Anyone else bothered by yet another prequel? Enterprise, Kelvin films, Discovery (s1-2), strange new worlds … there’s clearly a hesitancy to do something new right?
Separating late-period from early period Discovery doesn’t really work. As much as I like the time jump, it’s pretty much the same show, and Burhnam is still Spock’s sister.
Picard is still a relatively hard se-quel, which resonates with the essence of my argument … plus it had a Soong. I’m not sure you can describe S3 as any less nostalgia baiting or digging into established IP than any prequel. Not sure Picard, especially S3, is a convincing example of “Star Trek doesn’t have a default setting”.
Which leaves Lower Decks and Prodigy … which are by my reckoning the two relatively universally appreciated Trek projects since Voyager (at least amongst those that have watched them) … which I would claim is not a coincidence (not that we all have to like the same things).
They’re both animated too which I feel exemplifies the risk-aversion modern Trek production has to “new” projects/characters etc.
I want to watch the crew of a time ship, one that has to fix problems around the universe. They could go anywhere, probably lots of Q, cameos abound…
There was an episode on Voyager where Red from That 70s Show was trying to fix things in time and kept not getting the results he wanted or expected. I want a limited series of that with a ton more references to previous episodes/movies.
Separating late-period from early period Discovery doesn’t really work.
So your contention is that the third and fourth seasons of Discovery are a prequel to…something?
Picard is still a relatively hard se-quel, which resonates with the essence of my argument
Which makes it a prequel? Your argument is that the default setting is “prequel.”
But okay, prequels are bad and sequels are bad, so I guess we need to pick one episode of “old Trek,” and all future series and films should occur simultaneously with that episode.
Sighs. For a moderator I have to say this is poor form.
You’re putting words into my mouth, putting up straw man args, misinterpreting my statements and not really caring to try to engage with my side of the discussion all while being unnecessarily aggressive for what is a difference of opinion.
I hope you’re just in a bad mood.
But to clarify … it’s simple … leaning into old IP vs coming up with new IP.
I think there’s been too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I fear this new thing will continue that trend. Your argument about “default setting” is basically the same thing I’m saying where I think the interest in anything that can be directly tied to anything TNG and earlier is the “default setting”.
so I guess we need to pick one episode of “old Trek,” and all future series and films should occur simultaneously with that episode.
Don’t know where you pulled that from. It’s literally the opposite of what I’m saying. Really not sure what’s going on here.
And TBH, I’m going to report this, whatever that means in this situation. You’re being a moderator factors into my decision to do so.
Are you trying to say that I can’t clarify my sentiment or why I think something and so once I say one line everything I say has to be blind to its strict and literal meaning?
It’s not like a preponderance of leveraging older IP can’t make someone tired of prequels (which were the first words out of my mouth).
Or, if you’re trying to counter my criticism that you’re putting words in my mouth. Well your quote is from a couple of posts earlier … you were replying to a different post with different words.
And spare me the concern trolling bullshit.
What’s funny is that I’m not trolling, and accusing me of that in this rude way only exacerbates this.
The fun thing about the Matalas post-TNG/legacy thing for me is that it nicely straddles the line between being new and nostalgic. Seven would be captain and a whole bunch of other stuff too would be new, but still connected to the TNG era past.
Anyone else bothered by yet another prequel? Enterprise, Kelvin films, Discovery (s1-2), strange new worlds … there’s clearly a hesitancy to do something new right?
It doesn’t bother me at all, because I don’t think a fictional universe needs to have a “default” setting.
Aren’t prequels the default setting? What trek have we had since voyager that didn’t have a Spock or Soong in it?
Lower Decks, Prodigy, Picard, late-period Discovery…is that enough? Should I continue?
There are more?
But to dig into this …
Which leaves Lower Decks and Prodigy … which are by my reckoning the two relatively universally appreciated Trek projects since Voyager (at least amongst those that have watched them) … which I would claim is not a coincidence (not that we all have to like the same things).
They’re both animated too which I feel exemplifies the risk-aversion modern Trek production has to “new” projects/characters etc.
I want to watch the crew of a time ship, one that has to fix problems around the universe. They could go anywhere, probably lots of Q, cameos abound…
There was an episode on Voyager where Red from That 70s Show was trying to fix things in time and kept not getting the results he wanted or expected. I want a limited series of that with a ton more references to previous episodes/movies.
So your contention is that the third and fourth seasons of Discovery are a prequel to…something?
Which makes it a prequel? Your argument is that the default setting is “prequel.”
But okay, prequels are bad and sequels are bad, so I guess we need to pick one episode of “old Trek,” and all future series and films should occur simultaneously with that episode.
Sighs. For a moderator I have to say this is poor form.
You’re putting words into my mouth, putting up straw man args, misinterpreting my statements and not really caring to try to engage with my side of the discussion all while being unnecessarily aggressive for what is a difference of opinion.
I hope you’re just in a bad mood.
But to clarify … it’s simple … leaning into old IP vs coming up with new IP.
I think there’s been too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I fear this new thing will continue that trend. Your argument about “default setting” is basically the same thing I’m saying where I think the interest in anything that can be directly tied to anything TNG and earlier is the “default setting”.
Don’t know where you pulled that from. It’s literally the opposite of what I’m saying. Really not sure what’s going on here.
And TBH, I’m going to report this, whatever that means in this situation. You’re being a moderator factors into my decision to do so.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
The literal words out of your literal mouth.
And spare me the concern trolling bullshit.
Are you trying to say that I can’t clarify my sentiment or why I think something and so once I say one line everything I say has to be blind to its strict and literal meaning?
It’s not like a preponderance of leveraging older IP can’t make someone tired of prequels (which were the first words out of my mouth).
Or, if you’re trying to counter my criticism that you’re putting words in my mouth. Well your quote is from a couple of posts earlier … you were replying to a different post with different words.
What’s funny is that I’m not trolling, and accusing me of that in this rude way only exacerbates this.
I’m OK with more prequels if it means letting Terry Matalas continue handling the post-TNG timeline.
I’m with you.
The fun thing about the Matalas post-TNG/legacy thing for me is that it nicely straddles the line between being new and nostalgic. Seven would be captain and a whole bunch of other stuff too would be new, but still connected to the TNG era past.