[Dark]

The biggest problem with prequels mucking with canon is that midichlorians completely undermine the mysticism of the Force, which had previously been described as "an energy field created by all living beings". Completely changes the tone of the setting!

Hang on, what are we talking about again?

[LogicalLeopard]

Stop that. It's not a sticking point with the fans that dislike Disc. People like Shadowmeph are well in the minority where ever you go on the internet. Only thing you're doing is clumping together the legitimate complaints with the ones like Shadowmeph. Same thing is happening with Star Wars. If you do not like The Last Jedi then you must be a Alt-Right, Nazi, Russian bot, or actually might be Hitler incarnate.

Just stop giving credence to any of that nonsense. All you're doing is invalidating the concerns that Bridger, Mack, Three, Myself or anyone else that has problems with Discovery, by focusing on one persons bigoted mindset.

I did no such thing. I was responding to Shadowmeph's comment, and the specific things he brought up. Those opinions are shared by a number of people who loudly complain, make videos, etc. I didn't speculate on what percentage of fans are in that category, although I would assume it's a minority. However, it is shocking to me, as I was saying, that ANY fans feel that way. <br>

I never claimed that people who didn't like Discovery were alt right, Nazi's, etc. If you look at my posts, some of the posts are responses to specific issues that people have - like the Klingon makeup, relationship between Spock and Burnham, technology, etc. The only time I talked about the race and gender issues is when Shadowmeph brought them up. That is a separate conversation, so I didn't invalidate anything that you or anyone else who had an issue with the show said.

Talking about these issues does not give them "credence." I dont believe in straying away from difficult conversations, because the people who feel that way sure dont shy away from them. However, I have endeavored to be respectful and polite in my responses, and not accusatory. It's just how I feel about the situation.

[LogicalLeopard]

As I mentioned in my post previously - in the name of 'change', stretching it to other side of graph and making the change drastic - then criticizing ALL old trekkies for not liking it, is ridiculous. But captain obvious, yes, there is a shift in the opinions of the demographic - surprised?

That has nothing to do with age,color,race of a character and more with the continuity and the way its being written and directed. I ain't got issues with cinematography, fancy animations - all welcome. I'm someone who likes sequels based on already set precedence / continuity. Yes previous Trek also did some changes (esp DS9 comes under fire where it shows the war side of Fed) but there have been so many episodes within exploring the whole concept of morality despite being in war of an individual (In the Pale Moonlight). That was change while respecting the already set precedence all-in-all. The over-all precedence of other shows was still respected and in-effect till the events of DS9 as well within the show. Precedence was respected by show writers. Precedence is very key for me, what's the point otherwise?

Discovery is not even on the same graph for me, it's something completely different.

I dont think people are being criticized for not liking it. I think people are being criticized for how LOUD they dont like it. *LOL* As you said, it's VERY clear why many people would not like it - it's a totally different style of storytelling, they made quite a few questionable changes that are kind of jarring, etc. But what is baffling is how vocal people continue to be about not liking it. It's like this: Why would anyone produce a video about how bad Discovery is NOW? Sure, if you gave it a few episodes, didn't like it, didn't care for the first season, I get it. But there are people that continue to just hate on it, and the question becomes, "Why are you investing so much time and energy into something you dont even like?" There are a lot of shows I dont like, but I dont continue talking about them.

On a separate forum I participate in, there are a handful of guys that are always barging in on Discovery posts and saying how they dont watch the show. On like almost every one. Why? If I dont like The Flash TV show, I dont hang around in a DC Comics Universe chat and comment on every episode recap how I refuse to watch it.

But that's really just a symptom of our times. People feel they have to be loud about everything.

And to be clear, I'm not talking about the discussion here, which seems to be pretty tame and polite.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't care if Burnham was white, brown, blue, or leopard print, the character at the writing level is bad, she's like Wesley Crusher if he got all the screentime. People making an issue of race and/or gender are not the overwhelming concerns raised in this thread against Discovery, a lot of the points are based on canon, writing, and how they have changed things that shouldn't have been changed.

Characters are only as good as what the writers produce, and in the case of Burnham, the writing is awful, does not support the strengths of the actor, and do nothing to help the character. Maybe it's written in a way some people like, that's fine, personally, her character is one of the reasons I don't like Discovery, she is front and centre of everything, and is never wrong, this is bad writing, even Data and Seven of Nine were wrong.

Burnham was wronger than most any main character has been in the first episode, though. I mean, she got sent to prison! *L* She spends a significant amount of time trying to rectify her mistake, to the extent that she can, and at the end of the series, admits to a roomful of Starfleet Officers that she was wrong. The wrongness of her actions have even been commented on in the new season. Through the series, she also made some mistakes. She was wrong about Ash, she was wrong about Mirror Georgiou, I dont understand why you think she was never wrong. The whole season is basically, "Burnham Screwed Up, and Finally Understands in the Last Episode."

[Three of Seven]

Burnham was wronger than most any main character has been in the first episode, though. I mean, she got sent to prison! *L* She spends a significant amount of time trying to rectify her mistake, to the extent that she can, and at the end of the series, admits to a roomful of Starfleet Officers that she was wrong. The wrongness of her actions have even been commented on in the new season. Through the series, she also made some mistakes. She was wrong about Ash, she was wrong about Mirror Georgiou, I dont understand why you think she was never wrong. The whole season is basically, "Burnham Screwed Up, and Finally Understands in the Last Episode."

Oh, we're bringing up the mutiny thing are we? That thing where she never really served any time (oOooOOoO 6 months prison), or punishment for her actions? And was given a medal for it at the end of everything? She started the war, and got rewarded for it, crazy.

When I say she is never wrong, it's in the context of how she talks down to superior officers, and then magically, her idea is always the right course of action. Forget Mary Sue, the new definition should be named after Burnham, someone who has made big mistakes in the past, completely forgiven for them, and always has the right solution to a problem.

First episode of the new season, she talks, Pike says something like "We won't abandon Starfleet Officers." and Burnham turns around and says "Of course not, we should go in and blah blah!" and then when they get into those silly pods, she lectures that guy who later dies about his flying, then does effectively the same cocky stuff he did, that got him killed, but she's Burnham, so got it right! GO TEAM BURNHAM WOOOOOO!!! Then she gets a rock through her leg, but still, it's okay, just a fracture, she's Burnham afterall! While Nog loses a leg in DS9.

Burnham has plot armour so thick, there is no need for a full crew, it's silly, and predictable. What will happen is episode 2? Discovery will get into a pickle, Burnham will have a solution, problem solved, yay! She's a terrible character, she's wooden and two dimensional.

[LogicalLeopard]

Oh, we're bringing up the mutiny thing are we? That thing where she never really served any time (oOooOOoO 6 months prison), or punishment for her actions? And was given a medal for it at the end of everything? She started the war, and got rewarded for it, crazy.

When I say she is never wrong, it's in the context of how she talks down to superior officers, and then magically, her idea is always the right course of action. Forget Mary Sue, the new definition should be named after Burnham, someone who has made big mistakes in the past, completely forgiven for them, and always has the right solution to a problem.

First episode of the new season, she talks, Pike says something like "We won't abandon Starfleet Officers." and Burnham turns around and says "Of course not, we should go in and blah blah!" and then when they get into those silly pods, she lectures that guy who later dies about his flying, then does effectively the same cocky stuff he did, that got him killed, but she's Burnham, so got it right! GO TEAM BURNHAM WOOOOOO!!! Then she gets a rock through her leg, but still, it's okay, just a fracture, she's Burnham afterall! While Nog loses a leg in DS9.

Burnham has plot armour so thick, there is no need for a full crew, it's silly, and predictable. What will happen is episode 2? Discovery will get into a pickle, Burnham will have a solution, problem solved, yay! She's a terrible character, she's wooden and two dimensional.

You said that Burnham was never wrong. She was from the very first episode. You're saying now that you mean how she talks down to superior officers. Who, besides Pike? And even Pike had to stop freaking out and realize that he was wrong for treating the crew like they didnt care as much as he did. Which was, in my opinion, a clever way of addressing Rigel VII, but anywhoo...

She didnt lecture Blue Redshirt, he lectured HER. She test drove the pods, and she told him to adjust his pod. He didnt and lectured her on his Cautian roommate and nonsense and died.

If you want to talk Mary Sue, the discussion starts and ends with Kirk, "someone who has made big mistakes in the past, completely forgiven for them, and always has the right solution to a problem."

I mean, come on.

Burnham has plot armor, but so does every Trek character. They're in death traps every week and someone figures the right answer out and no one dies unless their contract is up.

But if you dont like the character, that's fine. All I'm saying is that some of these gripes, like the Mary Sue thing, are ridiculous.

- - - Updated - - -

"Why?" Come on now, Is it really that surprising to you that people that have spent most of their lives around Star Trek are very passionate? Of course there are people that still hate it, because it's not the Star Trek people know and love.

Question is, why do you care so much if people dislike it or not.

Good point. Some Trek fans have been known to be obsessive. But I think it has more to do with two things with our society: One, everyone has a voice. That's not a bad thing, but when you can make a blog or a YouTube channel to not only vent your frustration, but get a bunch of followers hi fiving you, you tend to keep it going instead of just letting it go and watching something else. And two, people are really into picking sides and really demeaning the other side. That's not a new concept, but today, you can choose to digest only information that caters to your opinion, like cable news channels and such. And each side is really loud about it.

Why do I care so much? It's not a question of "so much." I dont lose sleep over people doing these things. It's just a counterproductive behavior that is an annoyance. And unlike a person who doesnt like a show, since I like a show and frequent Star Trek spaces, it's annoying to see people who dont like it crowding into those spaces. And to be clear, I'm not talking about people who have problems with the show, or dont like some or many aspects of the show, I'm talking about the people who arent watching it, claim to be disgusted by it, but take every opportunity to occupy spaces specifically discussing it to spread their negativity. It's like showing up to a book club meeting and seeing a guy who read the first two chapters of the book and hated it, yet he attends EVERY meeting even though he hates it and stopped reading it weeks ago. *LOL*

[Shadowmeph]

[QUOTE=



Honest question: If you dont care about gender or race, then why does it matter that Burnham is a black woman, or strong black woman? How is that "fake?" You said that the Discovery creators are trying to please people. Weren't they doing that with TOS as well? It had minorities, true, but Kirk was intentionally created as a strong white man, as were virtually all the heroes of the time. The character of Number One was intentionally axed because she was a strong white woman.

Minorities and women in leading roles is not the "new fad." We have simply progressed to the point in our society where people are more accepting of these characters in major roles. Some people.[/QUOTE]
I think you miss understand what I was saying I was using the Word Fad which isnt the best word to use . I what I was meaning is tha t he writers are lazy and that what ever is our there in the real world they are pushing and at this time maybe not right now but more then likely when they were writing this is tha there seemed to be allot of small new but noticeable new about woman not being paid the same as men and not allot in authority positions like CEOs or bug boss or dominant position strong woman. also there is the racist or was allot of racist type things in the news ( maybe not so much now because Donalds all over the news with his tweeting ) so the writer in a sense put in burny as that type of character she is not that high on the totem pole but she is a force to be reckoned with . like I said before I am not talking about her being fake ( again another back choice of words) I am meaning lazy writing trying to draw in . in the real world I work security and my other guards I work with dont think woman should be doing it I totally disagree and I am not going to get into why that is . but the writing to me seems so obvious as to what t hey are doing. I am not sure if anyone is going to understand what I am saying. in some ways I like her character and I dont really care about colour or gender I was just saying that it is the new fad or theme that is or was going on in society at the time of the writing to me its just lazy writing like trying to fill in the check boxes and trying to hard . instead of just writing the story anyway it isn't like i am not going to continue watching Discovery . I am ony saying what I am seeing in the story writing as a trend and relating it to the real world which TOS used to do but when I watched it it didnt seem that obvious I didnt realize until many years later when someone pointed it out to me about how back in the 1960s it was basically white is right basic idea ( which I always have totally been against ) and in TOS they were multicultural . anyway it doesnt matter

[LogicalLeopard]

I think you miss understand what I was saying I was using the Word Fad which isnt the best word to use . I what I was meaning is tha t he writers are lazy and that what ever is our there in the real world they are pushing and at this time maybe not right now but more then likely when they were writing this is tha there seemed to be allot of small new but noticeable new about woman not being paid the same as men and not allot in authority positions like CEOs or bug boss or dominant position strong woman. also there is the racist or was allot of racist type things in the news ( maybe not so much now because Donalds all over the news with his tweeting ) so the writer in a sense put in burny as that type of character she is not that high on the totem pole but she is a force to be reckoned with . like I said before I am not talking about her being fake ( again another back choice of words) I am meaning lazy writing trying to draw in . in the real world I work security and my other guards I work with dont think woman should be doing it I totally disagree and I am not going to get into why that is . but the writing to me seems so obvious as to what t hey are doing. I am not sure if anyone is going to understand what I am saying. in some ways I like her character and I dont really care about colour or gender I was just saying that it is the new fad or theme that is or was going on in society at the time of the writing to me its just lazy writing like trying to fill in the check boxes and trying to hard . instead of just writing the story anyway it isn't like i am not going to continue watching Discovery . I am ony saying what I am seeing in the story writing as a trend and relating it to the real world which TOS used to do but when I watched it it didnt seem that obvious I didnt realize until many years later when someone pointed it out to me about how back in the 1960s it was basically white is right basic idea ( which I always have totally been against ) and in TOS they were multicultural . anyway it doesnt matter

Racism and gender equality have always been issues. It's not exactly something that writers have to look at the headlines and copy. You may not know, but Discovery has a diverse set of writers and producers, so perhaps it's not "lazy writing" as you believe, but simply writing realistic, relatable characters. If you're a woman, a female character does not take reviewing newspapers to write. If you're a minority, it doesnt take reading a story about racism to come up with a minority character.

You see it as checking boxes. What makes a minority character or a female character a box to be checked? But more importantly, what does a series look like with "non lazy" writers who dont "check boxes?"

I think you need to check your line of thinking, and why you think minority lead characters are lazy writing.

[Sorotia]

These dumb videos. I love Trek, and I've loved it since before TNG premiered. I also love Discovery.

If a person doesn't like Discovery, why cant it be simply, "I dont like it." Why does it have to be, "I dont like it, and no REAL Trek Fan can like it either? Why do people devote so much time to actively hating something they DONT like?

There are lots of shows that I dont like. Yet I haven't made a YouTube video about any of them. Don't like Discovery? Fine. You have several hundred other Trek shows to watch for the rest of your life, plus novels. I'm not even sure why people look at these videos anyway. But rest assured, I wont make a video about Disco-haters videos. *L*

Maybe because people want Star Trek that lives up to the heart and soul of what Star Trek is....and if we're silent....then we will never be heard.

[Thelin th'Zarath]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojtX_Oz4WsU

Watch the entire thing. You'll soon realise that nothing in DIS is Canon. Prime and Kelvin 'timelines' are not Canon either (1966-2005). it's just a marketing ploy by CBS and Bad Robot for merchandising rights back in 2009 between Movies and TV. Sadly STO has gone along with it because, well they don't own the IP. So, unless the re-merger of the old and new Viacom happens, this show is just what it appears to be, another reboot. Spread the word.

I for one feel a little relieved. It makes sense with all the errors and silly explanations that have been given. Now I can enjoy this show for what it is: Just another dark sci-fi show with a Trek label glued on.

And by the by, The Orville has the real Trek spirit going. Let me go see where that thread is (and if it's not up, I'll make one).

[Rellimie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojtX_Oz4WsU

Watch the entire thing. You'll soon realise that nothing in DIS is Canon. Prime and Kelvin 'timelines' are not Canon either (1966-2005). it's just a marketing ploy by CBS and Bad Robot for merchandising rights back in 2009 between Movies and TV. Sadly STO has gone along with it because, well they don't own the IP. So, unless the re-merger of the old and new Viacom happens, this show is just what it appears to be, another reboot. Spread the word.

I for one feel a little relieved. It makes sense with all the errors and silly explanations that have been given. Now I can enjoy this show for what it is: Just another dark sci-fi show with a Trek label glued on.

And by the by, The Orville has the real Trek spirit going. Let me go see where that thread is (and if it's not up, I'll make one).

I’m good with it. The TOS timeline doesn’t really hold up in 2019 anyways.

Orville ratings are really struggling.

[Bridger]

The Orville might be struggling and Discovery is hated that was proven when the first episode of Season 2 was put on Youtube.

It took forever before it reached 1 Million views and so many dislikes, so this 25% different Star Trek has also no future and when the 25% different Picard show will be released it will be the final nail in the coffin and ruin one of the most loved character in Star Trek's history.

[LogicalLeopard]

Maybe because people want Star Trek that lives up to the heart and soul of what Star Trek is....and if we're silent....then we will never be heard.

Speaking up and being heard is one thing. Being just poisonous and bitter is another thing. There are many people who have problems with
Discovery, and they are able to discuss those problems in a positive manner. Then there are people who are just loud and consistently negative, to the point where there is nothing constructive that can come out of their vitriol. <br>

I think people with complaints have been heard. Whether it was their intent, or whether it was through complaint, we are seeing Discovery moving more to a familiar place of Trek. The past few episodes have been awesome, with that kind of scientific mystery of the week storytelling that Star Trek does, even while maintaining a focus for the season with an overall mystery. It has also demonstrated ways that certain things that appeared out of synch with canon will move toward canon.

Are these guys who make these poisonous videos paying attention to that? Or are they continuing to make videos about how bad it is and how it's on it's last legs? If a person has to be that negative, I dont need to listen to them, and neither will the people who can actually change the situation. Producers will listen to that and say, "You know what, cant please those people, lets do what we want."

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojtX_Oz4WsU

Watch the entire thing. You'll soon realise that nothing in DIS is Canon. Prime and Kelvin 'timelines' are not Canon either (1966-2005). it's just a marketing ploy by CBS and Bad Robot for merchandising rights back in 2009 between Movies and TV. Sadly STO has gone along with it because, well they don't own the IP. So, unless the re-merger of the old and new Viacom happens, this show is just what it appears to be, another reboot. Spread the word.

I for one feel a little relieved. It makes sense with all the errors and silly explanations that have been given. Now I can enjoy this show for what it is: Just another dark sci-fi show with a Trek label glued on.

And by the by, The Orville has the real Trek spirit going. Let me go see where that thread is (and if it's not up, I'll make one).

The idea that nothing in Discovery is Canon is beyond silly, because the whole show is canon by definition. However, anyone is free to watch anything and use their own person head canon. That's fine.

[Bridger]

The idea that nothing in Discovery is Canon is beyond silly, because the whole show is canon by definition. However, anyone is free to watch anything and use their own person head canon. That's fine.

By the license everything has to be 25% different that includes everything so it can't be canon.

[Scarlett]

By the license everything has to be 25% different that includes everything so it can't be canon.

Agreed. I mean, there is "canon" in STD. It's just not what a lot of people expect "canon" to be. So a little deviation means the end of the franchise

[Sul-Matuul]

The ridiculousness of the "canon" argument does my head in, it really does.

Firstly CBS decides what belongs in their IP's canon universe and background, the exact same way Disney decides on Star Wars. Now tbh that doesn't really mean much because at the end of the day you can decide for yourself what you want to be canon and what to ignore and that's your choice. But it doesn't change the official word on the matter.

Secondly, if all Trek throughout history just followed the same canon laid out like some religious text whence one must not deviate from for fear of being summarily executed we'd never have had things like DS9, VOY, multiple episodes in TNG etc. The beauty of Trek was always the moving forwards, and thinking of new ways to explore being human and exploring the galaxy. Sitting down arguing over what a Klingon's hair looks like, or what colour the trim on Pike's uniform needs to be is going against the very idea of Trek i feel, and it's wasting time on petty arguments rather than enjoying something new.