Same here, but were I will always differ is that I'm willing to give the writers the benefit of the doubt.
Spoilers Yeah... I give up - Star Trek has abandoned philosophical naturalism - it's depressing/juvenile
- Thread starter INACTIVEUSS Einstein
- Start date
Yeah, I've quit watching more than one Trek show, and I'm still with Discovery for now. So all the arguments that "Old Trek was bad too" ring hollow for me.
That said, part of my frustration is that Discovery has so much potential that's being squandered. They have the luxury of time, budget, a serialized format, flexible runtimes, fewer episodes to fill and unprecedented freedom in their storytelling, and I expect them to capitalize on that. It should not be bad like shows from 25 or 50 years ago; it should be much better. It's almost impressive that they've managed to make the nuKlingons so paper thin after forcing me to read so many subtitles.
That said, the show is beautifully shot, the effects are the best we've ever gotten and some of cast are truly terrific. So for now, I'm willing to see if many of the problems are temporary growing pains caused by the troubled development process. I just hope that the storytelling improves.
Last edited:
Yeah. IMHO once they fired Fuller and realized whatever high-concept crap he wanted to do wasn't going to work, they should have basically set their aims much smaller. Essentially just sit the writing team down, have them figure out the central conflict in each of the characters, and what sort of scenarios let us explore this conflict. If it resulted in having the series only semi-serialized for the first season, without a huge epic plot line, so be it. Generally speaking serialized Sci-fi goes for the main arc lasting for multiple seasons anyway, with the first one mostly setting the stage and being much lower stakes.
"Philosophical Naturalism"? How dull. 
It will improve. That's part of developing a show, allowing the actors to fill out their characters, etc.
I don't argue that "Old Trek was bad" so much as "Old Trek struggled too." I think DISCO gets shellacked for things that Old Trek did and that's more frustrating to me. I feel like DISCO doesn't get any slack.
It's a very disturbing image of naked people discussing Plato and Kant"Philosophical Naturalism"? How dull.
Why spend a lot of time criticizing old Trek now? Not only isn't it timely, but all the critiques in the world won't change a damn thing about how the old series progress. In contrast, this show will retool, and fan response will play a role in how it retools.
Have you met the fan base? There are whole websites devoted to critiquing Old Trek, so that point fails on evidence alone.
To me, this show will not be allowed to stand on its own without being criticized to pieces.
I highly doubt it, and respectfully, I really hope not. Most fans are so splintered in their thoughts, mean-spirited in their criticism, and anal in their expectations that I'd rather the showrunners simply create the characters and stories the want, and let the chips fall.
Nothing makes me sicker than the "run things the way we want" mentality from the "fans." Football fans don't get to set the depth charts and call the plays. They tune in / buy tickets or they don't. The "ownership" mentality is one of the few things I find intolerable in Trek fandom.
I've spent countless dollars and time on Star Trek...movie tickets, home media, collectibles, books, games, conventions, autographs, shirts, Star Trek Vegas Experience, Star Trek TOS tour in Ticonderoga NY, etc etc etc. I don't feel I own or am owed ANYTHING. They make shows, I consume them (or not). That's my role. I'm not a writer.
Stories are art forms, not restaurants looking for ideas to improve the menu. The minute the writers start taking fan opinion like notes in some fucking suggestion box in Dunkin' Donuts, you might as well fold it up.
Of course that still happens, but it's mostly focused around the "worst of the worst" now - episodes like Threshold and A Night in Sickbay. The merely somewhat flawed/mediocre episodes are basically forgotten now.
I'm not sure why this is a problem. Art/literary/film criticism is a very real and respected academic field. Whole shows have come out in recent years where the discussion about the episodes were more popular than the episodes themselves. Further, it's just far easier to talk about how things don't work then it is to comment on what does work.
I must go to different websites...
Easier doesn't mean better. Why not discuss both? Why not allow the fanbase to embrace both in a meaningful way, and incorporate it in to fan art, fiction and the like? I am truly baffled by the resistance to incorporating Kelvin Trek and DISCO in to the fold, as it were.
I don't get it.
I don't understand sports fandom, but my understanding is it's just tribalism right? You support the team, whether they're in the right or not.
Other types of fandom don't work that way, and never have. If your favorite band comes up with a shitty album, most people don't get defensive and proclaim till the end of time it's just as good as the last one. They admit it's shitty and hope the next one is better.
Ultimately, we're not buying the togetherness of being part of Trek fandom. We're buying a product. And if we think the product could be better, we say so, just like someone who gives something only two stars on Amazon.
you have never been around U2 fans?
No. You support the team by wanting it to win. You'll never find any forum for a sports team that is just mindlessly slavish to them. You'll see half the threads recommending firing the coach, and who should replac them, and the rest will be recommendations on replacing team members like they are clubs in a golf bag and not people. It's fandom.
I guess I should have added a "usually" caveat.
Ahh, okay. I've done everything I can to avoid sports as much as possible in life, so I don't really know how people who enjoy sports act.
Sure. But the band should not feel “they owe the fans” more of the same. They should feel free to try new things if their creative spirits move them that way. There’s always the risk of losing some fans but there is also the potential of gaining more. And any art, commercial or otherwise, should strive to innovate without being hostage to “the fans’ expectations” (far too diverse to truly satisfy anyway).
Oh I agree, and I think any art form or form of entertainment is naturally set up for praise and criticism alike. In essence, that is its sole purpose. That's not what I'm arguing against at all.
I'm arguing against the idea that fan criticism be actively used to shape the direction of characters or stories. Fans are so far up their @$$ about what they want and don't want...that's a losing strategy.
Bingo
Exactly. The whole "fans are owed" something for their loyalty feels like entitlement to me. If I don't like the direction of a show, band, film series, book series, I don't buy it. That's the relationship.
Similar threads
