> @patrickngo said: > valoreah wrote: » > > saurializard wrote: » > > JJ Abrams didn't rebuild any canon. He made an alternate timeline using the existing Prime canon post-Nemesis. > > Also, you could argue that Star Trek didn't exactly endure but got killed by the failure of Nemesis and Enterprise, before being resurrected by a high-budget alternate story that used the old franchise. > Heck they cancelled/didn't bother with a movie (which was basically ST2009 but in the Prime timeline), a cartoon (Final Frontier), a few other shows and a whole theme park before the Nu movie was released. > > > > > Star Trek didn't get "killed" by Nemesis or Enterprise. If it had, there would have been no JJ Trek or Discovery. It would have ended there and we wouldn't be discussing this topic today. > > > > > > iirc, it was killed by Paramount, quite intentionally and deliberately, due to a fall-off of metrics and profits and claimed "Audience fatigue". That Nemesis and Insurrection were nearly "Killer tomatoes" level bad movies, and that Enterprise was mismanaged and mishandled, (shifting air times, on a network soaked in reality shows and sitcoms) didn't help, and the financial problems of the parent company (iirc it was Viacom holding both CBS and Paramount and all their properties at the time) contributed both the quality deficiencies, and the myopic decision making that pretty much put the franchise in a coma until 2009.
One minor point: Nemesis was certainly bad, but so were Insurrection and Generations. Nem probably would've still made a profit had it not released in direct competition with Die Another Day, The Two Towers, and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. (It's like when Fox released the last Alvin and the Chipmunks movie on the same day as The Force Awakens: ROFLPWN.)
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
How much entertainment can I pick out of these ten words?
Let's start with the first five: It's not made for you
-Unless you're Les Moonves, or one of his minions; You can't make that statement
-Secondly, if you're saying that it's not being made to appeal to fans of TOS, why have they declared that it's being set in the Prime Universe?
-If you're saying that it's not being made to appeal to fans of a particular generation, then you're saying that it's being made to appeal to a new audience. A modern audience. Which means hipsters, millenials and SJWs. That means catering to them.
-If this is being made to cater to hipsters, millenials and SJWs, that means focussing on sociopolitical issues which will be completely uninteresting, if not outright repulsive, to people who don't share that echo-chamber mentality. That means,
-They're completely missing out on the wider audience, at the expense of aiming for the narrow audience.
-That does not suggest a series with a long shelf-life. Not a good plan for what is the flagship show for CBS Streaming.
Let's move onto the last five words: so just drop the issue.
Not quite as much meat on these bones, but it is typical SJW tactic of 'I don't like what you're saying, so I'll use any means to silence you' of 'I can't counter your points with reason or logic, so I'll just go down the emotive route of scolding and telling people what to do'
Somehow, I doubt that proving the points patrickngo and others have been making about Discovery are true, was your intent, but congratulations, you accomplished it with ten words!
Now, onto the topic itself: Klingons.
If these fellas had facial and cranial hair, they would look as similar to the Klingons we have seen since the movies onwards, as a Neanderthal looks to a modern human being. So personally, I'm happy to consider them Klingons (or at least proto-Klingons) till proven otherwise by the series itself
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Oh look bollocks. You've just basically said 'I can't be arsed reading your arguments so I'll dribble a load of words I don't like like SJW or Millennial and just act as though that's your point'.
It's not your Star Trek get over it. Go back and watch your own and leave the future to the real fans.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
did you like the REd/Blue superman? (Post death-of-superman)
did you notice when Nick Fury went from being a middle-aged white guy to a middle-aged black guy?
how did you feel about Jared Leto's Joker vs. Heath Ledger vs. Jack Nicholson?
Superman blue wasn't bad, but worked better as a different character. I loved how they eventually gave the costume to Livewire.
Black Fury is the son of the other one.
Best Joker was Mark Hamill. Jared Leto was second best IMO. Leto really nailed the Clown Prince of Crime thing. His Joker was believable as a master criminal. Heath Ledger did a great job at portraying the Joker's evil sadistic side, but completely missed how the Joker at least tries to be funny. also... he almost totally dispensed with the clown gags. Acid spraying flowers, razor sharp playing cards.... that Bang gun.... Also, Heath Ledger Joker was a terrible criminal. He stole money just so he could burn it. Jack Nicholson, dangerous, unpredictable, but generally a bit too sauve. He did make a decent crime boss, but just not edgy enough.
Oh, and Doctor Who has also never been rebooted just like Star Trek hasn't. A reboot is a seperate continuity not a retool of an existing one. BSG was rebooted, Barman was rebooted. ST and DW were not.
A case can be made that nuBSG happened some number of decades after old BSG. There's not a lot of info to go on though.
Oh look bollocks. You've just basically said 'I can't be arsed reading your arguments so I'll dribble a load of words I don't like like SJW or Millennial and just act as though that's your point'.
It's not your Star Trek get over it. Go back and watch your own and leave the future to the real fans.
It made things easier once I realised they're using "SJW" and terms like this simply to adress people disagreeing with them, as this topic prooves that the context of the topic is completely unrelated to the terms used.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Oh look bollocks. You've just basically said 'I can't be arsed reading your arguments so I'll dribble a load of words I don't like like SJW or Millennial and just act as though that's your point'.
It's not your Star Trek get over it. Go back and watch your own and leave the future to the real fans.
Keep screeching, you're just proving our point that Discovery is being aimed at millenials and SJWs
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Oh look bollocks. You've just basically said 'I can't be arsed reading your arguments so I'll dribble a load of words I don't like like SJW or Millennial and just act as though that's your point'.
It's not your Star Trek get over it. Go back and watch your own and leave the future to the real fans.
It made things easier once I realised they're using "SJW" and terms like this simply to adress people disagreeing with them, as this topic prooves that the context of the topic is completely unrelated to the terms used.
Nah, I'm not using SJW to mean people who disagree with me, I'm meaning SJW to relate to the clear target audience of Discovery
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
-Secondly, if you're saying that it's not being made to appeal to fans of TOS, why have they declared that it's being set in the Prime Universe?
You are aware that the Prime Universe consists of more then just TOS right?
Right, Enterprise, TNG, DS9 and VOY.
Which of those series are you seeing a resemblence too?
I've heard the theory that this should be considered a sequel to Enterprise, rather than a prequel to TOS. I rather like that idea, it certainly makes the Kelvin Timeline-esque designs make sense
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Nah, I'm not using SJW to mean people who disagree with me, I'm meaning SJW to relate to the clear target audience of Discovery
Typical SJW tactics, I see It's nice that you are hyped for Discovery, but please let other people have their own opinions, okay?
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Nah, I'm not using SJW to mean people who disagree with me, I'm meaning SJW to relate to the clear target audience of Discovery
Typical SJW tactics, I see
How is anything I said there, SJW tactics
I haven't tried to silence anyone's opinion or tell them to 'go back to your old Trek' (like artan did) just pointed out that they proved the point that Discovery is absolutely not aiming for a wider audience, but a niche one, which, in a flagship show, is potentially setting themself up to fail.
It's nice that you are hyped for Discovery, but please let other people have their own opinions, okay?
I wouldn't go so far as to say 'hyped' Curious? Definitely. Fearing the worst? Absolutely. I'd describe my feelings as 'interested to see what they're going to come up with'.
And sure, I AM allowing others their opinions. I wasn't denying artan artan's opinion. I pointed out that artan's entitled attitude and statement was just proving the point that this is not a Trek for ALL fans, only the chosen few But that wasn't denying someone their opinion. But what you're doing, getting that scolding tone again IDIC? Not being employed in those 'go back to your old trek' attitudes whatsoever
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
did you like the REd/Blue superman? (Post death-of-superman)
Wut?
did you notice when Nick Fury went from being a middle-aged white guy to a middle-aged black guy?
Considering I only know the Samuel L Jackson portrayal... nope. Besides he's good as THE spy.
how did you feel about Jared Leto's Joker vs. Heath Ledger vs. Jack Nicholson?
-Leto? Not a clue.
-Nicholson? Accurate portrayal of the comic book character.
-Ledger? Good adaptation of the comic book character into a more realistic Anarchist style character who thrives on mayhem and chaos. In short "some just want to see the world burn".
Did you enjoy the Star Wars Prequels as much as you did the original trilogy?
Had its ups and downs. Did not like how Anakin became a whiny brat though.
Do you agree that suicide squad is set in the same continuity as Batman Begins? that COULD BE, that it's logical for it TO be?
Never saw it, but it does look like it would fit.
did Kevin Costner as "Robin Hood" work for you?
Considering I grew up with that version of Robin Hood? Yes.
did you feel M. Night Shayamalan's version of Avatar The last Airbender do justice to the source material (setting, story, characters).
I had not seen the cartoon at the time so it was a bit of a "gateway drug" to the world of Avatar. Was also a lot more serious than the cartoon.
What did you feel when you watched Alien 3 after seeing Aliens and Alien?
What was whitewashed away in the feudal Japanese makeover of the 1980s is that the Klingon Empire was not an empire in name only. The Klingons were conquerors and slavers.
In ToS the term Planetary Overseer was used, indicating that whole worlds were enslaved by Klingon masters, and that literally hundreds of species were involuntarily members of The Klingon Empire.
Some particularly aggressive slave species could be used in Discovery as Klingon Troops, resulting in weird not-klingons as the expendable shock troops... err, bad guys.
These aliens could be a crossbreed between klingons and some other race, as we know from previous Trek that Klingons will breed with anything, just like humans do. Thus we have weird lizard-looking true Klingons.
We don't know what the back-story on these guys may be yet. Imagining the worst before you see it is not nearly as fun as hoping for the best.
Nope. Telling you something is not for you is not entitlement. Telling you something shouldn't be for you would be. I know you already have the answers you want to write but try reading first.
CBS can target whatever audience they like and oddly enough they're picking the one of 2017 and not the 60s. It's almost like they're an active buisnes and and not a nostalgia generator. It's not your Trek but yours still exists.
I know you have trouble reading so I'll iterate I haven't actually given my opinion of the show here or said if it's even for me. I know you like the idea of people having entitlement but you're the only one flashing it around.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Nope. Telling you something is not for you is not entitlement. Telling you something shouldn't be for you would be. I know you already have the answers you want to write but try reading first.
CBS can target whatever audience they like and oddly enough they're picking the one of 2017 and not the 60s. It's almost like they're an active buisnes and and not a nostalgia generator. It's not your Trek but yours still exists.
I know you have trouble reading so I'll iterate I haven't actually given my opinion of the show here or said if it's even for me. I know you like the idea of people having entitlement but you're the only one flashing it around.
Making a statement as if you have the inside-studio-management knowledge to actually do so, is arrogant and entitled.
And absolutely, they can do that. But answer me this: If they're not interested in the audience of the 60s, why go to all the effort of saying:
-This is Prime Timeline
-This is 10 Years before Kirk and the Enterprise
Why say those things, unless they are trying to interest the markets those elements resonate with? Come on, straight answer. Why say those things unless they are indeed trying to interest that audience?
Oh, and you have given your opinion of the show: You clearly said:
Leave the next generation to the next generation. It's not made for you so just drop the issue and get another set of rose tinted glasses and go back to the past.
That's not just an opinion, it's a declaration.
And once more, you have to revert to deflection, projection, as well as condescension and insults, rather than providing a straight answer. But I don't mind, you're just proving the points further
Post edited by silverlobes#2676 on
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
... But answer me this: If they're not interested in the audience of the 60s, why go to all the effort of saying:...
-This is Prime Timeline
-This is 10 Years before Kirk and the Enterprise
This has been answered several times. CBS doesn't own the rights to JJ Trek, so they have to set this (or any Trek series they want to make) in the prime timeline.
And yet they've consciously made (that we've seen so far) look like the Kelvin Timeline. Perhaps Paramount should sue CBS for copying their ideas
That still doesn't answer the question of if they're not interested in the audience of the 60s, but aiming for a Modern Audience, why are they relying on the '10 years before Kirk and the Enterprise' hook?
Either they want the audience, or they don't. Artan declared very surely that Discovery isn't being made for [that type of fan], so I really think it's for artan to clarify their stance on those points.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
And yet they've consciously made (that we've seen so far) look like the Kelvin Timeline. Perhaps Paramount should sue CBS for copying their ideas
Looks more like a dimly lit Connie refit bridge if you ask me. Not quite sure what you are looking at.
^ Doesn't really resemble the bridge below.
That still doesn't answer the question of if they're not interested in the audience of the 60s, but aiming for a Modern Audience, why are they relying on the '10 years before Kirk and the Enterprise' hook?
To give people a general idea of when the series takes place. Star Trek is part of the lexicon now. I imagine most people know who Captain Kirk and Spock are, even if they've never seen a single episode of Star Trek before.
I don't buy it. It certainly sounds plausible, but that's not information a viewer needs, in order to become interested in watching the show. It's tying specifically into people's awareness of Kirk and Spock, rather than drawing interest in its own points of interest. It still requires audience awareness or sentimentality to work as a hook for their interest.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Comments
> valoreah wrote: »
>
> saurializard wrote: »
>
> JJ Abrams didn't rebuild any canon. He made an alternate timeline using the existing Prime canon post-Nemesis.
>
> Also, you could argue that Star Trek didn't exactly endure but got killed by the failure of Nemesis and Enterprise, before being resurrected by a high-budget alternate story that used the old franchise.
> Heck they cancelled/didn't bother with a movie (which was basically ST2009 but in the Prime timeline), a cartoon (Final Frontier), a few other shows and a whole theme park before the Nu movie was released.
>
>
>
>
> Star Trek didn't get "killed" by Nemesis or Enterprise. If it had, there would have been no JJ Trek or Discovery. It would have ended there and we wouldn't be discussing this topic today.
>
>
>
>
>
> iirc, it was killed by Paramount, quite intentionally and deliberately, due to a fall-off of metrics and profits and claimed "Audience fatigue". That Nemesis and Insurrection were nearly "Killer tomatoes" level bad movies, and that Enterprise was mismanaged and mishandled, (shifting air times, on a network soaked in reality shows and sitcoms) didn't help, and the financial problems of the parent company (iirc it was Viacom holding both CBS and Paramount and all their properties at the time) contributed both the quality deficiencies, and the myopic decision making that pretty much put the franchise in a coma until 2009.
One minor point: Nemesis was certainly bad, but so were Insurrection and Generations. Nem probably would've still made a profit had it not released in direct competition with Die Another Day, The Two Towers, and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. (It's like when Fox released the last Alvin and the Chipmunks movie on the same day as The Force Awakens: ROFLPWN.)
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Let's start with the first five: It's not made for you
-Unless you're Les Moonves, or one of his minions; You can't make that statement
-Secondly, if you're saying that it's not being made to appeal to fans of TOS, why have they declared that it's being set in the Prime Universe?
-If you're saying that it's not being made to appeal to fans of a particular generation, then you're saying that it's being made to appeal to a new audience. A modern audience. Which means hipsters, millenials and SJWs. That means catering to them.
-If this is being made to cater to hipsters, millenials and SJWs, that means focussing on sociopolitical issues which will be completely uninteresting, if not outright repulsive, to people who don't share that echo-chamber mentality. That means,
-They're completely missing out on the wider audience, at the expense of aiming for the narrow audience.
-That does not suggest a series with a long shelf-life. Not a good plan for what is the flagship show for CBS Streaming.
Let's move onto the last five words: so just drop the issue.
Not quite as much meat on these bones, but it is typical SJW tactic of 'I don't like what you're saying, so I'll use any means to silence you' of 'I can't counter your points with reason or logic, so I'll just go down the emotive route of scolding and telling people what to do'
Somehow, I doubt that proving the points patrickngo and others have been making about Discovery are true, was your intent, but congratulations, you accomplished it with ten words!
Now, onto the topic itself: Klingons.
If these fellas had facial and cranial hair, they would look as similar to the Klingons we have seen since the movies onwards, as a Neanderthal looks to a modern human being. So personally, I'm happy to consider them Klingons (or at least proto-Klingons) till proven otherwise by the series itself
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
It's not your Star Trek get over it. Go back and watch your own and leave the future to the real fans.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Black Fury is the son of the other one.
Best Joker was Mark Hamill. Jared Leto was second best IMO. Leto really nailed the Clown Prince of Crime thing. His Joker was believable as a master criminal. Heath Ledger did a great job at portraying the Joker's evil sadistic side, but completely missed how the Joker at least tries to be funny. also... he almost totally dispensed with the clown gags. Acid spraying flowers, razor sharp playing cards.... that Bang gun.... Also, Heath Ledger Joker was a terrible criminal. He stole money just so he could burn it. Jack Nicholson, dangerous, unpredictable, but generally a bit too sauve. He did make a decent crime boss, but just not edgy enough. A case can be made that nuBSG happened some number of decades after old BSG. There's not a lot of info to go on though.
My character Tsin'xing
It made things easier once I realised they're using "SJW" and terms like this simply to adress people disagreeing with them, as this topic prooves that the context of the topic is completely unrelated to the terms used.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
My character Tsin'xing
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Which of those series are you seeing a resemblence too?
I've heard the theory that this should be considered a sequel to Enterprise, rather than a prequel to TOS. I rather like that idea, it certainly makes the Kelvin Timeline-esque designs make sense
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Typical SJW tactics, I see
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
I haven't tried to silence anyone's opinion or tell them to 'go back to your old Trek' (like artan did) just pointed out that they proved the point that Discovery is absolutely not aiming for a wider audience, but a niche one, which, in a flagship show, is potentially setting themself up to fail.
I wouldn't go so far as to say 'hyped'
And sure, I AM allowing others their opinions. I wasn't denying artan artan's opinion. I pointed out that artan's entitled attitude and statement was just proving the point that this is not a Trek for ALL fans, only the chosen few
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
He committed criminal acts, but Heath Ledger's joker is best described as an anarchist.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
-Nicholson? Accurate portrayal of the comic book character.
-Ledger? Good adaptation of the comic book character into a more realistic Anarchist style character who thrives on mayhem and chaos. In short "some just want to see the world burn". Had its ups and downs. Did not like how Anakin became a whiny brat though. Never saw it, but it does look like it would fit.
Considering I grew up with that version of Robin Hood? Yes.
I had not seen the cartoon at the time so it was a bit of a "gateway drug" to the world of Avatar. Was also a lot more serious than the cartoon.
EW! I GOT ALIEN3 ON ME! GET IT OFF! GET IT OFF!
What was whitewashed away in the feudal Japanese makeover of the 1980s is that the Klingon Empire was not an empire in name only. The Klingons were conquerors and slavers.
In ToS the term Planetary Overseer was used, indicating that whole worlds were enslaved by Klingon masters, and that literally hundreds of species were involuntarily members of The Klingon Empire.
Some particularly aggressive slave species could be used in Discovery as Klingon Troops, resulting in weird not-klingons as the expendable shock troops... err, bad guys.
These aliens could be a crossbreed between klingons and some other race, as we know from previous Trek that Klingons will breed with anything, just like humans do. Thus we have weird lizard-looking true Klingons.
We don't know what the back-story on these guys may be yet. Imagining the worst before you see it is not nearly as fun as hoping for the best.
CBS can target whatever audience they like and oddly enough they're picking the one of 2017 and not the 60s. It's almost like they're an active buisnes and and not a nostalgia generator. It's not your Trek but yours still exists.
I know you have trouble reading so I'll iterate I haven't actually given my opinion of the show here or said if it's even for me. I know you like the idea of people having entitlement but you're the only one flashing it around.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Making a statement as if you have the inside-studio-management knowledge to actually do so, is arrogant and entitled.
And absolutely, they can do that. But answer me this: If they're not interested in the audience of the 60s, why go to all the effort of saying:
-This is Prime Timeline
-This is 10 Years before Kirk and the Enterprise
Why say those things, unless they are trying to interest the markets those elements resonate with? Come on, straight answer. Why say those things unless they are indeed trying to interest that audience?
Oh, and you have given your opinion of the show: You clearly said:
That's not just an opinion, it's a declaration.
And once more, you have to revert to deflection, projection, as well as condescension and insults, rather than providing a straight answer. But I don't mind, you're just proving the points further
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
That still doesn't answer the question of if they're not interested in the audience of the 60s, but aiming for a Modern Audience, why are they relying on the '10 years before Kirk and the Enterprise' hook?
Either they want the audience, or they don't. Artan declared very surely that Discovery isn't being made for [that type of fan], so I really think it's for artan to clarify their stance on those points.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth