I guess I'm a hipster, because I was indifferent to Star Trek before it was cool.
After the first Nu-Trek movie, I came to accept that the Star Trek I loved was gone and not coming back. Every Nu-Trek product announcement since then has barely elicited a "meh" from me. I never even bothered to pirate Discovery or Picard. It's just not worth my time.
The only thing good to come out Nu-Trek is watching Mike and Rich from Red Letter Media try to describe the awfulness of the new shows while their souls slowly shrivel and die.
I had to peace out of the latest RLM Picard reviews because Mike and Rich can’t call a spade a spade. The show sucks exactly because the writers are radical leftists, but the RLM crew can’t bring themselves to come out and just say it. It’s frustrating watching them flounder around looking for politically correct criticisms.
I guess when they started hanging out with Hollywood celebrities and Macaulay Culkin. They had Patton Oswalt on too but it didn't seem like they got along with him at all.
I don't understand the hatred for the Abrams movies. What was there, 1 and 1/2 good Star Trek movies in over a dozen attempts before then? Star Trek was always a TV franchise, and the only way to have it be a viable film franchise was to do exactly what they did.
The movies weren't what killed the franchise - it was Discovery, Picard and the rest.
In fact the movies could have reinvigorated the franchise had they been paired with another TNG, Voyager or DS-9 style series set 30 years after TNG which was in that same cerebral, thoughtful, hopeful vein as classic Trek. The dumber, flashier movies would have been a great "gateway drug" to "Real Trek" on the TV to keep the "True Trek" fans happy, and probably would have subsidized the whole operation. Those movies were pretty decent for what they were.
None of the Next Generation movies were terribly good, and they were clearly trying to be more action adventure than sci-fi, but at least they retained some of Gene Roddenberry's original spirit of Trek.
Abram's Treks were generic, dumb-as-fudge space operas, dressed in flashy Star Trek clothing, with none of that spirit.
They were made from the same pattern most generic action blockbusters are made this century:
Think up some spectacular action set pieces with fighting and explosions.
Knock out a lazy, incoherent script to get characters from one set piece to the next.
(If it's a reboot) Throw in some references to the far superior originals to pander to fans.
The first one almost qualified for "just turn off your brain and enjoy it" status.
Into Darkness was "self-administer a chainsaw lobotomy and enjoy it or die and end your suffering whatever lol" awful.
From the opening scene of "let's hide a massive star ship from the primitives under the ocean right next to where they live" to McCoy injecting Khan blood into a tribble because SCIENCE, to ripping off Wrath of Khan "but it's clever because we reversed the roles," I sat slack-jawed in the theater, because even with my low expectations, I was flabbergasted by the scope of lazy, stupid hackery on display.
Nobody who thought those movies were great was going to be drawn in to a "true Trek" series that deals with heady sci-fi concepts and boring discussions about tachyons or whatever. It's not the same audience.
The new series (plural) followed the lead of the Abrams films: Flashy effects, histrionic drama, and stupid plots written by people who don't understand or care what Star Trek was about, or sci-fi in general.
What you're suggesting could have worked, but we all know it didn't work out that way. It didn't work out that way because JJ Abrams & Alex Kurtzman never had any intention of honoring the franchise. Their goal from the beginning was to turn it into shit.
Their only major talent is going to the correct synagogue.
Ironically that episode highlights massive problems with STP given it's not only Stewart's own favourite episode but considered one of the best of the whole series yet so much of it contradicts some of the main points STP repeatedly brings up.
Additionally the reboot movies and their related materials even contradict STP as the tie in comics flat out show things that STP claims otherwise.
I guess I'm a hipster, because I was indifferent to Star Trek before it was cool.
After the first Nu-Trek movie, I came to accept that the Star Trek I loved was gone and not coming back. Every Nu-Trek product announcement since then has barely elicited a "meh" from me. I never even bothered to pirate Discovery or Picard. It's just not worth my time.
The only thing good to come out Nu-Trek is watching Mike and Rich from Red Letter Media try to describe the awfulness of the new shows while their souls slowly shrivel and die.
I had to peace out of the latest RLM Picard reviews because Mike and Rich can’t call a spade a spade. The show sucks exactly because the writers are radical leftists, but the RLM crew can’t bring themselves to come out and just say it. It’s frustrating watching them flounder around looking for politically correct criticisms.
Most likely because they are leftists. The skinny bald guy on RLM certainly is.
Jack isn't really an RLM member, he's more like a faaaaaaaabulousssss frequent guest.
I guess when they started hanging out with Hollywood celebrities and Macaulay Culkin. They had Patton Oswalt on too but it didn't seem like they got along with him at all.
Here are the writing credits, per imdb.
Kirsten Beyer ... (created by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Kirsten Beyer ... (story by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Kirsten Beyer ... (written by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Michael Chabon ... (created by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Michael Chabon ... (written by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Michael Chabon ... (story by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Michael Chabon ... (teleplay by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Akiva Goldsman ... (created by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Akiva Goldsman ... (story by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Akiva Goldsman ... (teleplay by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Akiva Goldsman ... (written by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Alex Kurtzman ... (created by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Alex Kurtzman ... (story by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Gene Roddenberry ... (based upon "Star Trek: The Next Generation" created by) (21 episodes, 2020-2023)
Nick Zayas ... (executive story editor) (10 episodes, 2020)
Nick Zayas ... (written by) (10 episodes, 2020)
Christopher B. Derrick ... (staff writer) (10 episodes, 2022)
Juliana James ... (staff writer) (10 episodes, 2022)
Juliana James ... (story by) (10 episodes, 2022)
Juliana James ... (teleplay by) (10 episodes, 2022)
Matthew Okumura ... (executive story editor) (10 episodes, 2022)
Matthew Okumura ... (story editor) (10 episodes, 2022)
Kiley Rossetter ... (staff writer) (10 episodes, 2022)
Kiley Rossetter ... (written by) (10 episodes, 2022)
Terry Matalas ... (written by) (4 episodes, 2022-2023)
Terry Matalas ... (story by) (4 episodes, 2022-2023)
Terry Matalas ... (teleplay by) (4 episodes, 2022-2023)
Jane Maggs ... (written by) (3 episodes, 2022)
Jane Maggs ... (teleplay by) (3 episodes, 2022)
James Duff ... (story by) (2 episodes, 2020)
James Duff ... (teleplay by) (2 episodes, 2020)
James Duff ... (written by) (2 episodes, 2020)
Cindy Appel ... (written by) (2 episodes, 2022)
Christopher Monfette ... (story by) (2 episodes, 2022)
Christopher Monfette ... (teleplay by) (2 episodes, 2022)
Christopher Monfette ... (written by) (2 episodes, 2022)
Sam Humphrey ... (written by) (1 episode, 2020)
Ayelet Waldman ... (story by) (1 episode, 2020)
Ayelet Waldman ... (teleplay by) (1 episode, 2020)
Travis Fickett ... (story by) (1 episode, 2022)
I thought the new movies were at least okay scifi, but not good ST movies.
I'm with you though. I saw what STD was and just accepted it was dead and gone.
Almost nothing in them is science fiction. It's just schlock.
That's why I said okay. It's watchable, even if it's not really good.
I don't understand the hatred for the Abrams movies. What was there, 1 and 1/2 good Star Trek movies in over a dozen attempts before then? Star Trek was always a TV franchise, and the only way to have it be a viable film franchise was to do exactly what they did.
The movies weren't what killed the franchise - it was Discovery, Picard and the rest.
In fact the movies could have reinvigorated the franchise had they been paired with another TNG, Voyager or DS-9 style series set 30 years after TNG which was in that same cerebral, thoughtful, hopeful vein as classic Trek. The dumber, flashier movies would have been a great "gateway drug" to "Real Trek" on the TV to keep the "True Trek" fans happy, and probably would have subsidized the whole operation. Those movies were pretty decent for what they were.
None of the Next Generation movies were terribly good, and they were clearly trying to be more action adventure than sci-fi, but at least they retained some of Gene Roddenberry's original spirit of Trek.
Abram's Treks were generic, dumb-as-fudge space operas, dressed in flashy Star Trek clothing, with none of that spirit.
They were made from the same pattern most generic action blockbusters are made this century:
The first one almost qualified for "just turn off your brain and enjoy it" status.
Into Darkness was "self-administer a chainsaw lobotomy and enjoy it or die and end your suffering whatever lol" awful.
From the opening scene of "let's hide a massive star ship from the primitives under the ocean right next to where they live" to McCoy injecting Khan blood into a tribble because SCIENCE, to ripping off Wrath of Khan "but it's clever because we reversed the roles," I sat slack-jawed in the theater, because even with my low expectations, I was flabbergasted by the scope of lazy, stupid hackery on display.
Nobody who thought those movies were great was going to be drawn in to a "true Trek" series that deals with heady sci-fi concepts and boring discussions about tachyons or whatever. It's not the same audience.
The new series (plural) followed the lead of the Abrams films: Flashy effects, histrionic drama, and stupid plots written by people who don't understand or care what Star Trek was about, or sci-fi in general.
1, 2, 4, and 6 were actually good.
What you're suggesting could have worked, but we all know it didn't work out that way. It didn't work out that way because JJ Abrams & Alex Kurtzman never had any intention of honoring the franchise. Their goal from the beginning was to turn it into shit.
Their only major talent is going to the correct synagogue.
Ironically that episode highlights massive problems with STP given it's not only Stewart's own favourite episode but considered one of the best of the whole series yet so much of it contradicts some of the main points STP repeatedly brings up.
Additionally the reboot movies and their related materials even contradict STP as the tie in comics flat out show things that STP claims otherwise.
You have a season until Inner Light in that case as it's the second last episode of s5.