‘Star Trek’: Nickelodeon Near Deal For Kids Animated Series

[clearspira]

And here we have the microcosm of exactly how this show is going to go over with fans...

Oh very much so.

[technobabbler]

IMO, Nick is the most juvenile (not being pejorative) of the kid's channels, ages say 5-10. And I don't see kids and teens turning to Nick to watch a Star Trek show.

And my guess is that ST:Nick would be so watered-down for sub-13ers, adults (except the die-hardest fans) would be bored to tears.

If this was Cartoon Network, obviously my thoughts would be different. But Cartoon Network isn't a Viacom outlet.

PS, I think ST:Nick is vaporware regardless.

[Deledrius]

Or in other words, it's not really meant for you?

That is the most annoyingly lazy response to media criticism.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Or in other words, it's not really meant for you?

That is the most annoyingly lazy response to media criticism.

Then go ahead and compare it to Wrath of Khan by all means.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Anyways I'm not wanting to start an argument so sorry on that front, I don't know how you're gonna judge the show, and I also feel of the mind to regard shows with a consideration for the audience it's intended for. Not meaning to say you're unable to do that, or that you have to.

Though I'd like this kind of topic to be unpacked a bit.

[clearspira]

Or in other words, it's not really meant for you?

That is the most annoyingly lazy response to media criticism.

Then go ahead and compare it to Wrath of Khan by all means.

Today's logical fallacy: reductio ad absurdum i.e. trying to prove your point by using the most extreme and borderline ludicrous example possible. No one has ever claimed that this new show is going to suck because it pales next to the best Trek has to offer.

[Zoinksberg]

Now clearspira, clearly his comment wasn't really meant for you, so you can't really judge it for the lazy fallacious argument it is and instead you should simply not express an opinion on it since the comment was only meant to be for people who agree with him.



Bad writing is bad writing. Maybe it is more forgivable in a show aimed at children, but attempting to deflect any criticism with "it isn't for you" is lazy. Roger Ebert famously disliked slasher flicks and always gave them bad reviews. To say "they aren't for you" is correct, but attempting to use that to say his comments on their bad writing (and boy do the later Friday the 13th films suffer from that) are invalid is a pretty pathetic defense. One I have sadly heard more than a few times.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Or in other words, it's not really meant for you?

That is the most annoyingly lazy response to media criticism.

Then go ahead and compare it to Wrath of Khan by all means.

Today's logical fallacy: reductio ad absurdum i.e. trying to prove your point by using the most extreme and borderline ludicrous example possible. No one has ever claimed that this new show is going to suck because it pales next to the best Trek has to offer.

It's an intended exaggeration. Doesn't really have to do with vertical assessment of the show. I'm not really sure if any other property for comparison would work, but yeah it comes off that way.

Bad writing is bad writing. Maybe it is more forgivable in a show aimed at children, but attempting to deflect any criticism with "it isn't for you" is lazy.

There isn't really any criticism to deflect, except criticism that it's aimed at children.

[Admiral X]

The criticism is directed at the predictable "defense" of something that is aimed at children. Yet shows like Avatar: The Last Airbender illustrate quite handily how stupid such a defense is.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The criticism is directed at the predictable "defense" of something that is aimed at children. Yet shows like Avatar: The Last Airbender illustrate quite handily how stupid such a defense is.

Teen Titans Go was what was coming to mind for me.

And yeah I no want make fun. Aimed at the defense specifically, I get it, seems fine. Just personally the show itself I'm not putting as much stake into it for said reasons, not sure if anybody here really disagrees with that notion. And I want to say I don't really have the time to worry about the people defending it, but actually I can't really imagine people saying that too seriously, so I just dunno.

This site in particular largely weighs episodes within canon and is largely about this kind of stuff. I don't have a problem speculating on this kind of stuff seriously even if it's kids shows (that includes videos like Maler's 5-hour angry youtube rant :p that Patrick Willems no want watch).