5 ms·

I tried to vibe with this POV. What's wrong with more content? But it really does cheapen the art/media you used to adore. Even if you try to ignore it, i.e.

I tried to vibe with this POV. What's wrong with more content? But it really does cheapen the art/media you used to adore. Even if you try to ignore it, i.e. you don't have to watch / read all the Star Trek content that has been produced in the last 20 years, and after picard season 1 I completely checked out of all of it, but it just kind of makes everything you loved seem so empty. It was all about generating positive cash flows...the whole time.

Obscurity4340 3y ago
See my "all i care about" comment
to11mtm 3y ago
I feel a lot of this. Parts of Discovery are good, more-so if you look at it from a 'home team' perspective where you'll take any win. OTOH It's only re-watchable to a certain point. Lower Decks, I do like as far as escapism goes but frankly has a lot of 'Yeah this is licensed parody' moments. Sometimes, things should end. Sometimes they end too soon (Farscape comes to mind [0], thankfully it did get a finale at least,) but when you keep adding on 'the additional adventures of' the risk of winding up in some form of everyplot, or just breaking canon, gets wayyyyy tooo damn high. As a counterpoint to that, Picard Season 3 is incredibly watchable, (even RLM thought so,) I hope you try it if you haven't. It somehow does a pretty dang good job with things. [0] - It really is a benchmark for a lot of sci-fi despite the fourth wall tapping.
- Obscurity4340 3y ago
  I feel like you're so close to getting to the point of realization that this fixation on duration and quality is ultimately arbitrary and, in my view, harmful. How else do you explain reboots besides the money part? There's clearly demand for it since people like what they know and their millions+-strong population must in some sense agree with me
Obscurity4340 3y ago
I appreciate you succinctly boiling down what I am trying to address here. I obviously disagree with this position strenuously but in my own way and for the purpose of really "putting a name" to that which I am advocating against, you have done both sides a great service.
- Obscurity4340 3y ago
  Amicus hackae
grotorea 3y ago
> I completely checked out of all of it, but it just kind of makes everything you loved seem so empty As someone who really agrees with the previous poster, this may be the crucial point. I can "disbelieve" the stuff that I think is stupid cashgrab sequel crap, specially if it was not made by the original author. Because think about it, if someone somewhere made a bad fanfic, would it ruin the previous media? Obviously not, right? So why is it different when it's a billion dollar media company that bought the right to slap the "official" name and logo on their fanfic*? If you don't like it, ignore it. If you like it, then great more media of the franchise you enjoy! * Assuming the people writing it are fans and not 100% just there for the money.
- Obscurity4340 3y ago
  I dont know if this comprehensively addresses my issues with the topic but its pretty damn close :) Like this is more an issue of revisionism than it is...I don't even know how to formally refer to the opposing argument and I would rather let everyone else chime in and speak for me here
Obscurity4340 3y ago
I wanna emphasize the part about the actors having fun. That in some sense is a tricky thing since actors profession and main task is to conceal what they are and take on whatever role—or at the very least, to sublimate their personal qualities into their subject. Having said that, I feel like even a famous and highly-skilled actor is not going to be able to perform at their best if they are really just in contract-fullfillment mode for a money-grubbing production... It would seem that no matter how well they were technically perceived, it would slip through somehow and thus violate my condition that the actors are mostly having fun and voluntarily performing, particularly if its with a group of their actor friends that appear in each others' films. I don't worry about the money-grubbing so much cuz chances are the actors are in on it and to some degree inclined to do well and make it enjoyable for themselves and their audience.
Obscurity4340 3y ago
I don't mean offense but it seems almost as arbitrary as complaining that additional purchased game content or whatever the acronym is destroys whatever game it extends when you had all that fun along the way, maybe even to the extent that players/you wanna play a little longer. Harmless doesn't even begin to cover that outside of complaints that its unfair socioeconomically to extend the cost of playing such that kids who were "lucky" to even be able to afford merely the game are being discriminated against economically or whatever either in isolation or with reference to their more fortunate peers. Im getting a bit sidetracked here so I won't be taking notes on this, unfortunately :( but I do think its pretty much analagous in my opinion.

Obscurity4340 3y ago

See my "all i care about" comment

to11mtm 3y ago

I feel a lot of this. Parts of Discovery are good, more-so if you look at it from a 'home team' perspective where you'll take any win. OTOH It's only re-watchable to a certain point. Lower Decks, I do like as far as escapism goes but frankly has a lot of 'Yeah this is licensed parody' moments. Sometimes, things should end. Sometimes they end too soon (Farscape comes to mind [0], thankfully it did get a finale at least,) but when you keep adding on 'the additional adventures of' the risk of winding up in some form of everyplot, or just breaking canon, gets wayyyyy tooo damn high. As a counterpoint to that, Picard Season 3 is incredibly watchable, (even RLM thought so,) I hope you try it if you haven't. It somehow does a pretty dang good job with things. [0] - It really is a benchmark for a lot of sci-fi despite the fourth wall tapping.

Obscurity4340 3y ago
I feel like you're so close to getting to the point of realization that this fixation on duration and quality is ultimately arbitrary and, in my view, harmful. How else do you explain reboots besides the money part? There's clearly demand for it since people like what they know and their millions+-strong population must in some sense agree with me

Obscurity4340 3y ago

I appreciate you succinctly boiling down what I am trying to address here. I obviously disagree with this position strenuously but in my own way and for the purpose of really "putting a name" to that which I am advocating against, you have done both sides a great service.

Obscurity4340 3y ago
Amicus hackae

grotorea 3y ago

> I completely checked out of all of it, but it just kind of makes everything you loved seem so empty As someone who really agrees with the previous poster, this may be the crucial point. I can "disbelieve" the stuff that I think is stupid cashgrab sequel crap, specially if it was not made by the original author. Because think about it, if someone somewhere made a bad fanfic, would it ruin the previous media? Obviously not, right? So why is it different when it's a billion dollar media company that bought the right to slap the "official" name and logo on their fanfic*? If you don't like it, ignore it. If you like it, then great more media of the franchise you enjoy! * Assuming the people writing it are fans and not 100% just there for the money.

Obscurity4340 3y ago
I dont know if this comprehensively addresses my issues with the topic but its pretty damn close :) Like this is more an issue of revisionism than it is...I don't even know how to formally refer to the opposing argument and I would rather let everyone else chime in and speak for me here

Obscurity4340 3y ago

I wanna emphasize the part about the actors having fun. That in some sense is a tricky thing since actors profession and main task is to conceal what they are and take on whatever role—or at the very least, to sublimate their personal qualities into their subject. Having said that, I feel like even a famous and highly-skilled actor is not going to be able to perform at their best if they are really just in contract-fullfillment mode for a money-grubbing production... It would seem that no matter how well they were technically perceived, it would slip through somehow and thus violate my condition that the actors are mostly having fun and voluntarily performing, particularly if its with a group of their actor friends that appear in each others' films. I don't worry about the money-grubbing so much cuz chances are the actors are in on it and to some degree inclined to do well and make it enjoyable for themselves and their audience.

Obscurity4340 3y ago

I don't mean offense but it seems almost as arbitrary as complaining that additional purchased game content or whatever the acronym is destroys whatever game it extends when you had all that fun along the way, maybe even to the extent that players/you wanna play a little longer. Harmless doesn't even begin to cover that outside of complaints that its unfair socioeconomically to extend the cost of playing such that kids who were "lucky" to even be able to afford merely the game are being discriminated against economically or whatever either in isolation or with reference to their more fortunate peers. Im getting a bit sidetracked here so I won't be taking notes on this, unfortunately :( but I do think its pretty much analagous in my opinion.