Star Trek: Strange new worlds

[Deledrius]

Fair reviews at least would show positives and negatives. You can't tell me that all of nuTrek has 100% shitty scenes.

I'd tend to agree with you, but at some point if you do this you might be left just describing how wonderful the lipstick is on the pig. No one's going to get much out of something so shallow when that's the case, whether they agree or disagree. Being fair doesn't necessarily mean presenting both sides of something as equal when they are not.

Thankfully, so far, SNW is actually very good (for a pilot, anyway). There's plenty of room to grow and improve, but it's starting off from a strong position. This isn't "there's no where to go but up" territory, and I'm excited about that.

[CharlesPhipps]

I'd tend to agree with you, but at some point if you do this you might be left just describing how wonderful the lipstick is on the pig.

Thankfully, so far, SNW is actually very good (for a pilot, anyway). There's plenty of room to grow and improve, but it's starting off from a strong position. This isn't "there's no where to go but up" territory, and I'm excited about that.

That gets into the truck of the matter that there are people who utterly hate every single second of NuTrek and yet they KEEP WATCHING AND TALKING ABOUT IT. Any other franchise and they would just watch something else but they KEEP watching something they HATE and whenever someone wants to talk about the show that they like, they show up to talk about how much they hate it.

It's like threadcrapping on a massive-massive scale.

And it never gets any better because they hate it SO MUCH they can't actually contribute anything to any thread other than saying how much they hate it.

Which means there's no room for how they can improve the show or what to discuss because it's utterly irredeemable.

So what's the fucking point of responding to any of their criticism?

Example:

Me: I like Tilly but I hate Burnham.

Guy: Tilly is stupid, whiny, and swears!

Me: Well I like her exhuberance and think it contrasts nicely to Burnham's inconsistent personality.

Guy: All of their personalities are inconsistent!

Me: I admit I really enjoyed the idea of a Klingon religious revival and war but they didn't do it too well and thought it could be improved

Guy: Everything they did with the Klingons was garbage! EVERYTHING!

Me: Well what did you think of Saru?

Guy: SARU SUCKS!

Me: Right. Okay.

Yeah, real fucking fun conversation. Real illuminating.

[Deledrius]

Yup, there's a world of difference between criticizing something and just complaining about it. Of course, sometimes it gets very tiring.

[McAvoy]

Fair reviews at least would show positives and negatives. You can't tell me that all of nuTrek has 100% shitty scenes.

I'd tend to agree with you, but at some point if you do this you might be left just describing how wonderful the lipstick is on the pig. No one's going to get much out of something so shallow when that's the case, whether they agree or disagree. Being fair doesn't necessarily mean presenting both sides of something as equal when they are not.

Thankfully, so far, SNW is actually very good (for a pilot, anyway). There's plenty of room to grow and improve, but it's starting off from a strong position. This isn't "there's no where to go but up" territory, and I'm excited about that.

I definitely agree that a show that is truly bad would be just lipstick on a pig if you are trying to look for the positives.

I should have clarified about what I said about fair reviews. I am not saying every review should be a even split of 50/50 positives and negatives.

Really try to look at the positives for example Shades of Gray orCode of Honor.

[CharlesPhipps]

I definitely agree that a show that is truly bad would be just lipstick on a pig if you are trying to look for the positives.

I should have clarified about what I said about fair reviews. I am not saying every review should be a even split of 50/50 positives and negatives.

Really try to look at the positives for example Shades of Gray orCode of Honor.

I think it's more, "if you utterly hate a show then you don't actually have anything to really talk about."

It's kind of an end of criticism or discussion.

[McAvoy]

I definitely agree that a show that is truly bad would be just lipstick on a pig if you are trying to look for the positives.

I should have clarified about what I said about fair reviews. I am not saying every review should be a even split of 50/50 positives and negatives.

Really try to look at the positives for example Shades of Gray orCode of Honor.

I think it's more, "if you utterly hate a show then you don't actually have anything to really talk about."

It's kind of an end of criticism or discussion.

I don't know. Maybe fans are just comparing the nuTrek to the old Trek through rose colored glasses.

I have said this before, but I could honestly do the whole negative review thing in any of the old Trek episodes, even the great ones. I could easily do one for Yesterdays Enterprise. Attacking the idea of photon torpedoes causing a temporal rift, how a escaping Federation ship would cause a war with the Klingons and not a war with Klingons against the Romulans. Or how the Enterprise is a battleship but shows as the real one. Or I could go into small details in that episode like the uniforms, the design of the Enterprise being the same despite 20 years of war. Or how the same crew more or less is still on the same ship despite 20 years of war. Or what is Guinan since she knows vaguely something is different. But only at that point. Not any point leading up to that point.

All of those I can write as a negative review like many have done here. But as we know that episode is considered gold.

[Worffan101]

I mean, there's dumb stuff in the SNW premiere, too. But the character work is solid for the most part and the plot is decent if fast paced, and bringing back the meeting room scene was a good idea.

It's just a decent Trek show, finally. If STD and Picard weren't literally infuriatingly awful and inconsistent, respectively, it would barely be worth mentioning. But the way things are, SNW being a solid show is notable because the other options are held back by the format (Lower Decks),a kiddie cashin without any feeling of being genuine (Prodigy), or hot garbage (STD, Picard season 2).

Anyway, Anson Mount rocks, nuSpock isn't horrible, Romijin has always been underrated, the writing is good, and they have a good sense of how to tie the story together.

It's a good show. I like it. There just isn't that much, outside of the security chief being comically edgy and Kurtzfuckwit's name being in the credits, to complain about.

[CharlesPhipps]

I mean, there's dumb stuff in the SNW premiere, too. But the character work is solid for the most part and the plot is decent if fast paced, and bringing back the meeting room scene was a good idea.

It's just a decent Trek show, finally. If STD and Picard weren't literally infuriatingly awful and inconsistent, respectively, it would barely be worth mentioning. But the way things are, SNW being a solid show is notable because the other options are held back by the format (Lower Decks),a kiddie cashin without any feeling of being genuine (Prodigy), or hot garbage (STD, Picard season 2).

Anyway, Anson Mount rocks, nuSpock isn't horrible, Romijin has always been underrated, the writing is good, and they have a good sense of how to tie the story together.

It's a good show. I like it. There just isn't that much, outside of the security chief being comically edgy and Kurtzfuckwit's name being in the credits, to complain about.

I mean the above sounds like nonsense because this is almost literally the same cast from DISCO season two.

Sorry.

[Frustration]

Fair reviews at least would show positives and negatives. You can't tell me that all of nuTrek has 100% shitty scenes.

If 90% of it is garbage, does it really matter if there's an occasional bit that is only mediocre?

Here, conduct an experiment: get a big pot, put it on your stove, and empty a can of soup into it. Then fill that can with sewage and pour it into that pot, repeat eight times. Would you want to eat the result?

[Worffan101]

Fair reviews at least would show positives and negatives. You can't tell me that all of nuTrek has 100% shitty scenes.

If 90% of it is garbage, does it really matter if there's an occasional bit that is only mediocre?

Here, conduct an experiment: get a big pot, put it on your stove, and empty a can of soup into it. Then fill that can with sewage and pour it into that pot, repeat eight times. Would you want to eat the result?

Yeah, there's a difference between being fair and being unfairly balanced.

If I'm reviewing Tom Kratman's latest neo-Nazi wank fantasy, I'm not gonna have much positive to say. Most of my review will consist of "the prose sucks, the author's politics are obvious and toxic, the action sucks, the author's understanding of military matters is shockingly bad for someone who was a literal Lt. Colonel in the Army, and the entire thing is one long polemic about how Tom Kratman is a genius who wasn't appreciated by those pussies in the Pentagon and their effeminates concern for "human rights", don't read this bullshit." Because Tom Kratman's books are like that.