Author Topic: star trek  (Read 330633 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3060 on: May 21, 2020, 12:29:12 PM »
But they've now announced that the new Captain Pike series is going to be lighter in tone and more episodic, so I dunno if fling shit at wall and hope it sticks is an ongoing strategy as they churn through showrunners and keep announcing new spin offs, if the direction they've taken with discovery and Picard is actually generating business and CBS subs and validating their strategy, or if their continuing resistance to giving the fans what they've been clamouring for actually does just boil down to


:idont

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3061 on: May 21, 2020, 12:31:06 PM »
I really liked WestWorld S1 and S2, I haven't seen S3 yet.
Compare Picard S1 to WestWorld S1 - both a highly serialised reboot of an existing property. Which would you rather sign up to a service to subscribe to after watching the first couple of episodes?

:trumps

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3062 on: May 21, 2020, 01:26:51 PM »
So what are our hopes for the planned Section 31 show?  For me, I want the actions of their lead protagonist(s) to be fatalist and grimy (kind of like how Vic Mackey does his job, but with less selfishness), but tonally contrasted by constantly presenting us the utopian veneer of Starfleet and the Federation.  Things like brutal assassinations of diplomats and their families against propaganda level backdrops of Starfleet as benevolent caretakers, research into biological warfare to be used against allied races like the Vulcans and Klingons, in the event they become “existential threats” to the good of the Federation. Shit like that.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 01:31:39 PM by Tuckers Law »

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3063 on: May 21, 2020, 01:38:24 PM »
I have no idea to expect from it. I figure it could be a procedural like Law and Order. IDK.
IYKYK

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: star trek
« Reply #3064 on: May 21, 2020, 01:45:46 PM »
I like Q

this goes in the hungrynoob thread

BIONIC

  • Virgo. Live Music. The Office. Tacos. Fur mom. True crime junkie. INTJ.
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3065 on: May 21, 2020, 01:50:27 PM »
Margs

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3066 on: May 21, 2020, 01:54:53 PM »
Westworld season 1 is fine but 2 and 3 are star wars tier  :nope

stufte

  • Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3067 on: May 21, 2020, 01:55:31 PM »
Picard was barely a Star Trek show. It was generic space drama pew pew with a veneer of Star Trek. Both this and Discovery are embarrassingly vapid "Star Trek" shows.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3068 on: May 21, 2020, 02:08:42 PM »
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?
IYKYK

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3069 on: May 21, 2020, 02:12:14 PM »
So what are our hopes for the planned Section 31 show?  For me, I want the actions of their lead protagonist(s) to be fatalist and grimy (kind of like how Vic Mackey does his job, but with less selfishness), but tonally contrasted by constantly presenting us the utopian veneer of Starfleet and the Federation.  Things like brutal assassinations of diplomats and their families against propaganda level backdrops of Starfleet as benevolent caretakers, research into biological warfare to be used against allied races like the Vulcans and Klingons, in the event they become “existential threats” to the good of the Federation. Shit like that.

Which would be great, but they've already kind of handicapped themselves on that front by making it a crapsack universe where starfleet are already morally compromised, so they can't pull a Demolition Man where nobody expects federation members to act like that because they already do anyway.

The ideal show would be something like the OG Mission Impossible TV show, where they're doing shit like pulling long con mindops on people, like that ep of DS9 where they kidnap Kira and gaslight her into thinking she's a Cardassian to try and smoke out a high ranking Cardassian traitor by making him think she's his daughter.
Realistically my expectations are set at the Mission Impossible films, where there is a nominal plot, but its just action setpieces and gadgets.

Michelle Yeoh is great though, so I'm sure her hamming it up as undercover Rita Repulsa will be entertaining regardless of what she has to work with.

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3070 on: May 21, 2020, 02:17:05 PM »
Thread merges and closing threads like the skyler one because someone doesn’t like them, this place is a fucking prison on planet bullshit!  :rage. All mods are cops

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3071 on: May 21, 2020, 02:19:15 PM »
Thread merges and closing threads like the skyler one because someone doesn’t like them, this place is a fucking prison on planet bullshit!  :rage. All mods are cops

Indeed. Who is doing this shit.
IYKYK

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3072 on: May 21, 2020, 02:25:23 PM »
But they've now announced that the new Captain Pike series is going to be lighter in tone and more episodic, so I dunno if fling shit at wall and hope it sticks is an ongoing strategy as they churn through showrunners and keep announcing new spin offs, if the direction they've taken with discovery and Picard is actually generating business and CBS subs and validating their strategy, or if their continuing resistance to giving the fans what they've been clamouring for actually does just boil down to
(Image removed from quote.)

:idont

Captain Pike was pretty inoffensive but Spork was. :trigger

bork

  • おっぱいは命、尻は故郷
  • Global Moderator
Re: star trek
« Reply #3073 on: May 21, 2020, 02:28:03 PM »
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?

Your entire thread wasn't merged with this one.  Just the few posts made today.  I thought Tuckers Law bumped the wrong thread and figured I'd help.   APOLOGIES FOR SUCH A MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER AND DISRUPTION.  ::)

What the fuck is with the hostility in this thread?
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 02:32:26 PM by bork »
ど助平

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3074 on: May 21, 2020, 02:31:05 PM »
I actually forgot new Spock existed till now. Michelle Yeoh was about the only thing from new trek that didn't feel like swallowing twice regurgitated vomit.

stufte

  • Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3075 on: May 21, 2020, 02:36:53 PM »
https://www.startrek.com/news/the-humbling-of-admiral-picard

Mother Fuck this show and anybody who worked on it.

spoiler (click to show/hide)
And anybody who likes it.
[close]

Quote
While TNG positioned Captain Picard as an ally to marginalized groups, from Klingons to androids, Picard challenges him to check the privilege he’s enjoyed through various series as an able-bodied male Earthling of elevated Starfleet rank.


HAHAHAHA what in the absolute fuck. Klingons... a marginalized group??? This shit right here. This author is a fucking idiot.

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3076 on: May 21, 2020, 02:40:02 PM »
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3077 on: May 21, 2020, 02:47:21 PM »
Everything pre-Picard showed the Romulans as aggressively territorial, xenophobic, monocultural, homogenous and totalatarian, with a territory the size of the Federations (where the Federation are comprised of hundreds of different cultures and species up compared to the Romulans ROMULUS FOR ROMULANS empire) but Picard makes them space irish and suddenly they're the underdog minority resisting the colonisers I guess

:idont

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3078 on: May 21, 2020, 02:48:53 PM »
Unironically Picard's Housekeepers the O'Romulans are the best characters in Picard.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3079 on: May 21, 2020, 02:50:25 PM »
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.
IYKYK

stufte

  • Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3080 on: May 21, 2020, 02:57:44 PM »
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.

Star Trek has always been progressive and tackled controversial real world issues. But Picard has the inherent flaw of both not understanding the Star Trek universe and the general hopefulness for the future that it has, and handling social issues with all the subtlety of a rabid Targ.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3081 on: May 21, 2020, 03:02:47 PM »
If Britain was a V For Vendetta fascist dystopia that had never been in the EU, and a long history of fucking about in other countries politics and aggressive military confrontations along its borders, and Brexit was the EU refusing to help us out when a natural disaster rendered most of the island uninhabitable, then sure, great analogy

stufte

  • Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3082 on: May 21, 2020, 03:04:21 PM »
Why wasn't Seven seeking revenge for Icheb (who she was practically a mother to) instead of Hugh, who she had just met for the first time?

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3083 on: May 21, 2020, 03:05:30 PM »
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.
recent history, every show I've watched that's put our modern boogaloo shithole in their promo material instead of promoting how strong the writing is or such has usually been a preemptive shield against criticism. Picard is no different

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3084 on: May 21, 2020, 03:06:05 PM »
When Patrick Stewart started talking about Brexit in promotional material I knew we were in for some pain

How come? A lot of the best Trek episodes are analogies for modern problems.

Star Trek has always been progressive and tackled controversial real world issues. But Picard has the inherent flaw of both not understanding the Star Trek universe and the general hopefulness for the future that it has, and handling social issues with all the subtlety of a rabid Targ.

True, but my question was for Momo who said Star Trek tackling Brexit - a modern issue - was inherently bad. I'm not talking about Picard's handling of it. I'm talking about Momo finding fault in real world issues placed in Trek which according to him made him know we were  "in for some pain." Which hints that Momo finds placing real world issues in Trek to be bad period.

A big criticism I have with many critics of this is that as said, Trek has ALWAYS put progressive issues at the forefront and showed a spotlight in a futuristic analogy to modern problems. Always. Yet somehow Trek is now seen as "sjw", something Trek has always been. My conclusion is that these people didn't mind in the past because it was further away from them. So now, as they support things like Brexit, they're personally attacked. Now, this isn't the case for every critic. But it is for a lot of them. Politics and Trek mingle like peas and carrots.

Your move, Momo.

IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3085 on: May 21, 2020, 03:06:55 PM »
Lol

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3086 on: May 21, 2020, 03:08:07 PM »
honest question, what in Picard had anything to do with Brexit?

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3087 on: May 21, 2020, 03:11:09 PM »
honest question, what in Picard had anything to do with Brexit?

Again, you're talking about what's in Picard. Momo said because Patrick Stewart was talking about Brexit in the shows hype season that it meant we were all in for a bad time.

IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3088 on: May 21, 2020, 03:11:32 PM »
honest question, what in Picard had anything to do with Brexit?
I don't even know, nor do I care the show was bad. From where I stand they just used trump and brexit to distract from what they probably knew will be a poorly received show.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3089 on: May 21, 2020, 03:16:06 PM »
I don't take issue with anyone that doesn't like Picard or critiques it.

My issue immediately starts and begins with the very common mindset that modern tv shows using modern real world politic as a commentary for their stories is inherently bad. Even regarding shows that have a vast history of it like Star Trek.

Criticism is fine. Saying Star Trek is getting too political is where I LOL.

Momo's post was,"Patrick Stewart was talking about Brexit therefore I knew it was going to be bad!" can be construed in many ways. So I asked him to expound.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3090 on: May 21, 2020, 03:18:49 PM »
It's also funny how the same people shit on Star Trek for this also praise things like Black Mirror or Orville's social media episode.

Speaking of Black Mirror, I have no idea why CBS doesn't just make new Star Trek shows in that vein. Black Mirror shows that modern sci-fi doesn't need mass serialization to work or even be popular.
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3091 on: May 21, 2020, 03:18:55 PM »
It's actually kinda nuts if you think about it, Patrick Stewart out there saying Star Trek can't be optimistic anymore because we live in a post brexit world. Like the 90s and the countless horrific civil wars was any better? Prolly was for him cause that shit happened somewhere else lmao

stufte

  • Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3092 on: May 21, 2020, 03:19:22 PM »
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3093 on: May 21, 2020, 03:21:37 PM »
Quote
my question was for Momo who said Star Trek tackling Brexit - a modern issue - was inherently bad. I'm not talking about Picard's handling of it. I'm talking about Momo finding fault in real world issues placed in Trek

Quote
Trek has ALWAYS put progressive issues at the forefront and showed a spotlight in a futuristic analogy to modern problems. Always.

Quote
So now, as they support things like Brexit, they're personally attacked. Now, this isn't the case for every critic. But it is for a lot of them. Politics and Trek mingle like peas and carrots.

Quote
Again, you're talking about what's in Picard.

:confused

I can't help but feel if they're talking about a hot button topic pre-release, and there is zero reference to that subject in the actual final product, its difficult to rebut the claim they were pre-emptively trying to do some damage control by invoking culture war

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3094 on: May 21, 2020, 03:21:42 PM »
It's actually kinda nuts if you think about it, Patrick Stewart out there saying Star Trek can't be optimistic anymore because we live in a post brexit world. Like the 90s and the countless horrific civil wars was any better? Prolly was for him cause that shit happened somewhere else lmao

I saw it differently. I watched Patrick Stewart's "I'm back!" speech and how TNG brought so much hope to so many people and read it that the new show would be the hopeful Trek we are looking for. It wasn't exactly that, but I still found it to be optimistic and hopeful in its own way.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3095 on: May 21, 2020, 03:25:02 PM »
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

That's fair. But Trek never treated message as secondary.





Trek was never subtle.

Do you mind expounding? I mean, there's an entire analogy to Palestine and Israel in TNG/DS9.

Shosta, you might want to back out because of spoilers now.
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3096 on: May 21, 2020, 03:26:51 PM »
You're not even reading anyone's posts Cindi

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3097 on: May 21, 2020, 03:28:04 PM »
Who is the massive fa.ggot that merged my thread with this thread?

Your entire thread wasn't merged with this one.  Just the few posts made today.  I thought Tuckers Law bumped the wrong thread and figured I'd help.   APOLOGIES FOR SUCH A MASSIVE ABUSE OF POWER AND DISRUPTION.  ::)

What the fuck is with the hostility in this thread?
I posted that comment mostly in jest.  Like we saw with Nacho, us Star Trek fans are always angry about something and lose sight of the ultimate truth: at least it’s not Star Wars.

Apologies for calling you a cop.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3098 on: May 21, 2020, 03:30:44 PM »
You're not even reading anyone's posts Cindi

Pretttttty sure I am. But the points you're making are highly, highly flawed and in your case, just undeveloped. Saying that Trek made message secondary is a laughable claim to me.
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3099 on: May 21, 2020, 03:34:27 PM »
You can tell a story while respecting lore, everyone is saying new Star Trek is so obsessed by making their points that they have to throw out lore to do so. I'm not sure what you didn't understand, but I am sure you aren't reading anyone's posts to try and understand what they are saying and just doing so in order to further whatever it is you're doing here. So goodday, I can't be arsed

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3100 on: May 21, 2020, 03:35:27 PM »
Continue, the Star Trek wars do

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3101 on: May 21, 2020, 03:36:00 PM »
You can tell a story while respecting lore, everyone is saying new Star Trek is so obsessed by making their points that they have to throw out lore to do so. I'm not sure what you didn't understand, but I am sure you aren't reading anyone's posts to try and understand what they are saying and just doing so in order to further whatever it is you're doing here. So goodday, I can't be arsed

How is Star Trek throwing out lore?
IYKYK

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3102 on: May 21, 2020, 03:36:49 PM »
Not today Satan.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3103 on: May 21, 2020, 03:37:41 PM »
What was the contemporary political analogue that Picard handled?

Throw out the concept that humanity has evolved into a more utopian society in a post-scarcity universe, and make them racist assholes?
But then the actual nazi-analogues who are the victims of the racist assholes are still even worse, and sort of brought all that shit on themselves anyway, making the racist assholes sort of justified?

e:
Like, I get what you're saying about pre-emptively kneekerking about MUH ESS JAY DUBYAS RUINT MUH STAR TREK mouth breathers, but what does Picard actually do to put its money where its mouth is? Where is its smart writing leaving parallels to be drawn?

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3104 on: May 21, 2020, 03:39:07 PM »
I will say that compared to other Treks, Picard does seem to lead less into the speculative side and more in the reactive side of messaging and commentary, which I could see some mistaking as being more upfront and obvious.

Still: Star Trek is and has always had both subtle and overt messaging in its stories, and I’m okay with it as long as they’re trying to say something about “us”, even if it’s hamfisted.

stufte

  • Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior Senior
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3105 on: May 21, 2020, 03:42:05 PM »
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

That's fair. But Trek never treated message as secondary.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Trek was never subtle.

Do you mind expounding? I mean, there's an entire analogy to Palestine and Israel in TNG/DS9.

Shosta, you might want to back out because of spoilers now.

That DS9 episode still respects the source material over the message. It talks about the hardships, the struggles of the past within the Star Trek timeline, and the optimism of a future that has moved past those hardships. It doesn't treat Sisco as a victim, it shows how far humans have come as a species. Star Trek has moved from "shit was hard, but we're better now and we want to show you how we deal with these ancient issues as an enlightened species" to "shit is hard NOW, and look how much we suffer for it, please suffer with us".

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3106 on: May 21, 2020, 03:42:46 PM »
What was the contemporary political analogue that Picard handled?

Throw out the concept that humanity has evolved into a more utopian society in a post-scarcity universe, and make them racist assholes?
But then the actual nazi-analogues who are the victims of the racist assholes are still even worse, and sort of brought all that shit on themselves anyway, making the racist assholes sort of justified?

I'm not the one saying that Picard even had political analogies. I'm not the one saying political message overtook the lore of Star Trek or that Patrick Stewart talking about Brexit meant that the show was going to suck.

They've made the claim politics and message is overcoming the story. They're the ones saying injecting politics into Trek is bad. I'm just going with what they're saying. I never made any claims about Picard's political analogies at all.

That's other people. This entire time all I've done is counter that Trek injecting politics isn't inherently bad because it's something its always done. That's their argument. I'm refuting their argument.

IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3107 on: May 21, 2020, 03:49:40 PM »
I was a pretty politically active teenager when TNG was on the air, I watched it with my super conservative father, who also loved the show. The writing in these new shows (the new Twilight Zone is the same) treats the source material as secondary to the "message" when it should be the other way around.

That's fair. But Trek never treated message as secondary.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Trek was never subtle.

Do you mind expounding? I mean, there's an entire analogy to Palestine and Israel in TNG/DS9.

Shosta, you might want to back out because of spoilers now.

That DS9 episode still respects the source material over the message. It talks about the hardships, the struggles of the past within the Star Trek timeline, and the optimism of a future that has moved past those hardships. It doesn't treat Sisco as a victim, it shows how far humans have come as a species. Star Trek has moved from "shit was hard, but we're better now and we want to show you how we deal with these ancient issues as an enlightened species" to "shit is hard NOW, and look how much we suffer for it, please suffer with us".

But the message is the source material.

Even Kirk gave in to his own racism, although he later realized his error. Admirals are routinely shown as corrupt. Sisko, the very person you're defending, literally was a co-conspirator in assassinating a Romulan leader to force them into fighting against the Dominion. Much of the most renown DS9 quotes revolve around flawed humanity.


And I quote:

Quote
"But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."

But suddenly humanity is incapable of ills? Remember in DS9 when they institute fear mongering and even genocide against a species because of shape shifters?

This is a highly flawed premise.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 03:55:11 PM by Cindi Mayweather »
IYKYK

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3108 on: May 21, 2020, 03:51:47 PM »
Still: Star Trek is and has always had both subtle and overt messaging in its stories, and I’m okay with it as long as they’re trying to say something about “us”, even if it’s hamfisted.

which is why I've found both Discovery and Picard deeply unsatisfying for scifi shows using the Star Trek name, because... in the end they don't really have much to say, and threw out what made star trek special because their mystery box plots needed them to do that for the plot to work.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3109 on: May 21, 2020, 03:55:18 PM »
I'm not the one saying that Picard even had political analogies. I'm not the one saying political message overtook the lore of Star Trek or that Patrick Stewart talking about Brexit meant that the show was going to suck.

They've made the claim politics and message is overcoming the story. They're the ones saying injecting politics into Trek is bad. I'm just going with what they're saying. I never made any claims about Picard's political analogies at all.

That's other people. This entire time all I've done is counter that Trek injecting politics isn't inherently bad because it's something its always done. That's their argument. I'm refuting their argument.

But that just begs the question, if you have nothing political to say and no analogous insights to make, why would you imply what you have created does exactly that before release?

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3110 on: May 21, 2020, 04:01:53 PM »
I'm not the one saying that Picard even had political analogies. I'm not the one saying political message overtook the lore of Star Trek or that Patrick Stewart talking about Brexit meant that the show was going to suck.

They've made the claim politics and message is overcoming the story. They're the ones saying injecting politics into Trek is bad. I'm just going with what they're saying. I never made any claims about Picard's political analogies at all.

That's other people. This entire time all I've done is counter that Trek injecting politics isn't inherently bad because it's something its always done. That's their argument. I'm refuting their argument.

But that just begs the question, if you have nothing political to say and no analogous insights to make, why would you imply what you have created does exactly that before release?

Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

IYKYK

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3111 on: May 21, 2020, 04:04:50 PM »

Quote
"But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."
Fucking love Quark  :rejoice

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3112 on: May 21, 2020, 04:05:21 PM »
Many Trekkies:

Federation would NEVER abandon refugees like this! This goes against Federation principles!

Also Trekkies:

Star Trek Picard has NO political messages or analogies!

IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3113 on: May 21, 2020, 04:06:01 PM »
I agree that most shows/movies where the pre-hype media involves talking about hot button political issues instead of the show itself regardless of if the show touches or doesn't touch said issues usually aren't high quality in the end. That's not exactly the same thing as "media that uses current issues analogues are always bad", but they do tend to intertwine a lot.

This is fair.
IYKYK

Tuckers Law

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3114 on: May 21, 2020, 04:06:31 PM »
Real talk: when we gonna get Nic Cage as Starfleet captain?  Can you imagine?

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3115 on: May 21, 2020, 04:09:38 PM »

Quote
"But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."
Fucking love Quark  :rejoice

Trekkies: Humans are perfect in the future  :six:

Also Trekkies: says DS9, the show that is highly critical of the Federation, humanity, and what it takes to maintain such an utopia, is the best Trek

 :crowdlaff
IYKYK

Yeti

  • Hail Hydra
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3116 on: May 21, 2020, 04:11:23 PM »
Continue, the Star Trek wars do

It’s 20XX and people are mad online about Star Trek
WDW

D3RANG3D

  • The Bore's Like Bot
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3117 on: May 21, 2020, 04:12:10 PM »
TOS is best Trek though.

GreatSageEqualOfHeaven

  • Dumbass Monkey
  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3118 on: May 21, 2020, 04:13:30 PM »
Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

Well I was asking you what the message was for multiple posts and this is the closest you've come to answering that instead of just saying "but I didn't say they did!".

What's the contradiction?
That I don't see the modern U.N. denying humanitarian aid to a country wracked by a natural disaster, no mattera how shitty that counties history is, and I don't see how an even more evolved society that doesn't even have actual logistical concerns about sacrificing their own resources to assist someone else would do that either?
Except that they have to do that or the plot doesn't work.

That a demonstrably shitty group will do shitty things, but instead of doing it in secret as every other appearance they have made has shown to be their preference, would instead choose to do it openly and clumsily?
Except they have to do that or the plot doesn't work.

I'm not trying to shit on something you enjoyed, but there are so many "it has to be like this so the plot works" aspects that makes me frustrated, because the plot just isn't fucking good enough to justify everything they sacrifice in order to make it happen.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: star trek
« Reply #3119 on: May 21, 2020, 04:19:39 PM »
Mmm.

This is where I step in and defend Picard's politics and say that, yes, it does have something political to say. I'm not quite sure how Romulans hunting Synths because of what they are and killing them or Federation abandoning Romulans because of political pressure isn't political. Or that the show has no message at all.

It's funny you're arguing it's not stating these messages while others are saying these messages are too overt.

Quite a contradiction. Which is it?

Well I was asking you what the message was for multiple posts and this is the closest you've come to answering that instead of just saying "but I didn't say they did!".

We were arguing two different things at first. Then what we argued just intertwined.

I find most of the critiques of Picard's politics in the Federation are almost all flawed. They're so bad. Arguments like,"Federation would never be that xenophobic". A big flaw Picard makes is not referencing the Dominion War and its effects on post-war Federation. After the Cardassian border conflict, Dominion, shape shifter sabotage I think it would be fairly realistic for the Federation to grow more xenophobic after that war. The problem is that Michael Chabon and ilk said they didn't want new viewers to to get too wrapped up in lore. Big mistake. But I understand the reasoning and why the Federation is like this.

You say Picard makes no modern political analogies but I find the western world growing more xenophobic. This is directly in Picard. So the idea that Picard has no political relevance or commentary is baffling to me.

:idont
IYKYK