[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 20473)
File  []
>> No. 20473 Anonymous
8th March 2016
Tuesday 8:00 pm
20473 Star Trek
If anyone's interested, Voyager and TNG are continually playing at http://vaughnlive.tv/downlorrd .

Also general Star Trek thread, what do you think of the new movies? What setting would you want a new series to be in?
195 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 23031 Anonymous
27th January 2020
Monday 6:59 pm
23031 spacer

Visually? Yeah, I love it, especially due to ENT being the earliest instalment and Archer's dad being involved in the development of the warp drive. It's thematically perfect.

But that fucking song, man.
>> No. 23032 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 4:25 am
23032 spacer

>The 79-year-old actor leans in and clasps his hands when recounting his upbringing in the North of England. He stands and paces when a subject such as Brexit or Donald Trump aggravates him
>“The Next Generation” presented a humanist future in which issues like poverty, race and class have long been sorted out, and conflicts are more often resolved through negotiation and problem-solving than at the point of a phaser pistol.
>Stewart had no desire to go there again.
>“I think what we’re trying to say is important,” he says. “The world of ‘Next Generation’ doesn’t exist anymore. It’s different. Nothing is really safe. Nothing is really secure.”

Wonderful. I've always hated the boring idealism and forward-thinking of Star Trek and thought it would be better if it focused around our immediate political problems.
>> No. 23033 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 5:07 am
23033 spacer

TOS was forward thinking and idealistic. TNG did cover immediate political problems. The futuristic humanist element of Roddenberry's vision was all but abandoned in TNG. Stewart is a fucking idiot not even understanding the show he was in.

I'm sure I'll be challenged but I have no desire to preemptively go through every TNG episode to prove my point, there were rather a lot of them. Instead let's have would be challengers pick out a humanist episode and I'll either explain why they're wrong or present two political episodes. They'll run out of episodes before me.

Really Roddenberry's Grand Idea was mired in misunderstanding from the start. TOS was premised on perfect people being perfect, to the point where the entire Enterprise NCC-1701 crew was by definition multi-racial and multi-gender, huge back in the 60s. No mention of the Enterprise's associated faction, United Federation of Planets was present. Presumably it was forced on Rodders by the studios as a way to ground the show to the viewer, along with removing the woman and the latino. The show was supposed to be perfect people behaving perfectly, it only became a communist utopia because Rodders was forced to think up a convincing backdrop for the actions of the ship.

TOS never strove to bring up current political problems because it didn't need to, Rodders had existential ideas to deal with. God (literally every fucking episode), gods (Who Mourns For Adonais?), our relationship with god (The Squire of Gothos) and gods (Where No Man Has Gone Before), our relationship with those who saw us as gods (too many to fucking count, Miri, A Piece of the Action), our relationship with those who act like our gods and for all intents and purposes have the power of what we would call gods (The Cage, The Menagerie). Rodders really fucking loved exploring god like relationships. More importantly though and more persistently he explored the human aspect itself, emotion vs logic, compassion vs pragmatism, leadership vs anarchy, duty vs hedonism. I'm really understating how much of the human condition is explored by Rodders in TOS. It's not forward thinking humanism, it's WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE AND WHY ARE WE? I remember one episode where the crew goes a bit insane (The Naked Time) where a crew member holds a knife at his comrades and demands to know what humans are doing in space, claiming we weren't designed for it and we have no business being here.

I think the one thing Roddenberry loved more than god was psychology. All of TOS is an exploration of psychology, about a third of it has god themes in there as secondary to the psychology and the remaining two thirds are divided across various interesting subjects. I always recommend The Enemy Within to budding or aspiring Trekkies as the epitome of Roddenberry's fantastic dissection of the human mind in to its component parts as he understood them. TOS is actually a trinity of trinities and I'm going to stop there.

My overall point is Star Trek was never about whatever stupid twats say it was about. It was a psychological exploration of humanity, not a political one. Then P-Stew came along and made it all a thinly veiled analogy on the American wars of aggression or some such bullshit.

I don't mind Trek as focused on immediate political problems, it would be a novel and exciting adventure, contrary to what P-Stew believes. (I haven't seen DSC or ENT but I assume ENT was pew pew and DSC was identity politics which hardly counts.)
>> No. 23034 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 6:04 am
23034 spacer


You're right about the thematic differences about TOS and TNG, but I personally found TNG far more interesting for exactly that reason.

Thinking about it, the explorations of psychology versus the 'space western' element in TOS never really gelled together for me as a viewer -- but I understand the action element was also kind of forced on Roddenberry.

TNG seemed more of a sincere attempt to imagine a future society, plausible in a (slightly) less abstract way. It's a setting which allows humanity to flourish, something really interesting in and of itself.

I also can't stress how important it is to have that vision broadcast in the mainstream, and how uniquely relevant that could have been for television right now. We've had years of:

- The Walking Dead and various zombie based horrors, which seems to one predicated on fear of the Other and survival at all costs in a hostile environment
- Game of Thrones, which I seems to be some sort of grand Machiavellian story about quasi-medieval politics
- The return of stories like Blade Runner, maybe one of the defining dystopian sci-fi films
- Black Mirror, which admittedly can be thematically mixed, but built its foundations on fucking terrifying and plausible ideas around technology/social developments
- Loads of young adult fiction like Hunger Games

I don't think this is what the previous poster meant, but just to point out the obvious: it's possible to tackle immediate political problems in a utopian way. If this series is going the way I think it's going, it's going to be embarrassing to look back at episodes like TNG's The Drumhead, or DS9's Past Tense and Paradise Lost.

A new Star Trek series could have provided a much needed counterpoint, provided a different perspective on political problems, offered something to aim for, all in the center stage of pop culture. And at a time when television viewers are used to heavily serialised fiction, it could have built up a very sophisticated world.

I haven't watched any of Picard, yet, but I suspect it's a missed opportunity.
>> No. 23035 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 8:58 am
23035 spacer


That's actually the thing I dislike most about Star Trek's timeline. The idea that we need some massive setback in order to "shock" us
onto the right path seems uncharacteristically cynical. Probably just a bit of lazy writing.

I think Devil's Due is an underrated episode, about the planet that completely changed their society for the better based on a centuries-old agreement with an alien impersonating the devil, until Picard reveals her as a fraud.

I can't find a clip of it, but I love the scene where Picard points out it was their hard work and courage that created the society, not their fear of or imagined debt to "Ardra".

Plus Ardra herself is a definite would.
>> No. 23036 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 9:19 am
23036 spacer

Pedantic note but Picard reveals her as somebody using technology to emulate powers normally attributed to deities like the devils she claimed to be. He didn't expose her as a fraud, he simply proved that she had a knowable method of expressing natural disasters and personal forms. For all we know after the Enterprise sailed off she went full on horned entity of old and collapsed the planet from within for their insolence.

You also seem to overlook the fact that what the inhabitants of the planet believed to be the literal fucking devil showing up was a bit of a shock which prompted them to do all the hard work to improve their planet. If some big red horned bloke turned up on Mount Sinai today and started bellowing at the gathered news media to sort it the fuck out, then suddenly everyone went local vegan and stopped flying abroad on holiday would you attribute that to us making the necessary changes or to the big red horned bloke shit scaring us in to improving ourselves?

Whichever way you look at it that planet rightfully belonged to Ardra, fraud or not. Contracts were signed and the Federation had no galactic police powers in that region of space during the time of the agreement, or even after the Enterprise, an exploration ship, arrived. It's entirely possible that the Federation got their way through the right of might as the Federation often did, but I want to challenge your assertion that the Federation were morally justified in their actions in this case.
>> No. 23037 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 9:36 am
23037 spacer

I understand the point you're making, but I disagree. For one, I think it's heavily implied in the episode that Ardra had no real power beyond illusion, with the exception of the quakes being somewhat destructive. It's also implied that the planet is advanced enough technologically to defend themselves, and it was mainly a genuine belief in her supernatural ability that stopped them fighting her.

Beyond that I think the whole point of the episode is that the people on the planet realised their success was the result of their own effort, even if it was spurred on by an earlier belief in something false. They were left to their own devices for centuries, effectively with no external influence other than their own beliefs about what happened.

About the planet rightly belonging to Ardra, as I understand it, this Ardra was actually a con-artist and was likely not even the same entity they originally signed the agreement with, she just learned mythologies and exploited these beliefs. Even if that weren't true, it is not a morally defensible position to lay claim to a whole species.

The Federation being a "might is right" organisation is an interesting discussion though. I'm fairly sure the Federation was meant to have been all peaceful agreements and negotiations, unless they've rewritten the history. That's the idea I find most compelling, at least.
>> No. 23038 Anonymous
28th January 2020
Tuesday 9:45 am
23038 spacer

The might is right argument is a finicky one, it comes down to whether you have an open mind about morals or not. The Federation in TNG prided itself on making the morally right choices when measured by the 90s zeitgeist, except when it would lead to their annihilation (the blue guy who blew up an entire species for killing his lover). The problem is the future galaxy isn't and shouldn't be measured by that standard. Who are we (the 90s earth people watching) to say the contract was invalid? If it's invalid shouldn't we also be clamouring for the raid and shut down of Risa as essentially a brothel? I'm sure there were other "futuristic" moral things that slipped by because we were all too busy cheering the downfall of what we perceived to be evil, even though we didn't have the right to bring about their downfall. Similarly I'm certain (blue guy) there were morally objectionable factions we didn't bring to our zeitgeist conceived notions of justice because they would have simply blown us out of the sky.

The Q were originally designed to address this disparity between thought, right and behaviour but they got diluted as the series went on. Perhaps it was too intellectual for audiences who just wanted to see Fat Riker condemn bad men with a haughty righteous tone at the time.
>> No. 23069 Anonymous
2nd February 2020
Sunday 10:47 pm
23069 spacer
Picard episode 2 is so dumb I was put off watching after 15 minutes. It is one thing to have a reveal that there is a double secret tal shiar as a bad twist, that's corny writing, but to have someone blurt it out as the first piece of dialogue of episode 2 makes me think a child wrote the story.

We then proceeded to have someone say "ha that's what we wanted you to think" and use technology that is indistinguishable from magic, and talk about wibbly wobbly timey wimey using words I understand in context that make no sense.

If I wanted that kind of lowest common denominator "the audience doesn't really care anyway" writing I'd watch Sherlock. This is not the saviour we hoped for just another dumb 24 knock off.
>> No. 23070 Anonymous
2nd February 2020
Sunday 11:54 pm
23070 spacer

>The Federation being a "might is right" organisation is an interesting discussion though. I'm fairly sure the Federation was meant to have been all peaceful agreements and negotiations, unless they've rewritten the history.

DS9 explores the limits of that argument. The Maquis were Federation citizens, but their planets were handed over to the Cardassians as part of a peace treaty. Bajor wasn't *forced* to co-operate with the Federation, but they didn't have a lot of choice either; if Bajor eventually became a Federation member, they would be "freely" choosing to join under threat of Cardassian/Dominion invasion.
>> No. 23071 Anonymous
3rd February 2020
Monday 6:50 am
23071 spacer


Can't even escape them in space?
>> No. 23072 Anonymous
3rd February 2020
Monday 11:41 pm
23072 spacer
So I'm halfway through the second episode and the Lady-Admiral just said "fourteen species threatened to pull out of the Federation", but then heavily implied the Federation is made up of thousands of species, making the fourteen sound completely insignificant.

Writing's just so shite, it's horrible, car crash stuff, no weight.
>> No. 23073 Anonymous
4th February 2020
Tuesday 8:35 am
23073 spacer

I had a similar reaction in the crime scene where they kept on having a charter say, "doing x will be impossible" then 2 minutes later saying "I can do a super verion of X" it happens maybe 4 times in a row.
>> No. 23074 Anonymous
4th February 2020
Tuesday 9:27 am
23074 spacer
Yeah, that too, it was so obvious it was going to play out like that as well. I wrote notes during the first episode, but for the second one the disappointment piled up so fast I didn't bother. It seems like every other scene I was laughing a little at the dogs dinner dialogue or I was able to finish a character's sentence owing to how predictable it all was. Questions: Why was Astrogirl shagging the creepy Romulan man? Why are the Federation pro-genocide now? Did Picard's dog die? Did it commit suicide to get out of this boring TV show? Did the Dominion War happen in this timeline? Hey, yeah, it did! So did everyone forget about the Romulans helping? Or that film where the Lady-Romulan was nice, did Picard not tell anyone? Is everyone acting weird and stupid because those brain worms from TNG series one finally came back? Didn't we already see what happens when Starfleet's pushed to its limits in DS9? Hmm, this mystery box is looking an awful lot like a portable toilet filled to the brim with terrible ideas, lads! I think perhaps we ought to drop it down that well in Russia that went all the way to Hell and let the Devil have it back.

That's just the crap I remember too, despite what this post suggests I'm not even that big of a Trekkie. STP is shaping up to be a bad show by any metric.
>> No. 23075 Anonymous
4th February 2020
Tuesday 10:40 am
23075 spacer

Well it was clearly going to be dumb as soon as that fuck off explosion happened and no one seems to have noticed or care. I hoped that was a single contrivance to get the plot moving turns out that was just the vanguard of contrivance.

Picard talks like a child, he is either spelling out what the plot point you are supposed to take away from the most recent incoherent dialogue, or he is asking questions in profoundly naive one dimensional ways. About the only characterisation he has is that he likes earl grey tea, but they've turned it into an obsession.
>> No. 23076 Anonymous
4th February 2020
Tuesday 11:54 am
23076 spacer


I think the best thing is just to treat this series as a continuation of the films.

As Martin Scorsese mentioned about the MCU films, they're a bit like theme park rides -- and I have a feeling that the studios working on the current wave of comic book films probably lump Star Trek and Star Wars in with those, in terms of demographics. Anything with any vaguely "nerdy" pop culture credit has and will be mined for cash. All of these films and series are starting to look and sound bizarrely similar.

The more I think about it, the more I realise that actually TNG was the exception. The organisations and economic incentives that make up the film/TV industry simply aren't geared toward making thoughtful, hopeful visions about the future of humanity, particularly ones that get into the mainstream.
>> No. 23077 Anonymous
9th February 2020
Sunday 11:53 pm
23077 spacer

Shooting stars in space, aye, yeah, whatever.
>> No. 23078 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 11:41 am
23078 spacer

I mostly don't really like Star Trek Picard, but it got me watching DS9 (from the start), and I liked it more than I was expecting to.

Sisko is much more relatable than Picard, and Major Kira is much more wankable than Janeway.
>> No. 23079 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 12:19 pm
23079 spacer

DS9 has aged better than any Star Trek franchise IMO. It was way ahead of its time in having a massive ensemble cast and long multi-series plot arcs. If you enjoyed the first season, you're in for a treat - a lot of people complain that it doesn't really get going until the start of season 3, which isn't wholly unfair.
>> No. 23080 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 12:21 pm
23080 spacer


>It was way ahead of its time in having a massive ensemble cast and long multi-series plot arcs.

You might also enjoy...
>> No. 23081 Anonymous
12th February 2020
Wednesday 1:04 pm
23081 spacer

I am definitely one of the people who finds before season 3 there are a few too many lazy B-plots about Quarks latest wacky scheme. There are some great episodes and moments in there still but it definitely feels weaker overall compared to where it is going.
>> No. 23082 Anonymous
13th February 2020
Thursday 2:46 am
23082 spacer

gul dukat.jpg
It's a good thing DS9 nicked so many of J. Michael Straczynski's ideas for Babylon 5 when he pitched his show to Paramount, otherwise it might've been a pile of wank.

The actors in DS9 really elevate the show. For example, the guy who played Garak got so invested in the character that he started writing a journal from his perspective, which he eventually released as a book. The guy who played Gul Dukat talked about playing him not as a villainous antagonist for Sisko and The Good Guys to foil, but as the hero of his own story. His approach was so effective that it made the writers turn him into a cartoonish villain in season seven because Dukat was so popular.
>> No. 23083 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 2:27 am
23083 spacer

>>DS9 ripped off B5

This guy gets it. Hell, they only made the decision to set the next Trek on a space station when they heard B5 was actually going to air.

B5 was always the better of the two shows. DS9 was a fucking snooze-fest for the first two seasons. You'd watch B5 and they were setting up not one but TWO major wars, and then you'd look at DS9 and it was yet another "Constable, it's all kicking off on the Promenade!"
>> No. 23084 Anonymous
14th February 2020
Friday 5:43 pm
23084 spacer

We were having a fun conversation at work today about what if Corrie went on a mad one, and had a year long plot arc about the bombs dropping and Ken Barlow and the gang surviving in a post nuclear Salford. Then they wrap it all up with an arc about David travelling back in time to prevent it all, thus reverting the show to the status quo as if nothing had ever happened.
>> No. 23085 Anonymous
24th February 2020
Monday 7:58 pm
23085 spacer

Treks Akimbo.png
*inspiring music swells*

You ever think you'd see someone get off their face on bennies in a Star Trek show?
>> No. 23086 Anonymous
25th February 2020
Tuesday 12:03 pm
23086 spacer

Nothing about the idea of star trek is sacred now so they are honestly capable of anything. It is well within the realms of possibility by the end of this season Picard ends up on the run from the police after someone plants a dead hooker in the boot of his car to stop him getting somewhere in time to stop the bomb going off, whilst trying to attend both his wife's birthday and watch the big game with his boss at the same time with hilarious consequences.
>> No. 23087 Anonymous
5th March 2020
Thursday 5:59 pm
23087 spacer

McCoy dosing himself up on something (admittedly by accident) was basically the whole reason for City on the Edge of Forever
>> No. 23117 Anonymous
9th April 2020
Thursday 10:08 pm
23117 spacer
Can someone explain why I really don't like Voyager? I just find it very, very dull. My current theory is that I don't like the characters/actors or that it all feels a bit aimless. Sure, they're trying to get home, but I've been watching the beginning of series 2 and there's so much pratting around. Even Next Generation had more focus than this and their whole job was to bumble about the galaxy looking for things to do.
>> No. 23118 Anonymous
9th April 2020
Thursday 11:26 pm
23118 spacer


Did you like Enterprise? Voyager was objectively the worst series prior to Enterprise.

Personally I like, but I understand that this is due to nostalgia more than anything else.

Maybe use the attached infographic to pick and choose episodes that appeal if you want to stick with it.
>> No. 23119 Anonymous
9th April 2020
Thursday 11:33 pm
23119 spacer
That image is a level of autism i wasn't prepaired for.
>> No. 23120 Anonymous
9th April 2020
Thursday 11:45 pm
23120 spacer

Sorry lads. I posted it before I had looked at it properly. The TNG, and DS9 are both useful, the guy has serious beef with Voyager.

Wired has a guide also:

I stopped watching Picard 7 or 8 eps in. It was OK, but not really in the spirit of Trek. It also retconned a lot of stuff. The Orville is a better spiritual successor to Roddenberry Trek than the grimdark stuff that has been coming out.

I quite enjoyed Avenue 5 also, which is Armando Iannucci writing a show set on a space cruise ship.
>> No. 23121 Anonymous
10th April 2020
Friday 12:19 am
23121 spacer

>Can someone explain why I really don't like Voyager?

It's just not very well written. Far too many of the main characters are two-dimensional, nothing substantial is made of the tension between a Starfleet and Maquis crew and the journey home seems like an inevitable sequence of ex machina events.

The core story concept of being hopelessly lost in the arse end of space just isn't manifested in the vast majority of the scripts. The ship is supposed to feel claustrophobic, the crew are supposed to be wavering between hatred, terror and despair, but it never quite comes together. Weirdly, I think that Red Dwarf actually did it better (until the piss-awful VIII) by making it explicit from the outset that there was no hope and these characters really were doomed to drift through space.
>> No. 23122 Anonymous
10th April 2020
Friday 12:25 am
23122 spacer
>Can someone explain why I really don't like Voyager?

Pick one of the 4 bellow.

The characters are almost universally unlikable and only one has any development (the doctor), Kes almost has a character arch but then they fired her from the show for being too interesting and emotionally intelligent. Chakotay isn't a fuckwit, but as a result they run out of things to do with him very quickly.

The writers got so obsessed with 7of9 that she is shoehorned into every scenario to the point that it is exhausting.

The plots start becoming insulting to your intelligence the borg for example go from this high concept cold systematic machine in TNG to being Saturday morning cartoon villains who get very close to yelling "I'll get you next time Janeway!", contrast that with TNG where the drama almost always comes from a problem solving process, or a philosophical debate.

They get bored of their own premise about 2 seasons in and stop worrying about the attrition or consequences of their situation.

>did you like Enterprise? Voyager was objectively the worst series prior to Enterprise.

Enterprise started bad, really bad, but the last season might be the best star trek Season. You have to imagine that holodeck episode never happened and then the end of the show is superb.
>> No. 23123 Anonymous
10th April 2020
Friday 10:33 am
23123 spacer
Picard was disappointing for a number of reasons, the least plot spoilery of which would be the inclusion of the boss-eyed Madchester Romulan, which had me rolling my eyes, tutting and imploring if that's really where things are going.

I think the worst bit was how the entire premise of the show, Picard's main spur into action, surrounding the legality of androids in Federation space gets brushed under the carpet in the last couple of minutes. We hear the crew going on like "Ahhh, thank god androids are legal in Starfleet now, phew!" - no defence of the ethics of synthetic life and no exploration or resolution of the supposed Starfleet conspiracy to get androids banned in the first place. Of absolutely anything related to Jean-Luc, and how in Picard he never shuts up about how great Data was, why was this fundamental plot point completely ignored? Was it oversight, or did the showrunners really not bank on people being interested in what made TNG great?

I have lost any good will towards new Trek now.
>> No. 23124 Anonymous
10th April 2020
Friday 10:48 am
23124 spacer
I also have to add I haven't seen Discovery, I was warned to it being a complete mess with absurd school drama lesson plot twists every other minute.
>> No. 23125 Anonymous
10th April 2020
Friday 11:26 am
23125 spacer
If you can imagine this, Picard was sold as a deep-character study for those who wanted something deeper than STD. There's one legitimately fun Short Trek (The Trouble with Edward) which isn't connected to the series and is just a piss-take.
>> No. 23126 Anonymous
10th April 2020
Friday 11:39 am
23126 spacer
Before watching Picard, I saw that clip where Patrick Stewart gets on stage at some comic con and promises that Picard will be like TNG. He admits they didn't have anything written at that stage and it was an ongoing process to ensure that only the best aspects of TNG will make the cut.
It now feels like either his contribution was saying how all the women's clothes fall off, and before they could get their knickers back on he's seen it all, or that tv shows have been ruined by the utter fucking trash that was Lost and Kurtzmann is going for that lazy style of writing where everything is a plot twist with Patrick Stewart having no say.
>> No. 23130 Anonymous
11th April 2020
Saturday 12:20 am
23130 spacer
I think I've seen a single Enterprise episode in it's entirety, so, who knows? I think the main reason I can't get into Voyager, as others have touched upon, is the characters/actors. I wouldn't call them unlikable myself, they're mostly really bland. Janeway and the EMH are the only two I enjoy, everyone else is quite dull, with the exception of Neelix who I'm thinking of prosecuting under the coervice control legislation that came into effect a few years back. Having just finished DS9 recently perhaps doesn't help as the level of acting was really a cut above in that series. However, that's really the culmination of not only good actors, but proper direction and writing too. The only intriging thing about someone like Ensign Kim is how someone so boring got such a fit girlfriend, and you can't pin that all on the actor.

I also have things to say about Star Trek Picard, but I'll boil it down to the following because no one cares enough to read my PhD dissertation on the matter: it's utter shit and it has poisoned the Star Trek well truly and completely. You can't row back up the waterfall.
>> No. 23131 Anonymous
11th April 2020
Saturday 1:11 am
23131 spacer
I think my relationship with my ex started to fail when we ran out of TAS TNG ENT and DS9 to watch and moved on to VOY. She doesn't like when yell at TV shows and I yelled a lot during VOY, and STD.

Maybe things would be different if we had picked TOS instead, but that was going to be the reward for making it through VOY, I guess it would have been borrowed time, watching both Voyager and Picard would have ruined it eventually.
>> No. 23156 Anonymous
16th May 2020
Saturday 9:53 am
23156 spacer
A new New Trek has been announced: https://intl.startrek.com/news/star-trek-strange-new-worlds-anson-mount-rebecca-romijn-ethan-peck-cbs-all-access

The premise is ST:D Pine and Spock go off exploring, because "these iconic characters have a deep history in Star Trek canon," which may be true for Spock, but Pine? Pine was just the guy whose face got melted in the pilot and couldn't be bothered doing morse code.

Can you blame me for being cynical if Kurtzmann is still at the helm with some of the same team who worked with him on Picard? ST:D and ST:P were atrocious to the point they'd practically wink at the camera and hint there was something original and Trekky about the plot just to rub it in, so I aren't really holding my breath they'd be able to actually make a good episodic series.
>> No. 23157 Anonymous
16th May 2020
Saturday 12:18 pm
23157 spacer

Back to 4Chan.png
>but Pine? Pine was just the guy whose face got melted in the pilot and couldn't be bothered doing morse code.

Pike was the captain in the pilot and survived the episode unharmed. Nobody here is watching this rubbish anymore and you will notice from the lack of Star Wars threads that it's not the place to circlejerk endlessly.

I'd even hazard that 'online discussion' is what keeps all this going. There's no other way to explain it.
>> No. 23158 Anonymous
16th May 2020
Saturday 1:01 pm
23158 spacer

Could nae give a shite.
>> No. 23159 Anonymous
17th May 2020
Sunday 8:32 am
23159 spacer
It is amazing how quickly they were able to burn through our good will. From being excited that star trek was comming back. History will forever be tained by this. And like the star wars prequels before in 20 years you will get a bunch retards insisting these new shows are some how as good or better. As the song goes "if you tolerate this then your children will be next".
>> No. 23174 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 2:40 pm
23174 spacer


Horror has a face, and you must make a friend of horror.
Horror and moral terror are your friends.
If they are not, then they are enemies to be feared.
>> No. 23175 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 3:49 pm
23175 spacer
>History will forever be tained [sic] by this.

I know you personally might be being facetious, but the strange culture of seething outrage around shit like this bothers me and I can't place why.

I suppose it's because it's people getting furious over something which barely matters, but that happens all the time. I think it's just the utter pointlessness of it all, when it comes to media like this - people furiously saying they are going to boycott $media, but then as soon as it comes out, they are playing it or watching it.
>> No. 23176 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 3:56 pm
23176 spacer
I'm not really a Star Trek-head but this just looks like Rick & Morty with a Trek skin. Reminds me a bit of the recent Thundercats show, modern lolsorandumxd humour applied to a well loved and respected franchise.
>> No. 23177 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 5:29 pm
23177 spacer

> but then as soon as it comes out, they are playing it or watching it.

All I can tell you is I personally stopped watching, and I loved Star Trek. It won't stop my love of the originals but without some major shift in creative control I am not interested in doing anything other than complaining that it isn’t how it should be, unless someone whose judgement I trust tells me otherwise.

I think the inertia will carry people to watch these shows with hope for a while, this isn't a case of this being 'bad star trek' this is a case of a brand being cheaply milked. This is the equivalent of all that silly Cthulhu crap you get that has nothing to do with the original books, only it has the stamp of authenticity on it.
>> No. 23178 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 6:58 pm
23178 spacer
I've not seen massive angry reaction against nu-Trek really. Many people seem to enjoy it, well, not "many", but some. I've never really seen a boycot movement either, but if there were one it's easy to make a bunch of folk on the internet seem like a Mongol hoard, trampling across all before it, when in reality it's just a few dozen angry weirdos. I think what you've done is take a few disparate things and turn them into a big thing that doesn't exist in reality.

Also I know it's not strictly Star Trek related but I think I saw Mike Stoklasa nearly cry earlier and I'm forever changed by it.
>> No. 23179 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 7:14 pm
23179 spacer

I've just watched that. What a bizarre saga. The rumour is that the Shatner twitter account is actually run by one of his daughters, which probably explains a lot.
>> No. 23180 Anonymous
23rd July 2020
Thursday 10:23 pm
23180 spacer
> I know it's not strictly Star Trek related but I think I saw Mike Stoklasa nearly cry earlier and I'm forever changed by it.

For the uninitiated who are curious


for the uninitiated who are curious with short attention spans 19 mins in.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Delete Post []