I’ve been noticing that more and more as well. Rob makes legitimate points and tries to expand on them. I don’t always agree but I wanna hear what he says. Idk if they’re just short on time, or if John is just rude.
I'd like to point something out if that's okay with everyone. I don't know about everyone here but I watch the show everyday. That said every time Star Trek gets brought up Rob and John say the same exact thing every single time. Almost word for word. The debate about it never changes. I like listening to John and Rob talk about Star Trek but mostly when they're both on the same page whether it's dealing with the original series or the next generation. I don't like hearing the same exact thing from both of them every time it's about modern Trek. Nothing from either side is added to the discussion. Honestly it gets tiring because we all know what they're going to say. I don't think John's intentionally being rude. I just think he knows where both of their thoughts are going to go on the subject so he's just trying to speed it along. I'm glad that Rob thought it was at least decent. Also, I do think that it's a testament to how well modern Trek is doing when John favors the familiar and treaded ground of that franchise as compared to his complaints of Star Wars constantly going back to the same characters. I hope for both of their sakes John gets on a better page with Star Wars in the way that he's become fine with how Trek has familiar beats and I hope Rob eventually gets to a place with Star Trek that is satisfying even if it never reaches what he believes to be the pinnacle of Trek. Just my thoughts everyone. Peace
I agree. I used to like John for his humility and lately he's just gotten rude, full of himself, and completely disinterested in anyone else's opinion if they disagree with him.
I agree with Robert's commentary about how _Star Trek_ was built on allegory and how _Strange New Worlds_ might not be. He always has such thoughtful commentary about so many pop culture topics, I appreciate him so much!
I think John is missing the point. Seems to be a long running thing with him sometimes. What Rob is saying is the use of science fiction to tell allegorical stories was a wonderful piece of Star Trek throughout its history. It opened up debate and dialogue. Doing what the STN did is just telling the audience rather than showing them through good storytelling. I did enjoy the pilot, but Rob is entirely correct about what he is saying, and John forces in his points, and refuses to let anyone prove him wrong, then cuts off the debate for "time". It's a cowardly thing to do if you ask me.
I am with Rob with this. in the 90s, i knew friends who could quote star dates per episode. i am not that much of a trekkie, but i loved TOS, TNG, DS9, Enterprise, and even VOY
Not a Trek fan but I really appreciate Rob trying to articulate how he feels. It's easy to just say you don't like something or it missed your expectations. I'm gonna check this out now based on how Rob described the perspective of the show.
@@KamLagan Agreed! He has learned not to get upset and flustered and just move past it. He handles it like a champ, but I really wish John wouldn't do that to him.
i just watched the last episode and it has me fully hooked in for next season. That scene alone with pike and spock was emotional, i liked most of it tbh, i will be more than happy with a new season, was a weekly must watch.
I'm with Robert on this. This episode was more telling you what to think instead of giving you the chance to think for yourself. I also have to say that was a pretty extreme ultimatum Pike gave the leaders of that planet. He could have worded it better. Add to that my overall problem with this show which is how the Enterprise looks and how big the bridge is, what the tech looks like, etc. It's like it's not from the same Star Trek universe it claims to be a part of. Plus, specifically in this premiere episode, a lot of liberties were taken with lore and canon. And even established facts concerning Spock and T'Pring.
@@Ohalexsimmons It was okay for TNG's bridge to be better and bigger. TNG takes place in the future of TOS. That's fine. Even Expected. But SNW takes place before TOS.
@@Ohalexsimmons When I said "same tech" I meant the "look" of it. When TNG went back to TOS with Scotty, they honored the look. When DS9 went back to TOS they also honored the look. If you can't honor the look, then don't go back. Move forward. I can't watch this crap. It's too distracting. It's only good for "casual" Trek fans. Reply if you want but I'm turning notifications off. I didn't mean to start a debate.
As always, Rob describes my feelings on new Trek perfectly. Love it when Trek comes up and Rob is on the show. Agreed 100%. I honestly wish John would give him a little bit of freedom to express it more, because it's so cathartic and spot on.
Rob has some valid points, but Strange New Worlds is not aimed at people that has watched every episode (and film) of previous shows and read every novel, like he has. It's made to bring back the joy of old Star Trek to people who never experienced it and to please a majority of trekkers, who were demanding a return to episodic storytelling and a less ominous tone. And so far I think it's being successful at that.
John is terribly wrong on the Jan 6th reference, I agree with Rob. Was Jan 6th egregious? Absolutely! But the television show shouldn't alienate a large portion of their viewers by showing exact footage of the event. Not sure I want to watch this show now, even though I'm against what happened on that day. Was a shame to hear this since I paused the video to watch the trailer and loved it, now I don't know how to feel.
John why don't you let rob talk and explain his feelings on the episode rather than cutting him off and trying to belittle his opinions just because you disagreed with them. If you don't have enough time for a full discussion than don't debate him. You explained your opinions, let him fully explain his. He never spoke once when you were talking and yet you didn't give him the same courtesy. Maybe you should consider slightly remodeling these "discussions" so that everyone can speak and give their opinions and then if you deem there is time you can have a debate at the end. Because nearly every video you post I will see in the comments at least one person complaining that you either cut off rob or didn't give him enough time to speak. I know it's your show and you can ultimately do whatever you want, but you have invited a fellow, respectable, not only film pundit, but also film director onto your show. Not only is he very qualified and articulate with his opinions (and if you stopped cutting him off I'm sure he'd finish his thoughts much quicker), but he's also without a doubt the most knowledgeable person in the room when it comes to Star Trek. I truly hope you read this and properly think on it because I'm positive the majority of your viewers feel the same way I do.
@@GPsarakis If he wouldn’t cut him off all the time, Rob would get to his point soon enough! Robs opinion on this particular topic is much more interesting than what the girls have to say, so give the man a bit of time.
@@dertodesking8379 If they had seen the episode they're opinion would've been interesting to hear, they represent the general audience Paramount hopes they can draw in more of with their shows. Rob was rehashing stuff he said on his video that he posted days ago. So if you want to hear him go on for 1 hr about Trek you can see that there.
@@GPsarakis I’ve seen that video, but not everyone knows he has an own channel, + ppl tune in to this video, I think if they bring up the topic on this show everyone is entitled to voice their opinion. I didn’t say the girls opinion doesn’t matter, you’re right they represent the “average viewer” while Rob represents the hardcore Trek nerd. And it’s not just this show, he’s often cutting Rob short!
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of Strange New Worlds. That said, I am 76 and liked it better than the other recent new Star Trek endeavors. Better writing, better flow.
Completely disagree with John's point. There is a BIG difference between actual allegory and making an overtly specific and political comparison. One allows for timeless moral lessons and the other instantly dates the film/show while also, as Rob says, alienates some viewers. The ENTIRE point of allegory is to take a problem of our real world, remove it from its context and present it in an interesting and relatable way. By doing this, you disarm the viewer into seeing the situation without bias, and if you do it really well, you might even convince someone to end up agreeing with you through the power of empathy. (Or, put metaphorically, allegory is like when you hide your dog's medicine inside of peanut butter. The viewer eats the peanut butter (the fun genre story) because it tastes good without realizing they are also being fed medicine, (the moral lesson) It's about the subtlety of storytelling. We may know that they were talking about Vietnam in the 60s, but the message applies to any war, because it is fantastical and therefore timeless. The premiere of Strange New Worlds only ensconces itself within the political moment by making direct political references, and given the passage of time, will become irrelevant and outdated. The old magic of Star Trek was that it transcended the political moment, and that magic is gone, because the majority of Hollywood doesn't know how to do allegory anymore without political grandstanding. Rob's right. There IS a difference, and it's an important one.
@@ronpetersen2317 Many of the same people crying 'offense' here are the very same ones calling other people 'snowflakes' every day. Secondly, why aren't there any liberals offended by 'no justice no peace' signs in the same clip? Those kinds of protests long predate the trump era and span both parties. As usual with everything today, conservatives are taking selective offense and crying the loudest like proverbial 'hit hogs hollerin'. Finally, I see no reason for Star Trek to remain forever static. But I DO see a reason for those who see their own bad actions reflected, to instead stop whining and change their behavior. Here's an idea if you don't want to end up as watershed newsreel footage in MSM, tv and movies, how about maybe not storming your capitol with a noose and chanting for your vice president's execution? Just a thought🙄
Rob is right, it's not that the message is bad or wrong, it's how you push the message to force people to think without telling them how to think. Their thinking may be wrong and they do need to think about it, but if you tell them how to think instead of making them think, they will tune you out.
Strange New Worlds is doing to the Star Trek Franchise what The Mandalorian has done for the Star Wars Franchise; it's taking the franchise back to its roots to then rebuild something new. It's brought back old fans and brought in new fans. The Next Generation, which is my favourite series, had a rough start yet Strange New Worlds has had a solid and even better first season. It's got a showrunner, writers and cast who know what they're doing and I love so many of the characters - especially the new characters: Ortegas, Hemmer and Angel, to name a few. My biggest gripe with so many forced identity politics shows and movies, 'woke', is that they suffer from arrogant inexperienced artists fresh out of college who ego boost themselves by lecturing the audience yet they do not know how to write a good script, never alone structure a long format story or deliver it. They then pat themselves on the back by hiring a diverse cast and crew, rapid-fire out dividing tweets, and within their arrogance believe themselves to be the figureheads in progressing us forward. However, their arrogance does not allow them to see that they are actually setting diverse stories back, undoing all of the decades-long important and hard work for us to have inclusive shows with low-quality shows and movies that bomb, divide audiences, and taint the name 'diversity' and 'diverse stories' within the mainstream. Their POC and LGBT cast, crew, and audience then publically suffer for it. Strange New Worlds is the leading example, take note Kathleen Kennedy and Marvel, on how to be inclusive while telling progressive yet also engaging well-written, acted and directed stories that no matter what side of the political stratosphere audiences are on, they can enjoy and think about. No one has an issue (other than a small minority of racists, on both sides, who can tweet loud) with political agenda shows. But we do have an issue when they are not backed up by the above. Star Trek should be political, it's a left-leaning show, and it deserves the talented artists behind SNW. I'm very excited for season 2, where, from what I've read, they tread more out of the waters and into space. Am I over-hyped about it? Probably, because I have been taken back by how much of a breath of fresh air it is - likewise with The Boys.
Anson Mount is a great actor. He just played Black Bolt in the new Dr. Strange movie and nobody seems to be mentioning him. Hell on wheels was a great show. Loved the discussion and looing forward to checking out this show.
I agree with Rob, for a show that’s supposed to be futuristic and progress they sure do like to go back and retell stories and go back to an old format. Don’t get me wrong it’s a good show but just more of the same retelling of stories
Spock asked Kirk in Star Trek VI, “Is it possible that we, you and I, have grown so old and so inflexible that we have outlived our usefulness? Would that constitute a joke?” I wonder if that’s the case for a certain someone on the panel there?
Ayee, there's always an excuse. He was literally complaining, last week, that something they did, didn't fit his HEAD CANON. It was WRONG, not because the show shouldn't do a thing, but because in his HEAd it meant something else, so... I mean FFS Rob!
I been hearing for years since I was watching TNG, DS9, and Voyager which I loved that people wanted to know more about Christopher Pike, now we’re getting it and a lot of people complaining about start trek being in the past and not the future.
I generally agree with Rob on this. Give us something to think about, don’t tell us what to think. The writing really stands out to me, it’s just not as sophisticated as it used to be.
Anson Mount’s Pike is a modern day Trek iconic trek character. Star Trek have been trying to make new ones since Discovery and they’ve finally achieved it.
I agree with Rob 100%. I will say this show feels way more like the last shows and because of that I found it much more enjoyable than Discovery or Picard, but I can’t say that the Star Trek I grew up with and loved is back. I still think that The Orville is doing trek much much better than those who currently hold the keys to franchise
I agree with Rober Meyer that using the footage from the real life event that happened not so long ago drives a wedge between a major portion of the audience and the creators. The allegorical method of presenting a problem has a chance of convincing individual to have a look at the problem from a different point of view. Here what we witnessed for many people can be interpreted as incessant preaching and virtue signalling moral superiority.
I seem to be a rare fanatic of both Star Wars and Star Trek, however I do lean Star Trek for very sentimental reasons. As a child raised in the 80s my two fondest memories of going to theaters were #2) standing in line for the premiere of Return of the Jedi for hours with my family and #1) seeing the Wrath of Khan in theaters just my mother and I. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..."
That's why I like Pike looking up the personal history of the people he saw himself save. He realizes that he must cherish every moment till then and then because he saves their lives he can accept his fate. I believe that's why the Talos people give him a happy ending. Signs of that his acceptance of number 1 Illyrian heritage in recent episode.
A resistance series centered on worlds resisting the early Dominion invasions could be interesting notably by seeing what the conquered species were like prior to being bio-reengineered to serve the founders.
I realize it is John‘s show and all, but on this topic, his opinion is the one that I am least interested in hearing. Give Rob a chance to talk and make his point without your incessant interruptions.
I've never seen this channel until now, but that Rob guy I can agree with mostly, but I think he's missing that the stories each week can be "episodic", and the characters can have "arcs", giving the viewers the best of both story telling devices.
I hope there is an arc soon where they kill off Uhura. In a respectful way, of course. And then that British security officer needs to go. And that George Samuel Kirk. And then M'Benga and Chapel can be killed in a transporter accident, like what we saw in TMP. The Enterprise will have to get new officers, of course. But they can't be any worse.
"The Offer" on paramount plus..easily the best new show out there. People are missing a great show if not watching. The making of the Godfather and how it got made..maybe just as good as the movies..yup I said it.
Me, too! Except Discovery. And Picard. And Strange New Worlds. And, to be honest, I'm not really a fan of Voyager, though I liked Jeri Ryan for some odd reason.
I gotta disagree a bit with Rob, because I think serialized storytelling is actually the weakness in discovery and Picard. 10-20 episode arcs that all feed into a single vague galactic threat story, no room for the one offs, no character building except for the main 2-3 characters, lazy virtue signaling instead of allegory. I think this episode shows potential to be the best new trek since Enterprise because they’re able to bring SOME of that old storytelling style back through the episodic structure
Here's a plot hole/trope episode 1.3 unintentionally solves: Scotty's continual underestimating of the Enterprise's capabilities. Una secretly sets up a hidden power drain on the warp core for Dr. M'Benga, then when Scotty later joins Engineering (before becoming Chief of Engineering) he would observe and rate the ship's capabilities at that less than optimal level thinking that is the best it can do, i.e. thinking the 95% performance is actually 100% performance. Then when Una and M'Benga rotate out and presumably remove the secret power drain without his knowing, it would be to him that suddenly the ship performs better for no discernible reason, which he wouldn't ever count on because he can't explain it. AND to Kirk, who has also been present for the secret power drain, would later just credit better than previous "best" performance to Scotty as a great engineer, his so-called miracle worker. Solved!
Damn it, @7:07 he interrupted Robert who seems like the most knowledgeable on subject and I wanted to hear his take on the rest of the modern Star Trek media.
Absolutely, guess the host had gone too long with out hearing his voice and had to interject even though the only good point in the video was about to be made.
Thats why i prefer Robservations to the John Campea show. Rob talks in depth about what he is an expert of (Star Trek) and he puts much thought in his analysis. Whereas on this show its just fast, shallow thoughts on everything media related, news stories, tv shows, press articles, some of which subjects John and the others didn‘t even watch/read completely or let alone think through.
Honestly, I don't think you're alone on that, and I think that's an astute way of putting it; Rob's passion is, in and of itself, pretty fascinating and he has a wealth of knowledge and a very stimulating/engaging way of crafting his perspectives that always feature some combination of intellectual, artistic, human, pragmatic, colorful, straight to the friggin point, and "tell it like it is". That combination of features results (for me at least) in the listener really being able to hear his passion, not just in tone/volume/inflection, but in the formation/construction of his sentences. He's also able to make deeper connections that aren't just surface level, like he really gets the REAL over-arching impact/effect/etc. that's several layers deep, not just the kinda obvious linear 1st layer conclusions. Anyway, I felt the same way so I had to 2nd your comment haha cheers!
I grew up watching the original star trek from the sixties after that I tried to watch deep space 9 and I tried the next generation I tried all those shows and just didn't do it for me then I started watching , strange new world. And you know what ,it's really great each episode gets better and better it reminds me of the old star trek and I really really enjoyed I mean coming from a person who didn't like any of them thats big, The cast they crew that they picked for the show I love them all thorough perfect for the rolls a play that I really enjoy the show. Then I started watching discovery the 2nd season to get an idea what's going on with the new one. Ps i like this spock better than the spock from the newer movies that came out A couple of years ago this blocthis Box is acts like the real spot how we would act being younger, A true vulcan
I don't think Rob has watched the past couple of seasons of discovery, it started out as a prequel series but now it's become a distant sequel set centuries after the other shows.
I would love to see a Robert Meyer Burnett and Steve Shives debate over Star Trek. But I will say that while I am enjoying SNW, it does feel like Star Trek is stuck in a certain time period. Which I don’t mind, but it would be cool to go ahead 50 years.
@@olympicnut I was a Next Generation fan and have seen some of the original series. I am now caught up on Discovery. It has good and bad moments. I loved Pike and Spock on there and am glad for this spin off.
Oh man, I totally agree with Rob on this one. Completely agree. I remember watching Private Little War as a kid and I *still* don't know whether I agree with Kirk or McCoy during that discussion. Because it is a complicated dilemma. And of course, as I got older, I knew they were talking about the Cold War, but that subtlety was masterfully done. Love you John!!! But Rob there is no debate. Rob is right on this one. :)
I'm on the liberal side of the political spectrum...but one of the things I liked about Peacekeeper is that Gunn put together a story that I think someone on the opposite side of the aisle (as the saying goes) could watch and we could sit down and have a discussion about it and we could have a totally political and non-political discussion about it at the same time and, dare I say, understand each other a bit more by the end of it? I really think old Trek was like that...but then Rob and I might be using nostalgia goggles...
SNW so far so good after 2 episodes. I see a disconnect with reality even for sci-fi with the wind turbines in the opening scene of the 1st episode. The turbines make for a pretty camera view but when set in an age of anti-matter energy and food replicators they are a bit farcical.
antimatter doesn't grow on trees, so to make the quantities of antimatter to power a civilization HAS to be a burden - wind is easy and free - and according to The Kardashev scale the more advanced a civilization is based on how much and how effective they are by using ALL it's energy resources
I tried it. I signed up for Paramount +, we even bought a big new tv and had a small gathering of friends, we were so excited to see it. Not one of us liked it. But we got a great deal on the tv. So not all bad.
The highest critically rated Star Trek show is The Orville season 2... 😅 The Orville also got a very high audience score for both session. Strange New Worlds has a great 1st episode... I hope it can remain like that for the entire season and don't end up like Picard season 2 which closely approaching CW Arrowverse level of writings.
I can say that this is by far the best Trek since the original. I think this is the trek that Gene wanted to make in 1969 but couldn't either because of technical limitations or network interventions.
I 💯 with Robert here. Shows nowadays have no subtlety, they just hit you on the head with their message, like a sledgehammer. He is also right that showing the Jan 6 insurrection is a big mistake, as you just potentially lost a good part of your audience and this totally unnecessarily, as there were numerous other ways they could have made their point, in a SUBTLE manner that would have had a much bigger chance to get the message across.
@@andrewcosta5001 No thank you, I have watched the first few episodes of season 1 and I do not feel the need to submit myself to further mediocre writing. 😜
I'm sorry John, but Rob has a point here. Telling people what to think and doing it in an allegorical way is a BIG difference. It's literally the basic principle of show, don't tell.
@@makokenji4350 no, that's not the point. The thing is that there is more value by leaving a message to be interpreted by the audience themselves, because then you can apply it to a lot of things in your life, not just a single scenario.
@@makokenji4350 Making people think, is much more effective than telling people what to think. They are preaching to the choir, and patting themselves on the back for being so brave. They are not changing any opinions of people who disagree with their "messaging".
@@MrAndyFlick Except no one cares for allegory when the message is considered apolitical. For example, I never seen anyone complain about allegory when a main character says that murder is wrong. It's only where conservatives disagree that we have to tip-toe around these ideas. Either way, John is right. The Uhura kiss was not left to interpretation. It pissed many people off. I always say that if your Star Trek show isn't Pissing off conservatives then you aren't doing Star Trek right.
@@makokenji4350 well, Stark Trek is not meant to piss some people off, it's meant to be for everyone, as an united galaxy. Understanding each other, not creating more conflict by forcing an idea. But that's just the way I see it.
Showing the Jan. 6 riots showed a complete lack of subtlety in the writing of the show. There are better ways to show your points of view in a drama than referencing current events in a setting where said events would be beyond irrelevant.
It was referencing divisions in America and it also included Portland and other riots. And you would know that if you actually watched the episode instead of just a clickbait video from a grifter outrage channel.
@@boxtears I didn't watch any clickbait videos, nice try. I know what they were trying to do, what I'm saying is that they did it in a very hamfisted, preachy way. It felt condescending and really rubbed me the wrong way. And again, such an event would be completely irrelevant in Star Trek's time. They could've gone in to talk about their WW3 in detail and make up more of their lore instead of putting recent events in such a preachy way.
@@markusbisma5015 You say that but Sisko was complaining about how blacks were treated in the time that a holo suite program took place. That was far more jarring to me than Pike just referencing something from old earth history to a bunch of aliens in roughly our state of development.
It doesnt matter what modern Star Trek does. It will always be wrong for Rob. Unfortunetley this mindset is not his alone but that of many Star Trek Fans. If they do something New it is not Star Trek but Just a new Science Fiction Show. If they Stick to the Classic Formular, Fans will say that it sucks that they are not trying something new.... I love All Kinds of Trek even though I dont think DS9 can be dethroned...
Don't speak for all. I hated Discovery and Piccard. Literally had to stop watching because I couldn't take it how bad the writing was. However, this new show, so far, I'm liking and plan on watching more.
Well, the MCU films and the Marvel Netflix shows were a big deal back then, so he must have thought Inhumans would be at the same level when he signed on. In the end, it paid off since he did get to be part of the MCU multiverse after all.
I honestly didn't know that footage from the Jan 6th riots was being used in Pike's presentation. But, then one wouldn't know that if they weren't looking for it.
Pike didn’t cite the context for the footage. But Trump signs could be seen as insurrectionists stormed the Capitol building which has become something of an Iconic image.
@@TheLAGopher There were no insurrectionists. And taking over the Capitol building doesn't mean they would control the government. But Democrats wanting to abolish the EC, pack the SC and allow millions of illegal aliens could very well be called 'insurrection'. Not to mention they spied on a sitting president and his staff and concocted a phony Russian collusion story. And they impeached him twice over nothing, which will come back to haunt the Dems in the coming years.
John trying to smother Rob’s rant immediately lmao also Rob is completely correct. But John doesn't really care about Star Trek so I can see why these types of things don’t bother him.
Critical take: Most characters work, and the Pike, Spock, Uhura, M'Benga, and Chapel, and Sing(h) (I thought Khan was from India) inspire confidence. I really like the Sing(h) character, who was stolen from the Camina Drummer character from The Expanse - it works here too. Who doesn't work is the Una character, who though good on bravery doesn't come across as competent. Worse, Kurtzman & Secret Hideout in episode 3 made her out to be more a freak with her Ilyrian super-human qualities. This one's flapping in the wind. Hemmer is too much a crank to be regarded as a team player, and also doesn't come across as that competent. The episode did finally make it clear who was in charge in sick bay with M'Benga. But it was shaky with Chapel's knowledge of medicine - is she a nurse or a physician? Also, how come only Chapel and not M'Benga wear white? The Ortegas character was also good, but the chop to her hair seems like another ripoff from The Expanse and her 'punk' hairdo would likely appear archaic in the 23rd century. There was still a bit of Kurtzman's fingerprints on this episode with Uhura's sassy comebacks to Hemmer, not respecting the chain-of-command. The show had better science & engineering consulting, but a brown dwarf planet would only break up slowly on the order of a million years or so near a black hole, and the scales of distance were all wrong. But by and large, this episode worked well and the show is on the right track. To make a good Star Trek show isn't to go with what 'trekkies' like myself like, but per Gene Roddenberry and DC Fontana, what makes for a good and believable story.
appreciate Rob's view's and i agree star trek is stuck for the most part not progressing forward. that being said, i loved Strange New Worlds on its own, it brings me back to the love i had for TNG Series. I would like future series to progress star trek forward for new stories new era. Strange new worlds can do its own thing, i hope new series can progress new era of star trek.
I mean, that’s kind of what Discovery and Picard are trying to do now, with varying degrees of success. I honestly don’t get this point. TNG is essentially just TOS 2.0. Sure, the ship looks different, the characters are different and it all takes place about 80 years later. But none of that actually affects the storytelling. Some early episodes were literally written for phase 2. With the exception of some new elements such as the holodeck, you could take pretty much any TNG episode and tell it with the TOS crew and vise versa. Really up until Disco the only trek show that left the formula and pushed the franchise forward was DS9, and even that was mostly episodic. It honestly sounds like he‘s complaining about a Star Trek show doing Star Trek.
Rob makes some good points, it's often a failing of modern writers to be so ham-fisted in how they present things. Someone described it as "presenting a question for you to ask yourself vs. telling you what to think". Pike's "presentation" in that episode was as subtle as a train crash. I will however never judge a show until I've seen a full season because if you're not even willing to let them set the stage and establish the characters before talking trash then your words and opinion should be regarded as just that, trash.
The only part of Pikes presentation that was on the nose was the few seconds of Trump riot footage that seems to have triggered some fans. The majority of the footage showing the nuclear destruction and environmental ruin that resulted, was not preaching it was Pike cutting through the BS. Had that Trump footage not been part of the presentation, nobody would have had a problem with Pike making a very Kirk like move and getting in the face of planetary leaders with the message they need to change
Strange New Worlds episode 1.01 is the best Trek I have watched since the 90's; it's only one episode though. I was reading reviews on RT and Amazon and people saying it's the worst Trek ever or it's so bad they need to just cancel Trek all together are so full of hate their reviews can't be even considered reviews and to the point they may not even have watched it. I read one reviewer saying that he enjoyed it and then realized they were playing with nostalgia and manipulating his mind using emotions. I'm like WTF, these reviews need to be removed as absolute troll trash
I don't appreciate how Kris was teasing Rob at the end. It may have been in good fun, but it did seem insulting. And, I think John needs to be more respectful of Rob's intimate knowledge of Star Trek On a separate note, I do think that SNW has the potential to be a great chapter in Star Trek. However, I would like to see an original Star Trek show that is more allegorical like the older shows (1966-2005), and takes place after the events of Nemesis (that isn't Picard)
@@ronpetersen2317 I did find it quite obnoxious when John and Kris were ridiculing Rob for his intimate knowledge of Star Trek. I'm sure she wouldn't appreciate it if someone ridiculed her for having intimate knowledge of whatever she's into
I'd love to see this discussion continue, especially with a few extra cast members. I loved the episode and when they actually showed real news footage I was like 'Hell yeah, tell 'em Pike!" but that's because I agree with the message. I think Rob has a good point that didn't occur to me in that this did cross out of allegory and into direct social commentary. Maybe Paramount doesn't care if they piss off a good chunk of their audience and I think that conviction is admirable but I only think that because I agree with the position they took. I cant help but think of my father, who got me into Star Trek in the first place. If he had the time to watch Paramount + instead of FOX News he would have felt totally betrayed.(Maybe that was exactly what they were going for) I liked the episode but I don't think I would have enjoyed it any less if they referenced a fictional schism in our history and hinted that the seeds were planted in the 2020s.
For over ten years some Trekkies scream to have their old Star Trek back then when it is FINALLY delivered... some Trekkies complain that we are retreading old territory. THIS is why Paramount/CBS hates trying to make the core fandom happy. It's just pointless to even try. Someone always complains. Apparently especially the Trumpsters who find themselves on the wrong side of history.
My God let the man speak without interrupting him. I swear sometimes John definitely lets everyone know it's his name on the show.
I’ve been noticing that more and more as well. Rob makes legitimate points and tries to expand on them. I don’t always agree but I wanna hear what he says.
Idk if they’re just short on time, or if John is just rude.
I agree fully. I’m here as a Rob fan so it kills me to see someone be so rude to him.
Rob got owned, he had no argument
I'd like to point something out if that's okay with everyone. I don't know about everyone here but I watch the show everyday. That said every time Star Trek gets brought up Rob and John say the same exact thing every single time. Almost word for word. The debate about it never changes. I like listening to John and Rob talk about Star Trek but mostly when they're both on the same page whether it's dealing with the original series or the next generation. I don't like hearing the same exact thing from both of them every time it's about modern Trek. Nothing from either side is added to the discussion. Honestly it gets tiring because we all know what they're going to say. I don't think John's intentionally being rude. I just think he knows where both of their thoughts are going to go on the subject so he's just trying to speed it along. I'm glad that Rob thought it was at least decent. Also, I do think that it's a testament to how well modern Trek is doing when John favors the familiar and treaded ground of that franchise as compared to his complaints of Star Wars constantly going back to the same characters. I hope for both of their sakes John gets on a better page with Star Wars in the way that he's become fine with how Trek has familiar beats and I hope Rob eventually gets to a place with Star Trek that is satisfying even if it never reaches what he believes to be the pinnacle of Trek. Just my thoughts everyone. Peace
I agree. I used to like John for his humility and lately he's just gotten rude, full of himself, and completely disinterested in anyone else's opinion if they disagree with him.
I agree with Robert's commentary about how _Star Trek_ was built on allegory and how _Strange New Worlds_ might not be. He always has such thoughtful commentary about so many pop culture topics, I appreciate him so much!
I wish rob wasn’t interrupted the whole time I mean he’s an pretty much an expert and I would like to hear his opinion on trek.
I think John is missing the point. Seems to be a long running thing with him sometimes.
What Rob is saying is the use of science fiction to tell allegorical stories was a wonderful piece of Star Trek throughout its history. It opened up debate and dialogue. Doing what the STN did is just telling the audience rather than showing them through good storytelling. I did enjoy the pilot, but Rob is entirely correct about what he is saying, and John forces in his points, and refuses to let anyone prove him wrong, then cuts off the debate for "time". It's a cowardly thing to do if you ask me.
I am with Rob with this. in the 90s, i knew friends who could quote star dates per episode. i am not that much of a trekkie, but i loved TOS, TNG, DS9, Enterprise, and even VOY
Rob "How much time you got" 🤣 love it
Not a Trek fan but I really appreciate Rob trying to articulate how he feels. It's easy to just say you don't like something or it missed your expectations. I'm gonna check this out now based on how Rob described the perspective of the show.
Rest in peace, Nichelle Nichols aka Lt. Nyota Uhura (Dec. 28, 1932 - July 30, 2022)
Whenever Rob starts cooking, John cuts him off 😩
I feel Rob sometimes gets abused by John. Rob is a good guy, smiles and moves on
@@KamLagan Agreed! He has learned not to get upset and flustered and just move past it. He handles it like a champ, but I really wish John wouldn't do that to him.
Once again Rob shows us why he is the man.
Wow John, if you don't agree then just cut off and interrupt the other person, Good God man!
i just watched the last episode and it has me fully hooked in for next season. That scene alone with pike and spock was emotional, i liked most of it tbh, i will be more than happy with a new season, was a weekly must watch.
I'm with Robert on this. This episode was more telling you what to think instead of giving you the chance to think for yourself. I also have to say that was a pretty extreme ultimatum Pike gave the leaders of that planet. He could have worded it better. Add to that my overall problem with this show which is how the Enterprise looks and how big the bridge is, what the tech looks like, etc. It's like it's not from the same Star Trek universe it claims to be a part of. Plus, specifically in this premiere episode, a lot of liberties were taken with lore and canon. And even established facts concerning Spock and T'Pring.
The idea that Trek never tells you what to think is laughable
@@Ohalexsimmons It was okay for TNG's bridge to be better and bigger. TNG takes place in the future of TOS. That's fine. Even Expected. But SNW takes place before TOS.
@@Ohalexsimmons My problem is that doesn't make sense. If they want to use better tech, then they shouldn't go backward.
@@Ohalexsimmons When I said "same tech" I meant the "look" of it. When TNG went back to TOS with Scotty, they honored the look. When DS9 went back to TOS they also honored the look. If you can't honor the look, then don't go back. Move forward. I can't watch this crap. It's too distracting. It's only good for "casual" Trek fans. Reply if you want but I'm turning notifications off. I didn't mean to start a debate.
As always, Rob describes my feelings on new Trek perfectly. Love it when Trek comes up and Rob is on the show. Agreed 100%. I honestly wish John would give him a little bit of freedom to express it more, because it's so cathartic and spot on.
Rob has some valid points, but Strange New Worlds is not aimed at people that has watched every episode (and film) of previous shows and read every novel, like he has. It's made to bring back the joy of old Star Trek to people who never experienced it and to please a majority of trekkers, who were demanding a return to episodic storytelling and a less ominous tone. And so far I think it's being successful at that.
John is terribly wrong on the Jan 6th reference, I agree with Rob. Was Jan 6th egregious? Absolutely! But the television show shouldn't alienate a large portion of their viewers by showing exact footage of the event. Not sure I want to watch this show now, even though I'm against what happened on that day. Was a shame to hear this since I paused the video to watch the trailer and loved it, now I don't know how to feel.
Rob is completely right and it's John that was obviously triggered. Glad you got your own show Rob where you can talk freely without being shut down.
Wow, Anson Mount is having a stellar week.
I love Rob’s perspective on Star Trek. I hope me and him get to have a convo about Star Trek at some point. Would be so much fun.
John why don't you let rob talk and explain his feelings on the episode rather than cutting him off and trying to belittle his opinions just because you disagreed with them. If you don't have enough time for a full discussion than don't debate him. You explained your opinions, let him fully explain his. He never spoke once when you were talking and yet you didn't give him the same courtesy. Maybe you should consider slightly remodeling these "discussions" so that everyone can speak and give their opinions and then if you deem there is time you can have a debate at the end. Because nearly every video you post I will see in the comments at least one person complaining that you either cut off rob or didn't give him enough time to speak. I know it's your show and you can ultimately do whatever you want, but you have invited a fellow, respectable, not only film pundit, but also film director onto your show. Not only is he very qualified and articulate with his opinions (and if you stopped cutting him off I'm sure he'd finish his thoughts much quicker), but he's also without a doubt the most knowledgeable person in the room when it comes to Star Trek. I truly hope you read this and properly think on it because I'm positive the majority of your viewers feel the same way I do.
Because John has a time restriction? If you want to hear Rob rant about SNW he's got his own video up on his own channel.
@@GPsarakis If he wouldn’t cut him off all the time, Rob would get to his point soon enough! Robs opinion on this particular topic is much more interesting than what the girls have to say, so give the man a bit of time.
@@dertodesking8379 If they had seen the episode they're opinion would've been interesting to hear, they represent the general audience Paramount hopes they can draw in more of with their shows. Rob was rehashing stuff he said on his video that he posted days ago. So if you want to hear him go on for 1 hr about Trek you can see that there.
@@GPsarakis I’ve seen that video, but not everyone knows he has an own channel, + ppl tune in to this video, I think if they bring up the topic on this show everyone is entitled to voice their opinion. I didn’t say the girls opinion doesn’t matter, you’re right they represent the “average viewer” while Rob represents the hardcore Trek nerd. And it’s not just this show, he’s often cutting Rob short!
@@dertodesking8379 At some point you have to cut someone off if they're starting to rant and go long though. Rob likes to ramble on at times.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of Strange New Worlds. That said, I am 76 and liked it better than the other recent new Star Trek endeavors. Better writing, better flow.
Completely disagree with John's point. There is a BIG difference between actual allegory and making an overtly specific and political comparison. One allows for timeless moral lessons and the other instantly dates the film/show while also, as Rob says, alienates some viewers.
The ENTIRE point of allegory is to take a problem of our real world, remove it from its context and present it in an interesting and relatable way. By doing this, you disarm the viewer into seeing the situation without bias, and if you do it really well, you might even convince someone to end up agreeing with you through the power of empathy. (Or, put metaphorically, allegory is like when you hide your dog's medicine inside of peanut butter. The viewer eats the peanut butter (the fun genre story) because it tastes good without realizing they are also being fed medicine, (the moral lesson)
It's about the subtlety of storytelling. We may know that they were talking about Vietnam in the 60s, but the message applies to any war, because it is fantastical and therefore timeless. The premiere of Strange New Worlds only ensconces itself within the political moment by making direct political references, and given the passage of time, will become irrelevant and outdated.
The old magic of Star Trek was that it transcended the political moment, and that magic is gone, because the majority of Hollywood doesn't know how to do allegory anymore without political grandstanding.
Rob's right. There IS a difference, and it's an important one.
This!!! The art of subtlety and allegory really has been lost for the most part in Hollywood…
I always felt that Star Trek had a way of bringing out an issue and ending it with make up your own mind and now it tells you what to believe
And you're free to accept or reject it. Just like people rejected an interracial kiss on TOS, or non gendered species and homosexual themes on TNG.
@@ronpetersen2317 Many of the same people crying 'offense' here are the very same ones calling other people 'snowflakes' every day.
Secondly, why aren't there any liberals offended by 'no justice no peace' signs in the same clip? Those kinds of protests long predate the trump era and span both parties.
As usual with everything today, conservatives are taking selective offense and crying the loudest like proverbial 'hit hogs hollerin'.
Finally, I see no reason for Star Trek to remain forever static. But I DO see a reason for those who see their own bad actions reflected, to instead stop whining and change their behavior.
Here's an idea if you don't want to end up as watershed newsreel footage in MSM, tv and movies, how about maybe not storming your capitol with a noose and chanting for your vice president's execution? Just a thought🙄
There is no such thing as "too much time on this topic" when Rob is talking Trek.
Rob is right, it's not that the message is bad or wrong, it's how you push the message to force people to think without telling them how to think. Their thinking may be wrong and they do need to think about it, but if you tell them how to think instead of making them think, they will tune you out.
It would be nice if John wouldn’t interrupt Rob.
Strange New Worlds is doing to the Star Trek Franchise what The Mandalorian has done for the Star Wars Franchise; it's taking the franchise back to its roots to then rebuild something new. It's brought back old fans and brought in new fans. The Next Generation, which is my favourite series, had a rough start yet Strange New Worlds has had a solid and even better first season. It's got a showrunner, writers and cast who know what they're doing and I love so many of the characters - especially the new characters: Ortegas, Hemmer and Angel, to name a few.
My biggest gripe with so many forced identity politics shows and movies, 'woke', is that they suffer from arrogant inexperienced artists fresh out of college who ego boost themselves by lecturing the audience yet they do not know how to write a good script, never alone structure a long format story or deliver it. They then pat themselves on the back by hiring a diverse cast and crew, rapid-fire out dividing tweets, and within their arrogance believe themselves to be the figureheads in progressing us forward. However, their arrogance does not allow them to see that they are actually setting diverse stories back, undoing all of the decades-long important and hard work for us to have inclusive shows with low-quality shows and movies that bomb, divide audiences, and taint the name 'diversity' and 'diverse stories' within the mainstream. Their POC and LGBT cast, crew, and audience then publically suffer for it.
Strange New Worlds is the leading example, take note Kathleen Kennedy and Marvel, on how to be inclusive while telling progressive yet also engaging well-written, acted and directed stories that no matter what side of the political stratosphere audiences are on, they can enjoy and think about. No one has an issue (other than a small minority of racists, on both sides, who can tweet loud) with political agenda shows. But we do have an issue when they are not backed up by the above. Star Trek should be political, it's a left-leaning show, and it deserves the talented artists behind SNW.
I'm very excited for season 2, where, from what I've read, they tread more out of the waters and into space. Am I over-hyped about it? Probably, because I have been taken back by how much of a breath of fresh air it is - likewise with The Boys.
Anson Mount is a great actor. He just played Black Bolt in the new Dr. Strange movie and nobody seems to be mentioning him. Hell on wheels was a great show. Loved the discussion and looing forward to checking out this show.
Because it's like a few minutes and he literally does nothing. Not worth mentioning, the slightest!
I agree with Rob, for a show that’s supposed to be futuristic and progress they sure do like to go back and retell stories and go back to an old format. Don’t get me wrong it’s a good show but just more of the same retelling of stories
Spock asked Kirk in Star Trek VI, “Is it possible that we, you and I, have grown so old and so inflexible that we have outlived our usefulness? Would that constitute a joke?” I wonder if that’s the case for a certain someone on the panel there?
Ayee, there's always an excuse. He was literally complaining, last week, that something they did, didn't fit his HEAD CANON. It was WRONG, not because the show shouldn't do a thing, but because in his HEAd it meant something else, so... I mean FFS Rob!
Rob was right 100% . The show should be making people reflect on similar issues not directly enforcing a viewpoint .
I been hearing for years since I was watching TNG, DS9, and Voyager which I loved that people wanted to know more about Christopher Pike, now we’re getting it and a lot of people complaining about start trek being in the past and not the future.
I generally agree with Rob on this. Give us something to think about, don’t tell us what to think. The writing really stands out to me, it’s just not as sophisticated as it used to be.
I have said it a thousand times, SNW is a TOS reboot. It has gone back to what ST was about pre-disco. Wonderful.
I loved the art direction on this show, LOL my cousin is the Supervising Art Director Jody Clement and I am proud of her. :) :)
Awesome.
Anson Mount’s Pike is a modern day Trek iconic trek character. Star Trek have been trying to make new ones since Discovery and they’ve finally achieved it.
Oh, Rob really held it together. Unleash that beast!
I agree with Rob 100%. I will say this show feels way more like the last shows and because of that I found it much more enjoyable than Discovery or Picard, but I can’t say that the Star Trek I grew up with and loved is back. I still think that The Orville is doing trek much much better than those who currently hold the keys to franchise
I am so ready for season 3. I know people love it but I feel like it hasn't got much respect.
I agree with Rober Meyer that using the footage from the real life event that happened not so long ago drives a wedge between a major portion of the audience and the creators. The allegorical method of presenting a problem has a chance of convincing individual to have a look at the problem from a different point of view. Here what we witnessed for many people can be interpreted as incessant preaching and virtue signalling moral superiority.
3 words...Rob is right.
Why
I seem to be a rare fanatic of both Star Wars and Star Trek, however I do lean Star Trek for very sentimental reasons. As a child raised in the 80s my two fondest memories of going to theaters were #2) standing in line for the premiere of Return of the Jedi for hours with my family and #1) seeing the Wrath of Khan in theaters just my mother and I. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one..."
I love them both as well, but without Trek I'm not sure we would have gotten Star Wars.
Anson Mount's charisma on this show is staggering. It's a wonder that he is isn't way more famous already.
Pike doesn't want to change the future he knows he has to save those crewmen and not let them die
That's why I like Pike looking up the personal history of the people he saw himself save. He realizes that he must cherish every moment till then and then because he saves their lives he can accept his fate. I believe that's why the Talos people give him a happy ending. Signs of that his acceptance of number 1 Illyrian heritage in recent episode.
A resistance series centered on worlds resisting the early Dominion invasions could be interesting notably by seeing what the conquered species were like prior to being bio-reengineered to serve the founders.
I just have to say I loved that debate it made me want to watch the old star trek shows/movies and Rob’s passion for it breathtaking
More of this please. Go Rob!!
I really wish John would just let others talk. I know its the John Campea show but it gets really frustrating every time he interrupts someone
He is the quintessential Napoleon type lol.
I realize it is John‘s show and all, but on this topic, his opinion is the one that I am least interested in hearing. Give Rob a chance to talk and make his point without your incessant interruptions.
I've never seen this channel until now, but that Rob guy I can agree with mostly, but I think he's missing that the stories each week can be "episodic", and the characters can have "arcs", giving the viewers the best of both story telling devices.
I hope there is an arc soon where they kill off Uhura. In a respectful way, of course. And then that British security officer needs to go. And that George Samuel Kirk. And then M'Benga and Chapel can be killed in a transporter accident, like what we saw in TMP. The Enterprise will have to get new officers, of course. But they can't be any worse.
"The Offer" on paramount plus..easily the best new show out there. People are missing a great show if not watching. The making of the Godfather and how it got made..maybe just as good as the movies..yup I said it.
Love all the Star Trek shows. Love em!
Me, too! Except Discovery. And Picard. And Strange New Worlds. And, to be honest, I'm not really a fan of Voyager, though I liked Jeri Ryan for some odd reason.
"He chooses really quality material"
I see we are all just deciding to forget Inhumans...
That's probably best, forget I said anything.
Lmao 🤣😂🤣😂 oh lord I can't believe you said that .
John really did not understand the point Rob was making.
Rob had no point, made a foolof himself
I wanted to hear rob. I didn’t get to hear it lol no problem with them disagreeing but l would say disagree after he’s made his point. 😎👍🏼
I gotta disagree a bit with Rob, because I think serialized storytelling is actually the weakness in discovery and Picard. 10-20 episode arcs that all feed into a single vague galactic threat story, no room for the one offs, no character building except for the main 2-3 characters, lazy virtue signaling instead of allegory. I think this episode shows potential to be the best new trek since Enterprise because they’re able to bring SOME of that old storytelling style back through the episodic structure
Here's a plot hole/trope episode 1.3 unintentionally solves: Scotty's continual underestimating of the Enterprise's capabilities. Una secretly sets up a hidden power drain on the warp core for Dr. M'Benga, then when Scotty later joins Engineering (before becoming Chief of Engineering) he would observe and rate the ship's capabilities at that less than optimal level thinking that is the best it can do, i.e. thinking the 95% performance is actually 100% performance. Then when Una and M'Benga rotate out and presumably remove the secret power drain without his knowing, it would be to him that suddenly the ship performs better for no discernible reason, which he wouldn't ever count on because he can't explain it. AND to Kirk, who has also been present for the secret power drain, would later just credit better than previous "best" performance to Scotty as a great engineer, his so-called miracle worker. Solved!
Anson Mount is awesome, he was amazing on the Hell On Wheels show
Damn it, @7:07 he interrupted Robert who seems like the most knowledgeable on subject and I wanted to hear his take on the rest of the modern Star Trek media.
Absolutely, guess the host had gone too long with out hearing his voice and had to interject even though the only good point in the video was about to be made.
Let Rob speak.
Wow, John was pretty rude here. Let Rob speak man, he was making great points. No need to keep interrupting & making snarky remarks.
Thats why i prefer Robservations to the John Campea show. Rob talks in depth about what he is an expert of (Star Trek) and he puts much thought in his analysis. Whereas on this show its just fast, shallow thoughts on everything media related, news stories, tv shows, press articles, some of which subjects John and the others didn‘t even watch/read completely or let alone think through.
Rob has a closed mind when it comes to new Star Trek. He’s just an old.
I always thought that if they ever did a Batman TV series, Anson Mount should be Batman.
i dont care about star trek even a tiny bit, but I find Robs passion for it very interesting
Honestly, I don't think you're alone on that, and I think that's an astute way of putting it; Rob's passion is, in and of itself, pretty fascinating and he has a wealth of knowledge and a very stimulating/engaging way of crafting his perspectives that always feature some combination of intellectual, artistic, human, pragmatic, colorful, straight to the friggin point, and "tell it like it is". That combination of features results (for me at least) in the listener really being able to hear his passion, not just in tone/volume/inflection, but in the formation/construction of his sentences. He's also able to make deeper connections that aren't just surface level, like he really gets the REAL over-arching impact/effect/etc. that's several layers deep, not just the kinda obvious linear 1st layer conclusions. Anyway, I felt the same way so I had to 2nd your comment haha cheers!
I grew up watching the original star trek from the sixties after that I tried to watch deep space 9 and I tried the next generation I tried all those shows and just didn't do it for me then I started watching , strange new world. And you know what ,it's really great each episode gets better and better it reminds me of the old star trek and I really really enjoyed I mean coming from a person who didn't like any of them thats big, The cast they crew that they picked for the show I love them all thorough perfect for the rolls a play that I really enjoy the show. Then I started watching discovery the 2nd season to get an idea what's going on with the new one. Ps i like this spock better than the spock from the newer movies that came out A couple of years ago this blocthis Box is acts like the real spot how we would act being younger, A true vulcan
I don't think Rob has watched the past couple of seasons of discovery, it started out as a prequel series but now it's become a distant sequel set centuries after the other shows.
And Rob's not the only one who hasn't watched it!
Rob is right!!
Rob.... Dude.... Starting in Discovery season 3..... It's totally moving forward! What are you smoking? 😂🤪💔
I would love to see a Robert Meyer Burnett and Steve Shives debate over Star Trek. But I will say that while I am enjoying SNW, it does feel like Star Trek is stuck in a certain time period. Which I don’t mind, but it would be cool to go ahead 50 years.
Anson Mount is awesome in star trek I was so happy to see him play Black Bolt in Doctor Strange 2 since he was the best part of the Inhumans show
I am loving Strange New Worlds. I loved the cast on Discovery and have loved the cast on this so far. Uhura is fantastic also.
DISCO is trash, IMO, but I respect your opinion. I am a "seasoned" Trek fan, so my perspective may be quite different.
@@olympicnut I was a Next Generation fan and have seen some of the original series. I am now caught up on Discovery. It has good and bad moments. I loved Pike and Spock on there and am glad for this spin off.
Oh man, I totally agree with Rob on this one. Completely agree. I remember watching Private Little War as a kid and I *still* don't know whether I agree with Kirk or McCoy during that discussion. Because it is a complicated dilemma. And of course, as I got older, I knew they were talking about the Cold War, but that subtlety was masterfully done. Love you John!!! But Rob there is no debate. Rob is right on this one. :)
I'm on the liberal side of the political spectrum...but one of the things I liked about Peacekeeper is that Gunn put together a story that I think someone on the opposite side of the aisle (as the saying goes) could watch and we could sit down and have a discussion about it and we could have a totally political and non-political discussion about it at the same time and, dare I say, understand each other a bit more by the end of it? I really think old Trek was like that...but then Rob and I might be using nostalgia goggles...
As a lifelong trekkie, I havent cared for any of the new kurtzman stuff until SNW. I though the first episode was fantastic
SNW so far so good after 2 episodes. I see a disconnect with reality even for sci-fi with the wind turbines in the opening scene of the 1st episode. The turbines make for a pretty camera view but when set in an age of anti-matter energy and food replicators they are a bit farcical.
antimatter doesn't grow on trees, so to make the quantities of antimatter to power a civilization HAS to be a burden - wind is easy and free - and according to The Kardashev scale the more advanced a civilization is based on how much and how effective they are by using ALL it's energy resources
I will give Strange New Worlds a shot, but I'm not hopeful at all. We are never going to get back to normal Utopia Star Trek.
I tried it. I signed up for Paramount +, we even bought a big new tv and had a small gathering of friends, we were so excited to see it. Not one of us liked it. But we got a great deal on the tv. So not all bad.
It's VASTLY better than any of the recent junk
The highest critically rated Star Trek show is The Orville season 2... 😅
The Orville also got a very high audience score for both session.
Strange New Worlds has a great 1st episode... I hope it can remain like that for the entire season and don't end up like Picard season 2 which closely approaching CW Arrowverse level of writings.
I can say that this is by far the best Trek since the original. I think this is the trek that Gene wanted to make in 1969 but couldn't either because of technical limitations or network interventions.
Robert mayer is absolutely correct.
I 💯 with Robert here. Shows nowadays have no subtlety, they just hit you on the head with their message, like a sledgehammer. He is also right that showing the Jan 6 insurrection is a big mistake, as you just potentially lost a good part of your audience and this totally unnecessarily, as there were numerous other ways they could have made their point, in a SUBTLE manner that would have had a much bigger chance to get the message across.
@@andrewcosta5001 No thank you, I have watched the first few episodes of season 1 and I do not feel the need to submit myself to further mediocre writing. 😜
Rob is hard core!!
I'm sorry John, but Rob has a point here. Telling people what to think and doing it in an allegorical way is a BIG difference. It's literally the basic principle of show, don't tell.
So being as light with your messaging as possible as to not offend people who disagree? Nah. I'm good on that.
@@makokenji4350 no, that's not the point. The thing is that there is more value by leaving a message to be interpreted by the audience themselves, because then you can apply it to a lot of things in your life, not just a single scenario.
@@makokenji4350 Making people think, is much more effective than telling people what to think. They are preaching to the choir, and patting themselves on the back for being so brave. They are not changing any opinions of people who disagree with their "messaging".
@@MrAndyFlick
Except no one cares for allegory when the message is considered apolitical. For example, I never seen anyone complain about allegory when a main character says that murder is wrong. It's only where conservatives disagree that we have to tip-toe around these ideas. Either way, John is right. The Uhura kiss was not left to interpretation. It pissed many people off. I always say that if your Star Trek show isn't Pissing off conservatives then you aren't doing Star Trek right.
@@makokenji4350 well, Stark Trek is not meant to piss some people off, it's meant to be for everyone, as an united galaxy. Understanding each other, not creating more conflict by forcing an idea. But that's just the way I see it.
Showing the Jan. 6 riots showed a complete lack of subtlety in the writing of the show. There are better ways to show your points of view in a drama than referencing current events in a setting where said events would be beyond irrelevant.
It was referencing divisions in America and it also included Portland and other riots. And you would know that if you actually watched the episode instead of just a clickbait video from a grifter outrage channel.
@@boxtears I didn't watch any clickbait videos, nice try. I know what they were trying to do, what I'm saying is that they did it in a very hamfisted, preachy way. It felt condescending and really rubbed me the wrong way.
And again, such an event would be completely irrelevant in Star Trek's time. They could've gone in to talk about their WW3 in detail and make up more of their lore instead of putting recent events in such a preachy way.
Exactly
@@markusbisma5015 You say that but Sisko was complaining about how blacks were treated in the time that a holo suite program took place. That was far more jarring to me than Pike just referencing something from old earth history to a bunch of aliens in roughly our state of development.
@@claudegrenier3180 SNW actually had a good pilot, and I say this as someone who completely skipped STD and PIC.
Here for Rob
Edit: If only he was allowed to talk
SNW has lots of promise. I don't mind a nudge on issues to things that matter, but a shotgun blast to the face is just going to turn me off.
It doesnt matter what modern Star Trek does. It will always be wrong for Rob. Unfortunetley this mindset is not his alone but that of many Star Trek Fans.
If they do something New it is not Star Trek but Just a new Science Fiction Show. If they Stick to the Classic Formular, Fans will say that it sucks that they are not trying something new....
I love All Kinds of Trek even though I dont think DS9 can be dethroned...
Don't speak for all. I hated Discovery and Piccard. Literally had to stop watching because I couldn't take it how bad the writing was. However, this new show, so far, I'm liking and plan on watching more.
@@davidjordannavarro5757 I don't. I said many, not all.
"Anson Mount is very particular about the projects he chooses" yes I had the same thought when I watched Inhumans.
😂😂🤣 That's where I saw him before. I was just trying to figure out what show have I seen him in and that's it
Well, the MCU films and the Marvel Netflix shows were a big deal back then, so he must have thought Inhumans would be at the same level when he signed on. In the end, it paid off since he did get to be part of the MCU multiverse after all.
Love Strange New Worlds!
I honestly didn't know that footage from the Jan 6th riots was being used in Pike's presentation. But, then one wouldn't know that if they weren't looking for it.
Pike didn’t cite the context for the footage. But Trump signs could be seen as insurrectionists stormed
the Capitol building which has become something of an Iconic image.
@@TheLAGopher There were no insurrectionists. And taking over the Capitol building doesn't mean they would control the government. But Democrats wanting to abolish the EC, pack the SC and allow millions of illegal aliens could very well be called 'insurrection'. Not to mention they spied on a sitting president and his staff and concocted a phony Russian collusion story. And they impeached him twice over nothing, which will come back to haunt the Dems in the coming years.
John trying to smother Rob’s rant immediately lmao also Rob is completely correct. But John doesn't really care about Star Trek so I can see why these types of things don’t bother him.
Let Rob Talk!
Rob had no argument
Totally get what Robert’s saying.
Critical take: Most characters work, and the Pike, Spock, Uhura, M'Benga, and Chapel, and Sing(h) (I thought Khan was from India) inspire confidence. I really like the Sing(h) character, who was stolen from the Camina Drummer character from The Expanse - it works here too. Who doesn't work is the Una character, who though good on bravery doesn't come across as competent. Worse, Kurtzman & Secret Hideout in episode 3 made her out to be more a freak with her Ilyrian super-human qualities. This one's flapping in the wind.
Hemmer is too much a crank to be regarded as a team player, and also doesn't come across as that competent. The episode did finally make it clear who was in charge in sick bay with M'Benga. But it was shaky with Chapel's knowledge of medicine - is she a nurse or a physician? Also, how come only Chapel and not M'Benga wear white?
The Ortegas character was also good, but the chop to her hair seems like another ripoff from The Expanse and her 'punk' hairdo would likely appear archaic in the 23rd century.
There was still a bit of Kurtzman's fingerprints on this episode with Uhura's sassy comebacks to Hemmer, not respecting the chain-of-command.
The show had better science & engineering consulting, but a brown dwarf planet would only break up slowly on the order of a million years or so near a black hole, and the scales of distance were all wrong.
But by and large, this episode worked well and the show is on the right track. To make a good Star Trek show isn't to go with what 'trekkies' like myself like, but per Gene Roddenberry and DC Fontana, what makes for a good and believable story.
appreciate Rob's view's and i agree star trek is stuck for the most part not progressing forward. that being said, i loved Strange New Worlds on its own, it brings me back to the love i had for TNG Series. I would like future series to progress star trek forward for new stories new era. Strange new worlds can do its own thing, i hope new series can progress new era of star trek.
I mean, that’s kind of what Discovery and Picard are trying to do now, with varying degrees of success. I honestly don’t get this point. TNG is essentially just TOS 2.0. Sure, the ship looks different, the characters are different and it all takes place about 80 years later. But none of that actually affects the storytelling. Some early episodes were literally written for phase 2. With the exception of some new elements such as the holodeck, you could take pretty much any TNG episode and tell it with the TOS crew and vise versa. Really up until Disco the only trek show that left the formula and pushed the franchise forward was DS9, and even that was mostly episodic. It honestly sounds like he‘s complaining about a Star Trek show doing Star Trek.
Robb can't get out of his own jaded vision of where star trek currently resides itself in. What's the opposite of rose colored glasses?
Rob = right
What's right about hating star trek because they wouldn't let you make your movie?
It's all subjective.
Rob makes some good points, it's often a failing of modern writers to be so ham-fisted in how they present things. Someone described it as "presenting a question for you to ask yourself vs. telling you what to think". Pike's "presentation" in that episode was as subtle as a train crash.
I will however never judge a show until I've seen a full season because if you're not even willing to let them set the stage and establish the characters before talking trash then your words and opinion should be regarded as just that, trash.
The only part of Pikes presentation that was on the nose was the few seconds of Trump riot footage that seems to have triggered some fans. The majority of the footage showing the nuclear destruction and environmental ruin that resulted,
was not preaching it was Pike cutting through the BS.
Had that Trump footage not been part of the presentation, nobody would have had a problem with Pike making a very Kirk like move
and getting in the face of planetary leaders with the message they need to change
Strange New Worlds episode 1.01 is the best Trek I have watched since the 90's; it's only one episode though. I was reading reviews on RT and Amazon and people saying it's the worst Trek ever or it's so bad they need to just cancel Trek all together are so full of hate their reviews can't be even considered reviews and to the point they may not even have watched it. I read one reviewer saying that he enjoyed it and then realized they were playing with nostalgia and manipulating his mind using emotions. I'm like WTF, these reviews need to be removed as absolute troll trash
I don't appreciate how Kris was teasing Rob at the end. It may have been in good fun, but it did seem insulting. And, I think John needs to be more respectful of Rob's intimate knowledge of Star Trek
On a separate note, I do think that SNW has the potential to be a great chapter in Star Trek. However, I would like to see an original Star Trek show that is more allegorical like the older shows (1966-2005), and takes place after the events of Nemesis (that isn't Picard)
Just for the record, “Star Trek: Discovery” Seasons 3 and 4 take place 900 years in the future. That’s *WAY* beyond “Nemesis” …
@@lovetheblue6659 Well, I'm thinking that the Kelvin timeline as well as Discovery and Picard should be relegated to non-canon
@@ronpetersen2317 I did find it quite obnoxious when John and Kris were ridiculing Rob for his intimate knowledge of Star Trek. I'm sure she wouldn't appreciate it if someone ridiculed her for having intimate knowledge of whatever she's into
I'd love to see this discussion continue, especially with a few extra cast members. I loved the episode and when they actually showed real news footage I was like 'Hell yeah, tell 'em Pike!" but that's because I agree with the message. I think Rob has a good point that didn't occur to me in that this did cross out of allegory and into direct social commentary. Maybe Paramount doesn't care if they piss off a good chunk of their audience and I think that conviction is admirable but I only think that because I agree with the position they took.
I cant help but think of my father, who got me into Star Trek in the first place. If he had the time to watch Paramount + instead of FOX News he would have felt totally betrayed.(Maybe that was exactly what they were going for)
I liked the episode but I don't think I would have enjoyed it any less if they referenced a fictional schism in our history and hinted that the seeds were planted in the 2020s.
For over ten years some Trekkies scream to have their old Star Trek back then when it is FINALLY delivered... some Trekkies complain that we are retreading old territory. THIS is why Paramount/CBS hates trying to make the core fandom happy. It's just pointless to even try. Someone always complains. Apparently especially the Trumpsters who find themselves on the wrong side of history.
You had me until you wrote “Trumpsters.”
People don't want "old Trek" back. They want it honoured. Respected. Advanced.
Not appropriated, bastardised, and exploited.