He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's >just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's >> just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's >> just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
On 1/21/2026 1:52 PM, shawn wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I think it's okay. I'm not as critical as a lot of viewers.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's >> just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's >just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
Verily, in article <5ji2nk1843003aau34vj1up8fevan883j4@4ax.com>, did nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com deliver unto us this message:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I semi-supported it, on the grounds that my expectations were so low
that almost anything would have seemed okay. I've heard a few other
comments along those lines: "It wasn't as terrible as I thought it would be."
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's >> just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
On 2026-01-21 05:52 PM, shawn wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And
that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
Holly Hunter has viciously panned the writers for doing a terrible job.
You can see her comments at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUDCXErZsCE
This has me wondering if they went through his papers and found some
notes about a possible new Star Trek series - or even just an unfilmed script from the original series - and turned it into Starfleet Academy, giving them the ability to credit Roddenberry for each and every
episode. That certainly adds *some* gravitas to the series if
Roddenberry had some sort of creative contribution to its genesis - or
at least it *could* for people inclined to think the man is a god of SF writing and can do no wrong.
Personally, I didn't despise it quite as much as everyone else although
I'm far from delighted with it. I thought Caleb, the bad-boy/rebel, had
the potential to be a very strong character as a guy who thinks outside
the box like Captain Kirk. I don't yet care about any of the rest of the cast and actively loathe that completely cringey young hologram woman
with the hideous hair style.
Verily, in article <10ktjs2$33lr8$1@dont-email.me>, did no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
This has me wondering if they went through his papers and found some
notes about a possible new Star Trek series - or even just an unfilmed
script from the original series - and turned it into Starfleet Academy,
giving them the ability to credit Roddenberry for each and every
episode. That certainly adds *some* gravitas to the series if
Roddenberry had some sort of creative contribution to its genesis - or
at least it *could* for people inclined to think the man is a god of SF
writing and can do no wrong.
That is intriguing. Of course, they might have ignored his notes (if
any) and simply stuck his name on for the same reasons they wanted the
Star Trek name on it.
Personally, I didn't despise it quite as much as everyone else although
I'm far from delighted with it. I thought Caleb, the bad-boy/rebel, had
the potential to be a very strong character as a guy who thinks outside
the box like Captain Kirk. I don't yet care about any of the rest of the
cast and actively loathe that completely cringey young hologram woman
with the hideous hair style.
Yeah, Caleb and the captain are the only ones who interest me. Tilly the hologram is so widely loathed that she might be written out after the
first season, if they have any sense.
I don't think I'm going to keep watching, since I've found some other
shows I like better, but I could be persuaded to return if the cast were winnowed down to a reasonable number of decent characters.
On 2026-01-21 05:52 PM, shawn wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
Holly Hunter has viciously panned the writers for doing a terrible job.
You can see her comments at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUDCXErZsCE
Verily, in article <10ktjs2$33lr8$1@dont-email.me>, did no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
This has me wondering if they went through his papers and found some
notes about a possible new Star Trek series - or even just an unfilmed
script from the original series - and turned it into Starfleet Academy,
giving them the ability to credit Roddenberry for each and every
episode. That certainly adds *some* gravitas to the series if
Roddenberry had some sort of creative contribution to its genesis - or
at least it *could* for people inclined to think the man is a god of SF
writing and can do no wrong.
That is intriguing. Of course, they might have ignored his notes (if
any) and simply stuck his name on for the same reasons they wanted the
Star Trek name on it.
Personally, I didn't despise it quite as much as everyone else although
I'm far from delighted with it. I thought Caleb, the bad-boy/rebel, had
the potential to be a very strong character as a guy who thinks outside
the box like Captain Kirk. I don't yet care about any of the rest of the
cast and actively loathe that completely cringey young hologram woman
with the hideous hair style.
Yeah, Caleb and the captain are the only ones who interest me. Tilly the hologram is so widely loathed that she might be written out after the
first season, if they have any sense.
I don't think I'm going to keep watching, since I've found some other
shows I like better, but I could be persuaded to return if the cast were winnowed down to a reasonable number of decent characters.
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I posted a non-inflammatory article about the show that mentioned Larry
Niven in my Larry Niven group and the defenders came out swinging
?Oh god I am so sick of listening to white men whine. Seriously, DVD's of Walker Texas Ranger exist... probably. Go watch all the intellectually
vapid 'unwoke' crap you want to. Stop telling story tellers how to tell stories.
Better yet, make your own SF series and compete with Trek in its
own milieu. Stop giving advice and actually do something yourselves,
because I'm one of you and Christ I'm sick of listening to your unmanly mewing."
"I'm old, I'm white, and I'm male. Somehow, miracle of miracles, I can make it through an entire day without being offended by new things and new ways
of thinking.
"Seriously, whenever I see some mayo-face neck beard complaining
about how something is "woke" I know that somewhere out there a stupid little misogynist fragile man baby racist angel is getting his wings."
"The show was designed for us boomers. And it's aggressively progressive. The chads can just deal with it, or run off and burn off their cortisol on the weight bench, dreaming of getting to touch a live girl who is not under sedation."
On Jan 21, 2026 at 8:57:29 PM PST, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:And that's
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either.
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I posted a non-inflammatory article about the show that mentioned Larry
Niven in my Larry Niven group and the defenders came out swinging
?Oh god I am so sick of listening to white men whine. Seriously, DVD's of
Walker Texas Ranger exist... probably. Go watch all the intellectually
vapid 'unwoke' crap you want to. Stop telling story tellers how to tell
stories.
More like, "Stop telling middle-aged woke white women how to tell stories!"
Here's an actual quote from the showrunner and executive producer Alex >Kurtzman about what they see as 'proper' Trek these days:
"We write with Black Lives Matter, the NAACP, etc., in mind. The goal is not >really to promote STAR TREK, but to promote these organizations and to use our >platform to bring greater awareness to these very, very important messages, >people and places."
So STAR TREK is just the macguffin they use to preach social justice. It's the >social justice that matters and all of you assholes who complain about things >like continuity and plot and believability should just shut the fuck up and >bask in the 'progressive' messaging with the rest of us.
Better yet, make your own SF series and compete with Trek in its
own milieu. Stop giving advice and actually do something yourselves,
because I'm one of you and Christ I'm sick of listening to your unmanly
mewing."
How is it 'unmanly' to notice how they get everything about Trek wrong? Female >Jem'Hadars? Or for that matter, Jem'Hadars that are genetically engineered to >be soldiers and killers, yet somehow have decided to lead a life of >bureaucracy and paperwork instead? Betazoids whose abilities directly >contradict everything we've known about them up to this point? A hologram >student whose entire character is one big logical contradiction but we're >supposed to just go with it because think of all the social justice stories it >will lead to?
Noticing all that stuff makes you 'unmanly' somehow?
"I'm old, I'm white, and I'm male. Somehow, miracle of miracles, I can make >> it through an entire day without being offended by new things and new ways >> of thinking.
All evidence to the contrary. You seem big mad about anyone who criticizes >Left Trek or has a different political viewpoint than yourself.
"Seriously, whenever I see some mayo-face neck beard complaining
Ah, so apparently bigoted racial slurs aren't part of your 'progressive' >ideology. Or is it only okay when they're directed toward white people?
about how something is "woke" I know that somewhere out there a stupid little
misogynist fragile man baby racist angel is getting his wings."
"The show was designed for us boomers. And it's aggressively progressive. >> The chads can just deal with it, or run off and burn off their cortisol on >> the weight bench, dreaming of getting to touch a live girl who is not under >> sedation."
Or they can continue to point out the drek that is currently masquerading as >STAR TREK and watch the ratings crater as no one who isn't a college professor >with a hammer-and-sickle flag on his wall will bother to sit through it, and >you can continue to whine about them on Facebook. Disney (finally) learned >this lesson with STAR WARS and Paramount will learn it with STAR TREK and >eventually stop catering to proto-communists like you and get back to what >made it a 50-year fan favorite franchise.
And yes, anim, you have my permission to copy this response to the asshole on >Facebook. I'm sure it will get you banned, though, because heaven forfend >grown adults should be allowed to speak their minds.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And >>that's just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <10ktjs2$33lr8$1@dont-email.me>, did
no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
This has me wondering if they went through his papers and found some
notes about a possible new Star Trek series - or even just an unfilmed
script from the original series - and turned it into Starfleet Academy,
giving them the ability to credit Roddenberry for each and every
episode. That certainly adds *some* gravitas to the series if
Roddenberry had some sort of creative contribution to its genesis - or
at least it *could* for people inclined to think the man is a god of SF
writing and can do no wrong.
That is intriguing. Of course, they might have ignored his notes (if
any) and simply stuck his name on for the same reasons they wanted the
Star Trek name on it.
Roddenberry is just listed by IMDb as creator. That?s standard IMDb policy.
Personally, I didn't despise it quite as much as everyone else although
I'm far from delighted with it. I thought Caleb, the bad-boy/rebel, had
the potential to be a very strong character as a guy who thinks outside
the box like Captain Kirk. I don't yet care about any of the rest of the >>> cast and actively loathe that completely cringey young hologram woman
with the hideous hair style.
Yeah, Caleb and the captain are the only ones who interest me. Tilly the
hologram is so widely loathed that she might be written out after the
first season, if they have any sense.
I don't think I'm going to keep watching, since I've found some other
shows I like better, but I could be persuaded to return if the cast were
winnowed down to a reasonable number of decent characters.
nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And
that's just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I am not aware of any positive reviews, save for shills.
I did notice that the hollywood shills are making excuses now.
Episode three is just an endless and pointless prank war. Hunter spends
the episode curled up and acting drunk and barefoot. I think Picardo has already bailed.
On 2026-01-22 1:23 p.m., anim8rfsk wrote:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:Look at the episode guide for Starfleet Academy. Here's the pilot:
Verily, in article <10ktjs2$33lr8$1@dont-email.me>, did
no_offline_contact@example.com deliver unto us this message:
This has me wondering if they went through his papers and found some
notes about a possible new Star Trek series - or even just an unfilmed >>>> script from the original series - and turned it into Starfleet Academy, >>>> giving them the ability to credit Roddenberry for each and every
episode. That certainly adds *some* gravitas to the series if
Roddenberry had some sort of creative contribution to its genesis - or >>>> at least it *could* for people inclined to think the man is a god of SF >>>> writing and can do no wrong.
That is intriguing. Of course, they might have ignored his notes (if
any) and simply stuck his name on for the same reasons they wanted the
Star Trek name on it.
Roddenberry is just listed by IMDb as creator. That?s standard IMDb policy. >>
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27385510/
See? Roddenberry is listed as a *writer* on every episode.
the first few episodes of Strange New Worlds and Voyager and it was the
same there: Roddenberry was listed as a writer.
I freely acknowledge that he wrote the first draft of this universe and
have no problem with him being acknowledged; I just don't think of him
as having been a writer on the later shows so that's why I mistakenly thought they'd built Starfleet Academy on the basis of something
specific he'd written like an unproduced script. I just find it odd that IMDB would present him as a writer of the episodes. But maybe that's
just me.
Personally, I didn't despise it quite as much as everyone else although >>>> I'm far from delighted with it. I thought Caleb, the bad-boy/rebel, had >>>> the potential to be a very strong character as a guy who thinks outside >>>> the box like Captain Kirk. I don't yet care about any of the rest of the >>>> cast and actively loathe that completely cringey young hologram woman
with the hideous hair style.
Yeah, Caleb and the captain are the only ones who interest me. Tilly the >>> hologram is so widely loathed that she might be written out after the
first season, if they have any sense.
I don't think I'm going to keep watching, since I've found some other
shows I like better, but I could be persuaded to return if the cast were >>> winnowed down to a reasonable number of decent characters.
anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
Episode three is just an endless and pointless prank war. Hunter spends
the episode curled up and acting drunk and barefoot. I think Picardo has
already bailed.
I see reviews from the usual suspects are showing up on YouTube.
I'll be watching them during my road trip.
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And >>that's just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
On Jan 21, 2026 at 8:57:29 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I posted a non-inflammatory article about the show that mentioned Larry
Niven in my Larry Niven group and the defenders came out swinging
?Oh god I am so sick of listening to white men whine. Seriously, DVD's of
Walker Texas Ranger exist... probably. Go watch all the intellectually
vapid 'unwoke' crap you want to. Stop telling story tellers how to tell
stories.
More like, "Stop telling middle-aged woke white women how to tell stories!"
Here's an actual quote from the showrunner and executive producer Alex Kurtzman about what they see as 'proper' Trek these days:
"We write with Black Lives Matter, the NAACP, etc., in mind. The goal is not really to promote STAR TREK, but to promote these organizations and to use our
platform to bring greater awareness to these very, very important messages, people and places."
So STAR TREK is just the macguffin they use to preach social justice. It's the
social justice that matters and all of you assholes who complain about things like continuity and plot and believability should just shut the fuck up and bask in the 'progressive' messaging with the rest of us.
Better yet, make your own SF series and compete with Trek in its
own milieu. Stop giving advice and actually do something yourselves,
because I'm one of you and Christ I'm sick of listening to your unmanly
mewing."
How is it 'unmanly' to notice how they get everything about Trek wrong? Female
Jem'Hadars? Or for that matter, Jem'Hadars that are genetically engineered to be soldiers and killers, yet somehow have decided to lead a life of bureaucracy and paperwork instead? Betazoids whose abilities directly contradict everything we've known about them up to this point? A hologram student whose entire character is one big logical contradiction but we're supposed to just go with it because think of all the social justice stories it
will lead to?
Noticing all that stuff makes you 'unmanly' somehow?
"I'm old, I'm white, and I'm male. Somehow, miracle of miracles, I can make >> it through an entire day without being offended by new things and new ways >> of thinking.
All evidence to the contrary. You seem big mad about anyone who criticizes Left Trek or has a different political viewpoint than yourself.
"Seriously, whenever I see some mayo-face neck beard complaining
Ah, so apparently bigoted racial slurs aren't part of your 'progressive' ideology. Or is it only okay when they're directed toward white people?
about how something is "woke" I know that somewhere out there a stupid little
misogynist fragile man baby racist angel is getting his wings."
"The show was designed for us boomers. And it's aggressively progressive. >> The chads can just deal with it, or run off and burn off their cortisol on >> the weight bench, dreaming of getting to touch a live girl who is not under >> sedation."
Or they can continue to point out the drek that is currently masquerading as STAR TREK and watch the ratings crater as no one who isn't a college professor
with a hammer-and-sickle flag on his wall will bother to sit through it, and you can continue to whine about them on Facebook. Disney (finally) learned this lesson with STAR WARS and Paramount will learn it with STAR TREK and eventually stop catering to proto-communists like you and get back to what made it a 50-year fan favorite franchise.
And yes, anim, you have my permission to copy this response to the asshole on Facebook. I'm sure it will get you banned, though, because heaven forfend grown adults should be allowed to speak their minds.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Jan 21, 2026 at 8:57:29 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the
show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I posted a non-inflammatory article about the show that mentioned Larry
Niven in my Larry Niven group and the defenders came out swinging
?Oh god I am so sick of listening to white men whine. Seriously, DVD's of >>> Walker Texas Ranger exist... probably. Go watch all the intellectually
vapid 'unwoke' crap you want to. Stop telling story tellers how to tell
stories.
More like, "Stop telling middle-aged woke white women how to tell stories!" >>
Here's an actual quote from the showrunner and executive producer Alex
Kurtzman about what they see as 'proper' Trek these days:
"We write with Black Lives Matter, the NAACP, etc., in mind. The goal is not >> really to promote STAR TREK, but to promote these organizations and to use our
platform to bring greater awareness to these very, very important messages, >> people and places."
This sounds a lot like when one of the writers for the CW SUPERGIRL said in >an interview that it?s not important they write good scripts. It?s
important they put in woke messages.
So STAR TREK is just the macguffin they use to preach social justice. It's the
social justice that matters and all of you assholes who complain about things
like continuity and plot and believability should just shut the fuck up and >> bask in the 'progressive' messaging with the rest of us.
Better yet, make your own SF series and compete with Trek in its
own milieu. Stop giving advice and actually do something yourselves,
because I'm one of you and Christ I'm sick of listening to your unmanly
mewing."
How is it 'unmanly' to notice how they get everything about Trek wrong? Female
Jem'Hadars? Or for that matter, Jem'Hadars that are genetically engineered to
be soldiers and killers, yet somehow have decided to lead a life of
bureaucracy and paperwork instead? Betazoids whose abilities directly
contradict everything we've known about them up to this point? A hologram
student whose entire character is one big logical contradiction but we're
supposed to just go with it because think of all the social justice stories it
will lead to?
Noticing all that stuff makes you 'unmanly' somehow?
"I'm old, I'm white, and I'm male. Somehow, miracle of miracles, I can make >>> it through an entire day without being offended by new things and new ways >>> of thinking.
All evidence to the contrary. You seem big mad about anyone who criticizes >> Left Trek or has a different political viewpoint than yourself.
"Seriously, whenever I see some mayo-face neck beard complaining
Ah, so apparently bigoted racial slurs aren't part of your 'progressive'
ideology. Or is it only okay when they're directed toward white people?
about how something is "woke" I know that somewhere out there a stupid little
misogynist fragile man baby racist angel is getting his wings."
"The show was designed for us boomers. And it's aggressively progressive. >>> The chads can just deal with it, or run off and burn off their cortisol on >>> the weight bench, dreaming of getting to touch a live girl who is not under >>> sedation."
Or they can continue to point out the drek that is currently masquerading as >> STAR TREK and watch the ratings crater as no one who isn't a college professor
with a hammer-and-sickle flag on his wall will bother to sit through it, and >> you can continue to whine about them on Facebook. Disney (finally) learned >> this lesson with STAR WARS and Paramount will learn it with STAR TREK and
eventually stop catering to proto-communists like you and get back to what >> made it a 50-year fan favorite franchise.
And yes, anim, you have my permission to copy this response to the asshole on
Facebook. I'm sure it will get you banned, though, because heaven forfend
grown adults should be allowed to speak their minds.
On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 22:19:14 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Jan 21, 2026 at 8:57:29 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote: >>>
shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 18:59:45 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
He doesn't like Holly Hunter's slouching bridge behavior, either. And that's
just for starters.
https://youtu.be/kormqz5NJQ4?t=52
Is anyone supporting the show? I've seen multiple commentaries on the >>>>> show with no one coming out in favor of what they've seen.
I posted a non-inflammatory article about the show that mentioned Larry >>>> Niven in my Larry Niven group and the defenders came out swinging
?Oh god I am so sick of listening to white men whine. Seriously, DVD's of >>>> Walker Texas Ranger exist... probably. Go watch all the intellectually >>>> vapid 'unwoke' crap you want to. Stop telling story tellers how to tell >>>> stories.
More like, "Stop telling middle-aged woke white women how to tell stories!" >>>
Here's an actual quote from the showrunner and executive producer Alex
Kurtzman about what they see as 'proper' Trek these days:
"We write with Black Lives Matter, the NAACP, etc., in mind. The goal is not
really to promote STAR TREK, but to promote these organizations and to use our
platform to bring greater awareness to these very, very important messages, >>> people and places."
This sounds a lot like when one of the writers for the CW SUPERGIRL said in >> an interview that it?s not important they write good scripts. It?s
important they put in woke messages.
I get how a writer can start to think like that. It's like the writers
behind MS MARVEL focused on getting their message out. What I don't
get is how the people running the studios don't see how not focusing
on the writing is going to hurt the audience retention.
In a small indie project you can do what ever you want and spend all
your efforts on some message, but in any sort of mass media project
that is clearly the wrong approach to keep a large segment of the
potential viewers watching. Yet there seem to be a significant number
of the money people at the studios who seem to ignore the way focusing
on a message turns off viewers.
Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
Episode three is just an endless and pointless prank war. Hunter spends >>> the episode curled up and acting drunk and barefoot. I think Picardo
has already bailed.
I see reviews from the usual suspects are showing up on YouTube.
I'll be watching them during my road trip.
Where are you tripping and please don't watch TV while driving.
anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
anim8rfsk@cox.net wrote:
Episode three is just an endless and pointless prank war. Hunter spends >>>> the episode curled up and acting drunk and barefoot. I think Picardo
has already bailed.
I see reviews from the usual suspects are showing up on YouTube.
I'll be watching them during my road trip.
Where are you tripping and please don't watch TV while driving.
I was checking up on Dad. He's doing well but needs a reason to
get out of bed.
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 15 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 232:02:08 |
| Calls: | 193 |
| Files: | 21,502 |
| Messages: | 79,667 |