Trekman10
@Trekman10@sh.itjust.works
- Comment on What's Mastodon precious? 1 month ago:
I think a lot of the attitude I saw on mastodon about this like a year ago was one of suspicion that they wanted an open network but didn’t use the fediverse standard
- Comment on Everything Star Trek Revealed at San Diego Comic-Con 2024 5 months ago:
youtu.be/vppzqloM_h8?si=mjQfSM-ioV3SW9je
that SNW clip didn’t rub me the right way. This video gets into why…
- Comment on a tale as old as time 1 year ago:
Unless she trespassed there’s nothing illegal. I don’t think she shared a specific address. It IS (was?) against the YT TOS but they only care about what makes returns for Google’s shareholders.
- Comment on 98 years worth of progress. 1 year ago:
None of the books being banned are pornographic. Don’t fucking lie to advance your cause of genocide
- Comment on MRW I learn the new animated shorts aren't going to be canon 1 year ago:
Cowards
- Comment on [deleted] 1 year ago:
I believe Kbin already fills that role either as a fork or at least as a similar platform
- Comment on Consideration to Defederate Hexbear 1 year ago:
It’s a pretty common joke for libright people
- Comment on [deleted] 1 year ago:
Not pictured: O’brien
keep it all inside and one day, die
- Comment on c/MoinsDeVoitures -- A French community to discuss problems of car centric societies, similar to !fuckcars@lemmy.world 1 year ago:
J’adore ca j’ai trouvé beaucoup des communautés francais sur lemmy a ce moment
- Comment on What was taken I cannot get back 1 year ago:
It’s ironic that some people go after Americans for being ignorant of the wider world then they go and act like America = East Coast
- Comment on Does anyone *not* love using their bidet? 1 year ago:
I don’t own one, but any of the times I’ve ever tried using some sort of fancy toilet seat with a sprayer, it squirts at such a force that it’s uncomfortable. It sucks because I have IBS and I have to be really picky about TP.
- Comment on All 50 states with the same naming convention as West Virginia 1 year ago:
Came here to say this
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
I mean, I can IMAGINE plenty of workarounds, the problem is that even the most practical way to explain them is illogical. It made far more sense that the NCC-1701 looked like how it did in the Cage (2254) up until sometime after Where No Man Has Gone Before (2265), before getting a refit for how it looks the rest of TOS (and again for the movies). Now, if I’m supposed to take the show at it’s word, the ship went through a massive, complete refit by 3 years later in Will You Take My Hand? (2257), only to revert one time to it’s 2254 appearance for 2265, and go through another refit by the Corbomite Maneuver (2266)? Is it really a lack of imagination here or is it actually that my imagination thinks about these things and fictional implications?
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
I so desperately wish that the Orville writers (IE, the DS9 and TNG writers I liked the most) were writing for current trek. So much of the criticisms levelled at the Berman-era are rectified here, and the show doesn’t serve as propaganda for the US state department.
- We follow up with planets (or get more explicit narration about how they didn’t just abandon some random planet to fend for itself after “fixing” a problem)
- Characters remember things from past episodes
- Gay and trans storylines
- Union politics make more sense than Federation politics
All without:
- Promoting the space NSA (Section 31)
- Promoting the view that governments have no choice but to act in bad faith so its up to Great Individuals to ensure they stay on the correct path
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
change over time in a 60 year old sci fi franchise.
This common refrain is so condescending, as if we’re being ridiculous expecting consistency in a piece of narrative media! It doesn’t matter if the Klingons, at the time of TMP, were intended to be a total retcon, because DS9 made lines of dialog that make that impossible. I understand that there isn’t a cohesive narrative across all of Star Trek, and I don’t expect writers of an episode of 1990s television to be cognizant that maybe a prequel will come along and show anachronistic Klingons, but what I do expect is the producers of Enterprise to make better decisions than “but da klingons have ridges, how will people recognise the klingons if they look like how they did in TOS?” (IDK Berman, guess you should have thought of that before doing a prequel series).
And today, in this day and age where everyone at least knows about secondary worlds (IE, a setting distinct/irreconcilable from the real world) if not in name than be experience, I absolutely do expect a level of consistency above what we got in the 80s and 90s.
Obviously, advances in real world technology will impact how TV and movies are made, but we’re not talking about Matte Paintings vs CGI. It’s not like when the shows in the 90s made the switch from physical models to CGI, they randomly decided “hey, lets make the Romulan warbird a completely different looking ship”, they recreated the physical model. When they started to be able to show more activity or detail in establishing shots of the ship or station, they didn’t then also decide to give DS9 an extra pylon, or make it yellow and act like it always was like that.
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
I’ve yet to find any rule stating only that which was commented on this post is valid evidence. You’d have to have your head in the sand to miss that the current iteration of Star Trek stems back to the 2009 reboot movie which literally was marketed as “its not your father’s Star Trek” and who’s director continually complained that he found TNG and TOS to be “too cerebral”. Alex Kurtzman, the guy in charge now, entered the franchise with '09. I don’t think he’s got the same mentality per se, but given that pre-Kurtzman trek saw past sets and props faithfully recreated and even celebrated (Relics from TNG, Trials and Tribble-ations from DS9, In a Mirror Darkly from ENT), while the current iteration, with a few exceptions (Beyond, Lower Decks, Prodigy), feels almost embarassed that it’s a spinoff of a campy show.
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
Doctor Who has faithfully recreated sets, props, and costumes from as far back as the 60s as recently as 2017. Continuity is a different story - there’s literally no doctor who canon - as the constant time traveling impacts things. Even the smaller TARDIS exterior from the Classic series is referenced as an actual, visual difference by the revival series. The current powers that run Star Trek would just pretend it was always that big.
I’ll never accept the idea that it’s okay to update a design but not properly reboot it and set it in a completely different and seperate continuity just because what you’re making a spin-off of is old enough that it doesn’t deserve to be treated legitimately. How many more years before the crude, gritty aesthetic of Star Wars suffers the same fate as the crude and campy aesthetic of Star Trek?
Whole series of television shouldn’t be ignored by their own spinoffs just because their set designer and marketing teams decided something was lame or uncool.
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
All that needed to be maintained was that the Klingons we see Kirk face in TOS were all afflicted by the virus - while it’s still reasonable to assume that, the presence of these hitherto unseen 3rd variant of Klingon complicates instead of simplifies, which is what ENT’s arc did. Now what, it’s ANOTHER coincidence that THESE klingons are even ridgier than we’ve seen before, but the other ones are still out there? To borrow your parlance, the Discovery redesign was intended to overwrite and replace what came before, because apparently Star Trek, unlike every other fantasy and science fiction thing I like, is Forbidden from being treated like a secondary world that should have its only internal consistency.
I was completely content to accept it was a coincidence that Kirk only saw augment virus-impacted Klingons in TOS, just like how ST Picard ended up establishing for Romulans (northern vs southern to explain the v shape bone ridge they had through TNG-ENT).
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
I don’t consider them different. I saw TMP for the first time after having grown up on TOS ans TNG and thought “oh they switched to TNG makeup for the Kirk movies?”
The irritation for TNG looking different than TOS also silly and misplaced. It’s 100 years later. That provides plenty of time in-universe for things to drift and evolve from one depiction to another. It’s the same reason why I have zero qualms in terms of continuity with S3 and s4 of Discovery.
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
Yeah, I really think a lot of the support for the Klingon redesign and other revisionist aspects of Discovery/the current era of trek it spawned comes from a "but the Original Series is cringe fail and LAME. We have to make cool science fiction action shows for the modern era and couldn’t possibly respect such an old show.
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
I’ll never understand why it’s treated by some people as some ridiculous expectation that things that couldn’t change so drastically over the course of 5-10 years (the entire biology of a species, for example) shouldn’t do so, and that we’re the odd ones for saying “but way how is this supposed to take place in the same timeline?”
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
Replace the shine and detail with a classic rubber mask, silicon makeup, and matte brown body paint in exactly the same head and body shape, stick them at a side table in Quarks circa S6 of DS9, and I challenge you to notice anything amiss. I think that is true for how they looked s2 Discovery with the hair and normal skulls I stead of the elongated Crystal Skull shaped look we got in s1.
For me, having them look like TNG Klingons doesn’t even solve the problem because ENT had implied that shouldn’t happen until the TOS movie era. They could have rendered explicit the implication that not every Klingon was infected by the virus, but that still doesn’t support making the Klingons look how they did in s1 DIS.
- Comment on Anyone else out there who actually really loved Discovery's S1 style of Klingons? 1 year ago:
Most of this reasoning is irrelevant to me simply because I don’t view each show as seperate. I watch DIS s1 and see this Klingons and can’t help but think “so what about Kang, Kor, or Koloth? How do they look right now?”
It doesn’t matter how cool or scary these new klingons look, they have four nostrils and elongated heads when before they were more like buff humans with ridges. That’s irreconcilable to me, regardless of how the actual aesthetic makes me feel when I watch an episode.
Taking it at face value, the Klingons looked like TNG, then they lost ridges, then regained them with even more than we’d ever seen before, then they lose them, then they go back to TNG? That’s annoying.