I watched Voyager. Liked it, even (a thing I disagree on with Chrome, which is interesting as otherwise we seem to be very much of a very similar mind on all sorts of things Star Trek). It was a lot like what a Star Trek lite adventure series should be - action took much more focus and the thing was more popcorny, but they still actually tried to have moral conundrums and other than some writing mishaps the underlying idealism was there. For comparison to it there is Discovery, and that was rather atrocious - the first season was just BAD all around, the second season was better, being passable in a "generic action sci-fi set in space" sort of way (while being a pretty awful Star Trek). To set my expectations of ST:P I have DIS and the TNG movies, and all the review sources I trust (mostly Chrome, but RLM's indepth looks too) seem to confirm those expectations: needlessly convoluted (in a way that doesn't actually pay off and falls apart upon a moment's thought) action schlock ignoring established lore and flipping the portrayal of the future completely on its head - it's no longer an idealistic utopia to inspire the viewer with how things could be, but just yet another generic "gritty", morally compromised sci-fi shithole. I'd have to actually watch the thing to confirm it for myself, but really... after all I've heard, I don't much feel like it.
File: 1589936553334.jpg (33.31 KB, 750x917, 750:917, IMG_20200519_071624.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Honestly this feels plinket/red letter media grasping at straws to revive a career.
File: 1589938034858.png (997.48 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Starlight_levitating_conta….png) ImgOps Google
I haven't watched it either. I've found the dozen or so reviews I've seen pretty entertaining, though.>>1034933
I'm not sure why it would need to be revived, exactly.
File: 1589941945896.png (358.38 KB, 640x752, 40:47, 92703195_2574591186127170_….png) ImgOps Google
I rather liked Star Trek: Discovery. Much better than Star Trek: Enterprise, IMHO.
File: 1589945708376.jpg (50.78 KB, 415x946, 415:946, you have got to be squiddi….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
hi sailboat!! how is picard? is it good? i am so excited if it is good!
File: 1589946932941.png (207.8 KB, 689x1002, 689:1002, 2286613.png) ImgOps Google
I already know RLM doesn't care for it so I'm not too interested in watching yet another of their reviews of New Star Trek. Nothing against them, that I've seen this many reviews for shows I don't care about counts for something, but at some point disinterest wins out.
But Star Trek wasn't part of my childhood. I've been watching it as an adult and I really enjoy it, but as far as I can tell the biggest flaw is that it breaks the formula and I'm not invested in the formula so I don't care about that. It's kind of weird for your blatant nostalgia bait to break the formula, but whatever. I can't help but wonder if there would be this much criticism if it was it's own show instead of being another Star Trek. Perhaps it would be a fan darling in that case.
File: 1589948055537.png (2.66 MB, 3755x4500, 751:900, 1754798__safe_artist-colon….png) ImgOps Google
Yeah, it's definitely not the best analysis - even of theirs. I think maybe they already felt they've gone over it seriously, so much of this was just goofing on it.>>1034949
Hi, Moony! I've not watched it, myself. I've found reviews of it to be fairly entertaining, though.>>1034951
From watching reviews by various people, I think this is why some ST fans give Discovery a pass (even if they don't like it) and despise Picard, over the exact same reasons - because Disccovery can be considered its own independent thing, while Picard directly contradicts and in many ways invalidates the series that it was based on.
It's all so far removed from the Trek of my childhood (namely, TAS and the TOS movies), that I don't even feel like I have a stake in it.
File: 1589949301523.png (1.03 MB, 1780x1916, 445:479, 2144061(1).png) ImgOps Google
I just don't see what the reasoning is to make it Star Trek Picard. Or Discovery, for that matter. They clearly have their own stories and formulas that they're working with.
I know why
they did, but it just seems like it would be suffocating to try and write anything like that.
Star Trek is a big name with a big dedicated fanbase and millions of casual fans. Calling it "Star Trek" is going to guarantee a certain amount of eyes on it just by virtue of the name and legacy.
But they also don't want to make it like the old Star Trek because their convinced they know what people like better than they do. Hence why the JJ Abrahms movies sucked.
At this point I find that the main source of entertainment value to be derived from Star Trek is blasting it. Once one fully accepts that ST is dead to the point they're no longer bothered by the fact, there's plenty of fun to be had in bitching about NuTrek.>>1034916
There's more to it than that though. TOS was made in the '60s, TNG technically started in the '80s but the whole crop of TNG+DS9+VOY was a '90s thing. Here you also have a 30 year gap (also different real world tech and different budget) leading to drastically different shows, always defined by their captains. Kirk was a man of action, Picard (the old one) was a careful, measured, philosophical diplomat. Sisko was... well, a bit of both, but additionally a rationalist made into space Jesus and a man capable of stepping off the idealistic path when extreme circumstances pushed him off of it but never losing sight of it and always returning, while Janeway was essentially a mother to her crew. So many differences, and there was a 30 year gap also, and yet the underlying spirit is the same. Not so with NuTrek, it's all a completely different thing that just slaps the brand on top for name recognition.>>1034948
Yeah it was a bit weak. They did proper dives on individual episodes though in their other format, so I guess they didn't want to repeat themselves? I don't know, I think I'd have preferred if they just did the finale that way also, instead of dragging out Plinkett.>>1034951
Fan darling? Hmm. The criticism levelled against them isn't just based on "it's not Star Trek", though that's a big part of it. The plots being convoluted just for the sake of being convoluted to the point of tripping themselves up, pointless mysteries that go nowhere and are forgotten about, the love of "you are fated" as a story device... hard to imagine it being more than a blip if not for slapping a "Star Trek" logo on to milk brand recognition. We'll never know, but in my estimate it does not exactly add up to being something like "the Expanse".
I got sixteen minutes in, thought I had been watching for at least a half hour, and when I asked if we could finish it tomorrow, my partner... Casually moved the mouse to show how much more we had to go.
Don't get me wrong! It's not Plinket. I love Plinket. I just didn't understand how I could already feel so...worn out from only sixteen minutes of fuckery
File: 1589967560337.png (784.46 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, -_S6E1.png) ImgOps Google
I think it's possible to have a show headed by people who respect old Trek. But these unfortunately are not.>>1034976
Same. I've become fond of the Critical Drinker for that reason among others.>>1034978
You might want to simply skip ahead to the conclusion at 1:23:53.
Here's the video between Mike and Rich on it. I think they do a fair better job of pointing to the specific problems involved in the show.
They go through other episodes as well.
Plinkett is a bit of an old fashioned comedic character so I think it's a tad rougher with the reviews.
Personally, I think RLM has been gliding on old fame for ages now. But, that's a topic for another day.
Understandable complaint when you're making a sequel.
There's an odd habbit with modern media these days to make a sequel to something, that basically throws out the window of everything that came before. Either by direct contradiction of established events, or by chucking the themes the thing was built on.
Don't really get it. Maybe it's a branding thing, where they want to get the old name onto something to draw in a crowd. Still, I think stuff like this'd be better received as a standalone new thing.
Modern audiences change. Things that were popular in the 90s may not resonate with a generation that grew up with smart phones and whatever the fuck that floss dance is. It's something I've grown accustomed to. Things that were culturally relevent when I was young slowly become less and less so over the years until one day you make a reference to Pinky and the Brain and realize that the show went off the air almost 2 decades ago and no one in the room knows what you're talking about.
So I understand that shows changing over time is something that is unavoidable. The problem here is that they want to have it both ways. You can't make something that appeals to modern floss-dancers AND banks on nostalgia. It can't be done, yet they keep trying because they're afraid to take a risk on a new IP.
No! Suffering through the pain is half the experience! >>1035026
But I am a fan of the Star Trek shows.
Huh...so that's why he was laughing at me so much every time I yelled at the computer and threw a piece of popcorn...
File: 1590002538518.jpg (308.43 KB, 1200x1777, 1200:1777, ENlBujmU0AESBA9.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Doing it both ways just ends up alienating both sides, as people who don't know anything about Star Trek aren't likley to pick this up thinking there's a huge backlog, and people who do know about Star Trek will hate it because it's changed so radically.
Yeah, that's a better review.>>1035033
Come now, going with generic-as-of-now is hardly an actual way to appeal to people. Consider The Martian, Gravity and Interstellar. All three are sci-fi, and each made so much more in box office than either of the new Star Trek movies, and neither is at all close to that generic sci-fi formula that's apparently a necessity for success.
And it's really not about nostalgia. Or at least it shouldn't be. Nostalgia is what gets you The Force Awakens - mostly competent but mediocre, flashy but safe, and overall soulless without much substance. Star Trek happens to be the ur-example of a franchise which has had a major generational update that was done well and massively successful. Surely you can't claim that the success of '90s Star Trek was about riding a wave of nostalgia from the '60s, or that the updated version was steeped in the '60s culture. Creating an updated version that still fits can be done, and it can be done well, as this very franchise has shown by doing it before. It also can be done badly... as this franchise has shown by doing it now. There's nothing special about "now" that would prevent doing it successfully though, as we only need to look at a show like The Orville which is pretty much a Star Trek TNG 2017 Edition (now with extra interpersonal drama and a new name). Not one thing there is Star Trek nostalgia-wise because it's a different franchise, and yet it's pretty much Star Trek.
Biggest complaint I have for the Orville is that the comedy seems jammed in at times.
Feels like they really wanted to just make Star Trek, but needed to put in comedy to make the thing marketable or maybe slip by copyright.
Still worth watching if you've got the time.
I guess that's a good point, TNG was an update that did it well. But then, how would one update the show and do it well for a modern audience? I feel like it would be hard to please Trek fans with anything.>>1035039
It literally is. The comedy was added because it's what expected from "The Family Guy... guy". But it's clear he didn't initially intend it to be comedy.
I hear people talking about the Orville alot, but I haven't really seen much of it because of the comedy element being done so poorly.
If you want more TNG, watch the Orville. The comedy's bad, but, it's at worst a distraction, and at best reminiscent of what you'd get in 'adventure' style cartoons.
Otherwise skip it.
I watched a fair chunk of it. Stopped after a while, and just watched more DS9. But it was fun for a bit. Finding a 3rd party streaming site was a pain, though
It does feel that way at times. There's good comedy moments in there too, even a few of the more outlandish ones (that thing with prank-stealing a leg was neat) but yeah, some of it is trying too hard. I don't think it's a copyright thing, but rather it might be there to placate the Fox executives who were pitched a space adventure comedy series by a comedy guy. Still, it's the best new Star Trek we've got, and they have learned to manage it better over time.>>1035041
Well, personally the way I'd go about it is I'd look at the similarities between TOS and the TNG era shows. What was the timeless core that those shows shared, which made them all work as "Star Trek" despite the differences in the update, then just write modern stories around that. I'd say it's the sense of optimism about the future, showing humanity as it could be at its best, and an adventure of exploration, still trying to ground even the more out there bits in a scientific approach. I really believe it could be done - and it's not like Star Trek fans are actually these rabid grouches that can't be pleased. Look at how many are perfectly willing to give a pass or even praise Discovery, and that's no Star Trek as I understand it. Further, like I said... you can look at the Orville. Here's a spoilery example, will enclose it in spoilerbrackets. spoilers
One of the recent episodes was about an archeological dig uncovering a number of artifacts, including a smartphone. One of the crew has the idea to scan it and create a simulation of the person it belonged to based on all the data in it, who turns out to be a woman singer. Then he interacts with her, gets a crush on her and actually tries to express that but the simulation is like "oh no, sorry, I have a boyfriend". So then he tells the simulation to delete the boyfriend... which in turn makes her a very different person - the boyfriend is the one who for example encouraged her to overcome her shyness and sing on stage etc. And so he restores the boyfriend and gives up on that holocrush, just going to her show one last time/spoilers
You get a perfectly modern story, with modern things like smartphones, with commentary about how much of our lives are in those things, but then also insight into the human condition with how much our lives are affected by others being in our lives. More relationship heavy than would be perfectly suited to my taste, but otherwise... pretty much a modern TNG episode.
So yeah, The Orville. The comedy is actually unfortunate but luckily it gets toned down over time. It's still there, but it becomes much more low key and the show is all the better for it. Let's remember, TNG had its growing pains too... honestly before Riker grew the beard the whole thing was kinda bad. Yet, it's now probably the definite Star Trek show there is.
Ahh, ok then. Well I read it so that's fine. I might give the Orville a shot eventually, but like you said, it's hard to find online and I'm not super into pirating stuff.
As for what makes something "Star Trek" or not, well I think that varies from person to person. Personally, I liked the more introspective more than the action-y episodes of TNG. But I'm sure other people feel the opposite. My favorite episode is "Measure of a Man", so I was happy to see a lot of elements dealing with Data and androids come back in Picard. But I'm not sure they handled it very well.
Also. like I mentioned, even though Picard is supposed to be a sequel to TNG, there was a long extended bit with Voyager characters that I didn't quite follow because no one watched Voyager. I recognized that 7 of 9 is a character from that show, but I didn't know anything about who she was or what she was about. So I can't tell if her appearance was true to her character or not.
File: 1590045851575.jpeg (4.07 MB, 2080x2942, 1040:1471, 1522282.jpeg) ImgOps Google
>>1035078>Personally, I liked the more introspective more than the action-y episodes of TNG
I think that's what most people liked it for. The action was pretty bad, honestly. Either somebody shouts that the shields are at 10% and Picard tells them to fire photon torpedoes while everybody pretends to shake, or they do this weird thing where they grab their fist with their other hand and try to hit the other guy in the back with it.
I would say most
shows about an intrepid crew of plucky people in space ships did action better. Which I suppose makes sense since most of the ones I'm thinking of came later. But still. If you were impressed by the choreography then... good for you I guess?
Wasn't me who said it's hard to find. If you need a source with no hint of the high seas, I think it's all on Hulu? Season 3 is slated to be a Hulu exclusive so I'd be surprised if they didn't have all the previous ones.
Told you I did watch and like Voyager. Seven of Nine's thing on Voyager was a quest to find her humanity and individuality after being turned into a borg as a child, as well as adapting to the enlightened values of the Federation which included actually caring about the freedoms, rights and lives of others - as well as dealing with the general fallout of having lived all her life as a borg, mental (some trauma, but also for example how completely crippled she was at interacting with other people - or also dealing with losing the PERKS of being in the collective) and physical (not all borg tech could be removed, and what was left would often act up). As a member of the crew, her role was scientific - she even got her own lab dedicated to the mapping of the quadrant and finding ways to traverse it faster, as well as collecting and analyzing stellar data along the way (which conveniently also allowed the capture and transmission of other signals, but that's another story). Apparently PIC's Seven instead is "double phasers go pew pew". Voyager's last episode has a time skip into the future where the ship has made it after decades, but as it turns out Seven died along the way (it's one of the things which prompt future Janeway towards temporal shenanigans with the idea to go back and help Voyager skip those decades of journey, thus avoiding all the crew deaths along the way) so PIC is not strictly speaking going against "Seven was estabilished to be a scientist in the future"... but c'mon.
"Measure of a Man" is often cited as one of the best episodes of TNG. And as it happens, from what I hear PIC pretty much pretends it never happened. Chrome was pretty down about how they handled the androids in it, at least. Actually it makes me wonder about the timeline here - is it the JJ Abrams universe? Because if it is, the destruction of Vulkan is one hell of a butterfly effect wingflap, so all bets are off and in-universe you can really say that trial/hearing never DID happen.>>1035079
You know who shouldn't have cared about Hugh? Seven. On screen, they never met or even had any idea about each other. And I hear that they never establish otherwise in PIC, just going with "ah well they're former borg right they all know each other".
Star Trek literally invented the Vulcan nerve pinch just to get out of having to use clumsy fight choreography, so it's not surprising it's a little clunky.>>1035082
I believe Picard is still original universe, but the thing that happened on the Romulan planet that sets up the JJ universe still happened.
As for Measure of a Man not happening... the show doesn't explicitly ignore it, but it does sort of ignore the fact that Data won his court case and was granted rights. It could just be that the Federation decided they only applied to Data.
File: 1590049557660.png (153.02 KB, 487x584, 487:584, A_confused.png) ImgOps Google
Also, isn't it established that all Borg DO know each other? Because you know, Collective hive-mind?
Well, that is a good question but one with an answer. While in the collective there's no individuality, so knowing an individual in the collective is a contradiction in terms. There's just the collective... and I guess the queen, but that's a different story. The only way this could work is by having their individual experiences be part of the hive memory that a drone could access, but being deassimilated cuts you off from that too. Voyager had interactions between former drones, and they have no idea about each other unless they learn the regular, individual way (I don't quite recall a comparable situation in TNG - there were cases of groups former drones there too, like those that Lore was ordering around, but an actual meeting between former drones, not so much). Voyager technically also had unimatrix 0, which was this virtual world where a small percentage of drones with a certain unlikely defect in their assimilation would regain their individuality in their regeneration/sleep and could interact, but the knowledge from that did not as a rule transfer to the waking life.
Well I mean, I understand that Borg don't have individuality, but they do have a designation number, like a machine part. So At the very least, she might be aware that a part labeled "five of nine" existed and that he's now called "Hugh". Plus, I think it's implied that Hugh has been in charge of de-borging that cube he was on for a while, sometime in the intervening 30 years. It's possible Seven just... went there and met him the old fashioned way.
Personally, I just got a kick out of understanding the reference.
This sort of thing seems like it would be pulled from the hive memory on an as-needed basis. There's just too many Borg drones out there, and little need to spread this information. The bottom line was, them both having been in the collective is no guarantee of them having known each other even in this sense. In VOY the only time Seven seems to have remembered a drone from her time as a Borg was when she personally interacted with that drone in some major way.
Sure, it's possible they met. I'm just saying them meeting has never been shown before nor was there any material to infer it naturally would have happened, so it would have been nice if she at least said something as to why she knows him - because as far as the information present in the shows is concerned they're perfect strangers. I kind of suspect the writers didn't know this and assumed otherwise without checking, which would honestly be par for the course.
Oh, Hugh absolutely is a great candidate to show up in whatever "The Next Generation: the Retirement Years" ended up, and "ha, I know that guy" can be fun. I'm just amusing myself with pointing out a plot hole with him and Seven and adding some extra Voyager context, since you said you didn't watch it.
File: 1590109076155.jpg (50.15 KB, 600x739, 600:739, shindou_shuichi_iii_by_meg….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
You know what I liked better than Star Trek? Farscape.
Farscape was fuckin amazing.
You remember this series at all ?
File: 1590116423430.png (4.04 MB, 1953x2363, 1953:2363, 2267975.png) ImgOps Google
Farscape was pretty fun. I liked SG1 and Battlestar Galactica too.
File: 1590117587048.jpg (14.43 KB, 480x360, 4:3, hqdefault.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I remember the brunnen-g fight song, but i never saw the show. Cool song tho, how's the show?
File: 1590117696067.jpg (148.09 KB, 812x1230, 406:615, 604a781787d26c364770e0de94….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
I hadn't really watched much of it either tbh. I just remember it running on sci-fi channel around the same time as Farscape
File: 1590124500315.png (670.71 KB, 1900x1200, 19:12, 1424805.png) ImgOps Google
They were in space!
That's really the one I saw the least of.
File: 1590129792423.jpg (42.58 KB, 800x401, 800:401, let_s_go_yuki__by_zutte_ch….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
You know what made me really enjoy Farscape?
(I mean besides the good character development and addictive plot)
The actors. The actors always seemed like they were having fun, or really enjoying their roles. That's what pushed it over the "I like this" line to the "This is in my favourites list"
Farscape was a blast. It was also super weird at times, and didn't make a ton of sense other times.
Still one of the most fun sci-fi series I've watched