Jay

Everyone has been warned repeatedly. Any further deviations from the topic or questions regarding the thread’s purpose (which has been clearly laid out) will result in temp bans for all involved.

I have an open thread where anything goes as far as the discussion of “toxic” fandom is concerned, regardless of your position on the matter. Quit disrupting this thread and go there:

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Culture-politics-and-diversity-in-Star-Wars/id/61333

DuracellEnergizer said:

Possessed said:

But you said

Nothing about the series in general would change.

You wanna know how I would’ve handled TOS if I’d been in charge? What the premise would’ve been? How I would’ve executed it? All the ins and outs?

Alright.

Here goes.

I’m going back to the '60s, now. . . .

***

The Federation would be over 1000 years old, but Mankind itself would’ve been exploring space for over 4000 years. In those thousands of years, humans spread throughout the Orion Arm of the galaxy. Due to various extenuating circumstances — war, plague, etc. — a fair number of these colonies became separated & isolated, forgotten. Some of these isolated colonies diverged significantly from baseline humanity, culturally and/or physiologically. Some, like the Vulcans, were peaceful & friendly and had little problem resuming contact with humanity. Others, like the Klingons, become warlike xenophobes. So on, so forth.

The series would be set in the late 7th millennium — 6745-6749 CE. At the beginning of the series, the Federation would not have yet made verified first contact with intelligent species of extraterrestrial origin. Ruins & relics of extinct alien civilizations have been catalogued, and spacers tell tall-tales of encounters with mysterious entities at the fringes of known space, but there’d be no confirmed sightings or encounters with living, breathing aliens.

Kirk’s five-year mission would primarily consist of

1. Patrolling the borders with the Klingon & Romulan Empires.
2. Delivering supplies to outlying outposts & colonies.
3. Dealing with pirates & smugglers.
4. Doing light exploration into areas of space which have been charted but not quite explored yet.

Most of the “new civilizations” Kirk & co. would encounter would be isolated human & near-human cultures. Eventually, however, genuine aliens would surface — truly bizarre critters like the Horlas & Excalbians & Salt Vampires & Melkot. They would remain few and far between, however, due to budgetary/SFX limitations.

And that’s my Star Trek.

P.S. – I’d also like to do ongoing character & story arcs, if the executives don’t mind deviation from the standard episodic storytelling formula. A full five seasons would be swell, too.

It’s easy to look back 50+ years and rewrite a groundbreaking science fiction universe with all the benefits provided by exposure to 50+ years of material that is both contained within and inspired by the universe you’re rewriting.

I’d watch your show today, though. It just wouldn’t be anything close to what we know as Star Trek.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Handman said:

I’m glad Duracell was never in the writers room during the original series run.

He has a point. If you’re suggesting none of these stories should’ve been told until budgets and practical effects work were up to your standards, well…that’s a bit asinine, no?

Jedi Master Skywalker said:

Will you go back to this once you have done 1997 SE

You’ve been asked repeatedly not to post like this. Project owners post updates as they have them.

This is an official warning for both this post and the similar post you made in DrDre’s thread. Future “update nagging” posts in this or any other project thread will be deleted and you’ll be banned.

pittrek said:

I said it before, say it again - Yoda with a lightsabre is like Gandhi with a machine gun

There’s nothing in the OT to indicate Yoda was a pacifist. We may not have seen him fight, but in ESB he trained Luke in the art of defense, and in RotJ he specifically told Luke that he must confront Vader in order to become a Jedi (with Obi-Wan basically telling him not long after that he had to kill him).

I don’t have a problem with Lucas modeling prequel Yoda after the martial arts master who plays old and feeble until he’s required to kick ass. The other strong audience reaction I saw was to Yoda Force-pulling his cane and resuming his hobbled stance just before people arrived on the scene.

fmalover said:

AOTC’s only saving grace for me is the lightsaber duel between Yoda and Dooku (yes I enjoy that scene, sue me).

Lots of people bash that scene, but when I saw it in the theater, the entire audience lost it when Yoda opened his robe and Force-pulled the lightsaber into his hand.

It seems hardcore Star Wars fans are likely as detached from what audiences like about the prequels (and probably sequels) as what they don’t.

DominicCobb said:

ZkinandBonez said:

DominicCobb said:

It’s interesting seeing people say that TPM looked “the most like Star Wars.” Certainly in terms of shooting on film, less CGI overall and more practical effects and real locations it looks more like SW than the other two. But in terms of designs I’m not entirely sure I agree. They definitely had some leeway with the film’s setting being years before and on some different worlds, but I think in some areas things definitely went too far afield and look like they’re from a different franchise altogether.

Well, I was more going for the over-all “feel” of the film, not necessarily specific designs.

I’ve learned to really appreciate the designs in the PT in the last few years, and I actually think it’s a good thing that the PT looks very different from the OT. I even thinks it makes sense for it to feel different too, which is why I like ROTS, though I don’t complain when they do feel OT-like either.

As for straying too far from the OT designs/feel, I personally think AOTC, and to a lesser degree ROTS, are the biggest sinners there. I’m curious about what things in particular from TPM you’re referring to. I always felt that TPM balanced new and old concepts really well.

The ship, set, and costume designs in general are too ornate and (on the whole) lack the rugged, lived-in and (most importantly) utilitarian feel of the OT. Even if they are justified in universe because of the film’s areas of interest (rich Naboo and Coruscant), it just doesn’t feel quite right for a SW film to have that kind of stuff as a primary focus. If the out-there designs weren’t so abundant, it probably wouldn’t feel like a problem to me.

But that’s not all of it. Pretty much all CG aliens in the film look silly and out of place. Not to mention the Gungans and their underwater city, which straddles a line between somewhat inspired and just plain wacky.

I will say I’m a fan of the battle droids. I probably would’ve preferred them a tad bulkier but they look pretty good.

I think the sets and costumes for TPM are appropriate for a society at its peak that has yet to be ravaged by the Empire. Free, wealthy societies have rich culture with beautiful, ornate architecture and fashion. Coruscant and Naboo fit quite well with what I’d expect “before the dark times”.

Jedit: Beaten by ZkinandBonez.

Creox said:

NeverarGreat said:

yotsuya said:

NeverarGreat said:

djsmokingjam said:

DrDre said:

Here are two links from the same critic. The first discusses weaknesses in RJ’s story, and argues that TLJ’s biggest weakness is, that the story doesn’t go anywhere. There are no consequences.

Short summary:

"In The Last Jedi, a lot happens. But not a lot happens for long. Leia’s sudden and unexpected death only proceeds her jarring return to life.

Kylo Ren’s betrayal of Snoke, which leads to a team-up with Rey and himself against Snoke’s guards, implies his redemption… But it isn’t long lasting as his actions hardly reflect his intentions. After the fight, he has to explain himself to Rey, and how they still aren’t on the same side.

This is a classic break from “show, don’t tell.” Kylo has to tell us his motives for the scene to make sense. He essentially retcons the entire sequence, because it might as well not have happened. The scene ends up telling us nothing new. Kylo Ren is a bad guy. But we were already aware of that. Actions should speak for a character, but in the most powerful scene of the film, they don’t.

Lastly, when Luke finally faces Kylo, there’s a moment where we’re meant to believe this is the end for the Jedi Master. It seems as if Luke has accepted his fate as Kylo runs toward him with his blade drawn. Luke literally tells him something similar to what Ben Kenobi tells Darth Vader: “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.”

Luke seems fearless. But then, we realize Luke has nothing to fear after all. He’s not even actually there. This scene is meant for us to anticipate Luke’s death, only for it to be revealed he’s fine… Only for it to be revealed a moment later that he dies anyway."

Both these points seem incredibly pedantic and overinflated to me.

In the first instance, “show don’t tell” does not mean either that dialogue is redundant in cinema, or that actions and dialogue always have to be in perfect concert, especially regarding villains (who are often by nature duplicitous or unstable). The entire point of the throne room sequence is to set up an expectation (Kylo will side with Rey) that is then upended; in much the same way as the action at the end of ESB sets up an expectation (Vader wants to kill Luke) that is then contradicted by dialogue (“I am your father”) rather than action.

On the second point, he’s just being incredibly literal. The entire subtext of the dialogue is not that whether Luke will literally be struck down - Luke has already made it clear throughout the film that he does not fear death - but that in opposing him, Kylo ensures Luke’s reputation will echo throughout the galaxy and that thousands will be inspired by his example, which we see happen in the final scene.

To say there are no consequences to the events in the film is absurdly reductive, and frankly typical of the wilfully and uncharitably misreading “criticism” I’ve seen so much of about this film.

I think what the critic was trying to get at is that the story does its best to deflate its own most interesting ideas. There are obviously consequences and character progression, it’s just that these moments are ultimately not as consequential as we are first led to believe.

Leia is blown out into space, presumably to her death! But wait, she’s using the Force in a way we’ve never seen from her before! Has she had substantial training in those thirty years? Has the Force suddenly ‘awakened’ in her as well, making her the ‘new hope’ for the galaxy that Luke suggested in ROTJ?

No, sorry. It was just an instinctual reaction to her impending death and her Force powers will not be a big factor in the rest of the movie.

Kylo kills Snoke! Now he’s teaming up with Rey against the goofy red guards! Will he really turn to Rey’s side and will they strike out together in a new direction in order to prevent a repeat of Rebels vs Empire that we got in the previous trilogy?

No, sorry. Kylo’s still a bad egg and Rey still has a deep loyalty to the Jedi ideals (despite her teachers hating them) and the Resistance (despite knowing them for maybe a day at most). And it will be a Rebels vs Empire situation quite explicitly until the end of the movie.

You get the idea. The movie goes in some interesting directions, but it seems to make a point of teasing these truly interesting directions and pulling it back to something much more tame.

No, one of the points of this film is that anyone can use the force. Not everyone is powerful enough, but people who are powerful enough can come from anywhere. This is implicit in the PT Jedi code - attachment is forbidden and by extrapolations, so is procreation. That means that none of the powerful Jedi we see came from a long line of Jedi in the family. So if being powerful only runs in the blood, where did all the PT Jedi come from?

I don’t see what this has to do with my point. I don’t really care about Leia’s Force powers, since they don’t really affect the story, but the movie spends its time showing this impressive feat with sweeping wide shots and powerful music as if it has totally changed the game in terms of Leia’s role in the story, only to drop that and have nobody speak of it again. Cut from the bridge explosion to Leia unconscious and nothing is lost from a story perspective.

The movie does go in many interesting directions, but this is the middle chapter and we did not see a resolution to any of them. This lack of resolution leads to this erroneous conclusion that this movie did not further the story. It furthered the characters and changed them. It tackled grander things than the Resistance/Republic/First Order conflict, which it left mostly in limbo.

Are you mistakenly talking about ESB, where the larger war was in limbo? Because in TFA, the First Order was treated as a sort of terrorist fringe organization, whereas in TLJ it all-but rules the galaxy.
Besides, this is again missing the point. The critic is saying that we are first given a very interesting direction which is quickly undermined in favor of a far less interesting direction. It would be like Vader saying ‘I am your father!’ and Yoda later saying ‘Messing with you, Vader was. Your father, he definitely isn’t’ and that being that.

And we know from ROTJ that Leia is strong in the force and like her brother in TESB (who grabbed his light saber with no known training of doing that) she grabbed a ship and in keeping with the laws of physics, she moved not the ship. Rey, Leia, and the boy at the end show us that anyone can use the force, from a Skywalker to a stable boy.

That’s all very nice, but again, what does it have to do with anything? We already assumed that Leia had the capability of doing what Luke could do (even if it was left undeveloped). Why would Rian bother to show us what we already assume unless these powers are called upon later in the movie? Luke and his lightsaber is a set up for the duel with Vader, where he is now able to pull himself up out of the Carbonite pit. It shows the progression of his skills. Leia’s ability is one-and-done.

A movie experience is more than just moving to the next plot point in a straight line.

It’s also more than a series of half-explored concepts and subverted expectations strung together by a hair-thin plot.

NeverarGreat and DrDre have laid out some compelling arguments supporting the main characters’ lack of progression in TLJ. It’s not a terribly interesting film in that regard.

nickyd47 said:

SilverWook would you kindly wipe my account off your site? I don’t want any association here anymore. Politics have officially infultrated Star Wars and now the franchise is dead to me. They don’t want my white male nerd input and I don’t blame them.

If you’re going to throw a fit because you can’t take over a single thread, no problem. All you had to do was restrict your arguments to threads where the debate is open and welcome, or create your own.

I’ve locked your account to prevent further spamming of this thread.

nickyd47 said:

I await your apology.
https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/star-wars-has-a-white-male-fandom-problem
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jun/11/anti-disney-group-harassment-star-wars-female-actors-daisy-ridley-kelly-marie-tran
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/05/29/as-solo-a-star-wars-story-flops-are-movies-about-white-men-box-office-poison/
https://www.quora.com/Why-has-Star-Wars-regressed-to-a-white-male-lead-again-in-their-upcoming-movie-after-the-proven-success-of-female-leads-in-the-last-three-SW-movies
https://hellogiggles.com/reviews-coverage/movies/star-wars-white-men-universe/
https://medium.com/@andrewgarofalo/are-star-wars-fans-angry-white-men-66bd89b8f14
https://mashable.com/2018/02/09/star-wars-white-male-filmmakers/

I don’t disagree with the point you’re trying to make, but note that on this forum, the OP sets the tone for the thread according to the rules. If you read the entire thread, you’ll see that we’ve already covered this issue due to previous disruptions.

I recommend you use the Culture, politics, and diversity in Star Wars thread for the thoughts you’re trying to express. You might find a more sympathetic ear.

Mocata said:

8 months later people are still arguing over this.

But 8 months later it’s still in the Blu-ray chart.

If a franchise has hundreds of millions of fans and only half of them like and buy the latest movie, that’s still a lot of copies sold. It doesn’t necessarily follow that it was a great movie or not divisive.

screams in the void said:

and here we go again …https://variety.com/2018/digital/global/ruby-rose-batwoman-quits-twitter-following-trolling-1202902971/ Anybody got a ticket off this planet ?

I’ve been following this story, and it’s hilarious to me that a lesbian cast to play a lesbian character is getting flack from the far left because she’s not gay enough, whatever the hell that means. Just proves there are loonies on both sides and you can’t please everybody, so just do the best work you can and don’t try to cater to fringe elements. It’s a losing proposition.

SilverWook said:

As Picard had a love for archeology, I like the Indiana Jones comparison.

I was thinking specifically of “Captain’s Holiday” when the idea came to me.

Handman said:

That would be incredibly boring. I said it before, but I want to see Picard as an ambassador, doing the kinds of things Spock did during TNG.

Yes, but rather than dealing with the same old species and conflicts, maybe Picard could be an ambassador whose specific purpose is to greet new civilizations when first contact is initiated. That would allow the writers to stay on the original timeline and introduce us to new worlds/species/stories instead of rehashing all the same old conflicts.

I picture Picard as this Indiana Jones-type ambassador who performs his formal duties as ambassador, but spends his time off the clock getting into adventures and solving diplomatic issues in unconventional ways.

Mrebo said:

Be great if they brought Captain Janeway back for a few episodes.

I started the new season of OITNB and only made it 5 minutes because I turned it off when I saw this.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Please keep my name out of your mouth, if you don’t mind. Thanks.

Lol. He’s not supposed to reference comments made by the site administrator?

If you left the thread because you found the discussion toxic, I wouldn’t be in here mentioning your name, especially in reference to a post you made elsewhere. If he has a problem with what I said, he can bring it up in the thread I said it instead of posting it in a topic everyone knows I’m deliberately avoiding because I said as much.

He probably forgot which thread it was in and it’s relevant to this thread. If I made a political comment somewhere and someone brought it up in this thread and I wouldn’t hold it against them. It’s actually one of the few things that even I wouldn’t hold against somebody.

What you find bothersome isn’t relevant. And whatever thread it involved, I made it clear that I didn’t want to participate in this one anymore, so I don’t appreciate my name being brought up in attempt to goad me into defending something I never said. Address what I posted where I posted it and leave me out of this mess.

And I don’t know why you guys keep bringing up the fact that I’m the admin. It has zero relevance.

When an admin of a site makes a demand, there’s an implicit threat behind it. It’s very obvious. It’s like if your landlord tells you to stop doing something.

And like a landlord, I would cite the lease if you were in violation of the terms and suggest you act accordingly. Did I cite the rules? No. I told him to get his shit straight.

If you feel threatened, that’s everything to do with you and nothing with me.

I don’t feel threatened at all. I’m just saying that being an administrator and then making demands has implicit threat of banning behind it. Obviously. I find it weird that you say the things that you say and act the way that you act and then expect people to be cordial with you. I didn’t say I was bothered by anything, so I don’t see why you brought that up because, you’re right, that is irrelevant. I wasn’t goading you either. He obviously wasn’t. He was just bringing up a comment that you made. I don’t even think he got it that wrong because being “uninformed” and “unintelligent” are often interchangeable words. And you obviously do read this thread regularly if you’re so ready to jump back in and police it and then continue to bicker when you claim to be checking out of the toxic conversation. You’ve contributed to the toxicity too. Not as much as I have, of course, but you’ve contributed nonetheless, so I find your whole attitude to this thread weird.

Yes, I read the thread because I’m a moderator and share responsibilities with others here to review posts. There have probably been a hundred posts since I stopped contributing to this thread that I disagree with vehemently, but I’m not wading back into this pool. We’ll have to agree to disagree on the “goading”.

Anyone using “uninformed” and “unintelligent” interchangeably needs a dictionary because they’re not synonyms by any stretch.

dahmage said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Please keep my name out of your mouth, if you don’t mind. Thanks.

Lol. He’s not supposed to reference comments made by the site administrator?

If you left the thread because you found the discussion toxic, I wouldn’t be in here mentioning your name, especially in reference to a post you made elsewhere. If he has a problem with what I said, he can bring it up in the thread I said it instead of posting it in a topic everyone knows I’m deliberately avoiding because I said as much.

He probably forgot which thread it was in and it’s relevant to this thread. If I made a political comment somewhere and someone brought it up in this thread and I wouldn’t hold it against them. It’s actually one of the few things that even I wouldn’t hold against somebody.

What you find bothersome isn’t relevant. And whatever thread it involved, I made it clear that I didn’t want to participate in this one anymore, so I don’t appreciate my name being brought up in attempt to goad me into defending something I never said. Address what I posted where I posted it and leave me out of this mess.

And I don’t know why you guys keep bringing up the fact that I’m the admin. It has zero relevance.

When an admin of a site makes a demand, there’s an implicit threat behind it. It’s very obvious. It’s like if your landlord tells you to stop doing something.

And like a landlord, I would cite the lease if you were in violation of the terms and suggest you act accordingly. Did I cite the rules? No. I told him to get his shit straight.

If you feel threatened, that’s everything to do with you and nothing with me.

You quit often threaten. So I call horshit. Just setting the record straight. Being admin simply is an extra burden you carry, you can’t pretend otherwise.

How many times will you guys accuse me of threatening people without anyone ending up banned before you’ll give up that tired old line? Don’t you think I would’ve graduated to actually banning people with whom I have differences of opinion by now if that were really a thing I did?

I’ve invited plenty of people to leave of their own accord over the years if they’re feeling oppressed, certainly. That invitation always remains open. I’m sure there are plenty of Star Wars forums where you can openly argue with moderators and administrators without being banned, right?

Please stick to the topic of politics. If you want to question my motives, create a thread in the feedback forum where we can continue this pointless debate about all my supposed threats that have never amounted to anything.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Please keep my name out of your mouth, if you don’t mind. Thanks.

Lol. He’s not supposed to reference comments made by the site administrator?

If you left the thread because you found the discussion toxic, I wouldn’t be in here mentioning your name, especially in reference to a post you made elsewhere. If he has a problem with what I said, he can bring it up in the thread I said it instead of posting it in a topic everyone knows I’m deliberately avoiding because I said as much.

He probably forgot which thread it was in and it’s relevant to this thread. If I made a political comment somewhere and someone brought it up in this thread and I wouldn’t hold it against them. It’s actually one of the few things that even I wouldn’t hold against somebody.

What you find bothersome isn’t relevant. And whatever thread it involved, I made it clear that I didn’t want to participate in this one anymore, so I don’t appreciate my name being brought up in attempt to goad me into defending something I never said. Address what I posted where I posted it and leave me out of this mess.

And I don’t know why you guys keep bringing up the fact that I’m the admin. It has zero relevance.

When an admin of a site makes a demand, there’s an implicit threat behind it. It’s very obvious. It’s like if your landlord tells you to stop doing something.

And like a landlord, I would cite the lease if you were in violation of the terms and suggest you act accordingly. Did I cite the rules? No. I told him to get his shit straight.

If you feel threatened, that’s everything to do with you and nothing with me.

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Please keep my name out of your mouth, if you don’t mind. Thanks.

Lol. He’s not supposed to reference comments made by the site administrator?

If you left the thread because you found the discussion toxic, I wouldn’t be in here mentioning your name, especially in reference to a post you made elsewhere. If he has a problem with what I said, he can bring it up in the thread I said it instead of posting it in a topic everyone knows I’m deliberately avoiding because I said as much.

And I don’t know why you guys keep bringing up the fact that I’m the admin. It has zero relevance.

Back to lurking moderator mode. Peace.

TV’s Frink said:

So why is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a “box of rocks” as our non-box friend Mrebo put it and our non-box friend Jay agreed with? I’m listening to an interview with her (granted it’s Pod Save America so they’re softball questions) and she sounds reasonably intelligent to me.

I said she was uninformed, not unintelligent. That wasn’t even in this thread (which I’ve done my best to stay away from because it’s basically digital cancer), but if you’re going to call me out, at least get it right.

Please keep my name out of your mouth, if you don’t mind. Thanks.

SilverWook said:

Jay said:

dahmage said:

Jay said:

SilverWook said:

I imagine there would be a physical media release eventually?

I reserve physical media purchases for things I’ve already seen and know I like, or perhaps something I feel I’m extremely likely to enjoy. I don’t have enough faith in any franchise beginning with “Star” at this point to blind-buy media.

Do you blind buy any media though? Not many do.

I used to quite frequently after I gave up on theaters (too expensive, crowded, and noisy) and stopped caring about being current, but once 4K became more prevalent, I pretty much stopped buying Blu-rays because I don’t have a 4K display yet and didn’t want to waste money on old media I’d probably replace (or jump into 4K early and end up replacing those because early releases on DVD and Blu-ray were often shit).

I’ve found 1080p streaming, while not as good as Blu-ray, to be adequate in the meantime, especially since I watch more TV than movies these days and care a bit less about A/V quality for TV shows.

4K is the niche within a niche though. And now we have more questionable color decisions being made and seldom an original audio mix in sight. I’ve read not every 4k display has all the new color tech, and yet another format has been unleashed on us where all the finer specs weren’t finalized. Yay progress!

I’d say if you buy a 2018 4K display with Dolby Vision and HDR10+ (either out of the box or promised in a future firmware upgrade), you’re pretty much covered. There are some other benefits to HDMI 2.1 like variable refresh rate, but that applies mostly to gamers.

I’ll probably cave on Black Friday and make the jump. I like to sit pretty close to the TV, and while my Pioneer plasma has held up remarkably well, I can see pixel structure and occasional aliasing. Even 1080p sources see some benefits in that regard when upscaled to 4K.

dahmage said:

Jay said:

SilverWook said:

I imagine there would be a physical media release eventually?

I reserve physical media purchases for things I’ve already seen and know I like, or perhaps something I feel I’m extremely likely to enjoy. I don’t have enough faith in any franchise beginning with “Star” at this point to blind-buy media.

Do you blind buy any media though? Not many do.

I used to quite frequently after I gave up on theaters (too expensive, crowded, and noisy) and stopped caring about being current, but once 4K became more prevalent, I pretty much stopped buying Blu-rays because I don’t have a 4K display yet and didn’t want to waste money on old media I’d probably replace (or jump into 4K early and end up replacing those because early releases on DVD and Blu-ray were often shit).

I’ve found 1080p streaming, while not as good as Blu-ray, to be adequate in the meantime, especially since I watch more TV than movies these days and care a bit less about A/V quality for TV shows.

SilverWook said:

I imagine there would be a physical media release eventually?

I reserve physical media purchases for things I’ve already seen and know I like, or perhaps something I feel I’m extremely likely to enjoy. I don’t have enough faith in any franchise beginning with “Star” at this point to blind-buy media.

Any image hosted by a third party that doesn’t load quickly enough can cause it, so it would be dependent on network conditions. Could come and go at seemingly random intervals.

If it’s not on one of the streaming services I already subscribe to (Netflix, Hulu, Prime, Sling, and HBO), I’m not paying for yet another one to see it.

Not ignoring, just not prioritized. Still on the list, though.

https://github.com/jaysylvester/comitium/issues/177

https://github.com/jaysylvester/comitium/issues/79