It looks like the upcoming Lower Decks season will be the last one 😭😭 I didn’t have any expectations for this show but it has quickly grown to be one of my favorites. I’ll miss it

  • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s teen drama. It’s not my cup of tea no matter how good. I understand Dawson’s Creek was very popular. I didn’t like it.

      • stevecrox@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        While there is nothing wrong with trying something new, the point of using a franchise is to leverage the existing fanbase.

        If you can’t get the fanbase enthusiastic you have a problem. Since you aren’t leveraging the existing fan base and the franchise will alienate some of your new target fan base.

        Replying to every comment that expresses an ambivalent or pessimistic view about a new show doesn’t change that. It just makes this space seem hostile to discussion.

          • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            That’s… Not the point of a franchise. The point of a franchise is to continue a story or path in a world from perspectives beyond that of our originating characters. The only criteria of a franchise is that it must take place in the same world.

            That’s a bold claim to make, and it’s not unreasonable that someone would disagree with you on it. The point of an established universe is obviously the background that the universe brings. Otherwise you may as well just create an entirely new universe. And given that the background is the value of the universe, there is a limitation to how far you can reasonably expect to bend it before the interpretation of the universe shifts from “fresh” to “hostile”.

            For example, I’m not a particularly big fan of the Avatar movies, but they’re clearly pushing a naturalistic, shamanistic anti-corporate utopian vision. It’s not my cup of tea, but that is what the universe IS. If the next movie comes out and the Nav’i create planet-wide Walmart franchise and spend two hours boosting their stock price, it is absolutely reasonable to look at that at the VERY least as a wasteful use of the franchise, and it is not negativity for fans of the franchise to complain that it is not what they signed up for.

            Now, we can argue all day about where that line is, but to suggest there ISN’T one at all is extreme.

              • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                There’s more to an established universe than just the lore and plot. The tone, setting, and ethos of the world are every bit as important as the factual nature of what’s already happened. I’m not going to make a claim that the idea of a teen drama in the Star Trek universe is inconsistent with reality of the Star Trek franchise’s universe, but it is fair to say it is inconsistent with the established tone. I’m not making the claim that’s going to mean it’s bad, but it is completely fair and valid for existing fans to voice concern about that tonal shift. The tone is no less important to a series than the events that take place within them. If Luke’s hand being sliced off in Empire Strikes Back was played as a comic, silly moment, even though the events are consistent with the established universe, and in fact exactly the same, the nature of the scene and the franchise in which it happens are altered. These are not trivial concerns.

                  • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    This is a flagrantly disingenous comparison. The creation of Starfleet Academy and focusing on a new view with new characters in an area that we know deals with these things is no where nearly comparable as taking a pre-established moment and playing it in a different tone completely. The existence of this show does not undermine or overwrite the tone of any other show like you’re suggesting with that comparison.

                    It’s possible I wasn’t clear here. I’m not suggesting changing the tone of it as it already exists, but that if its original tone had been different the entire tone of the film and the universe would have been completely different as well. And while I agree that Star Trek has often had many different tones over the course of all the series and media, it’s one thing to have a tone for a particular episode or two parter, and another to have such a drastically different tone for an entire series. Additionally, while we DO explore Wesley’s situation at Starfleet academy, and other aspects of younger Starfleet cadets in episodes like the DS9 episode where a ship is entirely staffed by cadets, it’s still usually viewed not primarily through their eyes, but through the eyes of the established crew, keeping the tone of the series consistent overall. This is very different than say, hypothetically, changing gears in season 6 of TNG and deciding to make Wesley the main character.

                    That said, the TNG episode Lower Decks handles this idea extraordinarily well, so it’s entirely possible the entire thing will work and be fine. But it’s also equally possible it could be such a drastic tonal shift that it does not. I don’t see it as unreasonable or overreacting for longtime fans to, sight unseen given the scant information we DO know, view it with wariness.