Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

[Gregatron]

The article says it was used rarely, thanks for making my point for me. Name the TOS episode that dropped S and F bombs. Name the episode where a crewman back talked Kirk and got away with it.

I beileve it was in the episode, "That C***s***er Balok and The ****ing Corbomite Maneuver". Duh!


Kidding aside, the pretentious and lengthy episode titles of NuTREK make "For The World Is Hollow And I Have Touched The Sky" look like amateur hour. Yeesh.

 

[Picard102]

S as in s**t. It makes no difference what's acceptable today, it's been well established that cursing was extremely rare in the 23rd century, another example of breaking canon.

**** was in TNG and ST IV.

 

[robn1]

**** was in TNG and ST IV.

Both were extreme circumstances. Data was adjusting to his emotion chip, and in Trek IV they were attempting the hell to fit in with the 20th century. Context, like canon, matters.

 

[Picard102]

Both were extreme circumstances. Data was adjusting to his emotion chip, and in Trek IV they were attempting the hell to fit in with the 20th century. Context, like canon, matters.

Like Kirk's name being retconned in TOS? The year TOS takes place being retconned in TOS?
Those seem like pretty huge canon violations, on a level higher than if they swear or not too much. But I somehow doubt you're going to tell me TOS is trash for these canon violations.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

**** was in TNG and ST IV.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

This is pretty interesting:

 

[Leinads]

Cannon Violations

 

[Gregatron]

This is pretty interesting:

That was more evenhanded than I expected, but it still felt a bit…shilly.

And it really just confirms that those who think Fuller’s vision of STD would have been so much better than Kurtzman’s are living in a fantasy world. Remember, Fuller has said that Janeway is his favorite Captain, and that Kirk is “a pig and a dick”, which is not something I would ever want to hear from a TREK showrunner.

The video also underlines just what this is all about, now: Corporate greed, and “targeting” children and young adults. When determining the gender/race/sexual orientation and makeup of the new shows, it was not about being true to the spirit and history of the material, or showing a future where all people are treated as equals. As with the comic book industry, they saw (possibly false) data that women could be a huge potential audience, and so the showrunners pandered to them.

 

[Gregatron]

Both were extreme circumstances. Data was adjusting to his emotion chip, and in Trek IV they were attempting the hell to fit in with the 20th century. Context, like canon, matters.

The fact that Kirk had to explain his new use of “colorful metaphors” to Spock in THE VOYAGE HOME says a lot. Sure, there’s some profanity in the movies (even the G-rated THE MOTION PICTURE), and a smidge in TOS, but, 99% of the time, our heroes actually used their words and their arguments to communicate like adults, instead of talking like thugs and bratty, vulgar teenagers.

 

[Bloop]

History repeats itself:

 

[asalaw]

History repeats itself:
View attachment 1600759

I don’t see a word in that article about anyone criticizing the quality of the stories, or in fact, any substantive criticisms whatsoever. This thread is full of specific criticism of the series, with pretty much nothing substantive in response.

In fact, I don’t see a substantive word from you anywhere in this thread.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion? Such as a point to make? Or are you just getting in line with the rest of the gadflies?

 

[Apollo]

History repeats itself:
View attachment 1600759

What tabloid did you pull that out of ?

There was a lot of speculation going on as whether TNG would be a success, before it first aired, Jimmy Doohans ranting over it was legendery, but fans were, some grudgingly, going to give it a chance.

It would be funny to hear what Jimmy would think of the new crap put out now!

God I miss that Man!!!!

 

[pengbuzz]

That was more evenhanded than I expected, but it still felt a bit…shilly.

And it really just confirms that those who think Fuller’s vision of STD would have been so much better than Kurtzman’s are living in a fantasy world. Remember, Fuller has said that Janeway is his favorite Captain, and that Kirk is “a pig and a dick”, which is not something I would ever want to hear from a TREK showrunner.

The video also underlines just what this is all about, now: Corporate greed, and “targeting” children and young adults. When determining the gender/race/sexual orientation and makeup of the new shows, it was not about being true to the spirit and history of the material, or showing a future where all people are treated as equals. As with the comic book industry, they saw (possibly false) data that women could be a huge potential audience, and so the showrunners pandered to them.

Yeah; I wonder how long it will be before they claim "profanity is good for children".

What tabloid did you pull that out of ?

There was a lot of speculation going on as whether TNG would be a success, before it first aired, Jimmy Doohans ranting over it was legendery, but fans were, some grudgingly, going to give it a chance.

It would be funny to hear what Jimmy would think of the new crap put out now!

God I miss that Man!!!!

He'd probably not like it one bit (Jimmy was old school), and get hate mail for his views.

The fact that Kirk had to explain his new use of “colorful metaphors” to Spock in THE VOYAGE HOME says a lot. Sure, there’s some profanity in the movies (even the G-rated THE MOTION PICTURE), and a smidge in TOS, but, 99% of the time, our heroes actually used their words and their arguments to communicate like adults, instead of talking like thugs and bratty, vulgar teenagers.

Instead of today's version, AKA Emo Trek: the Perpetually Offended Generation™

 

[Apollo]

^ I knew Jimmy and , and I can tell you there are a few ways he would have responded all hilarious! ^

As far as hate mail, all the fans loved him.

He was an amazing Man, one of a kind, like all his generation

 

[NakedMoleRat]

^ I knew Jimmy and , and I can tell you there are a few ways he would have responded all hilarious! ^

As far as hate mail, all the fans loved him.

He was an amazing Man, one of a kind, like all his generation

If you're one of a kind, like all of your generation, then you're not one of a kind! I know....I know!

 

[Ron]

If you're one of a kind, like all of your generation, then you're not one of a kind! I know....I know!

Well, technically each one could be of their own kind specific to only them

 

[NakedMoleRat]

Well, technically each one could be of their own kind specific to only them

But again.... not like "all of their generation..."

And again, I know... I know!

 

[Picard102]

History repeats itself:

Facts are not welcome here.

 

[Bloop]

I don’t see a word in that article about anyone criticizing the quality of the stories, or in fact, any substantive criticisms whatsoever. This thread is full of specific criticism of the series, with pretty much nothing substantive in response.

In fact, I don’t see a substantive word from you anywhere in this thread.

Do you have anything to add to the discussion? Such as a point to make? Or are you just getting in line with the rest of the gadflies?

Oh, relax. I just posted something that I thought was funny. I wasn't attacking anyone for their opinion, just trying to interject some humor in this thread.

But if you want to hurl insults, I stand by my previous posts in this thread as being, as you say, "substantive." I posted some below so no one needs to search though if they so desired:

I watched the 1st episode, I enjoyed it for the most part. I'm trying not to dissect it too much, though I had a couple qualms.
I realized that every iteration of Trek, from TOS to now, can be overanalyzed and nit-picked, so I'm trying not to let some of those things detract from my viewing. I tried giving ST: Picard more leeway as it went on, though I think it had more problems than just nit-picks (but I'll leave that for the Picard thread). But I'll mention a few thoughts I had.

Someone mentioned they thought it was unrealistic to have reverse engineered warp tech by "looking through telescopes" or something to that effect. While I'm no astrophysicist, I do know our space telescopes, and presumably the telescopes Pike referred to, are radio telescopes. They're not just magnifying telescopes. Radio telescopes pick up all sorts of information about cosmic bodies, so it's not impossible for me to think that a lot of information about how warp bubbles are created could be found from radio telescopic data.

I know this might be considered a nitpick, but I feel it's more than that: I didn't understand why Nurse Chapel was chasing the guy they were trying to sedate through the ship. Security should've been contacted, and actually should've been either in sick bay or guarding the doors. This is the kind of stuff that I feel is "lazy writing," where writers ignore what should happen in a situation just so they can have something happen in the story.

I also don't care for Nurse Chapel's character so far. Seems too different from the character we saw on TOS, and also seems a bit too contrary and flippant for a Starfleet medical officer. I thought the other characters seemed fine so far. The trailer made me worry about too much present-day lingo and attitudes being forced into the show. I'm fine with the show being a reflection of our times, but I don't want it to feel forced, or feel like the characters are just exaggerated caricatures. It's still too early to tell which way they'll go, though.

I had to look up Sam Kirk, since I wasn't sure who the character was supposed to be. I was ready to be upset over another "Easter egg" without substance being forced in, and it still borders on that, but at least his appearance doesn't seem to violate Trek canon, even if it feels a bit forced.
I'll leave you with this screenshot of Sam Kirk's only onscreen appearance, dead, played by William Shatner in a fake mustache:

View attachment 1574800

Am I only only one who thought the "light disease" was going to be compared to moths attracted to a flame? I may not have been paying close enough attention, so maybe they did. Seems like it would be an obvious "Trek" thing to do - make an analogy to a simple thing, so I'm surprised if they didn't.
It also reminded me of the sci-fi/horror movie Sunshine.

Some thoughts/issues after the latest episode (apologies in advance for the long post):

- I generally thought the episode was alright. Reminded me a bit if the TNG episode "Disaster," in which the Enterprise hit a "quantum filiment" (note: it's not a cosmic string!) which caused damage to the ship and its communications. In particular, the scenes with Uhura and Hemmer reminded me of LaForge and Dr. Crusher facing imminent danger in the cargo bay.

- La'an Noonien-Singh gets the Gorn to destroy one of their own ships by sending a message saying humans had boarded their vessel. How? Did I miss something where they were able to break into their communications and make it seem as if the message was coming from the Gorn? I honestly don't know. If not, then it seems pretty flimsy to be able to just send a fake communique and trick their enemy.

- It didn't seem like the time to perform a dangerous (as Spock himself said) mind meld on the shuttle craft, in light of the dire situation at hand. They ended up using the information Noonien-Singh remembered, but that wasn't part of the plan.

- Nitpick: Noonian-Singh refers to herself by her given name when using ship's communications rather than her family name, which doesn't feel like the established protocol. I don't remember any of the characters on any of the other shows using their first name when hailing (I can't imagine Picard saying, "Jean-Luc to Will" or "Jean-Luc out"). I'm sure they wrote it that way because it's quicker and easier to use her first nane than her hyphenated last name, but it still seems too informal.

- I still think there's too much 20th/21st century colloqialisms being used. For example "and the crowd goes wild," "Uhura for the win," "we've got this," "newbie" are all specific phrases and terms that are very rooted in our current time, and the way some of the characters speak, Chapel, Ortegas, and Uhura especially, is very "of our time." As I've said before, instead of modernizing the show, it immediately dates it and makes it feel more like it's set in our time period than being set in the 23rd century. The same goes for having too much of our current style trends influence the costumes, hair styles and makeup. The writers/show runners don't seem to understand that this is something that has plagued other sci-fi for decades. Even though Star Trek has fallen prey to it on more than one occasion, I feel they did a better job of trying to keep things "timeless" which has contributed to its longevity. Maybe the age of the writers has something to do with it - I don't know how old they are, but I think younger people don't always realize that colloqial speech changes relatively quickley. I've also recently noticed "period" shows set in the 70s or 80s using current words or phrases that didn't exist back then (at least not in the way they're used now).

- I think Peck does a decent job in his attempt to portray Spock, but I think he's overdoing some of it. For instance, he always pronounces "the" as "thee" and "a" as "ay." I'm not positive, but I don't think Nimoy did that, at least not every time he spoke those words. Peck's Spock also seems to be a little too familiar, and less aloof than he was in TOS, though that's more due to the writing. It kind of diminishes his character development and his close relationship with Kirk if he' already getting along so well with his Captain and crew mates. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

- A small nitpick/question: the ship was getting hotter while hiding in the brown dwarf, and all the crew had slightly sweaty faces, including Spock. But I thought Spock's partial Vulcan physiology enabled him to endure higher temperatures than full humans, so should he really have been sweating?

- Nurse Chapel still is pretty sucky. Maybe not all the fault of the actress, but I don't care for her characterization of Chapel. As I said above, she's also too much of a 2020s character. Noonien-Singh has also gotten annoying pretty quickly.

So I'm watching ep 5 ("Spock Amok") while writing this; I was trying to catch up to the current episode before posting, but I doubt I'll get there.

The "Freaky Friday" swap was where I tuned out (I'm still playing this episode in the background, but I'm just not interested). I was trying to like this show, but it just feels too much like fan fiction - sadly, some fan films do a better job of holding to the characters and lore. It just keeps rehashing old episode plots instead of creating new ones.

I looked at a few reviews and I'm dumbfounded that people actually enjoyed this. Scratch that - I can probably see why people that have never seen Star Trek or only have a limited knowledge of it enjoyed this. I guess knowledge of the characters and stories already told is a hinderence to my enjoyment.

Honestly, my favorite character now is the transporter chief, mainly because he doesn't seem to have any connection to any prior Trek characters, and he's been only shown as just doing his duty (at least through ep 5). I don't even know his name, but maybe that's helping - the fact that he doesn't seem to share a name with any previously created Trek characters and that he hasn't had any personal conversations tinged with modern colloqialisms is helping.

Two bridge officers having a phaser shootout in the corridor? I don't care if they used the lowest setting, that's got to be a HUGE violation of safety protocols. What if there was a malfuntion and soneone got killed or they damaged the ship? Imagine two navel officers having a showdown in a submarine with weapons - even if there was some scenario where they replace the live rounds with blanks or rubber bullets, you never aim a weapon at another person unless you intend to harm them. Even if no one was on the ship (which wasn't the case), I can't image two officers engaging in this sort of reckless activity and still remaining officers.

Spock and the other Vulcans just don't talk or act like the Vulcans as established in TOS or TNG. In SNW, there's no indication that they reject emotion other than their robotic delivery of lines. Here, they engage in bickering, friendly banter, and other emotion-driven dialog and activity. Yeah, Spock is half-human, but he'd never cold-cock another person (let alone a Vulcan) and blame it on his human side.

Maybe these stories and characters would be fine if they weren't in the Star Trek universe, especially if they weren't crammed into a timeline before the established series and movies, with familiar characters that don't act familiar at all.

Not sure if I'll watch any more - I started watching "For All Mankind" on Apple TV+, which is created by Trek alum and BSG reboot creator Ronald D. Moore, and it's a lot more compelling and interesting. It's semi-science fiction, with better drama and characters - I highly recommend it.

You can see I have been critical of the show, and cited specific reasons and observations. If you don't deem that "substantive," then I guess I have one last thing:

I know I'm risking further ire by posting that gif, but as the late, great Chubbs Peterson once said to Happy Gilmore, "just easing the tension, baby!"

 

[Apollo]

If you're one of a kind, like all of your generation, then you're not one of a kind! I know....I know!

I was refering to WW-2 Vets