Sfdebris.net

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:05 pm Do we really think it will turn out like TNG? They had competent writers come in to start cleaning up the messes created by earlier creative figures like Gene or Maurice Hurley. Then once they proved TNG was viable, they started creating spin-offs. The rate it's going, STD, with only one mediocre season under its belt, is not only in its second season, all sorts of secondary Star Trek spin-offs are being planned that would have been impossible to maintain cohesively when Trek was at the top of its game in the 1990s as a huge media juggernaut. There's a Khan series, there's a Lower Decks series, there's a Picard series, there's other plans for other series I hear, which is just frightening because it shows that for those behind the scenes, the approach to STD is the new norm - what Moore had said about Voyager becomes plain, that "the continuity of the [franchise] is completely haphazard. It’s haphazard by design. It’s not like they are trying desperately to maintain continuity of the [franchise.] They don’t care, and they’ll tell you flat out that they don’t care. Well, that is misreading the core audience. The STAR TREK, hardcore audience loves continuity; they love accumulating data on these ships. They love knitting together all the little pieces, and compiling lists, and doing trivia. That’s been a staple of the STAR TREK culture from the get-go. People really love the details. They love the fact that the details all add up and make one mosaic, and that the universe holds together. When you don’t give a shit, you’re telling the audience: don’t bother. Don’t bother to really learn this stuff, because it’s not going to matter next week, anything that happened this week." And look how well that worked out?

Seriously, how can they maintain continuity to not only previous Trek works, but other Trek series going on at the same time with all they plan? The answer is obvious. It was NEVER about the artwork. It's about selling CBS All Access. So my question is, again... why are people saying give STD time to grow? If we do that, it's going to further damage and mar the good reputation of the franchise and further dishonor all the previous installments with their utter rewrite of Trek into something that's 100% pure corporate byproduct - like the Star Wars movies. High in substance, looks mesmerizing, but has no substance. STD should NOT be given time to grow. We need to start boycotting it and hunt it down so that it will be shot before any more destruction to the franchise can be made. Sadly, I don't think that will happen... and so one of my favorite childhood series is being sacrificed at the altar of corporate greed, which is the antithesis to the ethos of Star Trek. I feel so helpless... what can I do?

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:52 pm Now that STD is part of canon, it is forever split between those who love it and will fight tooth and nail to keep it part of the Star Trek mythos, and those who hate it and don't want it as part of the Prime Universe. This is a BIG PROBLEM for the future, but those at the top don't care as long as they can get more subscribers to their All Access product.

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Tue Feb 26, 2019 10:32 pm I don't think STD will improve even with time. TNG was the first sequel series, so it wasn't beholden to a larger continuity to the same degree as today. DS9 had a much stronger start than most people think. And Voyager Season 1 is pretty much the same as Voyager anywhere else. Same as Enterprise.