot of them seem to just go away because such-and-so is one hell of a player who can catch the ball one-handed on tip-toes in a critical game-ending 2-minute drill and that's what counts at the end of the day.
Kirk "literally saved this planet" (Earth). Multiple times, arguably, and that kind of celebrity usually earns people a pass to occasionally do some not-so-savory things. As much as they would stand atop a mountain of moral superiority, Starfleet largely seems to be quite "ends-justify-the-means" in its practice. Section 31's existence is a perfect example of this philosophy.
The shit's long been out of the horse on this one.
Kirk "literally saved this planet" (Earth). Multiple times, arguably, and that kind of celebrity usually earns people a pass to occasionally do some not-so-savory things. As much as they would stand atop a mountain of moral superiority, Starfleet largely seems to be quite "ends-justify-the-means" in its practice. Section 31's existence is a perfect example of this philosophy.
The shit's long been out of the horse on this one.
He's not an athlete but in charge of a ship that can destroy a planet. The list of charges is long and saving Earth doesn't earn a pass in my mind.
When Kirk breaks the rules, he does it to save lives, often measured in the hundreds of millions or more. In TSFS, Kirk saved not only Spock, but he stopped Kruge and the theft of the Genesis data, saving who knows how many lives on all sides. Then, he went on to save Earth (again) in the next film, something he couldn't have done had he been arrested.
Kirk doesn't do this to harm people. The names on the wall of SFA may not be limited to examples of people who always follow the rules, but they are (presumably) limited to examples of people who break the rules only for very good reason.
IMO, that's the point worth discussing and debating, not simply whether the rules get broken, but whether it can be justified when they are broken, whether the ends are beneficial, and whether anyone's being harmed along the way to achieving the ends. That involves a higher standard than simply calculating whether, on balance, the ends justify the means.
Kirk doesn't do this to harm people. The names on the wall of SFA may not be limited to examples of people who always follow the rules, but they are (presumably) limited to examples of people who break the rules only for very good reason.
IMO, that's the point worth discussing and debating, not simply whether the rules get broken, but whether it can be justified when they are broken, whether the ends are beneficial, and whether anyone's being harmed along the way to achieving the ends. That involves a higher standard than simply calculating whether, on balance, the ends justify the means.
That doesn't absolve him of crimes.
It's a plot point in TVH that Kirk's punishment for the offense he committed*, the only one that was not dismissed because of mitigating factors that were accepted as such by Starfleet, was demotion.
* - The word "crime" was not used. His offenses were referred to as "violations of Starfleet regulations".
No they didn’t (the scenes, I mean), though they clearly wanted to. It was like a teenager gaze where they wanted it to be sexy and they probably projected it as being sexy, but it just wasn’t in the slightest — not least because, from the actual in-world perspectives of the professional crewmembers involved, of course it wouldn’t be.
Got to love the rules lawyering over here for Kirk. He broke the rules but it wasn't a crime.
Regardless, I do not find it sufficient.
I did not say you did. I find the script insufficient for the extent of offensives presented in TSFS and "saving Earth" is a ridiculous get out of jail free card, literally in this instance, that doesn't get extended to others.I didn't write the script!
Paramount Q1 2026 Earnings Hit Target But Streaming Sub Gains Lag A Bit
Paramount met most of Wall Street's expectations in the first quarter, though gains at flagship streamer Paramount+ fell slightly short.
deadline.com
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
