👏👏👏👏

People making that claim do not understand classic Star Trek. Classic Star Trek showed on screen how a true idealistic "color blind" society might actually function. Crew members all treated each other with respect and dignity regardless of what they looked like or their sex. Everybody worked together as a team and supported each other. Classic Star Trek gave the audience something to which to aspire. Modern 'woke' Trek is a regression where all these differences between crew members are highlighted and there is constant drama between the characters. This is why I absolutely despise Kurtzman Trek. His take on the franchise is a fundamental betrayal of everything Star Trek was intended to represent.

@@randyjones3050 exactly. Today, they have mistaken "pushing people with darker skin in front while putting people with lighter skin (asians included) in the background" for "racial equality". They have also mistaken "females with fully masculine characteristics putting all the men down" for "equality of women". Nyota Uhura, Tuvok and Geordi were characters IN the story, they weren't deliberately added by replacing a white or asian character. They were treated with respect and dignity without acting as victims and demanding privilege on the account of "historical events". Uhura didn't lose her mind at being called a "Nieg****", a word I am today afraid youtube bots will ban me for if I type. Geordi coped with his disability without playing a victim or demanding stipulations. And for pete's sake, no one was losing their mind over a person with VISION being cast as a blind man. Deanna Troi, 7 of 9, Janeway were all highly regarded and respected without the need to emasculate every man they came across (although sometimes they did, when and if it was deserved) all the while remaining WOMEN. Deanna Troi didn't have to single handedly murder 57 Klingon warriros with a toothpick to earn the respect of the crew; she was a woman doing her job and it was ENOUGH. Geez.

Woke is oppressing people of today for the transgressions of the past, or oppressing people tat aren't the privileged class. It's power dynamics... nothing to do with the moral outlook of the old Tsar Trek... imagine if they went to planets and studied who the oppressed skin colors or enders were to solve the problems.. woke people don't see what's important. their focus makes them blind so that they wouldn't be able to solve any problem like Kirk and Spock did.

Well said.

problem is, the audience they are replacing is a very large one and replacing it with a very small one.

Facts all around.

Your analysis is brilliant and spot on. It’s across the board in all geek genre it’s killing the comic industry too.

As a 54 year old I've given up on Star Wars, Star Trek and many more.... I've saved so much money on merchandise not buying there woke crap and stopped going to cinema. Multiple that by millions of people around the world and the damage is huge.

As with any STD it multiplies, once it starts it spreads around. There is what 5 strains over 5 years?

Unless you have a comet flashing across the sky. In The Producers, the absolute Worst Play was selected. It should have been a miserable bomb. But the actor playing Adolph Hitler was a natural comedian and ruined the plan to swindle little old ladies.

@@carlajenkins1990 Love that show.

very much like the new forgettable Moonfall! Poor Halle Berry and Patrick Wilson had to endure the writing of that movie!

I could not have said it better. This show id nothing but shite.

Well put. The shows messaging is tiresome and never-ending. People want to be entertained, not lectured. This show has no legs.

Shatner and Arnold Moss’s (Karidian/Kodos) scene in Conscience of the King. Plus, if you can find it, a deleted scene from City on the Edge of Forever on the stairs at the apartment house. Shatner is screen magic.

Shatner is awesome even when he sleepwalks his acting. If you havent yet go watch "Boston Legal" with William Shatner as "Denny Crane" and James Spader (The Blacklist) as "Alan Shore. Its worth watching for those 2 alone...

Plummer respected Shatner from his times in theater. He talked how much he wanted to act in a movie with Shatner....and later he made Star Trek VI. Arguably, one of the best Trek movies....

I met him and interviewed him a few years ago. Shatner exudes charisma even at his age.

I met Shatner when he was down here in 2011. Interesting guy, great storyteller. I asked him if he'd ever go back to Shakespeare and he talked about Stratford and working with Plummer who he described as "known for being a great actor, not known for being a great guy." I was a huge fan and still am, although he said his path had diverged from Shakespeare and never gone back.

_To blandly go..._

Get the guy doing Yellowstone.

Agree, current state of Star Trek is all over place.

Why he rock a 'do like Vanilla Ice Ice baby

He could have saved the series. He lit the screen on fire. I'm glad he's getting his own spin off. He's perfect as Pike. Loved it.

@@migangelmart well... he is Anson "MFN" Mount.

@@evilchaperone I agree its the only reason Strange New Worlds is of interest to me I just don't care for Kurtzman's handling of it.

He is a beautiful man. OK I said it.There. I may have to actually find a way to watch his show. My worry is they will dumb him down, or dumb the show down, or his lady second in command ends up being the real power behind the command chair.

Pro-black, Afrocentric without being PC preachy means good writing. At that time, they cared about good writing. And they admitted when they missed their own standard. Even "Enterprise," which I despised, tried hard to be good. I got the feel that Berman and Braga left at least partly because they felt they could not create something new, they still cared about the quality of the story. That is all gone today. Today's writing is not about the quality, only about "The correct message." Any criticism to the show instantly labeled as "Misogynist" or "Sexist" or any other awful label. Sad. Really sad.

What made DS9 so great is that it wasn't pro-black or Afrocentric. Avery Brooks wasn't playing a black character (he said so, himself). He was playing a human character, and believe it or not, humans are into different things, such as having a Yoruba art collection. Skin color isn't a factor in that. Sisko was human, like any other human.

Well there was that 1950's episode "Far beyond the stars".

@@G360LIVE this comment is what Star Trek really embodies. I still enjoy the current shows but it is missing that element that they are just people and the content of character is more important then a specific identity. And, yes Trek has always had political overtones, but not to the one-sided way that it is on being presented and lack of nuance to the allegory of the social topic that is being showcased in the episode. I do put some of the blame on a segment of the fan base for the lack of nuance and the one-side presentation of the social topics, if you are with them then you are the most evil thing in the world.

@@Kharmazov Brilliant episode, though. I thought it was Brooks' best performance. He was generally very stoic, but not that episode.

Nimoy and Shatner were mostly friends for most of their post-Star Trek years, until Shatner included Nimoy in a documentary Shatner made over Nimoy's objections. That's what finally broke their relationship. Let's face it, it's not easy to be friends with a rampant egomaniacal narcissist like Shatner, and Nimoy's friendship with Shatner lasted longer than all of Shatner's marriages combined.

Think you mean sex, rather than sexuality, but these days, who knows?

@@Falconlibrary Very true, Shatner could make anyone he worked with a little nuts, lol. I read a three volume series of books by Marc Cushman about the making of TOS and one thing I recall was how as Spock got more and more popular, and Nimoy got more and more fan mail, Shatner started to insist that as the star of the show he should have more lines in each episode than Nimoy did. He would sit off to the side with the script counting words, lol.

And they didn't break the Prime Directive within 30 seconds of the first episode. Like Captain Michelle Yoh.

@@rightwired Ahhh, but then you refer to that rare and ignored thing that is canon. A word that does not exist in the vocabulary of Kurtzman and crew.

Also a lot of hacks...

Was gonna write something similar. I have zero movie making background but when I watch a Casablanca, I instantly know that it is good and includes all the details Chato mentioned. In fact, while he was taking about framing/filming a STAR, I instantly visualized shots of Ingrid Bergman in that film and it made perfect sense to me.

Well said! I really enjoy hearing Chato's perspective, which I believe is unique on KZfaq. I wonder if the situation can be reversed. When he mentioned that the directors for Discovery were inexperienced, Rings of Power just announced (Dec 2022) that the second season will have all female directors only. There is one who directed the "battle scene" in (I think) episode six, who is returning, but the others are all new. On the one hand, new directors have to earn experience somehow. On the other hand, ROP have basically told the world that the male directors from season one's work was not good enough.

I don't think studios are "risk-averse", though. They tried to make 'Terminator' kill John, Tried to kill Luke Skywalker, and (allegedly) attempted to retcon Indiana Jones out of existence and replace him with a woman. The only way to tread more financially risky ground would be by trying to remake 'Cars', with a pod of whales.

@@matthewmosier8439 I think the studios thought "Terminator", "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" in all of those cases. If they wanted to take risks, they wouldn't keep rebooting franchises. I don't think they realised just what would happen to those franchises.

Brilliant

Yep. They probably ran out of ideas with him because he is male

Doug Jones is a great character actor and actor of characters. I've enjoyed his performances in many, many movies. He is wasted on STD.

Clever word juxtaposition.

@@CallMeChato Perhaps you should watch it again from a different lense, Sir. Perhaps catch it with the opinion of a black person who has never watched Star Trek.

@@suzygirl1843why would anyone do that? The fact that you can ignore TOS and Uhura says volumes. Her character existed during the time of race riots and stayed at the behest of Dr King. Doesn’t get more real than that.

Both Yeoh and Isaacs were great.

@@Falconlibrary Yes, STD hates itself though, so they always decide to write out the show's best characters and actors lol.

@@KotCR I have to say, Saru's guy, Doug Jones, he's pretty good, and I was fond of him as captain....until he was writen out. Yeap, Discovery hates itself....

@@luchomscyfy Nah, people seem to hate empowered black female characters. Not just in Discovery but in real life. Look at how people responded to Ketanji Brown Jackson

@@suzygirl1843 you believe Ketanji Brown is empowered? Pfff. Ok.

this would be interesting

Second this

Yes, please. "3 Shows or movies in sci fi or fantasy that you recommend"

I know nothing about moviemaking, but the approach you have described is the same as required by, for example, medieval guilds. Young teenage boys started as an apprentice, and had to learn all aspects of the trade or craft. It took years before they could become a master of their trade or craft with the result that they knew exactly everything about their work. There is a reason the system has survived for centuries. I think we have a divide between the people who think they're too well educated to have to start at the bottom, and the others in charge who agree with that. A lot of the writing nowadays is also boring and predictable because young writers have little life experience. The channel "critical drinker" has a video series on "why modern movies suck" which goes into more detail. Disparu has a video from approximately end of November 2022 in which a writer for the Witcher says that the screenwriters hate the source material and think they're too smart to have to lower themselves to work on it. Furthermore, that all the Hollywood screen writers feel this way about every single intellectual property, including Star Wars, and Tolkien. The entertainment and video games journalists also think they're too smart to be wasting their precious brain cells on writing about the stuff. All of them have nothing but contempt for the fans of the source material.

What's lacking in Hollywood is an investment in black stars. There's only a handful: Denzel Washington, Morgan Freeman, Will Smith, Halle Berry etc.

@@suzygirl1843 It's one problem among many, but yes, there's a lot of untapped talent. How many black directors are there? Again, only a handful. And we know it's not because black people lack talent. But you're a one-note singer, I see from your other comments.

Hey, thanks!

Michael yoah should have be the lead! What a Show that could have been

I was not aware of this at all so thank you for your comment!

Aren’t you that POF guy?

Lloyd was dreadful. Agreed. The Phantom Edit cuts around a lot of Lloyd and Jar Jar and is great.

George Lucas said in that documentary that he chose Lloyd because he felt Lloyd could move production along faster than the other kids. So it was a technical decision not a character casting decision

Or why they chose to have a kid at all

I remember seeing that, too. Plus, the kid looked like a little Mark Hamill, circa 1976. Jake Lloyd acted like first-season Jerry Mathers from _Leave It To Beaver._ You know: cock head, screw face up briefly, sniff, rub nose, shrug. Instead of acting it was all little "look-at-me" tics. And I think *_that's_* why Lucas cast Lloyd instead of the other kid. Lloyd's style was *_familiar._*

@@ikept_the_jethryk2421 like Patton Oswalt said

So true, so true. Older fans get insulted because we want more of the same, which is totally not true. These shows (Picard in particular), rely heavily on just rehashed story elements from old series. Lifelong fans DON’T want more of the same, we want to know what happens next in the story, and we want new characters we actually care about!

Nerd/Geek Culture is considered "masculine", which is why it's being targeted for destruction.

They're doing that for the same reason Chinese chairman Mao instituted the Great Leap forward, power and control. The great leap forward was about the youth overturning the past and its traditions, destroying historical items like art, ending traditions, over turning society. With the woke they are doing the same but in less physically violent ways focusing more on on-line attacks and the intentional destruction if pop culture. It's all psychology and most of us just can't see it or refuse to believing that this couldn't happen here, this is America. The US is a turn key totalitarian state and they are destroying culture so once they're ready to turn that key there will be little resistance

I feel like the problem is that a lot of the time they just don't understand the difference between the concepts of text and subtext. Take the X-Men for example. The X-Men is commonly believed to be talking, in so many words, about gay people during the time it was written, but that Prof. Xavier and Magneto are largely inspired by Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. They wrote these ideas into the subtext of the characters and stories as a way of informing the characters actions. I would then go on to make up a strawman of what the modern version of this would look like, but I don't have to because it already exists. Black is a modern series that did not do well. It is a heavyhanded and racist as all hell X-Men ripoff that tries to convince us that in the universe of the story black people are the only race that has superpowers and they are still somehow oppressed. In making the subtext text they made the whole thing make no damn sense.

@@PenumbranWolf what a weird fucking tangent to go on. It seemed like you were saying something but, you had to get so weird... you just seem like a psycho. I encourage you, attempt to not be a spaz and it seems like you're maybe thoughtful enough to have something worth reading.

because it doesn't have the black female as the leader. Nothing has changed. She's still the Uhura archetype. You tell on yourselves.

@@suzygirl1843 Seth MacFarlane created The Orville so he could be a starship captain. He's not a black woman. In case you hadn't noticed. Maybe you should go create your own show?

@@suzygirl1843 That's the problem. You're so focused on gender and race, that you can't understand that that has nothing to do with what we're talking about. True Trek fans that love The Orville, also loved Janeway and Sisko that check your boxes. We are looking for clever social commentary, a fun tale with likeable charismatic characters. The Orville has all of those in spades. STD and sadly STP does not. Oh and how is the black doctor on The Orville, a Uhura archetype? And let's not bash Uhura, for the time her role was ground breaking.

@@suzygirl1843 "You tell on yourselves" What does that mean? What's your point? Are you not strong enough as warrior woman to call people racist? Keyboard nobody is what you are.

@@tomatodamashi Uhura was not the lead is the point. It was groundbreaking FOR the TIME. Now we want more. Today, women are business owners and ambitious.

I have this strange compulsion to buy "Old Spice"..

It's a Star Trek show made by people who hate Star Trek intended for and audience of people who don't like or watch Star Trek. Really you could say it's intended purpose is to support "The Message."

Check out the dining room at Cinderella's Castle in Disney world Florida. A few years go Disney removed "My Lord", My Lady and King Henry the VIII food. it now more gender neutral and fu fu healthy trendy. No fish taco [yet] but long gone is the cannon and realism. Very sad. My money no longer stops there [not so sad ]

@@allenshepard7992 They do what all revolutionary authoritarians do. Erase the history of everything and everyone who came before. There is no history or culture before them. Just ask Lenin and Stalin.

The problem that I see with this show is that it was already green lighted for multiple seasons. Doing that sets a perception in the audience that since the show has made it multiple seasons it must be good. This is most definitely the downside of the consolidation of entertainment companies.

@@kevinkorenke3569 Here you have the problem with little streaming channels producing their own shows. They need content, and will keep a piece of trash on because what else have they got? If Discovery was on the networks, there would be ratings attached, and everyone would see how many actually watched, and the thing would never have made 13 weeks. When they tried airing it on CBS, no one watched. But because it is where it is, now it has 4 seasons under its belt, and the cache of having lasted that long, so it must be good.

Well I kind of said that that the actors are not being given a chance to have the camera love them.

The actors play their part in pushing THE MESSAGE, you should see their terrible interviews. Even the Tilly actress admits her only function on the show is to be there for Fat Woman representaaaation.

@@CallMeChato 👍

@@Knightfall182 Very true. Some are more toxic than others though. Some are Ezra Miller's and others are just parroting, because that's the thing to do. I can't respect that, but I understand the pressure. If you speak out, you can go home. It's very complicated. I don't see the industry fixing itself, but rather just collapsing to one degree or another, and the space being filled by outsider creators... who will be maligned like youtubers, comicsgaters, authors like Brandon Sanderson who are stepping outside the industry boundaries and being very successful. I don't know. I just look forward to Chato and people like him with deeper involvement than me sharing their opinions and ideas. Whatever happens, I think will look radically different in 10 years. Well, there was a rant!

@@Knightfall182 I wouldn't really call her fat though. A little chunky. Of course it would certainly be absurd for an actual fat girl to be in Starfleet though.

I wonder, what is actually a charismatic black woman to a Anglosaxon audience? Just curious.

@@suzygirl1843 Off the top of my head, as far as current Star Trek goes on Lower Decks Beckett (Tawny Newsome) I think does a really good job of being a likeable rebel who dislike authority and likes to have a good time, and Captain Freeman (Dawnn Lewis) is enjoyable to see in the captains seat as someone more reserved, but still willing to break rules and take risks when the situations calls for it. We also get to see both characters far more in their down time, so the audience can actually get to know the characters. To me usually just feels like Burnham just feels like generic actiony lead that writers can just have dramatic revelation after dramatically revelation happen to, but none of it really seems to effect or change her character much outside the scenes it happens in. After what 4 seasons of discovery I would find it hard to describe her character outside of describing a very generic action lead. Beckett and Freemen I can very easily describe, in a way that I think most people would be pretty able to uniquely identify them.

@@PKAmedia I have an issue with that. People seem to place black women in certain boxes: The Conservative woman (Uhura), the magical Negro (Guinan), the Mammy (Dr. Finn on Orville and Captain Freeman), loud and sexually liberated (Mariner) or strong independent (Michael Burnham). I would like Normani or Ryan Destiny to be cast in these roles as the laid back romantic leads. I don't like seeing the same stereotypes over and over again of confrontational black women in media.

GQ also had the most charismatic protaginist in Sarazzar "deliver the device!!!"

@@yousernameish I agree, in this case the protagonist was a complete mustache twirler but that's what the script called for. Sometimes you don't need an intricate backstory and most of the time you don't need to know the childhood experiences that made the bad guy into the bad guy. Simply create a protagonist that is the slightly more powerful opposite of the antagonist and let good storytelling work its magic.

@@yousernameish Damn straight, also if you look closely they even got a pre-office Dwight playing one of the backup aliens lol.

Alex had a poster of Nixon in his bedroom.

I can't remember where I read this, and perhaps I am making this up as a memory in my own head. Years ago I remember they had Alex the character as a foil to the parents who were supposed to be the moral center. They were going to use the character as a running joke, but something happened that turned that around. The actor Michael J. Fox was an audience favorite. Despite the writing it turned out his conservatism was actually respected and rather popular. There was some growing for the character, but he often became more "sane" than his siblings or parents. In other words, the actor and the character transformed a gimmick into someone relatable.

The show was meant as a role reversal - instead of conservative parents and a radical kid you had the opposite (in a sense flipping shows like All in the Family). Aside from Fox's charisma the reason the character took off was because it was the 80s and so he was more in tune with the Reagan era culture. If the show was rebooted (a bad idea) the character would not resonate today no matter how charismatic the actor.

Exactly.

@@CallMeChato Did the whole world agree to that mindset, though? Or are there battling ideals and 1 wins over the other depending on who has the power of media?

Words like woke, fake news etc are preschool. I do however agree with your thoughts even though liberal agenda Over substance describe things better then woke.

@@eleventy-seven are preschool? I don't know what you mean but woke culture and fake news are very real things. Even if I could understand your gibberish, I 'd immediately discount it because of your profile picture. Disgusting. Damn you for jumping onto a damn band wagon that emphasizes your selfish feelings and disguises them as virtue while you drag us closer to nuclear winter for your hit of dopamine. Frankly, get bent current thing guy. Why don't you go back to yelling about masks or you gonna wait to hear what your next identity is from your handlers?

I haven’t watched the Star Trek he is in, but I give him major points for doing the only accurate Mississippi accent I have ever heard, for Hell On Wheels. My family comes from the area that his character names as a hometown, and he nailed it. For Louisiana, still waiting

That's because the fans are MEN. They are biased to see white men as leaders. Honestly, we have a LONG way to go for black females main protagonists. I have long waited for Storm solo movie, DC Vixen, Marvel Misty Knight spinoff etc

@@suzygirl1843 It's not that basic. It comes down to charisma and screen presence. Hence why everyone loved Sisko on DS9, he was believable as a leader. Same with Pres David Palmer on 24. Chadwick Boseman etc. Anson has that same quality. Sonequa does not, and the poor writing for Burnham doesn't help matters.

@@Knightfall182 Name me a black female character that YOU find charismatic? And don't write down Uhura because she was a glorified secretary.

@@suzygirl1843 Whoopi Goldberg as Guinan

Yeah, the whole point of subtle inclusion is that fiction can allow people to become familiar with and like atypical characters. I thought Euphoria did this well with its lead trans character. But when it’s done with an air of arrogance or righteousness it has the opposite effect.

You are right about the LGBTQ shoehorning part. But I think people's criticism of Michael Burnham are obtuse. There's a reason why Uhuru wasn't a main protagonist - there are people with better skills than her while Michael was trained by Vulcans to be the among best. She is not a Mary Sue. She sabotaged herself with that mutiny in episode 1 which showed you her greatest flaw: she thinks she's right all the time and is unforgiving. She let her emotions rule her in that 1 instant.

I think that they start out saying 'New TV show, we need X percentage Black...X percentage Gay...X percentage Women...X percentage Trans...X percentage Disabled etcetera. . One white actor amongst the cast. . Even if the percentage is minute, that's a required character. .

This is the crux of the problem. As a marketing executive you want to expand your customer base while retaining your existing customers. Often, a good product is destroyed by trying to please everyone and pleasing no one. How do you attract women, homosexual men and minorities to "hero's journey" stories? They appeal to heterosexual white men who identify with the heterosexual white male hero. You can't and studios have to accept that science fiction has a specific limited audience, just as romantic comedies appeal to women and musicals appeal to homosexual men. The reality is that men will go see a chic flick, but women will not go to see a guy movie.

@@billanderson1075 Funny thing is, they already figured out how to attracted women, the gays and minorities. You get a generic, handsome white guy, give him a competent black sidekick and everybody's happy. Hell, the generic white guy everyman was already a good standard for movies and television. We were at the point where a non-white guy could relate to the white guy on screen because all they'd ever seen was white guys. Ironically, things were a lot more tolerant and functional before wokeness.

If you want to know what a Communist Repatriate Camp was like tune into Discovery for an hour.

I think it's probably the only thing they kinda got right. Who knows what the population makeup will be by the 23rd, 24th, 29th century. I get it that it's an "American" show but in the fictional universe of Star Trek there is no "United States Of America". As for sexuality, heck it could be possible that by the 23th century most people are bi and heteros are no longer the majority. Don't get me wrong Star Trek Discovery and Picard are horrible shows, devoid of progressive thought provoking elements and filled with... I dunno progressive fascism? It's just not good and I'm perfectly happy with their spoof animated series "Lower Decks" which is the most "Star Trek" feeling show that came out of Paramount+.

Isaacs is surprisingly good. If you haven’t seen it, check out his performance as tough-guy PI in Case Histories.

Isaacs is exactly the kind of actor you need on a show like Discovery but of course the Hollywood rocket scientists with all their bullshit about male white toxicity have to get their way and good by Jason. Fortunately, the new Star Trek with Anson Mount is an indication that they are finally realizing they need to stop the bullshit and start making good television. Time will tell.

So why do you have a hard time understanding characters like Michael Burnham if you want us to tolerate the machismo type? Michael would fall into a similar category called a "proud" woman. Are these characters perfect? No but they certainly do have their own challenges that Fanbase kind of proved. I enjoyed Michael Burnham because she is actually a realistic portrait of an overachiever who prioritizes results over friendship or comradery. She learns along the way to include people into her endeavors - that was the point.

@@suzygirl1843 You would have had to have grown up around that generation to get a true grasp of the meaning. It is not a construct. It's not about overachieving. Anyone with a strong enough will can be an overachiever. It isn't any of those things. Mostly, it is an intangible. Like an "It" factor. You can't define it, but you knew a man had it when you saw him. It was all about mental attitude. It also was simple biology. Men were men. Women were women. Period. There were no infinite genders. it wasn't about how you "identify." It wasn't about pronouns. They would have what is now known as toxic masculinity. They didn't give a damn about your feelings. They prioritized getting the job done, which included being a provider or whatever else was required, and not accepting excuses such as, "I'm not feeling it today." Their mantra was simple. Shut up, quit crying, get the job done. Each and every day. This is the best I can do in this short space.

Great example. Reacher is great!!

It’s good? I saw what this actor wrote about Will Smith and was impressed.

I must be impervious to his charisma. He always seemed like a piece of cardboard to me. Well a hunky piece of cardboard. Now don't get me wrong, I really liked Reacher, but not because of his charisma. I found the two cops he worked with far more charismatic and engaging.

I must be the odd one out regarding the Reacher series, and stopped after a couple episodes. Got severe "Gary Stu", the character which begins great at everything, impressions and couldn't continue.

@@NefariousKoel Oh, he totally is a Gary Stu. Complete and utter male wish fulfillment. Still, the series was entertaining. It never really tried to be more than it was and it did have a quite good supporting cast.

We could be the brothers. He would be Q and I would be R.

I hear it now.

@@CallMeChato If I go to your patreon will you review HBO's Watchmen and juxtapose Regina King's character with Soniqua Martin-Green? They are similar so it would be a fair and balanced argument over charisma

@@suzygirl1843 Ha I don’t have a patreon account. I don’t do this for a living. Regina vs Sonequa. That’s interesting. I am not the official arbiter of charisma. I did not see HBO’s The Watchmen but I heard that Regina was very good. Sonequa has left me cold to-date. Perhaps she just needs the right project.

@@CallMeChato The brothers QQ ?

Let's not forget our good friend, Lens Flare...

I’ve seen a TV anchor that looks like an old hag onscreen but in real life she’s quite pretty.

It’s all about pushing that ball over the goal line. Charisma can trump writing but I’ve talked about writing in previous episodes.

@@CallMeChato You've tapped into a rich vein of nerd with the Star Trek theme, and it's great to get the perspective of someone who's been in the trenches. Thanks

Only if he includes his iconic role in "The Dam Busters".

Interesting. I might do The Prisoner.

@@CallMeChato Are you Number 1?

Completely agree, take Stargate Universe, an otherwise good show but it lacked one important thing, a good consistent villain. Star Trek Picard season two, six episodes in and we have no villain! I mean, unless you include the borg queen they are working with!? lmao

Star Trek Discovery Season four had no villain at all, except for maybe book who wasn't!

That's the weird thing though. We've been so trained to expect the "NYPD Blue" shaky camera that TV shows look contrived if the camera is locked off. I used to really appreciate smooth planned camera moves (see "Touch Of Evil" opening crane shot) but it seems to be a lost art.

You clearly don't get it. The best way to make the audience believe what they are seeing is real is to constantly remind them there is a camera...

Now *that* was some good television!

He'll be a Red Shirt Volunteer - possibly after acting bigoted.

They’re obviously doing that lame diverse “team” thing that almost every CBS show does.

That' was the point. She grew up on Vulcan but Season 1 criticized her lack of emotions and they had to retcon that a little bit to ramp up her emotions. I think you guys are making stuff up.

She's actually very charismatic off the set.

"We kinda... forgot..."

A million years later inside my head I still hear "He's so cute..." after someone says 'Alex P. Keaton'.

Michael J Fox really did steal the show. Michael Gross and Meredith Baxter were the ostensible stars of the show but Michael J Fox simply took over by way of his charisma and charm. He made the show about him, not because of ego or a desire to upstage the other actors, but through his power to finesse the audience. That's what we call star power.

What was funny about that, too, was that the conservative Alex was supposed to be the foil for the liberal parents, who were supposed to get the respect. It was almost but not quite like All In the Family in that regard.

Much appreciated!