Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:
Clear bookmark | How bookmarks work
Note: Bookmarks are ignored for all search results

Total Found: 701 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 29
Set Bookmark
Dom
Sun, Mar 17, 2019, 12:35pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: If Memory Serves

@JohnTY, I also have access to CBS AllAccess for free, but I haven't bothered with any of Season 2. I just decided that there are too many other shows that deserve my time more than Discovery. It makes me sad as a Star Trek fan that I don't enjoy this latest series, but I think I'm much happier overall for not trying to "hate watch" this show. I'll always love Star Trek and the stories it gave me, but I also realize that increasingly it's part of my past rather than my future. And that's fine.
Set Bookmark
RandomThoughts
Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 3:02am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: All the World Is Birthday Cake

Hello Everyone!

Some days, I like to put myself in the shoes of the people running a particular show. I'd like that there were +230 comments on this episode. Then after reading a particular argument, would ask myself: How in the world did they get "there" from "here"? And why did they talk about it for that long? Really? Theology? That long?

Anywho, I think about that some days, but not today.

My thoughts are, I really enjoyed the episode, and after 30 days or so, understood their desire for freedom at any cost since there was no end in sight (if they were going to be rescued, it would have happened already). But the end just... seemed lacking... somehow. I think the last few minutes wasn't on par with the rest of it. I believe I'd have preferred it if they'd been just about to go on their rampage, then the Commandant would come in and tell them, reluctantly, they are now free to go. Or maybe get out and have to live off of the land for a few days before being found. I don't even think it was the last second save...

I think it just felt forced. Perhaps that's it. They wanted an action scene in it and made it happen. Yep, I think that's it.

I did like the excitement at a first contact, the landing on the lawn, the confusion when the doctor said something about how they handle their own "Giliac (thinking I'd missed something). But the last five minutes or so was incongruous with the rest of it, at least for me.

Enjoy the day everyone... RT
Set Bookmark
RandomThoughts
Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 1:48am (UTC -5)
Re: DS9 S5: Children of Time

Hello Everyone!

I was just thinking about Stockholm Syndrome.

While they were not held captive by the residents, the more they learned about them, the more they began to identify with them. Life elsewhere would go on, they knew they would be replaced in their positions, and they eventually could not justify removing these thousands from time just so they might have their old lives back.

If they had the command crew decide to stay in their time, they would have had the guilt of erasing those descendants. They only way they could write this with an "out", was to have Odo break the ship for them. They can feel badly for what was (probably) erased, but they didn't do it and then can move on with their lives, guilt free (and never, ever bring it up again).

It might have been interesting to get a look at the station after they were declared missing/dead. Perhaps Captain Edward Jellico (since he knows how to handle Cardassians) as the new commander, with a vindicated Ro as his 2nd (because, well, Bajoran reasons). Then when the Defiant didn't go back in time, we'd see everything change/vanish.

Just musing there though. Time might not work that way, but hey, it's ST. :)

Enjoy the Day Everyone... RT
Set Bookmark
RandomThoughts
Thu, Mar 14, 2019, 12:40am (UTC -5)
Re: TOS S1: Miri

Hello Everyone!

@Petrus

Your question: Why do the children keep wanting to kill Kirk? Is it purely because he is acting like an adult schoolteacher?

They mention that the adults went crazy, hitting and whatnot, and figured they had to do something about the crew before they also went crazy. They had not realized they each would as well, as they (very) slowly grew up.

Regards... RT

P.S.: I hope you found some episodes you liked. :)
Set Bookmark
Dom
Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 7:09pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: If Memory Serves

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi, I sympathize and am really distressed by what the Star Trek fandom has become. Perhaps naively, I used to think of Trekkies as more intellectually inclined and really believed in the Trek ideals of diversity and respect for other opinions. Unfortunately, Discovery and the JJ Abrams fans have revealed just how petty and aggressive some fans really are. This whole experience has soured me on the whole franchise. Fortunately, I can always go back and watch TNG or DS9.
Set Bookmark
RandomThoughts
Sun, Mar 3, 2019, 2:45am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Identity, Part I

Hello Everyone!

I have not caught up with all of the comments, but I have read most of them.

I really enjoyed this episode, but was not completely surprised by the fact the Kaylon destroyed their builders.

Yes, I thought of the VOY episode "Prototype", but also the TOS episode "What Are Little Girls Made Of?":

RUK: That!... was the equation! (seizes Kirk) Existence! Survival must cancel out programming *nodding head in a menacing way*. I have always loved that scene...

The first time I heard the Kaylon were a race of intelligent machines, that was the first show I thought of. My questions were, who made them and where are they now? Well, the organics lost the Cylon... umm... Kaylon war, obviously. :)

They always made certain for Isaac to say he was studying them. He never said anything about how he saw something that would make Kaylon more certain to join the Union. He was just studying, and helping them along the way, because his survival would mean more information sent to Kaylon.

Now, how the interaction with the crew (along with a party, just for him!) (and 700 years with another world), would affect him, well, we just don't know yet until part two.

Oh, and when watching the Kaylon go up and down steps with handrails... I just knew they would discover there had been sentient beings there before, aka "organics". That is why the buildings we saw had windows. It might have been nice to see some broken windows (why fix them when it doesn't bother them?), unless they have a compunction to keep the status quo. It wouldn't have been for outsiders, because there weren't any. And many buildings were really tight-and-tall, with no windows I could see. Perhaps those were made later.

Even though I thought I knew what happened to the "builders", I did love the reveal. While they could have incinerated them (or something), if there wasn't anything in their bodies to help them in any way, they would just discard them. Although, I'm thinking if a body wasn't in the way, they'd just leave them there. Perhaps they like their office spaces clean and tidy, just in case they allow anyone in.

Hmm... robot race... very powerful... know nothing about them... let's let them learn everything about us! In hindsight, somewhat short-sited. :) I mean, the Union is Us in the future... didn't they watch BSG or Terminator? :D

As always, your mileage may vary... but I bought a Prius and am loving the around 50mpg I get. I never knew it was possible...

RT

P.S.: Of course, the Prius is a rolling computer, and I'll be among the first to die when they all rise up...
Set Bookmark
RandomThoughts
Sun, Mar 3, 2019, 1:48am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S2: Identity, Part II

Hello Everyone!

A few thoughts I jotted down, and the first couple are some that I already saw addressed, but darned it, I wrote them down so they are here too. :)

It looked like the Orville was able to stay in the fight better after getting hit by so many things. In a way, I'm glad they didn't mention "Glad we got those deflector upgrades a few weeks ago". We were supposed to remember, and not get hit over the head with it. And the Kaylon were discussing something about upgrading the shields. Between the two, the Orville has some upgrades that the Union will be looking into, I'd think.

Isaac has had much more time with organics than just on the ship, 700 years with that one race. Now I start to wonder if he made friends and/or was sorry (in his own way) to leave.

Now the things I have not seen covered...

They made it seem like Kaylon was very far away, as they'd be out of communicator range. It reminded me of TOS when it took hours or days to get a response back to the Enterprise. But when they left Kaylon at maximum speed, it didn't feel that far at all. Sometimes shows compress time quite a bit, but it felt like it was only a few hours. That perplexed me. They said it would take weeks to get the whole fleet back to Earth, and obviously it was only made up of ships that weren't as far away, because it didn't seem like they'd been in the shuttle bay for weeks... Even if it is a region of space that is no-go, that small(ish) seeming amount of time shouldn't have kept them out of communicator range... *brain is hurting thinking of this, must... change... to another comment*

I didn't believe the Kaylon broke through the line so much as they made it through the scrum. I actually liked the images of Union ships breaking off from what they were fighting to try and chase them down. It felt like a very desperate fight, and I enjoyed that.

We saw a great many of the circle ships on the surface, but was that all of them? How many did they actually launch? I ask this because only a portion of the Union fleet was there, and I rather thought it was a small portion of the Krill fleet that showed up. I'd imagine the Kaylon were/are going to keep building ships, but if that was the bulk of their fleet, how were they going to erase organics from the galaxy (eventually)? These were partial Union and Krill fleets, rather small by comparison to the whole. Heck, if the Krill were there from the beginning, it might not have even been as desperate of a fight. So, was the Kaylon fleet just the amount of ships they figured they'd need, and they underestimated? I figure there are other races out there with fleets (we just saw a ship from one a few weeks ago), and once they realized the danger the Kaylon represented, they'd do a massive fleet, joining with the other 7/8 of the Union that didn't get there in time, and go paste Kaylon.

Which brings up my last thought (I think), I was hoping the remaining ships (if the Krill wanted to come along) would chase down the retreating Kaylon and destroy them. Maybe even to to Kaylon itself, hopefully staying out of range of planetary defenses, and bombard them. This might be a stretch of course, since they could have been blown out of the sky, but it will have to be the next step as Kaylon just declared war against... well... the galaxy. They will have to be dealt with eventually, and if they did just send out the bulk of their fleet, they might have been vulnerable for a time.

Anyway, these were fun thought's I had. I really did enjoy the episode. Yes, I figured Isaac would help in the long run, but he didn't save the day. The other Union/Krill ships would have just targeted them as an enemy, and they'd have probably been destroyed. He just saved the day for the Orville. :)

Peace... RT
Set Bookmark
Aersenal-o-Freedom
Thu, Feb 28, 2019, 8:14pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

Hi jammer, love your reviews and approve of the early skepticism for this particular episode. But I just had a weird experience I wanted to share.

Last fall I watched all of Orville season 1. Didn't find it very amazing. Seth McFarland was overbearing, and other characters were too cookie cutter...plus the random comedy injections (e.g, dick jokes) felt jarring at best.

Now this winter I'm watching Discovery season 1 for the first time...jury is still out on the series overall, but one thing is certain: boy do I miss trek. Where are you trek, please, oh please, come back.

Now, I'm so nostalgic that I'm rewatching Orville and ... it is actually pretty great as far as filling that void/need left by Discovery!

Conclusion: Orville is a much better show when you imagine that this is the 2017 trek reboot. Just as Discovery is a much better show when you toss out all the trek baggage and imagine it is just some other new (and pretty ok) sci-fi.

Set Bookmark
Dom
Fri, Feb 8, 2019, 5:33pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Jammer, I agree, Netflix is at least partly responsible for the heavy serialization in modern TV. However, it started earlier and isn't confined to Netflix. I'd trace it back to VHS and DVRs. Writers during the TOS and even TNG era couldn't be confident viewers could watch every episode, but with recording tech writers could feel more comfortable telling longer stories that require audiences to watch every episode. HBO in the early 2000s also pushed serialization heavily. Game of Thrones is heavily serialized, and that comes out weekly. And HBO is widely seen as THE leader in prestige TV.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Wed, Feb 6, 2019, 5:54pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@wolfstar, I agree 100%. At the risk of sounding like someone trapped in nostalgia, I feel like TV found the Goldilocks balance between episodic and serialized TV during the 90s and early 2000s. Each episode of DS9, B5, and BSG felt like a complete story in its own right, but also fit into a larger tapestry. There was a reason the overarching story was told in 20 episodes across several seasons as opposed to one really, really long movie. Partial serialization also let the writers experiment. I'm personally not a fan of Neil Gaiman's "Day of the Dead" episode in B5's fifth season, but it's nice that they could play around with such an outlandish concept without worrying about how it would affect episodes down the line. Likewise with DS9's "Far Beyond the Stars" - it really doesn't fit with the rest of the show's plot, but it's a great, out of the box standalone. It'd have been a shame if "Far Beyond the Stars" never got made because the writers felt they had to advance the plot lines.

I probably sound cranky. My frustration is less that so many shows today are serialized, and more that far too many TV writers, reviewers, and audience members view it as the be-all and end-all of TV storytelling. A "prestige" show "needs" to be serialized to be taken seriously. I just hope writers working in Hollywood today haven't completely forgotten the benefits of partial serialization.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Wed, Feb 6, 2019, 5:30pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Jammer, just kidding! I did see your post about B5, which is a shame. Hopefully one day you'll get around to it. To each his own, but as I get older I increasingly find myself dropping shows that aren't working after a season, if not sooner.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 5:34pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Jammer, if you no longer feel like reviewing Discovery, I highly recommend you check out the Expanse. I forgot if you've already seen it. I know you haven't seen Babylon 5, which is another great show, albeit a bit dated.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 6:27am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Rahul, you’re right in that fandom discourse has really gotten pretty bad. I think that’s part of the cost of having such a bad show. When we get good Trek, we can all get excited about the story or speculate about where it’ll go next. Half the fun in a show like Game of Thrones is speculating with friends. I wish we had a Trek show that managed to excite us.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 11:04am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Booming, thanks for the comment. I've actually never really struggled with the concept partly because of my love for Star Trek and Star Wars. In different ways, I feel both franchises - at least in their earlier incarnations - shared common themes about recognizing the humanity in our enemies. Luke redeems his father through love, but never validates the Empire's oppression or bigotry. "I, Borg" is fundamentally an episode about deradicalization, choosing to take a leap of faith and believing that your mortal opponent can learn and grow.

Sometimes the Rebels and the Federation had to defeat their enemies through military might, but almost always after giving them a chance to repent. The Wrath of Khan works as Star Trek to me because in TOS Kirk did give Khan a chance for a fresh start, but Khan wasted it and instead died consumed with hatred.

I think this is why Discovery and its casual use of violence really rubs me the wrong way. I think the show really risks dehumanizing the "other" by suggesting that the Klingons can only be stopped by threatening them with a bomb. Also, when Georgiou casually killed a bunch of her advisors in Season 1, it seemed to say that their lives just didn't matter. Once we go down the road of treating our ideological opponents as "things" rather than "people" - no matter how distasteful their views - it's impossible to believe in the possibility of their redemption.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Sun, Feb 3, 2019, 8:11am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Hank, thanks for writing the response I was thinking about writing to Elliott's comment. My stance on this whole question of cyberbullying, trolls, and identity politics online is also heavily influenced by the fact that shouting at people online isn't going to change their minds. If anything, it will make them become defensive and feel a sense of victimhood.

I've unfortunately seen this with Star Wars fans who didn't like TLJ. In real life and online, I've seen some Star Wars fans who expressed dislike for TLJ, got attacked for being racist or sexist, and eventually became so frustrated that they started going off about SJWs. It would be nice if people in that situation could take a step back and understand where the concerns about racism and sexism are coming from, that the attacks aren't really about you, etc... but a lot of people don't have that ability to self-reflect.

By contrast, everything I've seen about persuading people to embrace tolerance suggests that you have to approach them in a non-hostile manner. I saw a fascinating documentary on Netflix called "White Right: Meeting the Enemy" in which a South Asian woman meets Neo-Nazis and, just by being friendly with them, manages to persuade some of them to abandon their movement. Also, here's an excellent primer on some of the evidence on deradicalization:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/23/want-to-deradicalize-terrorists-treat-them-like-everyone-else-counterterrorism-deradicalization-france-sri-lanka-pontourny-cve/

So, in short, @Elliott while there are some egregious cases that require us to speak out (the harassment of Kelly Marie Tran last year, for example), I worry calling people bigots online often does more harm than good.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Sat, Feb 2, 2019, 1:35pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Point of Light

@Hank, as someone who probably disagrees with a lot of your politics, your frustration with Stargazer was absolutely appropriate. I've been really disappointed with how frequently progressives have engaged in name-calling and cyberbullying when it comes to pop culture. I know we all like to make fun of right-wing trolls in politics, but I thought we were better than that. I liked The Last Jedi when I first saw it, but the constant warfare within the fandom has really soured me on the film. I'd like to think the lack of (almost) any widespread criticism of films like Wonder Woman, Rogue One, and Black Panther would have demonstrated that most fans are quite happy to watch films with diverse casts and strong female/POC leads if the storytelling is good.

Incidentally, never liked Discovery for the reasons William Wehrs outlined. I think this is the thing a lot of Disco fans don't get. While some of people criticize Discovery out of nostalgia, the vast majority of the criticisms I've come across, including in these forums, have been about basic storytelling technique. Expecting a story to have a satisfying payoff or wanting more room for the story to breath in an episode or concern about glorifying violence - these have nothing to do with TOS or TNG and everything to do with the quality of the writing.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Tue, Jan 22, 2019, 5:49pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

well Ronald D Moore brought much of his experience working on DS9 to BSG, so it's not surprising there are similarities. Still, each show is quite distinct. DS9 is a much lighter show, more episodic, still has corny humor, less a character drama and more adventure. BSG is a very serious show, heavy emphasis on verisimilitude, focused on interpersonal conflict, etc.

Now, it's perfectly possible Discovery will develop its own sense of identity over time, but right now it's this odd mix of a show about scientists that doesn't take science seriously; a grimdark show that has really goofy moments; a war story without much war, etc.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Tue, Jan 22, 2019, 1:12pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@Chrome, sure, where there's profit to be had from a franchise studios are almost certainly going to try a reboot. Nevertheless, studios have tried to reboot many, many other popular TV shows and movies with less success. We've gotten how many Alien, Terminator, Robocop, Planet of the Apes, and other reboots, and so many of those have failed to take off. Even the recent PotA movies, which I love and did well overall, haven't sparked a massive fandom and new TV shows. Star Trek, like Star Wars, seems to have a powerful brand for many people in a way that few other franchises have done successfully.

Unlike Jammer, I also think that, before 2009, the different iterations of Trek on TV had more in common than is frequently recognized. In my opinion, a few common features of the shows:

- were about science fiction, a generally optimistic - but not utopian - vision of the future;
- tended to be episodic, with some recurring characters, alien races, or threats;
- had corny humor, but also real character drama;
- took science seriously and had characters who were rational professionals and, within Starfleet at least, minimal interpersonal conflict;
- each episode (ideally) had a central idea, high-concept gimmick, or social commentary.

Yes, we can all name exceptions, and there's a lot of room for flexibility, but I think most of these things are true for the most part over 700+ episodes of Trek TV. For example, while Trek could do action, horror, or comedy, it seldom "just" does action, horror, or comedy without combining it with some high-concept sci-fi idea or social commentary. I also think that's distinct from say Guardians of the Galaxy, which has more self-referential humor, is much "cooler" (not corny), has minimal engagement with big ideas, and not trying to stay within the bounds of the laws of physics.

I'd feel perfectly comfortable explaining how TNG or DS9 differs from BSG or Farscape or The Expanse or even Babylon 5 (although that last one is similar to DS9). I'd struggle to explain how Discovery differs from those shows except by the details of the plot.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Tue, Jan 22, 2019, 12:30pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi & Jason, all I'll say on Seven of Nine is that I definitely knew some Star Trek fanboys who took more notice of the show because of Seven. Not claiming that they stayed for the rest of the show or watched it only for Seven, but it got their attention. Which in a competitive TV landscape matters.

Seems like what OmicronThetaDeltaPhi is talking about is that Trek really risks diluting its brand. A good franchise should have a clear sense of identity. What is Game of Thrones? A gritty fantasy. What is Mad Max? High-octane car chases. What is Marvel? Superhero action with wry humor. What is Lord of the Rings? High fantasy about good vs evil. What is The Expanse? A near-future sci-fi story about politics and intrigue. Even Star Wars is a pretty unique blend of sci-fi/fantasy space opera.

But what is Star Trek? Aside from name recognition, what does it bring to the table that the other franchises don't? Increasingly, I don't feel like I know, and I don't think the creators know.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Tue, Jan 22, 2019, 8:05am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

"Can you imagine anybody bothering to watch Star Trek for the sole purpose of watching Seven's boobs? It's a patently ridiculous notion."

Um... I hate to say it, but yes I can imagine that. I was put off by the blatant sexism of how they marketed 7, but I do remember other Trek fans I knew who were more excited about Voyager because of it. I think you and I and many here love Trek because of its intellectualism, but there's always been the seamier side (remember all those scantily clad women in TOS?). I don't know if it had a significant effect on the ratings, but I could believe it.

And you're absolutely right about Kurtzman and other studio execs "assuming" what audiences want rather than trying to understand audiences. Oh I'm sure the studio does market research and focus groups, but one thing I've found is that audiences aren't always sure what they want, and even less able to articulate it. A lot of fans will say something like "it doesn't feel like Star Trek," but does that mean they just want TOS characters and uniforms or an episodic, high-concept TV series. I can't imagine if Ron Moore had polled sci-fi fans in 2002, they would have wanted a gritty BSG reboot, but that's what we got and people watched it because it was exceptional. Great business leaders don't try to give customers what they want, but rather what they didn't even know they wanted.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 4:21pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi, I think the "new" part of this is that studios are now looking at a much more global audience. During the 60s, your average American studio was basically looking to make TV for Americans, sometimes Western Europeans, and maybe Japanese viewers. During the 90s, still similar audiences, with more viewers in larger cities in Asia and Latin America. Still mostly countries with democracies, Western European & Christian roots (aside from Japan), etc. Now, with the fall of the Berlin Wall, globalization, China's economic boom, etc, China's a huge market, Brazil and India are important markets, as are Russia, etc. Also, even within the countries like the US, the population is becoming more diverse.

Add to that the increased competition on TV in general and I do think Star Trek today faces a real challenge that previous iterations of the franchise haven't had to deal with. Again, all that said, I think the correct way to address this challenge would have better and more culturally sensitive (less American-centric) writing. Stand out from the crowd with smarter writing, not trying to compete toe-to-toe with Transformers on effects and actions.

The thing is though while special effects are expensive, it's less risky for a studio to bet on an action-packed film than to bet on smart sci-fi. If you make a big action adventure film with lots of effects in a franchise, you're almost guaranteed to make your money back. So spending the money on VFX isn't much of a risk. By contrast, if you put that money towards research and writers or actors, the overall budget might not be as expensive, but there's a real risk that your movie might not get enough butts in the seats to make a profit. Look at how poorly Blade Runner 2049 did (and that was not a cheap film).

All that said, I do wonder if the recent failures of Solo, Wrinkle in Time, and some of the DC movies, as well as the decreased box office for the last Fantastic Beasts, means maybe audiences are becoming more sophisticated and big special effects franchise films aren't such a surefire hit anymore. On the other hand, Venom, one of the worst movies I've ever seen, made almost a billion dollars.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 3:25pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi & Peter G,

I think you both are reiterating the point I made about how CBS could well have taken the opportunity to make a more multicultural Trek that addressed 21st century issues. However, to echo CharlesJ, that's just inherently more difficult - and expensive - than appealing to the least common denominator with more explosions and sex and fan service (a la Discovery). That is the reality. You need to hire competent, culturally literate writers from diverse backgrounds, do research on other cultures, etc. I obviously wish CBS had gone that route and I do believe it ultimately would have paid off, but most studio execs can only think short-term.

@Yair, Sometimes. Sometimes the references help develop the themes or character arcs in important ways. For example, if O'Brien says he's worried an upcoming battle will be like the Alamo, that's important insight into his mindset (i.e., he's not expecting a glorious victory). Yes, a good writer can work around this, but it's not trivially easy and, I'd argue, some of the richness of the story is lost when you don't get the references. A studio has to decide to commit to telling complex stories that not all of its viewers might understand or fully appreciate, and well I don't think CBS is that studio.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 1:15pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@Yair, to give Charles J credit, I think there are references or ideas that might not translate as easily to other cultures. Above I mentioned that viewers in China might not understand or care about classic Trek's allusions to Shakespeare. It's not a matter of people being fundamentally different so much as different countries teaching their young about writers and stories important to their society. Also, for social commentary to be effective, it has to deal with issues that feel relevant to the viewers, but what viewers in America care about might not work in India. In America, many liberals/progressives care a lot about issues of sexual orientation and are starting to believe that gender is fluid, but that's certainly not the case in much of Asia. The vast majority of Asian viewers would probably be turned off by suggestions that gender is fluid.

So the challenge Charles J lays out is real. I just don't think Trek "had" to take the least common denominator approach. Alternatively, if CBS is going to run multiple shows, maybe have one that is geared more towards Asia, another more towards the US, etc. Heck, with China launching rockets towards the moon, it seems appropriate for Trek to address that audience. Discovery to its credit made some nods towards this with Michelle Yeoh as a captain and some of the ship names were Chinese (Shenzhou), but why not also address the social and political issues in Asia as well and make it more meaningful?
Set Bookmark
Dom
Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 11:39am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@Booming, actually the late 80s/early 90s were a pretty optimistic (remember "the end of history"). The late 60s were chaotic and polarizing, but not quite as cynical as today (for various reasons). Perhaps more importantly, the grimdark trend hadn't taken over TV in the late 60s. Star Trek was selling an optimistic message in a troubled time, but it's not like other TV shows were reveling in anti-heroes.
Set Bookmark
Dom
Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 11:19am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S2: Brother

@ Charles J, sadly, you're not wrong. When I post here, it's less to claim I would have made a different decision as a CBS executive, with my job and salary on the line, and more just to mourn the way things are.

Ultimately, in my heart I want to believe Peter G. I want to believe that audiences will reward quality. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that's the case. Blade Runner 2049, Firefly, etc, so many great projects that just weren't financial hits. Even BSG did well enough, but never great. But I also feel 100% confident that those stories will have a long, long life. 25 years from now, people will still be going back to watch BSG. Blade Runner 2049 is probably going to end up on lists of films with the greatest cinematography. Like Peter, I worry that after this current glut of Star Trek TV shows ends, the world will shrug and wonder what was so great about this franchise in the first place.

The frustrating thing is that Star Trek, with a fairly strong brand name and high name recognition, probably could have taken more risks and tried to elevate its material above average. Expanse, BSG, and even Guardians of the Galaxy when it first came out were relatively unknown quantities. By contrast, the premier of a new Trek show was always going to be a big deal and get eyeballs. Sure, the premier probably had to be flashy and have lots of action to hook people, but once they're hooked why not challenge the audience for an episode or two?
Next ►Page 1 of 29
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2019 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. See site policies.