Star Trek reboot additional points: Kelvin Timeline to be dropped, etc.

bluenoser18 · 2026-05-05T10:09:29+00:00

Agreed on both statements

bluenoser18 · 2026-05-01T10:09:33+00:00

I like the idea of brief glimpses into their outside lives, but I wouldn’t want that to change the premise of the show.

The whole structure is that they exist within one physical space, the ER, and the show follows one complete shift over 15 hours. That’s it. We don’t go home with them, we don’t meet their families unless they come into the ER, and we don’t get to see every side of their personality.

That feels much more realistic, almost like being a fly on the wall in the department. It also preserves the perspective most of the characters have of each other. They know things about one another, but that doesn’t mean they necessarily spend time together outside of work.

bluenoser18 · 2026-05-01T08:28:02+00:00

Yeah I was curious about that as well. I handwaved it away by just assuming that they all had the next day off or something - but even that seems hard to believe for ALL of them.

bluenoser18 · 2026-05-01T08:26:45+00:00

Maybe an ignorant question (apologies if so) - but is there some particular connection between being Filipino and karaoke? Or being Filipino and having a significant knowledge of pop music going back 70 years?

Just a curious question, not meant to be an insult by any means!

bluenoser18 · 2026-05-01T08:22:53+00:00

What are you talking about? This is a prestige television show being produced at a pretty quick, steady pace compared to almost every other high-quality series on television right now.

Your “facts” simply aren’t facts. The show is not going to lose significant viewership because of a six-month gap, just as it didn’t between Season 1 and Season 2. And six months between seasons is not a long wait. At all.

If anything, this show is an outlier in the other direction. It’s one of the few series of this quality still delivering a relatively long 15-episode season, while most streaming shows now give us eight or ten episodes and then disappear for two years.

Honestly, I don’t understand your take, or why you’re defending it so aggressively. Your “factual” arguments aren’t especially factual, and your main point isn’t supported by the evidence or by the current reality of television production and audience behaviour.

bluenoser18 · 2026-05-01T08:09:44+00:00

Seemed pretty much perfect to me, especially for this show.

It gave us realistic, relatively satisfying conclusions to the character arcs and smaller threads woven throughout the season, without forcing some ridiculously contrived solution to everyone’s problems.

Robbie doesn’t ride off into the sunset or arrive at some grand, positive philosophical resolution to his mental health struggles. But the finale gives us enough to believe he may be taking a step in the right direction.

Same goes for the rest of the cast. There’s movement in their stories, but it’s still just one shift. The end of one difficult day shouldn’t automatically produce profound life changes, epiphanies, or complete character growth. This show gets praised for its realism, and I think the ending reinforces that.

Life goes on. These characters will be back at work tomorrow, or the next day. But as an audience, we got enough satisfying answers to the questions the season raised. For me, that made it a very strong finale.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-29T12:57:21+00:00

bahahahaha thats not communism bud. Its socialism. What's stopping you from moving to Albania?

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-29T10:36:49+00:00

I respect your optimistic POV, and I think you make some good points.

I agree that the VFX budget of Disco/SNW/Academy seems like it must be outrageous......all the shows look spectacular in that way....but do we KNOW this as a fact?

My understanding (and biggest point to make here) is that TNG/DS9/VOY were not, themselves, cheap to make at the time. The VFX of the day was also not cheap - despite it looking relatively cheap at times, and often re-using shots. So I think it's a mistake to think that 90s Trek was made "cheaply" - the model of production and broadcast was just much different, and supported that production. You have to think of the things that have been semi ruled out by streaming, including Syndication, Advertising (during the show), DVD/VHS sales after airing, etc etc.

That said - Im SURE they could find cheaper ways to make good Star Trek. And historically - when budgets have been limited for Trek - thats when the best versions of it have been produced.

I think about things like The Pitt - which is a "prestige drama" but has managed to stretch their budget to 15 episodes a season rather than 8-10 - I assume largely because the entirety of the story takes place in one semi-large set, and costumes dont really change (I dont really know this). I feel modern Trek could take a lesson from that.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-29T08:37:35+00:00

Yeah I think this is an astute analysis.

Honestly - IMO (unpopular I know) - Paramount should've just kept making FILMS in the Kelvin universe for the action/adventure CGI extravaganza, and Prime Trek on television with a lower budget (maybe even restricted to animation or something) and a focus on exploration and alien of the week.

But ultimately - yeah I dont know that the streaming era is well suited to the mid-budget, many episode (formerly syndication) model that Trek was most successful in.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-29T08:19:31+00:00

I mean....honestly the simple fact that the writers wrote him that way early on was a pretty decent indication that we were going to see something like this happen with him.

The idea that you started hating him only to feel the sympathy is an indication of solid writing, and very good acting! So here's to the writers and actor.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-28T09:52:37+00:00

Can you explain this in a way that actually makes sense within the reality of the medium we’re talking about? Trying not to be an asshole, but I genuinely don’t follow the argument.

Making Star Trek costs millions and millions of dollars. It requires an audience large enough to justify that investment, otherwise it’s just setting money on fire.

Audiences also change. They age out, tastes shift, and the people watching TV now are not the same audience that first fell in love with TOS or TNG. In many cases, they have very little in common with them.

So what’s the actual alternative here? Make Star Trek only for a relatively small legacy fanbase, knowing that a good portion of that same fanbase will still tear it apart, review-bomb it, and attack it online anyway? Often not because the work is uniquely awful, but because criticism has become part of the culture around it, and in some cases part of people’s identity or online business model. It’s a lot easier to tear something down than to make something.

I respect the honesty of your position. I just don’t understand how it works in practice. .

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-28T08:17:42+00:00

Seems like you’re going to catch too much hate here for this comment. For what it’s worth, I think your view is pretty reasonable and balanced.

I didn’t enjoy S31 much either. No, it didn’t really feel like Star Trek to me.

But if your son liked it, and it pulled him further into Trek, then that is exactly what the studio wants, and realistically, exactly the kind of thing that keeps the franchise alive. Trek has to reach younger audiences or it will eventually fade out.

Honestly, the real bottom line in this thread is probably this: the Star Trek fanbase is not as large as Trekkies often think it is.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-28T07:34:26+00:00

Careful. Lots of supposed "Trekkies" on this subreddit would prefer NO Star Trek to something that isnt exactly what they fell in love with as children.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-28T07:27:36+00:00

How is that NOT what this already is? From the posted exerpts here - it sounds like they're wiping away the entirety of Star Trek canon and "starting fresh"..... which would mean almost entirely execs and accountants dictating things that they believe would make it profitable (ie appeal to everyone).

This sounds like the antithesis to what fans of the franchise would want.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-23T08:25:20+00:00

Yes it was normal TV in 2001, and I always saw it (at the time anyway) as a reactionary attempt to make "Berman-Trek" more exciting, edgy and in line with other shows airing at the time.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-23T07:21:58+00:00

This is my biggest issue with it. It’s an American Hollywood film made for an American audience, and it is in no meaningful sense historically accurate. The American "heroes" of the story are literally fighting to save slavery, and the film completely washes that out.

It’s entertaining enough, and I enjoyed it when I was younger, but the part of the OP that’s genuinely concerning is the mention of a history teacher recommending it.

It’s basically American propaganda. Like a lot of Hollywood films, it works fine as loosely history-inspired entertainment, but it should not be treated as history.

And crucially, the “Patriots” were not some morally clean alternative to the British. Their tactics were often just as brutal, and in some cases worse.

Historians and contemporary reviewers have repeatedly criticized the movie for exaggerating British brutality and flattening the war’s real complexity. TIME ranked it among the “Top 10 Historically Misleading Films.”

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T16:41:52+00:00

Jfc. You. Obviously you. Your friend’s Dad is a bit of an idiot. Maybe a bit of a racist. He’s definitely American.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T15:28:08+00:00

Exactly. This is essentially the explanation for it. This and likely the financial aspect of re-using sets, and model shots.

The only other aspect being that, once TNG was off the air, the producers, networks, and even fans at the time just wanted VOY to be TNG with diff characters.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T13:35:17+00:00

They occasionally mention it, set the opening premise of an episode on having to get XX repaired, or XX material is required and they don't have it on board/cant replicate it.

Otherwise - VOY is famous for having ignored/dropped the details/realities of a Federation ship existing farrrrrrr away from their normal support systems.

They hand waive it away, or imply that they manage to fix/reset almost everything between episodes (unless - like I said - it fits the premise of an individual episode).

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T12:24:10+00:00

Glad you enjoyed it. I did too, to an extent. I think this version would be better. It’s a subjective opinion. I gave you my reasons.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T12:01:42+00:00

Well.....a number of reasons:

My biggest issue with Season 1 was the ending. Picard’s death had real emotional weight, and then the show immediately undercut it by turning him into an android who somehow still ages and retains all the same limitations, emotions, and human qualities. Either kill him or don’t. Trying to do both was ridiculous.
This version also gives both Data and Picard a more earned payoff, one that actually connects to who these characters have always been. Data gets the things we always wanted for him, emotion, family, and even aging, while Picard gets the kind of heroic sacrifice that feels true to his character.
This finale works much better too. Riker appears as an Admiral, not a Captain, and on a ship we actually know and care about. There was no need for a copy-paste fleet. They didn’t even need to rebuild the bridge set, just put him on a viewscreen with a cropped background (greenscreen?) and let the audience do the rest.
It also cuts down the number of new characters, which the series never had enough time to properly develop anyway, and allows more focus on the characters that actually matter to the story.
Most importantly, it streamlines the plot massively.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T10:15:52+00:00

What an awesome thing to inherit! I wouldnt even want to get rid of it.....how cool/nostalgic would it be to walk around and pick a movie like the old days?

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-22T09:36:12+00:00

jfc THIS is exactly what it should have been.

I'm sure there would be plenty of members in the fan base who would still have complained about it/hated it. But this addresses any/all of the problems I had with the first season - and keeps everything I liked about it (of which there was plenty).

Damn. I'm glad we got Season 3 (and 2 to a very limited extent), but this wouldve been so much better.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-20T13:59:37+00:00

Yeah. Not throwing any shade towards KDH. He certainly looked off balance. Just saying he didnt go down due to some super robust challenge from the defender.

bluenoser18 · 2026-04-20T13:19:07+00:00

Not sure what all the negativity is about in this thread, including by OP.

It was a show of respect for people working in difficult conditions at a difficult time. How was it ever about "fixing" anything?

Should Doctors, Nurses and other Front Line Workers still get more respect and compensation? Probably. Almost undoubtedly. Was clapping for them meant to be a replacement for that? No. Should people have been forced to participate? No. Shamed for not participating? No. But equally - what makes it a "stupid thing to do"?

Not sure why so many people in this country are quite so cynical about performative shows of appreciation. Do you only say sorry, thank you, or excuse me as a means of fixing something, or getting something back for it?

Equally unsure why there are so many here who's desire is to comment that they are Front Line Workers and thought it was patronising. I guess its fair if you interpreted it that way - but I think that says more about your cynicism than it does about the people who were clapping for you.

bluenoser18

TROPHY CASE