Star Trek: Discovery Season 4 - December 6th, 2022

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Except there were other species of Changeling in TOS (& TOS films). The people who rescued and taught Garth of Izar. Marta in Star Trek VI. It wasn't only the Founders.

[Show spoiler]This one was definitely a Founder though. Even though the CGI effect has evolved, the make-up when it "reverted" was definitely a Founder.

[DWeickerSr]

I don't know if Trek has necessarily changed. But the people viewing (or at least the ones commenting about it on the Internet) have.

A lot of the recent criticisms have been along the lines of 'its too woke', or 'they keep pushing their agenda down my throat'.

I don't recall hearing sentiments like this with past iterations. So whether was or always has been something (humanist, leftist, progressive, conservative, whatever), it wasn't at the forefront of the conversation.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by DWeickerSr

I don't recall hearing sentiments like this with past iterations. So whether was or always has been something (humanist, leftist, progressive, conservative, whatever), it wasn't at the forefront of the conversation.

I'm sure there were people who immediately switched off when Kirk kissed Uhura, or when Riker romanced a trans alien, but they didn't have internet bullhorns to broadcast it and get others fired up along with them.

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I'm sure there were people who immediately switched off when Kirk kissed Uhura, or when Riker romanced a trans alien, but they didn't have internet bullhorns to broadcast it and get others fired up along with them.

This.

The haters just have a soapbox at their fingertips these days, and they implode at a black woman taking centre-stage (and just to rub salt in to them, she's Spock's adoptive sister), two men kissing, and openly non-binary trans characters.

Just to be clear, there's a difference between simply not liking the show (fair game, it's personal preference) and hating it because of the above. The problem is, the latter tend to be the ones who just won't go away and watch something else...

[alexdg1]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

This.

The haters just have a soapbox at their fingertips these days, and they implode at a black woman taking centre-stage (and just to rub salt in to them, she's Spock's adoptive sister), two men kissing, and openly non-binary trans characters.

Just to be clear, there's a difference between simply not liking the show (fair game, it's personal preference) and hating it because of the above. The problem is, the latter tend to be the ones who just won't go away and watch something else...

The funny thing about all the hate leveled at Star Trek content created in the 21st Century is that it usually comes from conservatives who swear (on a Bible, I'm sure) that the franchise was not "woke" (the new right-wing buzzword, stolen from AAVE) until Star Trek: Discovery and its streaming service siblings came along.

Uh, no. Gene Roddenberry and his crew were, for the 1960s, just as "woke" as the new series' creators, writers, and producers. They just had to work within the limits inherent in working with mainstream TV networks such as NBC. Any discussions on race/gender equality, Cold War relations between superpowers, the Vietnam War, etc. could be had in Star TreK: The Original Series - so long as it was buried as subtext in a sci-fi/action adventure story.

Also, during TOS' original network run (1966-1969), producers (maybe out of weariness and inattentiveness rather than by deliberate malice) got lax about diversity in casting extras, and the background crew became whiter.

I have no issue if someone doesn't like New Trek for purely aesthetic reasons; I find that the pacing on Discovery and Picard suffers due to their format of "serialized drama." I don't hate any of the shows, mind you, but the ones I've seen on disc do have pacing issues because of the trend of stretching out a story that could easily be told over three episodes into one that must be told in 10 or 12.

[HD Goofnut]

I noticed this didn't have a slipcover. So stupid to have one for the first three seasons and then just drop it. I cut the DVD slipcover down and made it work.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by alexdg1

The funny thing about all the hate leveled at Star Trek content created in the 21st Century is that it usually comes from conservatives who swear (on a Bible, I'm sure) that the franchise was not "woke" (the new right-wing buzzword, stolen from AAVE) until Star Trek: Discovery and its streaming service siblings came along.

No, not quite. Sure there's some, but a lot of the neckbeards complaining have their politics on both sides of the aisle.

You'd have to be pretty blind and NOT a hardcore fan to not see the left-sided politics since the 1960s in TREK.

[Snake2410]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I noticed this didn't have a slipcover. So stupid to have one for the first three seasons and then just drop it. I cut the DVD slipcover down and made it work.

Different sudio, but Better Call Saul did the same thing. First 4 seasons had slips, but the last two didn't. Plus they ditched digital codes for the last two. So annoying for completionists.

[Hatter]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

No, not quite. Sure there's some, but a lot of the neckbeards complaining have their politics on both sides of the aisle.

You'd have to be pretty blind and NOT a hardcore fan to not see the left-sided politics since the 1960s in TREK.

True, but the Federation basically had its s*** together. Why is it now that lead characters cry all season, the crew doesn't get along and the Federation is suddenly utterly broken? That's really where the woke part basically hits you upside the head instead of weaving into the storyline while exploring strange new worlds.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by alexdg1

I have no issue if someone doesn't like New Trek for purely aesthetic reasons; I find that the pacing on Discovery and Picard suffers due to their format of "serialized drama." I don't hate any of the shows, mind you, but the ones I've seen on disc do have pacing issues because of the trend of stretching out a story that could easily be told over three episodes into one that must be told in 10 or 12.

Yeah, the thing holding me back from loving the modern shows is definitely the serialized format. I tend to dislike it in general, unless the show is super amazing which I don't think these are. They're fine, just not great, and I hate the format. You have to be Sopranos or Game of Thrones to get me to watch serialized TV.

Looking forward to Strange New Worlds when I get the time. Might as well wait for the BD now.

[JasonMichael]

Strange New Worlds is by far the best of the new shows. Perhaps not coincidentally, it is generally episodic, with just some character sub-plots running in the background of the season.

[Edward R. Meow]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Conservative and nationalist are defined ideologies. You either are one or you aren't. If you are, you'd have to ignore a loooot of Star Trek's messaging to enjoy it. Happy you can do that I guess.

So you have to agree with something's political message to enjoy it? That's silly.

* James Bond: Ian Fleming was a Tory & all the novels & early James Bond films are deeply conservative.
* The Lord of the Rings: Tolkien was a Trad-Catholic, conservative, monarchist, & supporter of Franco.
* Conan the Barbarian (Scwarzenegger): Pure Reaganism
* Jack Ryan: Tom Clancy consistently wrote his novels with anti-left wing & anti-liberal messages.
* On the Waterfront: Has a pro-McCarthyism message
* Rio Bravo: Same as above
* The Exorcist: Anti-Feminist, William Peter Blatty was a conservative Catholic.
* Mr. Smith Goes to Washington: Conservative director Frank Capra teams with conservative actor James Stewart to make a film about Washington corruption. Film is attacked by liberal politicians like Sen. Barkley upon its release.
* A Clockwork Orange: Anthony Burgess was a conservative Jacobite and that's reflected in this work (even if Kubrick leaned more liberal).
* Blade Runner: The first movie is a tad more liberal, granted, but Phillip K. Dick received death threats in his day for his conservative beliefs.
* True Crime: Go take a look at Andrew Klavan's youtube channel.
* Rocky: Need I even explain this one?

As well as any film by John Ford, Cecil B Demille, John Hughes, King Vidor, Mel Gibson, Clint Eastwood, John Milius, etc. And that's just a small sample.

And your profile picture is Cary Grant, who was a conservative.

I'm quite sure most on the political left enjoy those films, just as those on the right tend to enjoy Star Trek, Star Wars, The Matrix, or other progressive works. Let's end this notion that your politics have to align with something to be a fan of it.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Edward R. Meow

So you have to agree with something's political message to enjoy it? That's silly.

Didn't say that at all.

I said 1) complaining Trek is too progressive is ridiculous, and 2) you have to ignore Trek's messaging if you're a fan and conservative/nationalist. You're agreeing with that, so... not sure what your point is.

[Edward R. Meow]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Didn't say that at all.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth here, I was referring to this post of yours:

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I think to be a conservative or nationalist and be a big fan of Trek you would have to be either extremely dense as to its messaging or have a truly exceptional ability to separate art from its message.

It comes off as a discrepancy to paint the ability to separate art from politics as some exceptional thing, when you yourself have several movies in your blu-ray collection with staunchly conservative messages. I believe most people possess that ability.

I said 1) complaining Trek is too progressive is ridiculous, and 2) you have to ignore Trek's messaging if you're a fan and conservative/nationalist. You're agreeing with that, so... not sure what your point is.

Trek has always been progressive, but there's varying degrees of what that means. Showing an interracial kiss isn't comparable to the blatant partisanship (not to mention pure cringe) of having a politician cameo on your series.

Most liberals enjoy On the Waterfront, even with it's pro-McCarthy message. Now imagine if McCarthy himself made an appearance in the film.

(On artistic grounds, that's like comparing Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev or Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ to God's Not Dead, as they all have pro-religion messages. Yes, they all are Christian films, but the last does not deserve to be called art, it's just propaganda.

Not entirely unlike Truffaut & Godard. Both left-wing filmmakers, but Truffaut put his art first and his political subtext second. Godard did not, as he was just a propagandist. Granted, a very talented one who I enjoy, but one nonetheless. The same can be true of old Trek & new Trek (not that old Trek is high art), but people's complaints about progressive political messaging are usually less due to their presence, so much as how they're implemented.)

And even then, the Kirk-Uhura kiss wasn't the first. I Love Lucy had already done it a decade prior, partly due to the input of Republican actor Desi Arnaz.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Edward R. Meow

It comes off as a discrepancy to paint the ability to separate art from politics as some exceptional thing, when you yourself have several movies in your blu-ray collection with staunchly conservative messages. I believe most people possess that ability.

Yes but Trek is one of the more overtly and passionately globalist/progressive franchises out there, if not THE most. A movie like Elysium probably cumbersomely hits you over the head more, but Trek is a major franchise and way up there. Thus I believe it takes an exceptional ability to enjoy Trek if you are a nationalist or conservative.

I stand by that statement. Doesn't mean people can't do it.

Also while I have plenty of Reaganesque 80s action or "science bad" sci-fi I'm not sure I have anything serious that is really nationalist/conservative, i.e. not a genre movie. I'm not saying you're wrong though, just wondering what stood out. Interesting to read peoples perspectives. 80% of what I own is in boxes in the basement now so hard to get a cursory look haha.

Trek has always been progressive, but there's varying degrees of what that means. Showing an interracial kiss isn't comparable to the blatant partisanship (not to mention pure cringe) of having a politician cameo on your series.

I don't even like the politician mentioned because of her "I didn't lose" B.S., but it was a cameo and reportedly based on her love of the franchise and I just kinda let things like that roll of my back. I don't think it's indicative of the overall messaging being any stronger than previous examples in the franchise.

[badfingerboogie]

Originally Posted by Edward R. Meow

And even then, the Kirk-Uhura kiss wasn't the first. I Love Lucy had already done it a decade prior, partly due to the input of Republican actor Desi Arnaz.

While the Kirk-Uhura kiss certainly wasn't TV's first interracial kiss by a longshot, it still appears to be a somewhat important visual for an oft tumultuous time in the civil rights movement.

Regardless of what the armchair-bound spectacle-adjusting contrarians would have us believe, it's not without value.

[Edward R. Meow]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Also while I have plenty of Reaganesque 80s action or "science bad" sci-fi I'm not sure I have anything serious that is really nationalist/conservative, i.e. not a genre movie. I'm not saying you're wrong though, just wondering what stood out.

Depends on how broadly you're going to define genre. I'm not going to take the time to inspect every title, but here's what stood out to me from a quick glance:

* Zahler (Brawl in Cell Block 99, Dragged Across Concrete)
* Mel Gibson's Braveheart
* Michael Crichton stuff (Rising Sun, Sphere, Jurassic Park, Westworld)
* Tom Clancy (Jack Ryan #1-3)
* Eastwood (Eiger Sanction, Dirty Harry, Unforgiven, True Crime, Gran Torino)
* Michael Bay (Transformers, The Island)
* Lord of the Rings
* Vaughn's Kingsman trilogy
* Standard action stuff: Rambo 2-5, Invasion USA, Shooter, Olympus/London Has Fallen, Red Dawn
* Some sci-fi: Gattaca & Logan's Run

Feel free to dispute what you will, but I think we've gotten entirely off topic.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Edward R. Meow

Feel free to dispute what you will, but I think we've gotten entirely off topic.

I won't dwell on it, but pretty good list. I definitely have some libertarian tendencies and love Vaughn for that for example, even if I think it's unrealistic in modern society overall. A lot of those are meh bargain buys though.

Anyway... I think we largely agree overall, I am just putting the "have to put up with disagreement to watch it" in stronger terms. Cheers.

[Rocklandsboy]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I noticed this didn't have a slipcover. So stupid to have one for the first three seasons and then just drop it. I cut the DVD slipcover down and made it work.

It's worse than that - it's literally the first Star Trek BD, of any series (live action or animated), not to have a slipcover. WTF is up with THAT?!

Clearly there was supposed to be one, at some point, because it's pictured on this very site with a slip. This is a serious bummer to my OCD!

[Lava_Lander]

It's possible the print job was impacted by some kind of supply-chain issue. Lots of publishers are going through similar things the last 2 years which is why book released keep getting pushed back...