Value Subtracted
Have you ever considered that the Prime Directive is not only not ethical, but also illogical, and perhaps morally indefensible?
- 863 Posts
- 547 Comments
5·8 hours agoThese are just the ones that I’ve seen - if you happen across any others, feel free to share them.
At last, I can inform the world of my devotion to the Kosst Amojan!
Well, I should add that I’ve mellowed on both series over time - I think Voyager is fine once you accept it for what it is, rather than for what it’s not, and Enterprise…well, there’s some good stuff in there, but it will never be near the top of my rewatch list.
A decent number of people vocally hated DS9, Voyager and Enterprise, when they first started airing
It me
(well okay, I never hated DS9, and my dislike for Voyager grew over time, but it basically me)
So, putting aside your statements of quality (some of which I agree with and some of which do not, but it’s all subjective so whatever), I personally wouldn’t hold “audience size” or whether a series was cancelled against him, unless you think the shows weren’t any good. Seems like IDIC to me.
He’s not my favourite writer by any means, but I’m in almost total agreement with his overall approach to handling the property.
He wants each series to be unique, hires the showrunners, and seems to let them do their own thing. I think it’s a good approach, even though a couple of the projects fell short of their potential (y’know, in my opinion).
And he seems to work well with the suits, which is probably a good thing overall?
There’s a newer TrekMovie piece
Oh, thanks for this - I think I’ll share the original!
Edit: Never mind, it’s paywalled. I guess I’ll share the trekmovie version 🙄
“Hint” was probably a poor choice of words, when I really meant that a renewal hasn’t been announced.
What’s wrong with comedies?
Star Trek has a long history of comedy episodes, and arguably even a film, depending on how you feel about “The Voyage Home”.
Comedy and morality certainly aren’t mutually exclusive.
On top of that, the Ellison regime didn’t change the personnel directly in charge of CBS Studios (though they did change the people in charge of Paramount+, which is also relevant).
There’s also the lingering question of Kurtzman himself. He signed a five-year extension…five years ago. Not a peep regarding a renewal.
Time travel’s been outlawed by the Temporal Accords, so I hope not - someone could be in a lot of trouble.
I would imagine people are more uncomfortable with the “standing and chanting” aspect - you definitely can’t argue that those aren’t Starfleet values with a straight face.
I know what you mean.
I was thinking about it, though, in the context of the post-Burn setting. A lot of these kids probably didn’t grow up with a strong sense of any of those things, so maybe it makes sense to be pushing those values pretty hard.
This is in no way a defense of the new owners (they’re bad), but the bribe was made by the old owners (they were also bad).
41·3 days agoEven a broken clock…
I agree with all of your examples but Harry, and I think it’s meaningful that the rest are mainly…well, cadets.
This is something that Star Trek has always explored.
Sure, but there’s at least potential here to give it a more in-depth treatment.
I’m a lot more interested in the way the 32nd century setting plays into it all.
That’s really not how it works. One show doesn’t exist at the expense of another, or in this case four others.
Either that or the math teacher. Could go either way.
Inverse: Starfleet Academy Really Isn’t Your Parents’ Star Trek