Correct.
Would you say Picard is prime timeline or part of the Discoverse?
- Thread starter Yes Man the Great
- Start date
Certainly, but surely you must understand why many find it a little odd if not frustrating for someone to come into a forum for months (Picard) or years (Discovery) about a show they didn't like, to continue to repeatedly make pretty much the exact same arguments about why they didn't like it. I would think that person would have better uses of their time, perhaps talking about shows they DO enjoy, such as The Orville. But hey, you do you. If you get your jollies yelling from the rooftops "I think Discovery and Picard are mediocre" repeatedly for all the world to hear, that is certainly your right, but don't pretend to not understand why others might take umbrage at this perplexing behavior. To me, it's the same as going to Cowboy stadium and shouting at fans how much the Cowboys suck. Can they? Sure. Might the Cowboys suck? Possibly. Is that a great use of time? Probably not.
I think the thing that I find most odd is that somehow if new Trek doesn't engage then it must be bad. I've been watching Trek for a while now and I don't understand the need for all Trek to appeal to me. If I don't like it, new or old, that's OK. Doesn't make a person less a fan.
The above example in sports is great too-do I like my team all the time? Nope. Will I cheer them on? Yup. Will I always watch? Nope.
The above example in sports is great too-do I like my team all the time? Nope. Will I cheer them on? Yup. Will I always watch? Nope.
We still talk about TOS (Which I'm pretty critical of, even with it being my favorite), TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. Why would Discovery and Picard be any different? Fans of the franchise will likely have opinions that they've stated more than once, both good and bad.
Do I think there is a lot of potential in what All-Access is doing? Yes. Do I think they have fulfilled that potential? Not even close. Both shows have decent casts, and writing that even a lot of the fans won't try to protect because it is all over the place.
Hell, I just bought the FanSet Picard arrowhead badge pin the other day. The show may be mediocre, but I still support the franchise. Including continuing to subscribe to All-Access.
On a much more interesting subject, which is the original topic:
"Would you say Picard is part of the Prime Timeline or part of the Discoverse?" I'd say Picard and Discovery are intended to be part of the same universe.
"Would you say Picard is part of the Prime Timeline or part of the Discoverse?" I'd say Picard and Discovery are intended to be part of the same universe.
Yet they are doing a Pike show, set in the 23rd Century using the many of the same visuals.
I'd rather the show move forward with story telling techniques and technology than move "forward" in a fictional timeline.
What exactly is "convoluted" about DISCO's visuals? Always struck me as following the same basic design language as the other shows, with a few tweaks.
I don't, which is the perspective I am coming from. I watched every episode of TNG in it's original run (and re-runs for many years) and enjoyed the heck out of it, never made it through more than 2 or 3 seasons of any of the others. And when I go back and look at TNG NOW, I find those Berman era shows close to unwatchable. So you know what? I don't go in those forums and talk about those shows. I want to talk about shows that, on balance, I enjoy. Having an allegiance to a show just because it is part of a franchise and thus feeling the need to talk about things I don't enjoy just sounds exhausting. But, again, if you want to keep going to Citi Field and yelling "The Mets Suck! Their pitching is just weak, and anyone who likes this team just likes bad baseball," more power to you.
I understand which is why I said multiple times you have every right to do what you're doing. I guess I just don't for the life of me understand what you get emotionally out of continually coming in these two forums saying essentially the same thing over and over again, and I'm trying to because I find the behavior so fascinating, to want to wallow in things you dislike.Different folks are different.
Why is it "wallowing" to talk about something that is part of a bigger entity that one does like?
We've heard you loud and clear.
I don't think there's anyone here who doesn't know what you think. You got your message across. You're bored with New Trek and we're bored with you constantly saying the same exact thing over, and over, and over again.
If I may, because every post you've made in the Disco and Picard forum in the last two and a half years has been some variation of "I was bored by this show." "I find the writing for this show weak." "I wanted to like this show but was disappointed." Rinse and repeat. That, to me, is wallowing. I liked the Flash. He is one of my favorite superheroes in the DC Universe, so I was SUPER excited when he got his own show. I loved the first season, liked the second and third, then everything after that didn't connect with me until I stopped watching altogether. I can understand going into, say, an Arrow thread and going "You know, I just find the Flash to be disappointing, but I still love Arrow. The writing is subpar so I stopped watching." Then I would be comparing something I didn't enjoy with something I do enjoy, in the thread for the thing I enjoy. But to keep going into the Flash threads going "God this show sucks now, the writing is so bad, the performances don't work for me" over and over, would make me feel like I was #1, dwelling on the negative, and #2 being rude to the people in those threads who still enjoyed the show. So for our situation here, I would understand going into Gen Trek, or TNG, or whatever and comparing Disco and Picard to those shows, but to continually come in the forums to reiterate over and over how much I dislike the show, doesn't seem like I'm doing it because I like the overall franchise, it seems I just want to shit on a show others enjoy. But that's just me.
There were some nice moments in season 2, but overall I agree with you. However, I've long believed that Fuller's original plan was for Burnham's [non] relationship with Spock to play a much bigger role in the overall concept of the show. I also believe that it was the big point of contention as to why he left. I have no proof of this, of course, besides a feeling based on his writing style and story development of other shows.
And I also agree that the show's placement timewise is totally arbitrary. But then I've always seen Star Trek's future time as arbitrary. In fact, I believe one of the franchise's biggest mistakes was to ever invoke the Gregorian calendar at all. They had the perfect plot device with stardates. They should have kept it completely abstract and ambiguous. But I digress.
However, assuming they do go ahead with a Pike-Something-or-Other, I think that it would be seen as the best thing to come out of this era when it's all said and done. But that's because they struck such gold with casting/chemistry between Mount, Peck, and Romijn. None the less, it would have never happened had they not set Disco in that time period.
I also praise the acting quite a bit, though no one seems to remember that. It seems to me that you want a safe space where you and others can constantly repeat yourselves on how great the show is.
I think that's the more important part is that it is designed to continue to the same universe, the same story, but the trappings are different. Obviously, the tolerance for change will vary for person to person but the story principles, the guiding line is still present.
Sort of, but not really. I want a space to discuss something with other people who OVERALL enjoy the same show I do. I find it FAR more interesting to discuss a show with someone who is invested in it than not, ie, criticism is more like "I love the show, but this episode blew chunks. Where usually Spock is fairly consistently written as being unemotional, in this episode he was shouting 'The WOMEN!' every other sentence," as opposed to the 300th iteration of, "this episode was as bad as all the rest. The acting was decent, but the pacing was as off as it always is, the writing choices were as dumb as they always are, and the effects as usual looked like something cooked up in a TRS-80 in 1988." The first one makes me engage and want to discuss why I might see the show differently. The second one, I may have wanted to engage with the first, or even the 10th time. But two and a half years later? The response to that second one just becomes "We KNOW. We GET IT. So WHY ARE YOU WATCHING A SHOW YOU CLEARLY DISLIKE?" There is no ENGAGEMENT there, because clearly nothing the writers do will EVER satisfy that person, so what kind of productive conversation can be had? It's just the 300th version of the same conversation. My God, you've been here since 2001, surely you saw people banging their heads against the rock that was Stewey. Or in the SciFi forum with Kirk55555. And while I don't quite put you into that category, your dislike is far more blase than their over the top hatred, it fosters no better discussion.
Were you responsible for that fiasco?
I find Disco and Picard to be pretty much on par:
The casting/acting is outstanding.
The direction is usually better than [TV] average.
The production is pedestrian in design but looks great.
And the writing is underwhelming and uninspired and completely fails to create any significant amount of compelling intrigue or pathos.
In either case, there's enough to enjoy and warrant keep paying for CBSAA. Yet the last part is significant enough for me to take issue.
The casting/acting is outstanding.
The direction is usually better than [TV] average.
The production is pedestrian in design but looks great.
And the writing is underwhelming and uninspired and completely fails to create any significant amount of compelling intrigue or pathos.
In either case, there's enough to enjoy and warrant keep paying for CBSAA. Yet the last part is significant enough for me to take issue.
That's an interesting thought!
Re: Spock and Michael. I'm somewhere between the two extremes on this topic. I like DIS and I like Michael being part of a Vulcan family and I like her relationships with Sarek, Amanda, and Spock. I just... find DIS's versions of Sarek, Amanda, and Spock don't feel like the original characters to me, and don't like the subtext it adds to their appearances in TOS and TNG. And Spock's arc in DIS S2 feels like an early version of the arc he goes on in TOS and TMP, which feels... a bit like it undermines the prior works.
I like the DIS versions of Sarek, Amanda, and Spock, but I'd like them better if the writing an acting were identical but they were just different characters. But that doesn't mean I dislike DIS or want the Vulcan Family Drama not to be there! I really like seeing the internal dynamics of a Vulcan family forced to cope with a Human who's not fully embedded in their cultural practices.
Wrong! Go back and rewatch both shows over and over until you come back with the right answer!
Similar threads
