StillPaisleyCat

joined 2 years ago

I think I like the Dauntless model better than then onscreen version.

That Voyager-A is interesting.

While many older fans are disappointed that Starfleet Academy is set in the far future 32nd century, I am hopeful that it’s focus on original characters, will be a strength.

Having a few recurring Discovery characters around, and Robert Picardo as The Doctor, doesn’t negate that it’s fundamentally about new characters and not legacy ones or their immediate family.

Like the apparent ‘no technobabble’ edict from on high, with so many ‘kids of’ and ‘sibling of’ characters in the new era, I have to wonder if the IP holder had laid down some kind of structure forcing the creators to tie new main characters to legacy ones.

I am wondering if Pelia was created as much to give Holly Hunter’s character a legacy tie and check the required box for linkage to another character as much as she was to provide a vehicle for Carol Kane.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think we share a view on Scouts.

I think you missed the point on this though - it’s not a show for or with children.

It’s another go at selling an younger ensemble based on they’re being the offspring of a legacy character.

The article says Archer’s four adult children would be in their twenties and thirties. They would be in different roles and services.

I didn’t like the nepobaby, ‘children of’, angle in Picard and I didn’t really like Archer, so I can’t imagine why they would think this would be the way to draw in an audience.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)

On the other hand, they could pick up Vanguard for a more serious show.

I’m actually disappointed that United would focus more on Archer’s kids than his government

At least, there’s some kind of planning this time.

But Rick Berman was still hassling Terry Farrell to get her to get breast enlargements.

Which is one of the reasons she left the show.

It’s my favourite season just for that.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes, there were a few great season one Enterprise episodes such as ‘The Andorian Incident’ directed by Roxann Dawson of Voyager and guest starring Jeffrey Coombs as Shran but it was the fourth season that truly redeemed the show.

It was your assertion that ‘if you’re a fan of older Star Trek’, someone would share your view that irked me.

There’s a lot of older fans that don’t dislike the new shows. We just aren’t feeling the need to caution other older viewers about the new shows.

I felt that way about Voyager at one time.

Watched the episodes once as they came out but wasn’t seeking to rewatch.

But then our kids came along, hit their preteens, and for them Voyager reruns on cable was ‘their Star Trek.’

I watched Voyager more with them during their preteens and early teens than I did during its first run.

And I can say that it DOES stand up to rewatch. More, it has many ‘best of trope’ episodes.

I think perhaps it was Voyager’s unevenness in quality across the entire run or, perhaps fatigue from hundreds of episodes of TNG and DS9 rewatched immediately after they were broadcast, that led me to not appreciate Voyager as much initially.

All to say, I was very wrong about Voyager’s rewatch value, and perhaps many crusty 90s Trek fans are wrong about Discovery too.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Speak for yourself.

I’ve been watching since 1967 and happily watched all five seasons of Discovery as they came out.

I’ve also rewatched them all with other members of our household.

I’ve definitely watched Discovery more times than Enterprise.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I agree Discovery over Enterprise.

It’s hard to hold up the show that showed our first hero captain in the franchise not only condoning but choosing torture as an alternative as being ‘more optimistic’ or ‘more in line with Star Trek’s aspirational vision.’

Then there’s its sharp retrograde to bro culture.

BTW I’m almost as longtime a fan as possible.

My first episode was TOS ‘Devil in the Dark’ on the day it first broadcast in Canada in early 1967.

Since then, I have seen every episode in first run the week it aired EXCEPT when Enterprise went off the rails after 9/11, trying to be an apologia for the appalling reaction of the US which suddenly condoned torture and violations of the international rules based order.

 

Treklit has some great offerings. The Relaunch universe books in particular developed coherent serialized storylines and a group of strong authors. There is also a deep library of standalone books from across all eras of the franchise.

By contrast, serialized Star Trek is struggling onscreen. Of the current era, only Prodigy has excelled in serialized storytelling.

So, why not look to the books? Not just to lift an idea like Control or the end of the Borg, but to actually tell a coherent narrative across a season or season?

On Netflix, Prime and Apple, it’s become established that successful streaming shows are often based on novels and novel series. Those streamers have come to understand that novelists, not scriptwriters, excel in laying out long form storytelling, and resources are often better put in having the screenwriters adapt than create from the whole cloth.

Reading a recent interview with Mick Herron, author of the critically acclaimed and popular Slow Horses on Apple, with a second show based on his other books launching this fall, I was struck by the interviewer’s assertion of this truism.

I thought about several of the non franchise shows I enjoy and how many of them are more or less faithful adaptations of books.

I was also struck by the thought that both Skydance and Paramount are quite capable of producing excellent book adaptations for Netflix and Apple. Murderbot is a very current example.

So, what’s holding back Star Trek from exploiting the Vanguard series or the Starfleet Core of Engineers books?

Why insist on giving showrunners resources to keep retelling franchise stories with legacy characters and tropes?

Why not exploit that IP that Paramount already owns by adapting the best of decades of TrekLit?

 

During a panel with Picard season three showrunner Terry Matalas and Todd Stashwick (Shaw), were questioned about a ‘30-page outline’ for the Star Trek Legacy concept.

Reportedly, Michelle Hurd (Raffi) mentioned this during an earlier panel.

It sounds as though there’s nothing new in terms of interest from the executives about the concept, just fan interest and an ongoing campaign. Matalas and Stashwick are focused on the upcoming Marvel limited series Vision Quest in which Stashwick stars as the Paladin.

What’s interesting to me is that the more I hear about Matalas original pitch, the more I dislike. Matalas confirmed that it would have a Klingon focus.

While I loved the deep dives into Klingon lore in the 90s, I would prefer something new in the 25th century even a show featuring legacy characters.

As well, Matalas confirmed that they proposed that Shaw would a holographic recreation rather than revived by Borg nanites. We don’t need another grumpy hologram now that the Doctor is back in both Prodigy and Starfleet Academy.

I would find Shaw’s journey as a victim of the Borg with survivor guild to someone who accepts that his own life depends on Borg technology as much more interesting, compelling and new ground in terms of a character arc.

Edited to correct Michelle Hurd’s family name…

 

This is good news for assuring that SNW’s 3rd season production will move ahead after the strike.

Greenlighting a couple of extra episodes and a 4th season would make strategic sense, but I’m just not willing to give Paramount the benefit of the doubt on that.

 

Gizmodo’s James Whitbrook has yet more to vent on Paramount+‘s cancelation and erasure of Prodigy.

I hadn’t considered the cancelation from the perspective of systemic misogyny, which Whitbrook effectively is carating.

However, given that Janeway was surely chosen as the legacy captain for Prodigy because Voyager had proven itself to be an effective gateway for younger and new viewers on Netflix, Whitbrook’s inference Paramount views her less important to the franchise than Picard is biting.

Paramount wouldn’t dare treat what it’s done for Patrick Stewart and Jean-Luc Picard as a tax break. Casting aside everything that Prodigy stood for, and in the process doing the same to Mulgrew and Janeway’s legacy, is a cruel twist on what is already a cruel fate for the show.

view more: next ›