Some context on the Saskatchewan aspect that puts helps to understand the concerns being raised:
“Weekes also said Harrison once sought permission to bring a gun into the legislature. Harrison initially denied the allegation but resigned last week after admitting he had forgotten about the incident, which happened more than a decade ago.”
The CP photo caption says the incident happened in 2016.
Sounds like you just haven’t been aware of what she’s been in.
She had a Best-supporting actress Oscar nomination in 2004 for ‘The House of Sand and Fog’ and Primetime Emmy win in 2009 for Outstanding Actress in a miniseries or movie.
It’s more the case that , as for Michelle Yeoh, older women seem to get meatier roles in science fiction and fantasy than in mainstream or art house productions.
I would love to see Shorleh come over to the Trek franchise in a worthy role. I can definitely see her standing out in the 25th century.
It absolutely is confusing.
Roddenberry gave conflicting direction on this. By the time TNG rolled out, his position was that most of the crew were officers.
But it was a long and confusing evolution. After intervention by the network after the TOS pilot, turned Janice Rand’s yeoman role, which is one of the most senior NCO roles on a naval ship, into what seemed to be a personal secretary. NBC was no more ready for a senior NCO who was a woman than they had been to have a female first officer Number One.
Discovery makes things murkier by mixing in ‘Chiefs’ as a title for department heads but never actually saying who is chief medical officer or chief engineer.
Lower Decks seems to have ensigns being hazed with junior enlisted tasks. However, Prodigy has introduced warrant officers as another career pathway outside the Academy.
I’m convinced that many people don’t appreciate DS9 until their 30s.
Cool that the 90s shows each seem to appeal to different demographics even though they were all in theory designed for mass audiences ( unlike in the current streaming era).
The problem seems to be that a lot of younger fans that get into Voyager & TNG, just cringe at DS9 or find it boring. Once they’ve had that experience they’re hard to convince to give it a fresh shot when they’re older.
The OP’s point is that there were old fans gatekeeping and downtalking ‘NuTrek’ pretty much since fan organizations took out full page newspaper ads in the US trying to stop TAS from being aired.
I was going to Star Trek cons in 1990. No matter how objectively great season 3 of TNG was, many TOS diehards were still campaigning against it.
Longstanding TOS fans could still be pretty toxic at that point to new TNG fans in person too. The guests at cons were still largely TOS cast. It was hard even to get a TNG t-shirt then.
Fast forward to 1993 and TNG cosplay was everywhere, the guests and panels were TNG and DS9 was the exciting new thing.
It was popular. Don’t let those brigading against the mere idea of a musical distort the facts.
Some of the review sites like IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes ended up with average scores in the 7/70% range merely because of the large number of 1/10 votes.
If you check out the vote distribution, it was a small but very vocal minority who opposed the episode on principle, who created the impression that it wasn’t well received by the fandom.
Personally, I’m not a huge fan of American musicals, but I enjoyed and have certainly included it in my rewatches already.
I really hope this isn’t a permanent change. But with Lower Decks, who knows?
Great to see someone bring some positive She-Hulk energy here. Difficult to choose between the Byrne and Slot run’s for a favourite.
I just know that Mariner and Jen would get on fabulously.
That’s understating the role.
Administration does not equal secretary, except in the old British usage where the Secretary to the Prime Minister is what’s now called a Chief of Staff.
A yeoman is one of the most senior NCOs, responsible for communication with command and the admiralty, also responsible for performance assessments of all the enlisted ranks and more junior NCOs.
I appreciate that you recognize that so-called ‘labour productivity’* is primarily a measure of the quality and technological level of the capital that the labour is working with.
Too often, comparative measures of labour productivity and discussion focuses on hours worked, vacation days etc.
These are very much second-order.
Education levels are not second-order but Canadian workers are more literate and better educated across the board than the US manufacturing workers.
So, the real question in manufacturing (as it is in housing construction), “Why is the Canadian private sector so unwilling to invest in ongoing technological upgrading let alone innovation?”