New Star Trek series - 2017

varkanoid said:
Grrrr Social Media has a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...

Social Media is just a platform though, its "US" that puts the stuff on there, so IMHO you can't really blame it..
As for what those YT users and Influencers would be doing, something else I guess, but it is about time people stopped treating it as a fad and not a real job, if you are good at something and get paid for doing it, pay taxes etc then, its a job, just because its not your job or something you would/could do doesn't make it any less real..

That said the internet as a whole needs a reset, people say and do things that they wouldn't do IRL, and the internet being as accessible as it is means that there is a lot of crap out there, people need to be more real and not play to the masses for the likes and shiz when it's not really what they are about..
 
Steampunk said:
Apparently it's on one of the Paramount channels in the US, 10pm on a Thursday night. It's where they put programs to die.
Click to expand...

To be fair, they tried that game with TOS before it became a legend in syndication.

Wouldn't take much work on CBS's part to repeat the trick. Though they would need to screw up and produce something halfway watchable with only the deeply, deeply awful bones of STD S1 and S2 to work with...
 
Gerard said:
https://trekmovie.com/2020/09/23/st...ter-will-still-be-around-in-the-32nd-century/

Do they really have to shoehorn modern day **** into something that's meant to be set in the 32nd Century?
Click to expand...

Well to be fair, in the context of the free-spirited, utopian vision that star trek was/is supposed to represent, i'd probably not ere on the side of rigid social conventions remaining the same over a period of centuries. Also to be pedantic, it's not exactly the 32nd century as the story revolves around 23rd century transplants, so practically it's involves 23rd century norms. Obviously, it doesn't mean that current schisms would survive until then, but then it's fiction... so it's whatever the writers say it is.

Anyway, regardless of all of that, if it's thrown in the viewers face at every opportunity instead of offering decent character/story development, then well it deserves to be criticised harshly for various reasons. If it's subtle or barely acknowledged (as it should be) then I'm not sure it matters, however I'm not hopeful considering the writers involved.

I'm curious to know though, is it genuine 'inclusion', shameless viral advertising or is it focus groups deciding what a company does with it's products?
 
StriderX said:
Anyway, regardless of all of that, if it's thrown in the viewers face at every opportunity instead of offering decent character/story development, then well it deserves to be criticised harshly for various reasons. If it's subtle or barely acknowledged (as it should be) then I'm not sure it matters, however, I'm not hopeful considering the writers involved.
Click to expand...

^^^^^^This, I have no issues with what people want to be or do or what they stick where, as long as its not forced on people, which is what seems to be happening more nad more these days, people trying to please and appease certain groups, or, ALL groups, at the same time in the same show so people dont feel left out...
 
Guys, I really don't think that LGBTQ+ box-ticking is going to be the worst thing about the series going forward...not unless the dialogue, plotting and acting have all taken a significant leap forward in quality from Seasons 1 and 2. And there's precious little evidence of that from the trailers released so far.
 
JRS said:
Guys, I really don't think that LGBTQ+ box-ticking is going to be the worst thing about the series going forward...not unless the dialogue, plotting and acting have all taken a significant leap forward in quality from Seasons 1 and 2. And there's precious little evidence of that from the trailers released so far.
Click to expand...

Is it really "box ticking" or actually just representation?.....

LGBT representation in Star Trek Discovery was the first time I actually found myself changing my views as I previously felt that LGBT representation was forced, but I've since realised that view point is prejudice.
 
Martini1991 said:
LGBT representation in Star Trek Discovery was the first time I actually found myself changing my views as I previously felt that LGBT representation was forced, but I've since realised that view point is prejudice.
Click to expand...

Do you mean forced in Discovery or forced in the general media? It very much is forced in the general media and there's prejudice in recognising that. You can spot a character added because box ticking a mile off. Just look at Dr Who. But i've said this before, Stamets and Culber are great characters and for all Discovery's faults, they aren't one. or two, i guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom