• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Would it be cool if Philippa Georgiou showed up in Strange New Worlds?

Although I'd personally hate it (it'd be a continuation of the Discovery stupidity and would further worsen the "small universe syndrome"), I do think it will happen, because it's all about hype these days, not brains.

This (very Scottish) guy puts it perfectly:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
I do think it will happen, because it's all about hype these days
Nostalgia and small universe syndrome/interconnected universe sells. It doesn't take much brains to see that, and Trek was doing that even before the MCU (and other properties were doing that as well). While I find it annoying, this isn't a lack of brains but of appealing to the most number of audience members.
 
Although I'd personally hate it (it'd be a continuation of the Discovery stupidity and would further worsen the "small universe syndrome"), I do think it will happen, because it's all about hype these days, not brains.

This (very Scottish) guy puts it perfectly:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
If by "perfectly" you mean boorish, pretentious twaddle created by a boorish, pretentious twat intended for other boorish, pretentious twats, then sure.
 
There's gotta be ways they can bring back Prime Georgiou. I mean, L'Rell said they ate her, but nobody actually saw that happen... ;)

I just hope Michelle Yeoh didn't decide that playing the prime version was boring or anything like that. I mean, she obviously loved playing the MU version, but I hope this doesn't mean she's not interested in Prime anymore.
 
As much as I love seeing Michelle Yeoh kicking dudes in the face, I don't think it would fit what they're going for with Strange New Worlds.
 
If by "perfectly" you mean boorish, pretentious twaddle created by a boorish, pretentious twat intended for other boorish, pretentious twats, then sure.

So, people who don't agree with you are "pretentious boorish twats"? You have no arguments, so you resort to insults? Your attitude is poisonous.
 
Dude starts video off with a grand proclamation implying he's smarter and more mature than everyone else, and then immediately follows that up demonstrating he doesn't understand the material and weak-ass and throws in some snark about hookers and blow. Literally the definition of pretentious and boorish.
 
He's not wrong.

Yes, his resorting to insulting me because I linked to something he disagreed with really changed my mind.
I now agree that this scene:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Reflects how adults handle professional disagreements better than this scene:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Thanks, internet bullies!
 
If by "perfectly" you mean boorish, pretentious twaddle created by a boorish, pretentious twat intended for other boorish, pretentious twats, then sure.

So, people who don't agree with you are "pretentious boorish twats"? You have no arguments, so you resort to insults? Your attitude is poisonous.

He's not wrong.
Alright...criticism of the videos and the YouTube personality who made them are fair game. Let's not make or take the insults more personally than they need to be.
 
Alright...criticism of the videos and the YouTube personality who made them are fair game. Let's not make or take the insults more personally than they need to be.


If by "perfectly" you mean boorish, pretentious twaddle created by a boorish, pretentious twat intended for other boorish, pretentious twats, then sure.

The bolded part obviously means "you, who linked the video", but I'm not surprised internet moderators are biased.
I would've loved criticism of the video, I in fact tried to re-rail to the point. But, no, insulting me because corporal_clegg (and those who liked it) can't argue the point is ok. I can't insult them back, though. I do expect you wouldn't like that. Mods. Worse than useless.

The guy in the video is exactly that.

The comment was by an idiot who has to insult those who disagree because he can't refute the argument, and intended for other boorish idiotic twats.
 
Last edited:
The bolded part obviously means "you, who linked the video", but I'm not surprised internet moderators are biased.
I would've loved criticism of the video, I in fact tried to re-rail to the point. But, no, insulting me because corporal_clegg (and those who liked it) can't argue the point is ok.
Everyone involved in that exchange was given a friendly/informal warning. If you want to argue a moderator action, the place to do that is PM (the Conversation function), not publicly in the thread.

I can't insult them back, though. I do expect you wouldn't like that. Mods. Worse than useless.
And yet...
The comment was by an idiot who has to insult those who disagree because he can't refute the argument, and intended for other boorish idiotic twats.
This is a straight-up flame. As everyone involved was already told to knock it off, this earns you a Warning for Flaming. Comments to PM.
 
It's exactly the same type of comment that was made towards me. But it was ok then, it's just not ok to reply. Biased mod.
Everyone involved in that exchange was given a friendly/informal warning. If you want to argue a moderator action, the place to do that is PM (the Conversation function), not publicly in the thread.
What part of not arguing a mod action in the thread do you not understand? (That's a rhetorical question.) Your insistence on having to get in the last word publicly is liable to earn you another warning, because that is not how we do things around here.
 
Back on track..

No, I don't want Phillipa to show up on SNW, Honesly love Michelle, but I do think the Emporer character is played out. If she was allowed to be evil, but evil with a good point, like section 31 is suppose to be like, then yeah, it would be good, but she's not even an Anti hero anymore, she's just 'Good" and there for boring. The writers have written her in to a a dead end street.. Her in Season 2 was good, having her in season 3 was.. boring.
 
What part of not arguing a mod action in the thread do you not understand? (That's a rhetorical question.) Your insistence on having to get in the last word publicly is liable to earn you another warning, because that is not how we do things around here.

The part where that guy insults me and you're all in MY throat, that part.

The Old Mixer said:
Your insistence on having to get in the last word publicly

Pot, kettle...

I don't know why you think I'm going to tolerate being abused just because you say so.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top