There is now 880 episodes of Star Trek and 13 movies


log in or register to remove this ad

People younger than the average ENWorld poster.

(I still like it, though)
Really? Why think that? I'm the youngest person I know who has seen it (at least up until Michelle Yeoh left, I would watch her reading the telephone directory). And I'm a school teacher so come into contact with lots of younger people.

I don't see anything on the show to particularly appeal to younger viewers, unless you are suggesting younger folk like bad writing, bad direction, and can see in the dark.
 

Ryujin

Legend
Really? Why think that? I'm the youngest person I know who has seen it (at least up until Michelle Yeoh left, I would watch her reading the telephone directory). And I'm a school teacher so come into contact with lots of younger people.

I don't see anything on the show to particularly appeal to younger viewers, unless you are suggesting younger folk like bad writing, bad direction, and can see in the dark.
"Younger" might be a reference to the Nielsen 18-34 age demographic, but I would add "not Star Trek die-hards" to the list.
 

"Younger" might be a reference to the Nielsen 18-34 age demographic, but I would add "not Star Trek die-hards" to the list.
Again, I don't know anyone who watches Discovery who has not seen/does not like some other iteration of Star Trek.

And I would say die-hard Star Trek fans are going to be more tolerant of bad writing, so long as it says Star Trek on the label.

The Kelvin timeline movies, with the focus on action, spectacle and humour, might fit that, but not slo-mo po-fo Disco.
 

Arakhor

Explorer
I'm fairly tolerant of my TV, provided that it's not gory, particularly sweary, or too dark/quiet to see/hear anything (my senses are not getting any sharper with age!). By those measures, I have far more issue with Discovery's tendency to shoot in gloomy conditions and mumble an alarming amount of the time, than I ever did with the sometimes weak storytelling.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Again, I don't know anyone who watches Discovery who has not seen/does not like some other iteration of Star Trek.

And I would say die-hard Star Trek fans are going to be more tolerant of bad writing, so long as it says Star Trek on the label.

The Kelvin timeline movies, with the focus on action, spectacle and humour, might fit that, but not slo-mo po-fo Disco.

Is that you, Pauline Kael? ;)

Seriously, though, I don't think that this is an accurate summary. I am someone who likes DISCO, but is also frustrated with it on occasion. But even with my occasional frustration (most of it having to do with, "You have a lot of awesome crew, so let's use them more ... not just Michael Burnham"), I still think most of the criticism is overwrought and unwarranted.

First, DISCO was successful enough that it launched ... a lot ... of other Star Trek shows, including and especially SNW.

Second, I truly don't understand why people are holding it up as something that's bad.... compared to what? Enterprise? Voyager? We need to be bracingly honest, here- Star Trek has had one show that is a stone cold classic (TOS, with 2.5 all-time seasons out of 3). One that is right up there (TNG, which, again, didn't hit its stride until season 3!). One that Star Trek fans love, but almost no one else watched (DS9). And that's it.

The thing is- DISCO has five seasons. People like it. Was it as good as it could have been? No. I think that the whole thing got off to an off-kilter start because of the loss of Fuller, and the loss of confidence in S1. But I also think that a lot of the hate (and it is hate) is misplaced, and I would rather watch DISCO any day of the week and get a root canal than, um, this .....

184b468c79ce191572107cef269964248a2382b6.gif


#NEVERFORGET

ps- Besides, DISCO has David Cronenberg in a recurrent guest role as Kovich, which immediately makes it awesome.
 

payn

He'll flip ya...Flip ya for real...
Is that you, Pauline Kael? ;)

Seriously, though, I don't think that this is an accurate summary. I am someone who likes DISCO, but is also frustrated with it on occasion. But even with my occasional frustration (most of it having to do with, "You have a lot of awesome crew, so let's use them more ... not just Michael Burnham"), I still think most of the criticism is overwrought and unwarranted.

First, DISCO was successful enough that it launched ... a lot ... of other Star Trek shows, including and especially SNW.

Second, I truly don't understand why people are holding it up as something that's bad.... compared to what? Enterprise? Voyager? We need to be bracingly honest, here- Star Trek has had one show that is a stone cold classic (TOS, with 2.5 all-time seasons out of 3). One that is right up there (TNG, which, again, didn't hit its stride until season 3!). One that Star Trek fans love, but almost no one else watched (DS9). And that's it.

The thing is- DISCO has five seasons. People like it. Was it as good as it could have been? No. I think that the whole thing got off to an off-kilter start because of the loss of Fuller, and the loss of confidence in S1. But I also think that a lot of the hate (and it is hate) is misplaced, and I would rather watch DISCO any day of the week and get a root canal than, um, this .....

184b468c79ce191572107cef269964248a2382b6.gif


#NEVERFORGET
Your list is backwards!

star trek rom GIF
 

I'm fairly tolerant of my TV, provided that it's not gory, particularly sweary, or too dark/quiet to see/hear anything (my senses are not getting any sharper with age!). By those measures, I have far more issue with Discovery's tendency to shoot in gloomy conditions and mumble an alarming amount of the time, than I ever did with the sometimes weak storytelling.
Oh, indeed. That's why I called out the direction. I think it's the director's job to make sure the sets have enough light to see what's going on and the actors speak their lines intelligibly.
 



Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top