SHP Forums

Agreed. It is odd that they would purposefully turn a blind eye on the huge faithful fan base just to add in a few new kiddies that are easily mesmerized by brainless action sequences that know nothing of or care for the depth of Star Trek.

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:18 am I just don't understand why they're messing with canon at all. Why do this in "Prime"?

Welcome to the very same question I ask about Marvel Comics for the last 10 years.

Whoops! *blush* Thanks for correcting me, MI. I'll know better next time not to confuse TNG and Voyager.

What is the timeline after ST Classic, by the way? *curious* Is it ST Classic, then TNG, then Voyager? What happens after Voyager? (I'm leaving the films out of this so as to make it simpler. I did see the first ST film and "Wrath of Khan", but nothing after that).

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:18 am But the two characters are unrelated. In all honesty, they should have been the same character. Don't know why they didn't go with that. Perhaps it was because they figured what the cadet did was too irredeemable for a character like Tom Paris (from Voyager) and created another character instead who was similar but without that specific history.

I've read that one reason may have been that they would have to pay the writers of that TNG episode royalties for every time they use him. I'm not sure how true that is. Wouldn't Chief O'Brien have the same problem? I agree that it would have been interesting to have kept the TNG character (Nick Locarno). We never really learn what Paris did. With Locarno, we know exactly what happened and the type of person he was and would have made an interesting redemption arc for his character.

Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Sat Jun 22, 2019 2:21 am Whoops! *blush* Thanks for correcting me, MI. I'll know better next time not to confuse TNG and Voyager.

What is the timeline after ST Classic, by the way? *curious* Is it ST Classic, then TNG, then Voyager? What happens after Voyager? (I'm leaving the films out of this so as to make it simpler. I did see the first ST film and "Wrath of Khan", but nothing after that).

The chronological order of the series is: Enterprise (22nd century), Discovery (23rd century), The Original Series (23rd century), with TNG, Deep Space Nine (overlapping TNG and Voyager), and Voyager all in the 24th century. The last chronological piece of Star Trek is the 10th film, Star Trek Nemesis (or, a few minutes worth of flash-back in the J.J. Abrams film), at least until Picard comes out.

STD does not exist. At best it is bad fan fiction by "fans" who never saw all of single episode from any of the prime timeline series.

Um, what do you mean by STD, Collector? Do you mean Star Trek: Discovery (as opposed to the "other" STD)?

Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:11 pm Um, what do you mean by STD, Collector? Do you mean Star Trek: Discovery (as opposed to the "other" STD)?

Think you've been missing where it's been called STD as a "joke" - because it's a disease on the Star Trek name.

Well, fair enough. I've never seen STD in action (neither one nor the other)!

Hmm - if I'm not opening a Pandora's box here, where does the "Kirk vs. Picard" rivalry come from? Personally, I don't understand it. I've watched a few episodes of both, and I like them both just fine. They simply have a different style of captaincy, that's all. Very broadly speaking, Kirk is the "man of action", whereas Picard is more of an intellectual. *shrug* I don't understand why (some, hopefully!) ST fans get so aggressive about it. And then, of course, there is the "Kirk vs. Janeway" debate...

As for Abrams - from what I understand, he went to Paramount and told them he wanted the rights to all the merchandise, etc. for some of the new ST films, and they showed him the door? Is that right? If so ... I'm just wondering, where does he get off telling them what to do with their merchandise? Who died and made him boss?

Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:19 am Hmm - if I'm not opening a Pandora's box here, where does the "Kirk vs. Picard" rivalry come from? Personally, I don't understand it.

I am, by no means a big Star Trek fan. I enjoy them well enough, but I don't own a single piece of Star Trek merchandise (DVD, BluRay, Shirt, Toy, etc.)

However, I believe the debate really comes down to age - and which Star Trek you grew up with. Kirk, as you had said is a "man of action" - and that action including seducing every single female alien he encountered, it'd seem. And for it's time, it was all about men and machismo. Now they sprinkled in, the things about humanity in every episode, sure. But I always felt like it was "We men are awesome!" /flex. Where as Picard, was a new age of viewers who see - again, as you said, more of a man of intellect. (He also wasn't out to seduce every alien he encountered). So I always felt like "old school Trek" fans that grew up with Kirk, want that go get'em attitude, and the Picard fans want the "let's think this through." (It's not to say Picard was never a man of action, by any means).

This is the irony, of the new Star Trek movies (that most Trek fans hate) with all the "wham! Blam! Flash! Lens flare!"

I honestly think they're gearing towards the generation today, where kids are used to fast paced action, no time for any story development. This is the new target audience, because those who enjoyed Kirk, or Picard, are knee deep in life, house payments, etc., and may not have time to dedicate to watch a TV series - so the next target to try to hook is the youth.

I made that realization, unrelated - but sort of related - in regards to comics.
I used to collect comics - and tons of them! I think at the height - I was collecting about 34 titles - a month. That's 34 comics, every month.
In the last 10 years, that dropped down - to what I currently collect - which is... 1 title a month. (There's the occasional one shot or limited series, they might kick out, that I pick up).
I used to get so frustrated at comic writers, publishers, editors, etc., in the last 10 years. I felt like they threw continuity out the window, in favor of telling "flash bang" stories (quick, one two punch stories, with a death; that's eventually undone in a few months anyway). About a year ago (and I am ashamed it took me this long to realize it), I realized; these comics aren't being written for me anymore. I am not their target audience. They're gearing towards the kids, who - as I said earlier - sit on their XBOX or whatever - have zero attention span, and just need the quick fix. This is why they've done away with continuity. This is why they do "flash bang" stories. They're targeting the next audience of comic books, because people like me are paying 2,600 bucks for rent, or mortgage and car payments and electricity - and don't have the time or money to commit to a monthly title at $3.50 a pop these days.

But that's just my take! Other more... Star Trek type fans (which Collector and MI, certainly are) - may have different ideas.

Whatever debates happened in the past before Bad Robot committed fornication with the franchise resulting the current spread of STD, they weren't all that "aggressive." Perhaps there were a few people who took things waaay too seriously (there always are), but it was just friendly rivalry. At least in my experience. I know that Star Wars vs Star Trek fans have been pretty aggressive all throughout their fandoms, to both of their shames.

I agree that whatever they're trying to pass off as modern "Star Wars" and "Star Trek" and whatever else they've mutilated in the past few years (I hear Dr. Who is doing absolutely abysmally with the last season having totally tanked in ratings, but I don't watch it so I don't know firsthand) is just not made for me anymore. But that's not an excuse. I was a kid when I got into Star Trek and us kids back then are no different than kids now and I was into both TOS and TNG. It's the quality of entertainment that has changed. So many decades of comic book lore and writing style and cohesiveness added to the art. It's that art that is taking a hit and that's not something I'm ok with. It doesn't matter in the sense of real life goes on and it has nothing to do with day to day living, but our art is the soul of society and it's just getting dumber and dumber and I do take that somewhat seriously. It's not going to outright vanish as there will always be another show or story or franchise to pick up the pieces and continue on, whether niche or not, but the mainstream has been all but totally corrupted with this nonsense and it's just a sad thing to see.

I know every older generation says "I weep for the future" and it's an endless cycle of "youth being wasted on the young" and "back in my day yadda yadda yadda..." and all that, but after so many decades of more or less consistent quality in these franchises and artforms like Star Trek, Star Wars, comic books, you name it...and it's all going so downhill so fast NOW? Something different has happened. I can get on with my life and not let it bother me. In fact I'm so far past the point of the acceptance grief stage that I'm looking forward to how badly they're going to screw up Episode 9. But I'm not going to pretend the level of degradation to our most beloved franchises lately is ok. TNG was different from TOS but TNG was still created by Gene Roddenberry and still had the core values of Trek alive and well, which is why it succeeded. And the rest of the shows still somewhat held those values close and dear. Star Trek Discovery simply does not. It is the very first iteration to totally abandon it. Again, I would have been totally fine with it all taking place in the alternate universe or even another alternate universe (in fact I'm not ruling that out in my headcanon, because Prime is not Original Canon according to the Alternate Bad Robot Star Trek License stuff) but this is a stake through the heart of Star Trek's very soul. The only solace is that the old shows and movies aren't going anywhere and we can still enjoy them. But it's sad how hard the mighty have fallen and how tarnished the name of Star Trek is now and being known as to the masses.

Interesting news about Jar Jar's company:

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:08 pm I agree that whatever they're trying to pass off as modern "Star Wars" and "Star Trek" and whatever else they've mutilated in the past few years is just not made for me anymore. But that's not an excuse. I was a kid when I got into Star Trek and us kids back then are no different than kids now and I was into both TOS and TNG. It's the quality of entertainment that has changed.
(Snip)
I know every older generation says "I weep for the future" and it's an endless cycle of "youth being wasted on the young" and "back in my day yadda yadda yadda..." and all that, but after so many decades of more or less consistent quality in these franchises and artforms like Star Trek, Star Wars, comic books, you name it...and it's all going so downhill so fast NOW? Something different has happened.
I can get on with my life and not let it bother me. In fact I'm so far past the point of the acceptance grief stage that I'm looking forward to how badly they're going to screw up Episode 9.

So, here's the thing... I don't feel like it started "Now" as you said, for myself. (I can't speak for anyone else, naturally).
(Ironically, for me - both in regards to comics and movies. Since we're primarily focused on movies, namely SciFi, and you mentioned Episode 09 of Star Wars....)

Three simple words began the "path of ruin" - The Phantom Menace.

That movie was the first one, where I felt $#!+ started rolling down hill. And that was in 1999.
This movie was atrocious to me. Darth Maul looked great - but then pulled out the double lightsaber and I literally wanted to scream.
Lightsabers until now had almost been treated like two handed swords; and Jedi were Samurai.
Now we have this dude - with this double lightsaber - and he's jumping around everywhere. My annoyance rapidly escalated.
I feel like Liam would have been the better "Ben Kenobi" for the prequel (and the age gap would at least be closed, somewhat, between episode III and IV), since Liam out-shined Ewan in the brief time he was on the screen.
And then... Jar Jar. I probably don't need to go into that.
Episode II couldn't be as bad, right? Wrong. Just as bad. Now we have Jengo Fett to explain Boba Fett, and ruin the mystery. Effing horrible.
Episode III - sure, let me punish myself and see this. Yup. Just as bad. And Yoda, bouncing around like a leap frog - like EVERYWHERE - doing crazy loops, jump offs, the whole bit. Just to die of old age, and barely able to move 18 years later.
For the love of...

Now we go to Episode VII, which I enjoyed - but a lot of people were already hating.
And as I engaged them on Twitter (mostly trolling them at some points) - a lot of them revealed how they grew up with Episode I.
And it donned on me - this was the Star Wars of their generation. It wasn't mine, but they seemed to have loved it.

Entertainment changes like... every 10 years, I feel like. A new generation of things. Out went Heavy Metal, in favor of grunge. Out went grunge in favor of ... whatever music was next, to the point of now it's Taylor Swift, Pink, Lady Gaga, and such. But each thing seems to last 10 years, before a new thing comes up.

Someone (new to) who would watch the old, original Star Trek, probably couldn't get passed how corny it was. Might not be able to get past, TNG because it was too slow (not enough action).

I feel like we're in the generation of - instant gratification. Social media shows it. Video games show it. The world doesn't need to go to a record store - just download it from Napster, iTunes, Spotify, or any other music media platform. Get it now, get it quick.

I liked The Phantom Menace. Also has the best saber duel in the franchise. I was on the edge of my seat. I hated Attack of the Clones. I disliked the first half of Revenge of the Sith. Second half was darn good. But neither the saber duels in AOTC or ROTS riveted me in any way like TPM's did. I liked The Force Awakens, but there wasn't much to it. It succeeded because it emulated the OT. And I'm not just talking about mimicking ANH. But it all ultimately depended on how they developed the characters. I hated absolutely all of The Last Jedi. So that ruins The Force Awakens almost entirely, having undermined all the characters. All that's left that's good is what they emulated from ANH and when it comes to that I'd rather see ANH.

Star Trek was faithful for 40 years. That's a long time. Multiple generations. Little disagreements but nothing major or fandom-breaking. Same with Star Wars for that matter. The prequels vs originals was the biggest debate but it never split the fandom.

Side note - since there's so much hatred for JJA... and what he's done ... and I've mentioned comics...
https://www.marvel.com/articles/comics/ ... ider-man-1

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:00 am I liked The Phantom Menace.

Well, you're younger than I am. (I mean... dinosaurs are younger than I am too... so that may not be saying much).

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:00 am Also has the best saber duel in the franchise.

Oh, it was a great fight scene. I wouldn't argue that at all.
It just wasn't a great Star Wars fight scene (for me).
Because we went from the slow, moving, two handed form of lightsabre fights we've seen in Empire and Return. To, "Look at me! I am in a bouncy gym! Weeeee!"
Again, that's just for me.

MusicallyInspired wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:00 am Star Trek was faithful for 40 years. That's a long time. Multiple generations. Little disagreements but nothing major or fandom-breaking. Same with Star Wars for that matter. The prequels vs originals was the biggest debate but it never split the fandom.

Well, until now (for Star Wars). A lot of people hated "The Force Awakens" because Rey was a "Mary Sue." Me, I put my expectations aside (having been burned by the Phantom Menace), and went in, hoping to be entertained - and came out enjoying it - because I now accept that Jedi can bounce around like bouncy balls (based off what Episode I, II and III gave me).