muccamukk: B'Elanna standing in front of lines of code. (ST: Engineering)
[personal profile] muccamukk
...

Maybe it'll ... get better?

Date: 2017-09-26 05:59 am (UTC)
sapphire2309: (Alex)
From: [personal profile] sapphire2309
*offers hugs*

Date: 2017-09-26 06:16 am (UTC)
sapphire2309: (Default)
From: [personal profile] sapphire2309
That happens with fandoms you love sometimes. I'm sorry it's happening to you :(

Date: 2017-09-26 06:56 am (UTC)
sovay: (I Claudius)
From: [personal profile] sovay
I'm surprised at how badly that pissed me off in just two episodes. Guess I still care about Star Trek.

Since I have been hearing plot-vague but generally positive things from most of the people I know, may I ask?

Date: 2017-09-26 07:05 am (UTC)
legionseagle: (Default)
From: [personal profile] legionseagle
Don't know about our host's specific complaint but mine surrounds the degree to which the first two episodes depend on the Idiot Plot. That is, the whole driver for the action is a character who makes a Very Big Mistake. And while I can lap Very Big Mistake plots up with a spoon, (see for example Bujold's Memory or Conrad's Lord Jim which is a practically unique example in my view of the double Very Big Mistake plot, where the protag's first Very Big Mistake is matched with an equal and opposite second Very Big Mistake, which stems from his not wanting to make the same Very Big Mistake twice) for them to work and for me to continue to have interest in/empathy for the person making the VBM it has to come organically out of the sort of person they are and the sort of stresses to which they have been subjected, so you can see the VBM coming long before it happens and want to shout at them to change paths, but you know they can't.

When you have a VBM which runs directly contrary to everything we've seen about a character's influences, prior behaviour and relationships, then it just smells of the lamp.
Edited Date: 2017-09-26 07:05 am (UTC)

Date: 2017-09-26 07:09 am (UTC)
sovay: (I Claudius)
From: [personal profile] sovay
or Conrad's Lord Jim which is a practically unique example in my view of the double Very Big Mistake plot, where the protag's first Very Big Mistake is matched with an equal and opposite second Very Big Mistake, which stems from his not wanting to make the same Very Big Mistake twice)

Unrelated to the actual point of your comment, Lord Jim has a strong claim to being my favorite thing by Conrad, partly because of that double-sprung plot, although his sea-writing elsewhere is also excellent.

When you have a VBM which runs directly contrary to everything we've seen about a character's influences, prior behaviour and relationships, then it just smells of the lamp.

Thank you; that makes sense and sounds really annoying.
Edited Date: 2017-09-26 07:09 am (UTC)

Date: 2017-09-26 07:19 am (UTC)
legionseagle: (Default)
From: [personal profile] legionseagle
To be honest, I often find Conrad a bit of a slog, but my favourites are Lord Jim and Typhoo (also the joke about "Italian" restaurants in London, in The Secret Agent which is almost as true as when it was written,alas.)

Date: 2017-09-26 07:22 pm (UTC)
sovay: (Otachi: Pacific Rim)
From: [personal profile] sovay
To be honest, I often find Conrad a bit of a slog, but my favourites are Lord Jim and Typhoo (also the joke about "Italian" restaurants in London, in The Secret Agent which is almost as true as when it was written,alas.)

He's one of the writers whose language I like so much that while it would be disingenous to say that I can read him purely for style, I tend to enjoy him on the prose level even when I'm not crazy about other aspects like the plot. (Tanith Lee is like this for me. Her work has to fail hard in order for me to get nothing out of reading it.) I have not, however, read The Secret Agent, so I will check it out.
Edited (clarity) Date: 2017-09-26 07:25 pm (UTC)

Date: 2017-09-26 08:19 am (UTC)
ruuger: My hand with the nails painted red and black resting on the keyboard of my laptop (Default)
From: [personal profile] ruuger
Thanks for putting into words what bothered me about the plot. I couldn't quite put my finger on what it was, but yes, this.

Date: 2017-09-26 03:33 pm (UTC)
havocthecat: the lady of shalott (Default)
From: [personal profile] havocthecat
I...okay.

Definitely a library DVD loan.

(Can I have a post-Voyager show? PLEASE?)

Date: 2017-09-26 03:33 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
Oh, no. I'm not that thrilled about Klingons either, and I'm pretty sick of prequel stuff by now, just in general.

Date: 2017-09-26 07:14 pm (UTC)
sovay: (Rotwang)
From: [personal profile] sovay
This is a comprehensive list of reasons and I appreciate you writing it out.

the one Tragic Albino, who will presumably be the main bad for the rest of the show. (also they made the Klingons darker, widened their noses and thickened their lips, which choices... I have questions about)

And a tragic albino villain on top. Oh, jeez. You know, one of the things I like about the TNG Klingon redesign when I got used to it was that it removed a lot of the Orientalism from the original conception of the Klingons. Adding the racism back in on a different axis is not a progression I wanted to see!

4. Nothing about alien dude made sense at all.

Biologically, narratively, or both?

7. Basically, I feel like they should have just started with her coming to the new ship, and then find out about the rest of the tragic backstory later, when we knew her better. Because if they're trying to do character informing set up, they did a really bad job!

Agreed. It sounds like a major misstep in terms of audience investment and narrative structure, like all those novels that have clunky prologues instead of gradually paced revelations. Not to mention it's a lot more interesting from the perspective of an engaged audience to know there's something in a character's background that informs their decisions, their reputation etc., but not to know what it is—or to know part but not all of the story—or to know and not be sure what it means for their future—basically, the linear approach in this case is the least interesting thing to do with the character. I've seen it work, but in very specific circumstances, none of which were the pilot of a TV series. The 1965 film of Lord Jim incidentally has this problem, but it also has Peter O'Toole and stunning location photography, so I cut it some slack.

8. And they killed off the female Asian captain and gave us Jason Isaacs instead. I want a refund.

I really like Jason Isaacs. He's actually one of my favorite current actors who I don't see enough of. That said, I expected him to be in the background of the cast: Michelle Yeoh was getting all the buzz and I was looking forward to her. And if her character was always slated to be short-lived, flashbacks would make the audience feel a lot less cheated than a straightforward introduction and then a hard right into the fridge.

9. Nothing about this FEELS like Star Trek to me, and nothing about it makes me want to watch it for its own sake.

And that's a problem. I backed off Enterprise after two or three episodes for much the same reasons and nothing I ever heard about the show afterward has persuaded me that I chose poorly.

Phooey.

Date: 2017-09-26 09:11 pm (UTC)
sovay: (Rotwang)
From: [personal profile] sovay
Now, now they look like heavy metal rockers form the dead
with leather pants and frizzy hair and lobsters on their heads.


This new series does sound like a prime example of U.S.S. Make Shit Up.

Which I just have so many fucking questions about.

Like if he means literally that his species are some kind of delicious banshee, that is the world's most useless evolutionary adaptation if it doesn't actually keep you from getting farmed and eaten!

Basically they've lost a bunch of good will from me, and I'm going to keep watching, but the ensemble part once it settles in better be AMAZING.

I hope it is, because everything you have described strikes me as a really weird way to start any series that isn't, like, Blake's 7.

his type-casting in all things American aside.

I have always loved his story about auditioning for the role of Louis in the National Theatre's Angels in America: "Look, I play all these tough guys and thugs and strong, complex characters . . . In real life, I am a cringing, neurotic Jewish mess. Can't I for once play that onstage?"

(I would be delighted with a heroic Jewish starship captain, but in an ideal universe I'd still get not-dead Michelle Yeoh.)

Date: 2017-09-27 05:35 am (UTC)
sovay: (Rotwang)
From: [personal profile] sovay
At least making shit up is in fine Star Trek tradition, but so are sincerity and heart, which I'm not as yet detecting.

Does it feel cynical or just incoherent?

Like they'd admit that any other culture than WASP American had survived, at least not unless Avery Brooks were glaring at them balefully.

*grinds teeth*

(While we're within shouting distance of this subject, I am still not cool with the reboot destruction and permanent diaspora of Vulcan. That metaphor did not need escalating, thank you very much, and especially not in that way.)

It also bothered me that the Chinese captain with a Chinese accent had a French name, which is certainly possibly now and in the 23rd century, but sort of pinged my unintentional cultural imperialism detector, given the apparent lack of cultural osmosis... well, existing.

I read "Philippa Georgiou" as Greek, but I don't think that changes your point. It's like multiculturally recombinant names, which can either read as completely reasonable or weirdly exoticizing depending on the writing behind them.

Date: 2017-09-27 02:50 am (UTC)
lynnenne: (janeway: the big chair)
From: [personal profile] lynnenne
I really like the actress playing Michael, and I think her character has great potential. But my favorite was Michelle Yeoh and I'm annoyed that she won't be our captain.

I also dislike Klingons, always have. Would have much preferred a post-Voyager setting with occasional cameos by Kate Mulgrew.

It might get better, but this wasn't good.

Date: 2017-09-26 02:49 pm (UTC)
dorothy1901: Gilda: Put the blame on Mame (Default)
From: [personal profile] dorothy1901
I bailed halfway through the first episode, when Burnham dashed to the bridge to inform the captain that she had seen a Klingon, and instead of asking for more detail, the reaction was, 'nope, no Klingons have been seen for a century, you must be wrong.' To me, it was a clear sign of an idiot plot.

Also, the Klingons' reputation as fearsome warriors isn't really helped when you can accidentally kill one because he startled you.

Date: 2017-09-26 03:27 pm (UTC)
havocthecat: the lady of shalott (Default)
From: [personal profile] havocthecat
Oh. Dear. I'm not subscribing to a new streaming service just for Star Trek, original flavor Trekkie though I might be. Tell me more?

Date: 2017-09-26 03:33 pm (UTC)
havocthecat: the lady of shalott (Default)
From: [personal profile] havocthecat
...or I could just read the comments.

*reads comments*

Date: 2017-09-26 09:02 pm (UTC)
ymfaery: Iron Man flying through city (Avengers: Iron Man flying)
From: [personal profile] ymfaery
...ok, definitely not interested. D:

Re: *reads comments*

Date: 2017-09-27 07:19 pm (UTC)
ymfaery: Nick Fury waist up profile (Avengers:  Nick Fury side profile)
From: [personal profile] ymfaery
Who, Sarek's adopted daughter? Or whoever that black Vulcan lady is in the preview commercials, since obviously Yeoh's character died.

Date: 2017-09-27 01:13 am (UTC)
seascribe: (Default)
From: [personal profile] seascribe
Awww. Best SLP's buddy from high school is in it. Sad her show sucks.

Date: 2017-09-27 07:17 pm (UTC)
ymfaery: Hawkeye aiming at something off-screen (Avengers:  Hawkeye taking aim)
From: [personal profile] ymfaery
Well, TNG had Patrick Stewart. :Db
Page generated Oct. 22nd, 2017 02:52 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios