All Things Star Trek — Page 154

I mean I don’t see that as being that bad. He’s not saying they don’t have a right to be that way or that he even actually disapproves he’s just saying the personality type annoys him.

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

I did not. You’re saying that I’m not allowed to be uncomfortable in any circumstance for any legitimate reason, and that’s unfair.

I would not tell such people off. I would not shame them. I am just telling you guys here because I hang out here. It’s not like I harbor some resentment toward them or anything like that.

Ok fine, allow me to ask a question then, since I don’t understand how your reason is legitimate…why exactly does someone acting “effeminate” or “flamboyant” make you uncomfortable?

Because it’s awkward. I’ve never been much for the spotlight myself (see previous post about being nerdy), and I feel somehow myself embarrassed by proxy for people who draw attention to themselves when they do things that generate a certain level of public awkwardness.

Also, I myself try to blend in, due to drawing unwanted attention for my own unintentional behavior. If it appears that someone is flippantly, flamboyantly attempting to draw attention to themselves in a way that is so contrary to my own attempt at behavior, or in the way that I commonly try to identify with others, it throws me off because I don’t understand why they should be motivated to do so.

I don’t understand why someone else’s actions would make you embarrassed by proxy, but in the interest of allowing the thread to proceed on-topic I’ll drop it now.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Warbler said:

These are not Klingons.

These are Klingons.

FTFY

I knew someone was going to bring that up. Clearly when they were doing TOS they didn’t have the capability to make Klingons look like they do in the movies and nextgen and the rest of the tv series’. They eventually explained the difference in appearance in Enterprise. They have not as far as I know explained the appearance of Klingons in Discovery. With the history of the change in the appearance in the cannon already, any attempt to explain this new change in appearance will be far fetched. The change was unnecessary. One could argue the appear of Klingons in TOS looked cheap and clearly they did not have the budget or the capabilities to make Klingons look how the should. The same is not so of the movies and nextgen and the rest of the series’ If they had wanted, they could have make the Klingons look like they do in Discovery. The look of Klingons in the movies and nextgen and the other series’s has become iconic. There was no need to change them. What is next? Giving Vulcans and Romulans square ears instead of the iconic pointed ones? Finally in my opinion, the nextgen Klingons just look better.

TV’s Frink said:

This isn’t gonna become another “this (woman) isn’t a Doctor Who, this (man) is a Doctor Who” thing is it?

I fail to see the comparison between the two. Please also remember that I have agreed to give the female Doctor and a chance.

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Yeah, I’m fine with changes I just don’t like the looks of these new Klingons. It’s the design, not the change itself.

Be honest. It’s the fact that the Klingon women don’t have boob windows in their uniforms anymore, right?

That has absolutely nothing to do with my reasoning for disliking the new Klingons.

New, series, new take on things. That is how creativity works.

dahmage said:

New, series, new take on things. That is how creativity works.

It may be a new series, but if I am not mistaken, this is not considered a reboot. As far as I know, Discovery is suppose to take place in the same universe as TOS, nextgen, and the other series’.

Warbler said:

dahmage said:

New, series, new take on things. That is how creativity works.

It may be a new series, but if I am not mistaken, this is not considered a reboot. As far as I know, Discovery is suppose to take place in the same universe as TOS, nextgen, and the other series’.

yeah i know. but every series has their own transporter beam look, don’t they?

dahmage said:

Warbler said:

dahmage said:

New, series, new take on things. That is how creativity works.

It may be a new series, but if I am not mistaken, this is not considered a reboot. As far as I know, Discovery is suppose to take place in the same universe as TOS, nextgen, and the other series’.

yeah i know. but every series has their own transporter beam look, don’t they?

That can attributed to changes in technology. Plus you do have to allow for the improvement in special effects through the years.

If they don’t want Discovery to be “your daddy’s Star Trek” then call it a reboot. Totally separate it from the original cannon. Don’t say it is part of the same universe and cannon and then change everything.

but it is not.

That’s how “pretend” works, Warb.

There is also another problem: I still maintain that the original timeline no longer exists. It was altered by the Narada in Star Trek 2009 and the original timeline became the Kelvin timeline. Therefore Discovery is a tv series in a timeline that no longer exists.

TV’s Frink said:

That’s how “pretend” works, Warb.

We they say this is part of the cannon of the original Trek timeline, so that is how I will consider it.

Warbler said:

There is also another problem: I still maintain that the original timeline no longer exists. It was altered by the Narada in Star Trek 2009 and the original timeline became the Kelvin timeline. Therefore Discovery is a tv series in a timeline that no longer exists.

Did you just prove that up is down?

?