Author Topic: star trek  (Read 331061 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

VomKriege

  • Do the moron
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2880 on: April 23, 2020, 04:02:10 PM »
I've heard the argument made the other way, that she can act fine but the writing wasn't up to the character, there's definitely the feeling she was the eye candy of the cast for the producers. It's maybe a bit of both. Shosta mentioned how jarring it was that apparently there was no jurisprudence of any kind about the host and/or symbiote responsibility in case of a crime and overall the background mythology is surprisingly vague. I was not impressed by the Trill aquarium in a cave, to take another example. Odo and Quark are much stronger characters with very heavy traits, Brooks is a scenery chewer and Visitor is by far the strongest actor in the core cast. Farrell is not there but I think she's on the level of Siddig.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2020, 04:06:57 PM by VomKriege »
ὕβρις

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2881 on: April 23, 2020, 05:06:00 PM »
The problem with Dax is you're supposed to buy that Jadzia Dax acts so similarly to Curzon that Sisko can't help but instantly recognise his traits and mannerisms and find it difficult to see Jadzia as her own person, but then they fuck that up first by showing Curzon as played by Odo, a totally fucking unrecognisable character, and then introducing Ezri, also a totally fucking unrecognisable character

e: also leaned way too fucking hard into wannabe klingon storylines
« Last Edit: April 23, 2020, 05:11:54 PM by GreatSageEqualOfHeaven »

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2882 on: April 23, 2020, 05:18:34 PM »
Yeah Worf the Klingaboo was enough.

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2883 on: April 23, 2020, 07:56:56 PM »
Duet was a great episode. I agree that #NotAllGermans were bad people.
每天生气

VomKriege

  • Do the moron
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2884 on: April 23, 2020, 08:00:54 PM »
Duet was a great episode. I agree that #NotAllGermans were bad people.

Duet is the best episode in S1. This is something they'll revisit a lot with a lot of success but rarely better than it does.
ὕβρις

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2885 on: April 23, 2020, 08:46:26 PM »
S1 finale was good. I like the fundamental message of that episode, that there should be a place for both faith and science in our schools, and that if you try to create a conflict between them it just causes problems.
每天生气

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2886 on: April 23, 2020, 11:09:21 PM »
I remember watching the first season of Voyager and drifting away from it. I'm watching s2 off-and-on, and it's basically TNG methadone. It's nearly TNG, but it doesn't get me high.

I should just go back to DS9, but I can't watch that and do dishes or laundry at the same time. I have to focus on it. It's good TV.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2887 on: April 24, 2020, 06:33:59 AM »
If Voyager is TNG methadone, does that make The Orville TNG Ketamine? :thinking

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2888 on: April 24, 2020, 08:30:54 AM »
I've heard the argument made the other way, that she can act fine but the writing wasn't up to the character, there's definitely the feeling she was the eye candy of the cast for the producers. It's maybe a bit of both. Shosta mentioned how jarring it was that apparently there was no jurisprudence of any kind about the host and/or symbiote responsibility in case of a crime and overall the background mythology is surprisingly vague. I was not impressed by the Trill aquarium in a cave, to take another example. Odo and Quark are much stronger characters with very heavy traits, Brooks is a scenery chewer and Visitor is by far the strongest actor in the core cast. Farrell is not there but I think she's on the level of Siddig.
I think Farrell is a completely capable actor, it’s definitely possible that the actual scripting for her was weak, but for whatever reason I felt that she wasn’t able to fit/make work the role of Jadzia.  Especially the Klingon stuff.

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2889 on: April 24, 2020, 06:29:59 PM »
On ep 3 of S2 (the siege). I think this whole thing is a great analogy for how Russia is interfering in our electoral politics behind the scenes by pitting us against each other.
每天生气

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2890 on: April 24, 2020, 07:28:15 PM »
If Voyager is TNG methadone, does that make The Orville TNG Ketamine? :thinking

And Picard is TNG Kratum.

VomKriege

  • Do the moron
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2891 on: April 25, 2020, 06:49:33 AM »
Yeah I have mixed feeling about the Klingaboo stuff too. Obviously the contrast with Jadzia stature is part of the bit but it often came across as LARPing (and thus shallow). It still works because Worf is also a poseur and it's more of Klingon culture nerd couple than a Klingon marriage... And there's undertones of the fantasy rubber meeting the reality road a couple of times for Dax. It's hard buying Dax (even Curzon) would be taken seriously by the old school Klingon legends even when the script tries to address it though.

She's not comic relief proper but Jadzia is kinda the ditz / aloof punctuation and I think there was missed opportunities on having more meat to that character. The S7 turn was super clumsy but in a way it was a more palpable and concrete depiction than just talking about the "old man".
ὕβρις

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2892 on: April 28, 2020, 07:27:33 AM »
This reddit comment is too good :dead

Quote
If TNG used Discovery's format every episode would be: Riker gets dressed down for bringing a strange space STI aboard the ship > Something happens that moves the season arc an inch and a half > Riker stares doe eyed out his window while wearing space pajamas > Something else happens that moves the season arc an inch and a half > Geordi and Troi tell him that he's doing a great job and mean old Picard and the Admirals just don't get it > Stuff blows up > Picard tells Riker that his reckless and impulsive space STI possibly saved the day > Roll credits.

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2893 on: April 28, 2020, 08:22:56 PM »
I finished Picard. I more-or-less binged it this time, and tried to pay better attention than my first attempt, when I was doing chores and stuff while it was playing. I got four episodes in that time, and had no idea what was going on. So... for me, that's a little bit anti-Trek: there aren't many other OST, TNG, or VOY episodes where I can't just tune-in halfway and have a decent idea of what's happening. Picard uses nonsequential storytelling and more of an adventure/quest storyline than the semi-procedural pattern of previous series.

tl;dr: I liked Picard a bunch this time. It suffers from the same problem as the TNG movies, where Picard and Data are overwhelmingly the focus of the story. But it's not like the series own title and the very first shot in the show (Picard and Data playing poker) don't pretty much let you know that this will be the case. And in fairness, the new crew does get some reasonable amount of background and development over the course of this season's 10 episodes. I like it. I'm ready for more. And I say that as someone who probably won't ever go out of his way for more VOY or another season of DISCOVERY.

There are questions brought up which bear near-PKD levels of scrutinizing reality and the legitimacy of consciousness. There is a consistent presentation of the concept that life's preciousness is inherently tied to its limited nature. Death is what gives life meaning. That said, there are a couple of inherent missteps. Picard spoilers:

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The first synth, Dahj, is killed in front of Picard in the end of the first episode from whatever acidic spit-sac the Romulan assassins are using in place of cyanide capsules. She dies without ever mentioning her twin, Soji. It's likely that she never knew about Soji -- but Soji knew about Dahj. Sure, both of them were living lives that were couched in false memories, but why give one the memory, and not the other? And why is Dahj's life so casually tossed aside? And why is there a gold-skinned version of her which has no twin?

In the coda for Data, he requests that Picard turn off the quantum simulation in which Data remains conscious. This is the culmination of "life has meaning because it is finite." Data wants to benefit from that same awareness of limit, thus gaining further, final insight into the human condition. While it could be argued that, even with triple-redundancy on the quantum simulation, it is eventually going to fail. Nothing is forever, so this is less about awareness and finite-ness, and more about assisted suicide. I'm also OK with that.

What surprised me was pushing Picard's consciousness into an equally frail body, with a life expectancy of "more or less what you would've had if not for the brain tumor." Picard had his run, he lived a good life, has died of misadventure a couple of times -- but converting his consciousness into a new body seems to fly in the face of the series' main message. This is your one life. Use it as best you can because it is singular and precious. Unless you're Picard, in which case you'll be saved from a brain tumor, or a Nausicaan stabbing you through the heart, or whatever.
[close]

One more thing, when they're in the bar and Vajazzle Bijayzl is first introduced, I thought she was Deanna Troi. I thought, "Holy hells, Marina Sirtis has held up well!" That was a hell of a bodysuit. Anyway, yeah, I'll be in my bunk.

http://twitter.com/Jwhitbrook/status/1230868218065104896

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2894 on: April 28, 2020, 08:32:52 PM »
I am ready for everybody who worked on that abomination to be fired.  :-[

chronovore

  • relapsed dev
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2895 on: April 28, 2020, 10:42:58 PM »
I am ready for everybody who worked on that abomination to be fired.  :-[

My general impression is that you're not a positive thinker about many things. Which is fine. It does make me sad for you though.

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2896 on: April 28, 2020, 10:47:25 PM »
I honestly thought it was Marina Sirtis or a relative when I saw her.  had to pause the show to look it up.

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2897 on: April 28, 2020, 11:13:17 PM »
I am ready for everybody who worked on that abomination to be fired.  :-[

My general impression is that you're not a positive thinker about many things. Which is fine. It does make me sad for you though.

It's more of an issue with this show turning Star Trek from a thought provoking Scifi with a near Utopian future where moral dilemmas are shown not told to the audience, and turning it into generic bleak Scifi with turrible writing and elder abuse.

Shit characters
Shit Writing
Shit Dialogue
Nonsensical "plot"

spoiler (click to show/hide)
I guess the special effects look good, but fuck those ship designs are bad.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
They benched the only likeable characters the O'Romulans.
[close]

spoiler (click to show/hide)
This shit is worse than Discovery.
[close]

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2898 on: April 29, 2020, 02:19:31 AM »
The last two eps and especially the ending to Picard was offensively bad. The rest was ugh to meh.


However
spoiler (click to show/hide)
[close]


:lawd
« Last Edit: April 29, 2020, 02:24:57 AM by Momo »

MMaRsu

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2899 on: April 29, 2020, 03:54:50 AM »
It really is garbage though. Im not saying that because I dislike it. Im saying that because objectively its a really bad show
What

nachobro

  • Live Más
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2900 on: April 29, 2020, 09:32:29 AM »
this thread rules

anyway can't wait for season 2, i get 2x the entertainment. once from the show and once from the autistic spergouts in here :rejoice

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2901 on: April 29, 2020, 10:00:19 AM »
I don't know if Sonequa MArtin-Green is a bad actress, because the only other thing I've seen her in is a bit part in The Good Wife as a secretary, but she is awful as the lead in Discovery, and charitably she's either woefully miscast or the character is just terribly written.

That's why comparing her to Riker in that reddit comment doesn't work. You'd still be rooting for Riker.

nachobro

  • Live Más
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2902 on: May 02, 2020, 08:40:08 PM »

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2903 on: May 02, 2020, 10:38:34 PM »
He could be making that entire thing up and I wouldn't know. :lol

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2904 on: May 02, 2020, 10:41:54 PM »
I don't remember any of that shit, but I guess its a callback to Voyage Home...?

nachobro

  • Live Más
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2905 on: May 02, 2020, 10:46:20 PM »
someone get benji in here to confirm/deny

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2906 on: May 02, 2020, 10:55:30 PM »
I assume it'd be easy enough for someone to check a copy of the TNG Technical Manual. The Okuda's and others weren't above putting obscure references on things that were never expected to be seen like computer screens and stuff so labeling a door out of something wacky in the Technical Manual sounds like the kinds of things they did all the time. These became recursive because the Okuda's then wrote the Chronology and Encyclopedia which referenced a ton of them. Then later series referenced them.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2907 on: May 02, 2020, 10:57:28 PM »
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Cetacean_Ops
Quote
The term "Cetacean Ops" was only heard in the "background chatter" during the episode. The facility might also exist in the regular timeline as dolphins are mentioned to be aboard the ship in "The Perfect Mate". To date, the facility has never been shown on screen. Conceptual artwork at Andrew Probert's website shows that the facility may be have been featured in the original version of Star Trek Online. The subtitles for the episode on streaming services including both Netflix and Amazon, as well as the TNG Season 3 Blu-ray release, give the facility's name as "station Ops."

According to the 1996 reference book Star Trek: The Next Generation USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D Blueprints, lifeboats for the cetacean ops crew were located on deck 13. [1]
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Dolphin
Quote
The dolphins aboard the Enterprise-D were originally to have been referenced in TNG: "Relics". In the first draft script of that outing, Geordi La Forge remarked to Montgomery Scott, "Wait until you see the dolphins." However, that statement, in the final draft of the script as well as the final edit of the installment, became, "Wait until you see the Holodeck." [1]

The Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual indicates that the dolphins were part of the ship's complement, serving as navigational specialists. This would indicate that they are, in fact, a sentient species. They likely operated out of Cetacean Ops.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2908 on: May 02, 2020, 11:09:05 PM »
I assume it'd be easy enough for someone to check a copy of the TNG Technical Manual. The Okuda's and others weren't above putting obscure references on things that were never expected to be seen like computer screens and stuff so labeling a door out of something wacky in the Technical Manual sounds like the kinds of things they did all the time. These became recursive because the Okuda's then wrote the Chronology and Encyclopedia which referenced a ton of them. Then later series referenced them.

That's how I assume most of these situations happen... when you insert an in-joke into Star Trek, it becomes canon...

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2909 on: May 03, 2020, 03:30:54 AM »

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2910 on: May 03, 2020, 05:57:25 AM »
I finished Picard. I more-or-less binged it this time, and tried to pay better attention than my first attempt, when I was doing chores and stuff while it was playing. I got four episodes in that time, and had no idea what was going on. So... for me, that's a little bit anti-Trek: there aren't many other OST, TNG, or VOY episodes where I can't just tune-in halfway and have a decent idea of what's happening. Picard uses nonsequential storytelling and more of an adventure/quest storyline than the semi-procedural pattern of previous series.

tl;dr: I liked Picard a bunch this time. It suffers from the same problem as the TNG movies, where Picard and Data are overwhelmingly the focus of the story. But it's not like the series own title and the very first shot in the show (Picard and Data playing poker) don't pretty much let you know that this will be the case. And in fairness, the new crew does get some reasonable amount of background and development over the course of this season's 10 episodes. I like it. I'm ready for more. And I say that as someone who probably won't ever go out of his way for more VOY or another season of DISCOVERY.

There are questions brought up which bear near-PKD levels of scrutinizing reality and the legitimacy of consciousness. There is a consistent presentation of the concept that life's preciousness is inherently tied to its limited nature. Death is what gives life meaning. That said, there are a couple of inherent missteps. Picard spoilers:

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The first synth, Dahj, is killed in front of Picard in the end of the first episode from whatever acidic spit-sac the Romulan assassins are using in place of cyanide capsules. She dies without ever mentioning her twin, Soji. It's likely that she never knew about Soji -- but Soji knew about Dahj. Sure, both of them were living lives that were couched in false memories, but why give one the memory, and not the other? And why is Dahj's life so casually tossed aside? And why is there a gold-skinned version of her which has no twin?

In the coda for Data, he requests that Picard turn off the quantum simulation in which Data remains conscious. This is the culmination of "life has meaning because it is finite." Data wants to benefit from that same awareness of limit, thus gaining further, final insight into the human condition. While it could be argued that, even with triple-redundancy on the quantum simulation, it is eventually going to fail. Nothing is forever, so this is less about awareness and finite-ness, and more about assisted suicide. I'm also OK with that.

What surprised me was pushing Picard's consciousness into an equally frail body, with a life expectancy of "more or less what you would've had if not for the brain tumor." Picard had his run, he lived a good life, has died of misadventure a couple of times -- but converting his consciousness into a new body seems to fly in the face of the series' main message. This is your one life. Use it as best you can because it is singular and precious. Unless you're Picard, in which case you'll be saved from a brain tumor, or a Nausicaan stabbing you through the heart, or whatever.
[close]

One more thing, when they're in the bar and Vajazzle Bijayzl is first introduced, I thought she was Deanna Troi. I thought, "Holy hells, Marina Sirtis has held up well!" That was a hell of a bodysuit. Anyway, yeah, I'll be in my bunk.

http://twitter.com/Jwhitbrook/status/1230868218065104896
They could’ve saved that final episode for me if after
spoiler (click to show/hide)
Picard’s body dies, we see him wake up in Tom Hardy’s body.  That way at least something good eventually came out of that rancid piece of shit, Nemesis.
[close]

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2911 on: May 08, 2020, 03:04:33 PM »
So I finished up Picard. I'll post some spoiler stuff after this but my no spoiler comment is that I liked it, but I think the last two episodes are kinda dumb and drag down what was a pretty good initial season for a trek show. I prefer Discovery if I'm being honest. That show keeps me more on the edge of my seat and delivers what I want a bit more from a modern trek but its fine to have a different kind of trek show in some ways in Picard. Read no reviews or anybody's else comments outside a few in this thread because I don't give an f about what Red Letter Media or any other nerd groupthink fountain thinks about things  On to the spoiler stuff.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
The cast is mostly fine. I like them. I wasn't sure about Rios early on as it seems they were leaning heavily into a type but he grew on me and I like the silly bit where he plays all the other AI stuff. Rafi, Jurati are fine. I don't get the complaints about likability. They seem fine to me. Flawed sure but I'm perfectly fine with that. The Elnor/Legolas characters is seemingly the worst so far for me as he is very predictable and generic and they need to kinda do something about that.

The show starts off slow and things take maybe a little too long to juice the plot but once it got going, I was invested to see where it was going. I quite liked the first episode with Riker and Troi. It hit the right notes of nostalgia and emotion for me. I was quite excited to see where things were going once everything got going. But I must say I did not like those last two episodes much at all.

I'm generally the type of person who kind of favors emotion over plot. So when things don't kinda make sense plot wise mechanically I've very willing to let that go if the emotional element is strong. But if the plot is kinda jammed down my throat its harder to overlook and I feel like that last stretch of plot is both jammed down my throat and pretty dumb. When they show the future serpent robots traveling in space and time to come destroy things, my eyes were rolling into the back of my mind. Not only did it look goofy but thematically the threat here should be sort of be implied rather than shown. I felt that would have been more effective. Not only that but the whole conclusion is way too damn fast and convenient and put on a perfect bow. I didn't like the whole fleet magically showing up with riker in the chair. Too fan-servicey. I get that Star Trek is historically often like this. With 2 minute conclusions to rather complicated plots. But that's always been a flaw imo. Why not improve on that rather than just falling back on it. It felt like they crammed what should have been about 4 episodes into 2 and it wasn't the best writing on it also.

Some of that sounds pretty negative but mostly I enjoyed the show outside of large swaths of those final two episodes. Patrick Stewart pretty much effortlessly delivers great work in this role. I'd love to see other TNG members come back and deliver good cameos. I like the little mini-crew we've established for the most part. I'm down for it. I loved TNG as much as the next person but I never honestly wanted TNG 2.0 just in 2020. There are certainly flaws and things that need to be improved upon but that is true of every single trek show that has ever been on the air. The magic sauce has always been where the show eventually ends up going versus where it starts.
[close]
« Last Edit: May 09, 2020, 03:38:46 AM by Stoney Mason »

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2912 on: May 09, 2020, 02:22:25 AM »
I expect the second season of Picard to be worse than the first imagine being such hacks that you do the opposite of Real Trek shows and make shit worse than the first season.  :lol

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2913 on: May 09, 2020, 01:34:15 PM »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2914 on: May 15, 2020, 12:38:41 PM »
https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/star-trek-series-anson-mount-ethan-peck-rebecca-romijn-cbs-all-access-1234607259/

 :obama


Good News for me.


Sad news for the rest of the thread.

 :sabu

Although most will probably need to wait for an RLM video to form their opinion first.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2915 on: May 15, 2020, 12:43:27 PM »
I loved Picard until the last episode of so whichnwas flawed. So I love it but didn't find the conclusion satisfactory.

https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/star-trek-series-anson-mount-ethan-peck-rebecca-romijn-cbs-all-access-1234607259/

 :obama


Good News for me.


Sad news for the rest of the thread.

 :sabu

Although most will probably need to wait for an RLM video to form their opinion first.

I just feel we don't need another trek show. But I'll give it a chance.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2916 on: May 15, 2020, 12:45:31 PM »
Also I haven't clicked on this thread in weeks. Wastoid thread.
IYKYK

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2917 on: May 15, 2020, 12:50:57 PM »
My serious response is that three shows are a lot. But I also get hitting where the iron is hot. Trek on TV is hot for the first time in awhile so they are going to push it for all its worth.

I'm fine with it as long as the shows can keep a distinct separate focus and identity which is admittedly tough for trek. 

Anson Mount was really good as Pike so I understand wanting to keep him around for stuff as was Peck as spock. Romijn was kinda meh imo but maybe she can up her game if given more to do.

At one point there was also talk of a Michelle Yeoh Spin off show. Not sure if that is dead in favor of this or not.



nachobro

  • Live Más
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2918 on: May 15, 2020, 12:54:02 PM »
three shows is a lot of shows. were tng, ds9, and voyager ever on all at the same time? if so it would have had to be right at the very tail end of tng.

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2919 on: May 15, 2020, 12:57:08 PM »
Ew more Star Drek for the Drekkies.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2920 on: May 15, 2020, 01:00:06 PM »
three shows is a lot of shows. were tng, ds9, and voyager ever on all at the same time? if so it would have had to be right at the very tail end of tng.

I can't remember but even if they weren't syndication repeats were a thing at the time so it felt like they all ran at the same time because most of us watched the repeats right along with the new content.  (Although I dipped out on voyager really early)

The fact that syndication doesn't really exist anymore kinda helps a bit with the over-saturation. But yeah all three of these shows are fairly young with Discovery only being in season 3. Corona will of course slow down production on some of this stuff.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2921 on: May 15, 2020, 01:01:03 PM »
Ew more Star Drek for the Drekkies.

Don't worry. You will have more jack materal RLM videos. It's a win win.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2922 on: May 15, 2020, 01:02:54 PM »
My serious response is that three shows are a lot. But I also get hitting where the iron is hot. Trek on TV is hot for the first time in awhile so they are going to push it for all its worth.

I'm fine with it as long as the shows can keep a distinct separate focus and identity which is admittedly tough for trek. 

Anson Mount was really good as Pike so I understand wanting to keep him around for stuff as was Peck as spock. Romijn was kinda meh imo but maybe she can up her game if given more to do.

At one point there was also talk of a Michelle Yeoh Spin off show. Not sure if that is dead in favor of this or not.

It isn't three shows though. It's five. There's also the comedy show and the Section 31 Michelle Yeoh show.
IYKYK

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2923 on: May 15, 2020, 01:05:22 PM »
Yeah there's at least four shows (Discovery s3, Picard s2, Section 31 s1, Strange New Worlds s1.)

Which is ridiculous.

Viacom must be panicking they have fuckall to compete with Disney+ and HBO Max and are milking the Trek teat as much as possible.

Only this time it makes less sense than Disney with Star Wars -- SW is a global franchise. Trek is pretty US-centric sales-wise... Viacom putting all their eggs in the Trek basket does not make sense financially.

It does explain a lot of the creative decisions made with these shows though, there's a lot riding on them so they have to appeal to as broad an audience as possible.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2924 on: May 15, 2020, 01:06:52 PM »
three shows is a lot of shows. were tng, ds9, and voyager ever on all at the same time? if so it would have had to be right at the very tail end of tng.

No. It was a slow drip. DS9 aired while TNG was on. I remember. Then TNG ended as DS9 headed into s3.  Then Voyager aired soon after TNG ended because of the babies complaining.

TNG ended in may 94. DS9  was already on the air. VOY premiered January 95.

FYI, Enterprise aired like three MONTHS after Voyager ended. MONTHS. They didn't give any time to let these shows breathe. Just constant milking.
IYKYK

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2925 on: May 15, 2020, 01:07:09 PM »
I don't count the animated show. For me that its own thing in a completely different format and tone. That will be nothing like a traditional trek show. I don't know about the Michelle Yeoh thing if that is still happening. I'll judge them independently of course. Three Shows are a lot. But its also not like they are cranking out 22 season mandatory episodes where you are forced to feed the beast at that rate. That was equally a problem of old trek as with all television. They had to crank out a good portion of shit just to feed that massive amount of episodes.

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2926 on: May 15, 2020, 01:07:46 PM »
I don't think 3 or 4 shows is a lot when they are all like 10-13 episodes and seem to have longer times between seasons.  I don't see why we can't have them spaced out so ever three months we get 10 episodes.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2927 on: May 15, 2020, 01:08:35 PM »
I don't think 3 or 4 shows is a lot when they are all like 10-13 episodes and seem to have longer times between seasons.

I think its a lot of shows but I also think your point is fair which was also my point.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2928 on: May 15, 2020, 01:10:30 PM »
Damn yeah there's two other shows in development too, Lower Decks (two season pickup out of the gate??) and some cartoon show Nick is making maybe?

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2929 on: May 15, 2020, 01:12:52 PM »
The thing is I'd be fine with a lot of Trek shows, but why are the majority of them Discovery-era? What about the people that don't like Discovery era or prequels? They're fucked if they don't like Picard either.

Strange New Worlds would be more interesting if its placing in the timeline was ambiguous. The temptation in these prequel shows to touch and smudge up TOS stories is too great for the writers, and they routinely cock it up IMO.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2930 on: May 15, 2020, 01:13:10 PM »
Damn yeah there's two other shows in development too, Lower Decks (two season pickup out of the gate??) and some cartoon show Nick is making maybe?

Lower Decks I knew of but not the Nick show.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2931 on: May 15, 2020, 01:14:08 PM »
The thing is I'd be fine with a lot of Trek shows, but why are the majority of them Discovery-era? What about the people that don't like Discovery era or prequels? They're fucked if they don't like Picard either.

Strange New Worlds would be more interesting if its placing in the timeline was ambiguous. The temptation in these prequel shows to touch and smudge up TOS stories is too great for the writers, and they routinely cock it up IMO.

I'm sick of them sucking TOS' cock. Give me another post-Voy show. I'm fucking begging you!

IYKYK

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2932 on: May 15, 2020, 01:20:53 PM »
I like New Trek so I'm fine with this until I stop liking the shows. When that happens I will mention it personally. Everybody is of course entitled to their own opinion and preferences (once properly vetted by an RLM video of course)

My secret wish for a trek show was the rumoured original pitch for Discovery and that it was going to be an anthology show where you focused on a different cast and experience each season. I loved that idea. But I also understand why from a business perspective it was shot down.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2933 on: May 15, 2020, 01:24:59 PM »
I also like that idea.

Personally, I'm miffed Lower Decks is a comedy show. I love the idea of turning the episode Lower Decks into an entire show. A series about non-officer Starflet members fresh out of academy would be excellent and refreshing. Put it post-VOY and we could explore the state of the universe in a refreshing new way. Make it have the same format as DS9 where it's self contained but also serialized. I think that could be the traditional Trek show for diehard Trekkies.

The benefit of having all these shows is that they can appeal to every Trek fan under the sun: the people that like action and Borg plots, the people that like the politics, and the people that like the adventure. I hope they realize they need a traditional Trek show on the wings as well to placate their audience. People are starved for oldschool Trek. Give it to them. You have multiple shows. You can afford it.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2934 on: May 15, 2020, 01:30:40 PM »
I am going through DS9 as well man like half the season was pretty good and then shit episodes like that pop up and it never really recovers.
Battle Lines was amazing. Vortex was alright. The rest of this series must be pretty good if this is considered the worst season.

A lot of trekkies suggest to outright skip it because trekkies are bitches. DS9 is good tv straight through. Move Along Home is the only truly bad episode in my opinion. The quality of the show ranges from alright to fucking spectacular. There are some episodes I'm not keen on (mirror universe) but they're not "FUCK THIS IS AWFUL" tier either.

Easily the most balanced, best Trek show.
IYKYK

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2935 on: May 15, 2020, 01:31:12 PM »
I think everyone liked Pike in Discovery because he was a glimpse of a real trek captain doing real trek captainty stuff, so if they want to give him a show thats more like star trek while michael burnham stoically unemotes to every problem that she is either the cause of or the solution to over on discovery while pining over Clem Fandango, fair play to them.

:idont

I thought the chemistry between pike and number one was pretty good. Presumably there's some kind of economy to be had by building a permanent ship set, then slightly redressing it for each of the different shows that makes filming multiple series sort of concurrently make sense, because for all its faults, Discovery sure didn't look low budget in the sllightest.

TNG and DS9 overlapped slightly at the start of DS9, and DS9 and VOY overlapped at the end of DS9, but there's only so much they could do in the way of recycling sets for all three (although goddamn they got their moneys worth out of the stuff they built for ST:TMP :lol)

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2936 on: May 15, 2020, 01:41:17 PM »
I like New Trek so I'm fine with this until I stop liking the shows. When that happens I will mention it personally. Everybody is of course entitled to their own opinion and preferences (once properly vetted by an RLM video of course)

My secret wish for a trek show was the rumoured original pitch for Discovery and that it was going to be an anthology show where you focused on a different cast and experience each season. I loved that idea. But I also understand why from a business perspective it was shot down.
keeping on with this RLM shtick when everyone in this thread pretty much gives their opinions 5 mins after the show aired is distinguished mentally-challenged fellow fuel, but hey I guess it worked on me  :shaking :engel

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2937 on: May 15, 2020, 01:44:02 PM »
Nah he's right. I don't even watch RLM as a channel anymore. The people are too bitter, too cynical, and aren't pleasing to watch at this point in time. There are far better movie Youtube channels that offer criticism without wallowing in their own Gen X/older Millennial piss.
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #2938 on: May 15, 2020, 01:47:21 PM »
No he's not right, the people in this thread, ostensibly the readers of this thread have all shared their opinions well before RLM has given their opinions, that we laugh along with RLM later does in no way seed those opinions unless you've secretly discovered time travel.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member