[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 10 points 10 months ago

It’s not false advertising because it did everything it was advertised to do in the introductory demo when it went on sale six months later. Google is the one faking their demos.

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yes, exactly. Season 1 knew what it wanted to be. When it was over, I remember thinking "alright, not bad, I'm excited to watch this show grow the beard."

But it never did. In retrospect, Season 1 is the strongest season the show had to offer. Each subsequent season got a little worse as plots got more confusing, themes got more muddled, and no breakout characters emerged to carry the show through an abundance of narrative turmoil and worldbuilding strangeness. But above all else, seasons 3 and 4 are just boring. I don't care about the crew or their mission. The most interesting characters are consistently the outsiders: Pike, Vance, Rillak. I'll be watching season 5, but mostly out of a sense of obligation and morbid curiosity.

As much as I like SNW, it's still not quite the show I've been waiting since 2005 for: seven curious officers on a ship called Enterprise set in the mid-25th century. I worry that SNW has robbed us of the opportunity to see the classic formula set in the immediate post-TNG era... even though that seems to be what season three of Picard was explicitly setting up.

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

""""loudly declare""""

Adira tells Stamets their pronouns, and Stamets says "okay" approvingly. That's it. That's the full extent of what you are calling a "big deal."

You understand that even in a society where everyone is allowed to "just be," accidental misgendering is still going to happen and corrections will still need to be communicated, right? Marco misgendered Nico on their first appearance, so Nico must have corrected him. You are effectively arguing that enby representation is only acceptable if actual conversations about gender occur off-screen.

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 7 points 11 months ago

but as someone else pointed out it's still not super common for gay characters, especially male characters, to be shown as being romantically involved, which can be jarring when you're not used to it. Dunno, it's weird.

Yep, many people still struggle with it. What do you think it would take to change this?

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 8 points 1 year ago

Pfft, Geordi is the least of Worf's problems at that table. Data is literally a walking computer, Troi can read minds, and Riker is evidently the greatest poker player who ever lived.

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 7 points 1 year ago

Sokath, his eyes uncovered

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

... photoshop?

You're telling me that Robert Duncan McNeill isn't shredded?

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

EDIT: Apparently everyone on this website is insane

The inmates are running the asylum

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 9 points 1 year ago

Star Trek is cool

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't really care if they mess around with continuity if continuity is interfering with a good story they want to tell. My point is that the SNW writers are making a clear and concerted effort to maintain continuity.

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I love it when the "come to my free speech zone!" pitch reaches the point where a total lack of self-awareness is put on display

I really hope the mods here let you keep digging

[-] GuyFleegman@startrek.website 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're not wrong, but man the Prime Directive would make a whole lot more sense if it did. The commonly misunderstood version of the PD that is intended to prevent cultural contamination is clear and simple. Given its status as the literal top rule, the actual PD—a generalized non-interventionism/pro-isolationism dictum—is oddly complex, vague, and lacking a focused objective.

10
18
5
22
4
5
2
13
5
10
4
4
view more: ‹ prev next ›

GuyFleegman

joined 1 year ago