CBS Makes Star Trek: Picard Pilot Free On YouTube 'For a Limited Time'

[GhostCow]

Which period piece was it? I recall some controversy about something like that a while ago, but couldn't remember exactly what it was about.

I was more referring to the article written recently about how having all white casts in period pieces should be banned. You could be thinking of the film King Lear, Troy: Fall of a City, BBC's the story of Britain, or the 2016 Robin Hood series. There's been so much blackwashing of historicals that it's hard to keep track.

 

[sfsuphysics]

It's far more edgy to say woke, SJW etc though!

I really need to get around to watching this show, I mean in TNG (since they explored more than just the space ship side of things) like Earth is entirely "cool", there's no poverty, or hunger, or hell everyone just does their jobs for "the good of the state" not sure how you could get more "woke" that that.

 

[GhostCow]

I really need to get around to watching this show, I mean in TNG (since they explored more than just the space ship side of things) like Earth is entirely "cool", there's no poverty, or hunger, or hell everyone just does their jobs for "the good of the state" not sure how you could get more "woke" that that.

I dislike when people compare the Star Trek universe to communism even though I fell into that trap myself at one point. A post-scarcity society isn't really the same thing.

 

[DukenukemX]

Voyager was good? Since when?

When they introduced the Borg and Seven of Nine. Up until they introduced these elements into the show it was... boring. You can tell they made some massive changes when Kes was removed in favor of Seven of Nine. The Borg was awesome to watch as they were something we were introduced in Next Generation but we got to see much more of in Voyager.

I don't think the problem is "SJWs" or "wokeness" as much as everyone chasing the Marvel pie. As much as I enjoy the Marvel movies, they're not subtle and they're not exactly challenging the audiences' intelligence, yet they make so much money that everyone wants on board. So, they're following the same trend and trying to go with what they think makes the most money. Hollywood execs really don't care about politics, they care about money. They think appealing to the stereotypical millennial means they will get all the money, so they do it. Yet they simply don't seem to get that wrecking long beloved franchises is not exactly going to do it.

As long as they keep losing money then eventually they'll get the idea. In China they even call the media they produce “White Liberals”, which apparently is a derogative phrase.

If anything, the terrible "SJW" marketing probably helped Ghostbusters 2016, if only a little. Given how boring and bad the trailers were the movie probably would have been utterly forgotton if not for Sony manipulating the easily manipulated fools on both sides. Heck, the only reason I watched it was to see if it really was as bad as people were saying (it wasn't, though it was still pretty bad). Given how bad Supergirl has been and that keeps getting rewewed, I think there's a high chance of the phrase not applying to Batwoman. The show seems to have an audience and with Arrow gone and Supernatural ending, CW doesn't have any real big hitters left.

Ghostbusters 2016 made less money than they spent to make it. I doubt that losing money was Sony's goal. Probably an all female staff was going to make them more money than an all male staff with the script they had, but instead of fixing the script and making a proper move they just farted it out to theaters. Bat woman has extremely low ratings, so I can only imagine that whoever made the show really enjoys losing money? Wanna know what doesn't suck and has a female main character? Harley Quinn is actually really good and I can't wait to watch the next episode. Seriously, why isn't anyone talking about this show?

 

[GhostCow]

As long as they keep losing money then eventually they'll get the idea. In China they even call the media they produce “White Liberals”, which apparently is a derogative phrase.

The word you are looking for is Baizuo

Ghostbusters 2016 made less money than they spent to make it. I doubt that losing money was Sony's goal.

You'd be surprised. It's amazing the tax write offs you can get for bombing a movie in hollywood. Sometimes they do it on purpose and other times they care more about the social engineering than the money. Especially when certain people can just print all the money they want.

 

[Derangel]

When they introduced the Borg and Seven of Nine. Up until they introduced these elements into the show it was... boring. You can tell they made some massive changes when Kes was removed in favor of Seven of Nine. The Borg was awesome to watch as they were something we were introduced in Next Generation but we got to see much more of in Voyager.

As long as they keep losing money then eventually they'll get the idea. In China they even call the media they produce “White Liberals”, which apparently is a derogative phrase.

Ghostbusters 2016 made less money than they spent to make it. I doubt that losing money was Sony's goal. Probably an all female staff was going to make them more money than an all male staff with the script they had, but instead of fixing the script and making a proper move they just farted it out to theaters. Bat woman has extremely low ratings, so I can only imagine that whoever made the show really enjoys losing money? Wanna know what doesn't suck and has a female main character? Harley Quinn is actually really good and I can't wait to watch the next episode. Seriously, why isn't anyone talking about this show?

Seven of Nine definitely had the best episodes around her, but as good as Jeri Ryan was in the role she wasn't enough to save the series. She was a big part of making the Borg look like bitches and it lead to the ruination of one of the best Trek villains. At least she got actual character development though and didn't always suffer under the show's constant use of the reset button.

You really think Sony Pictures didn't know the movie was going to be bad and lose money long before that first trailer? Outside of convincing China to overlook their ban on ghosts (yes, seriously) Sony Pictures had to know the movie was doomed from the get-go. So they spun up the PR machine and used outrage to keep people talking. First it was the initial trailer that shit all over the original movies (that had to be intentional) then they had the cast and crew attack fans, constantly driving discussion of the movie. They knew it was going to bomb, but better to keep it in the news then to let people forget it exists. Plus, it allowed them to trick people into loving them again when the announced Reborn (which does look like it has some amount of potential).

The first episode of Harley Quinn was rough, the script was okay but they really didn't understand the tone they wanted and tried to use tons of swearing in place of jokes. Thankfully, from ep2 on the show has been brilliant. I loved their take on Damien and the whole "nemesis" thing.

 

[M76]

In the grand scheme of things those who are in to "wokeness" tend to have the same agendas as those into liberalism. They are just too surrounded by their echo-chambers and shut out anyone who disagrees, so they tend to take it a little too far on occasion.

There is nothing liberal in this way of thinking. Conform or die, is not very liberal is it? That is wildly authoritarian.

 

[M76]

Yeah whatever guy, welcome to my ignore list.

I guess I'm on your ignore list too, because somehow you forgot to reply.

 

[M76]

Ah yes the poor Nazis, why aren't these genocidal racist assholes glorified? And yeah I understand, white people are so underrepresented and persecuted it's really unfair. I figured it wouldn't take much for your thinly veiled racism to surface, I'm glad you proved my instincts right.

If you believe that in 1933 all of the German people suddenly became genocidal racist assholes, wouldn't that make every American literally Trump now?

Fact of the matter is that modern Wolfenstein games trivialized the nazies and made them look like children, which meant they weren't frightening but a joke, a woke caricature. And it basically invalidated the whole plot, if they are such bumbling idiots how did they win the war in the first place? The more intelligent the villain the more frightening, not the other way around.

 

[5150Joker]

If you believe that in 1933 all of the German people suddenly became genocidal racist assholes, wouldn't that make every American literally Trump now?

Fact of the matter is that modern Wolfenstein games trivialized the nazies and made them look like children, which meant they weren't frightening but a joke, a woke caricature. And it basically invalidated the whole plot, if they are such bumbling idiots how did they win the war in the first place? The more intelligent the villain the more frightening, not the other way around.

Can you read? He specifically said Nazis, not Germans. And good, fuck the Nazis, they should be mocked and the people that look up to them. Personally I don't care how woke material is as long as it's entertaining. I don't weep for right wing cultists and their perpetual whining of the Hollywood left. Star Trek was created by a liberal for liberals, not for card carrying Nazis who cry foul when there's women, gays or poc on TV. His son is an exec for Picard so he's carrying on his father's vision. Nobody is forcing any of you to watch it or even derail multiple threads about these shows with your bullshit.

 

[Krenum]

Watched it last night. The story has me interested. Not bad.

 

[M76]

Can you read? He specifically said Nazis, not Germans. And good, fuck the Nazis, they should be mocked and the people that look up to them. Personally I don't care how woke material is as long as it's entertaining. I don't weep for right wing cultists and their perpetual whining of the Hollywood left. Star Trek was created by a liberal for liberals, not for card carrying Nazis who cry foul when there's women, gays or poc on TV. His son is an exec for Picard so he's carrying on his father's vision. Nobody is forcing any of you to watch it or even derail multiple threads about these shows with your bullshit.

You know damn well that not all German soldiers are nazies, and in WW2 games all enemies are called nazies. You seem to think that only actual nazies want WW2 germans correctly and realistically represented when everyone would benefit from a better plot.

Nobody is forcing you to watch is still not an argument for anything. How could I have an opinion on it if I didn't watch it? And why am I not allowed to express my opinion?

Do you say only your opinion is valid, and anyone's who dislikes the show is bullshit?

 

[5150Joker]

You know damn well that not all German soldiers are nazies, and in WW2 games all enemies are called nazies. You seem to think that only actual nazies want WW2 germans correctly and realistically represented when everyone would benefit from a better plot.

Nobody is forcing you to watch is still not an argument for anything. How could I have an opinion on it if I didn't watch it? And why am I not allowed to express my opinion?

Do you say only your opinion is valid, and anyone's who dislikes the show is bullshit?

Imagine being dumb enough to complain about Wolfenstein not being a thoughtful game towards Nazis.

 

[M76]

Imagine being dumb enough to complain about Wolfenstein not being a thoughtful game towards Nazis.

I don't have to imagine anything as you clearly demonstrate not understanding that a complex more nuanced villain makes for much better entertainment than a dumb caricature.
Have you missed films like Battle of the Bulge, or Kelly's Heroes? Are they made worse by representing nazies as actual soldiers who are just as tired of the war instead of all being blood thirsty genocidal maniacs?
Just because you want to represent them in a realistic manner doesn't mean you have to sign up to nazi ideology.

It's not about being thoughtful to current nazies (fuck em there is no excuse for being an actual nazi now, not that there are many of those) It's about being fair and thoughtful to WW2 axis soldiers, most of whom were forced into service, especially towards the end of the war.

I'm baffled by the fact that you actually think people who dislike unrealistic representation and revisionism are all actual nazies. Talk about being dumb.

 

[Monkey34]

okayyy.....had to just skip all the posts.

The first ep was good enough, but I'm not paying for another streaming service just to follow it. Without getting mired in this thread-mess, I'll just say the political themes in the episode were pretty blatant. It's only the first episode, but it feels too obvious. Where's the subtle undercurrent of the plot to drive conjecture about what MIGHT be going on?

I realize Trek has always had a humanist left-leaning slant, but somehow it seems to have been done better in previous series. It was there, but blended better with the technological stretches, and personal stories of characters as well as the exploration of other planets species and cultures.

Picard ep1 just felt like it was missing a lot.....or maybe it was just an episode of msnbc.

 

[ThatITGuy]

I don't have to imagine anything as you clearly demonstrate not understanding that a complex more nuanced villain makes for much better entertainment than a dumb caricature.
Have you missed films like Battle of the Bulge, or Kelly's Heroes? Are they made worse by representing nazies as actual soldiers who are just as tired of the war instead of all being blood thirsty genocidal maniacs?
Just because you want to represent them in a realistic manner doesn't mean you have to sign up to nazi ideology.

It's not about being thoughtful to current nazies (fuck em there is no excuse for being an actual nazi now, not that there are many of those) It's about being fair and thoughtful to WW2 axis soldiers, most of whom were forced into service, especially towards the end of the war.

I'm baffled by the fact that you actually think people who dislike unrealistic representation and revisionism are all actual nazies. Talk about being dumb.

So basically Thanos vs "The Mandarin" in Iron Man 2

 

[relapse808]

No thanks. I'll make up my own mind on the episodes and not let some angry dude on the internet dictate my opinions for me. If people want to see politics in every fucking thing ever that's on them, but I refuse to go along with that utter stupidity.

I agree I watched it last night not expecting much but I actually ended up liking the show. This guy just wants to inject bullcrap into everything to get those Youtube clicks and subscriptions.

 

[atreidesgoldenpath]

I really need to get around to watching this show, I mean in TNG (since they explored more than just the space ship side of things) like Earth is entirely "cool", there's no poverty, or hunger, or hell everyone just does their jobs for "the good of the state" not sure how you could get more "woke" that that.

I have never felt as though TNG was "woke."
But, maybe I don't understand the term.

 

[Verge]

I'll finally have an opportunity to see the first episode! Hopefully this weekend!

"CBS has not said whether it plans to make other episodes available for free on YouTube in the future, but it seems likely. The description for the video says the episode will only be available "for a limited time" and that it's presented by Geico. It does not, however, clarify how long "a limited time" is or when the video might become unavailable."

https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/...card-pilot-free-on-youtube-for-a-limited-time

Big surprise everyone is stealing it off the internet instead of buying yet another subscription, for a single show.

 

[NeoNemesis]

If I didn't watch it you'd say you can't criticize it without watching it. If I watch it then criticize it then you call me a snowflake or sensitive! So what do you really want?


I don't know how is that related to anything in Picard, I really don't know, care to elaborate?
I find it curious that the so called woke are always first to point out what the so called right should be offended by, even before anyone speaks out. Perhaps they are projecting their own bigotry?

I wasn't even talking to you. I was talking to the guy that keeps posting videos of some angry dude continuing to watch it even after specifically saying that he hated the first episode.

As to your second comment, it demonstrates that what we perceive as being 'Left or Right' evolves over time. Nowadays a white man kissing a black woman is nothing, but back in the 60s I'm sure people like this Dave Cullen character would have been all up in arms about how liberal the show is and how everyone involved is overly 'woke' or a 'libtard'.

 

[M76]

I wasn't even talking to you. I was talking to the guy that keeps posting videos of some angry dude continuing to watch it even after specifically saying that he hated the first episode.

Sorry, didn't know it was a private conversation you're having. I never watched the video, I probably don't agree with most of it, but you written a non-argument I reacted to that. Saying that you don't have to watch it does not invalidate any criticism.

As to your second comment, it demonstrates that what we perceive as being 'Left or Right' evolves over time. Nowadays a white man kissing a black woman is nothing, but back in the 60s I'm sure people like this Dave Cullen character would have been all up in arms about how liberal the show is and how everyone involved is overly 'woke' or a 'libtard'.

It shows that stawmanning is still rampant. People assuming the positions of others without any basis in reality.

Personally I don't think the first episode of Picard was woke at all, I think it is bad for entirely other reasons.

 

[NeoNemesis]

Sorry, didn't know it was a private conversation you're having. I never watched the video, I probably don't agree with most of it, but you written a non-argument I reacted to that. Saying that you don't have to watch it does not invalidate any criticism.

It shows that stawmanning is still rampant. People assuming the positions of others without any basis in reality.

Personally I don't think the first episode of Picard was woke at all, I think it is bad for entirely other reasons.

Hardly a straw man argument. The argument demonstrates that Star Trek is 1) Liberal leaning and 2) Tries to push boundaries.

Given that this entire conversation centers around Star Trek being 'too liberal' it's literally the perfect analogy. I have no idea how you could categorize this as a straw man argument.

I've included a definition of what straw man argument means below for your reference:

The opposing argument may focus on just one aspect of the claim, take it out of context, or exaggerate it. The straw man argument, in this way, is an example of a red herring. It's meant to distract from the real issue being discussed and is not a logically valid argument.

 

[CptCabbit]

I both love and hate that this is being released weekly. I do believe its the better way to do things, despite my desire to have a finished story immediately.

 

[sfsuphysics]

I have never felt as though TNG was "woke."
But, maybe I don't understand the term.

Oh I'm probably absolutely misusing the term, as I'm too old and not very politically aligned to any "ethos" to follow all the buzz words that one side drums up and uses as their "bumper sticker" speech moments.

But I definitely saw the real world parallels of some of the things that TNG tackled, mind you they weren't multi-episode things like the Borg or something, but they did things like focus in on sexuality (not just in the screw everything Captain Kirk way) things like LGBT type stuff, how to deal with strong ideals (which can mean anything from politics to religion), looking back at the episodes though it may be a little difficult to see it, but when it came out the issues were there.

I dislike when people compare the Star Trek universe to communism even though I fell into that trap myself at one point. A post-scarcity society isn't really the same thing.

See it's not the Universe, it's what Earth does, and specifically Earth not just human looking people, and I get that "for the good of all mankind" isn't exactly a parallel of "communism" (in the most pure form) but it's close and I can totally see someone being upset that it's being suggested that money doesn't help push innovation, coming up with technobable to fix this (i.e. replicators) helps push back some of underlying questions, and sure there was a post-scarcity society depicted in Star Trek: First Contact, but when the show was set was well past that date and Earth was once again packed hell they had colonies on the Moon (Riker was from there ) . And sure you have the Ferrengi who's main focus was acquiring things, one could almost see some very "Jew like" parallels being mocked too, but if you noticed how they were always depicted as having dark ships, and were always back stabbing type of people. So I could easily see an anti-consumer type of message being there.

 

[OFaceSIG]

I could not stand discovery and maybe got two episodes into season 2. I despise it.

Picard on the other hand I not only watch, but I enjoy. TNG it is not, but I can watch it. The TNG, DS9 era of good or great Trek is dead, LONG DEAD.

 

[HeadRusch]

Watched the first episode. Wanted to like it. Production values are very high. Story felt like fan-fic. Most glaring impression: Patrick Stewart is playing Patrick Stewart, not Jean Luc Picard. Story feels like its about to turn into Star Trek III with a touch of The Bourne Identity. Typical "bad tv script" shit happens too often, bad guys with super powers can't seem to get the job done, Patrick Stewart can't run up a flight of stairs but survives a nuclear explosion with a mild headache..wakes up on his couch, no investigation, no big drama about a huge explosion happening....tsk tsk tsk not relevant to the human element of the story I guess....*sigh*.....whatever. It wasn't preachy or overtly woke, it just wasn't good or.....good.

I felt zero sense of nostalgia, so I thank them for my free episode and wish them luck, but this isn't my Star Trek.

 

[5150Joker]

Watched the first episode. Wanted to like it. Production values are very high. Story felt like fan-fic. Most glaring impression: Patrick Stewart is playing Patrick Stewart, not Jean Luc Picard. Story feels like its about to turn into Star Trek III with a touch of The Bourne Identity. Typical "bad tv script" shit happens too often, bad guys with super powers can't seem to get the job done, Patrick Stewart can't run up a flight of stairs but survives a nuclear explosion with a mild headache..wakes up on his couch, no investigation, no big drama about a huge explosion happening....tsk tsk tsk not relevant to the human element of the story I guess....*sigh*.....whatever. It wasn't preachy or overtly woke, it just wasn't good or.....good.

I felt zero sense of nostalgia, so I thank them for my free episode and wish them luck, but this isn't my Star Trek.

Finally some legitimate criticism. I agree with what you pointed out, I noticed those shortcomings as well. I'm also not happy with the way they completely neutered the Romulans but I'm going to continue watching it because it's the best Trek we've got right now.

 

[1_rick]

I was more referring to the article written recently about how having all white casts in period pieces should be banned.

A couple of years ago Doctor Who did something similarly-dumb: they ran into a regiment of English soldiers from like the mid-1800s, who'd somehow gotten transported to Mars. So far, so good, but they had an Indian guy as one of the soldiers...something that never happened at that point in time. Any Indians in a British regiment would have been servants. I don't remember for sure, but supposedly the writers explicitly said when asked they felt historical accuracy wasn't important compared to looking like today's audience, or something along those lines.

 

[GhostCow]

A couple of years ago Doctor Who did something similarly-dumb: they ran into a regiment of English soldiers from like the mid-1800s, who'd somehow gotten transported to Mars. So far, so good, but they had an Indian guy as one of the soldiers...something that never happened at that point in time. Any Indians in a British regiment would have been servants. I don't remember for sure, but supposedly the writers explicitly said when asked they felt historical accuracy wasn't important compared to looking like today's audience, or something along those lines.

Yeah I remember that. I had to stop watching in the Capaldi era because it started getting too woke and preachy. The things I've heard since then have made me glad I quit. At least nothing they can do now will ruin how great the Matt Smith era was and how great all the big finish stuff is

 

[1_rick]

Yeah I remember that. I had to stop watching in the Capaldi era because it started getting too woke and preachy. The things I've heard since then have made me glad I quit. At least nothing they can do now will ruin how great the Matt Smith era was and how great all the big finish stuff is

I really liked Capaldi's character, and the reimagining of the Master as Missy was nothing short of brilliant, especially after the buffoonish performance of the guy before; it's just a pity the writing was so bad.

The last season was pretty bad, but this season is crazy. Two episodes already beating the viewer over the head about how stupid people are today and how we're going to either fry because of global warming or choking on plastic (seriously. Apparently we're all chock full of microplastic.)

 

[GhostCow]

I really liked Capaldi's character, and the reimagining of the Master as Missy was nothing short of brilliant, especially after the buffoonish performance of the guy before; it's just a pity the writing was so bad.

The last season was pretty bad, but this season is crazy. Two episodes already beating the viewer over the head about how stupid people are today and how we're going to either fry because of global warming or choking on plastic (seriously. Apparently we're all chock full of microplastic.)

Missy was amazing and Capaldi was a great doctor. It was the writers that failed him. I just wish Missy had been her own character instead of gender bending the master for the sake of wokeness. The whole point of Missy was just to take something away from men even if she was well written. It's like they don't know how to "uplift" women or minorities without taking something away from white males or more likely they just enjoy doing it out of spite.

 

[vegeta535]

Why can't people just enjoy a show? People have to. Real everything down and analyst it to find something to bitch about. All the sjw bs made me angry too awhile back and now I just don't care. It was ruining my enjoyment. I like the first two episodes and can't wait to see th rest.

 

[GhostCow]

Why can't people just enjoy a show? People have to. Real everything down and analyst it to find something to bitch about. All the sjw bs made me angry too awhile back and now I just don't care. It was ruining my enjoyment. I like the first two episodes and can't wait to see th rest.

For some people that's half the fun. Some of my best memories of watching Kill La Kill are entwined with hitting up the subreddit to share in the hype and memes

 

[Derangel]

Missy was amazing and Capaldi was a great doctor. It was the writers that failed him. I just wish Missy had been her own character instead of gender bending the master for the sake of wokeness

Proof that is was solely for the sake of wokeness? Missy was the best, most complex, version of the Master in modern Who. Easily the only female character Moffat ever wrote reasonably well and her being the master worked amazing because of the relationship between the Master and the Doctor. Her being some random new character with no connection to the Doctor or the audience would have never worked. It wouldn't even have worked as well if she had turned out to be The Rani or Rassilon. Michelle Gomez's take felt so authentic.

 

[1_rick]

I just wish Missy had been her own character instead of gender bending the master for the sake of wokeness

I get that, but you know what? To me she so encapsulated the spirit of the character from the original run I didn't care. They never explained why they genderbent Missy and that's fine, because she was true to the character. The Doctor, we all know they did it for the sake of doing it. (Oh, and in last week's episode they introduced--out of the blue--a previously-unknown incarnation of the Doctor, who probably would've been before or after the second, and made her a black woman. I don't care, the show's kind of a fairly tale now instead of sci-fi. but I bet they did it with "let's piss off the seething tide of racists the writers probably assume watch the show" in the back of their heads. (Actually this new-old Doctor was kind of badass.)

 

[GhostCow]

Proof that is was solely for the sake of wokeness? Missy was the best, most complex, version of the Master in modern Who. Easily the only female character Moffat ever wrote reasonably well and her being the master worked amazing because of the relationship between the Master and the Doctor. Her being some random new character with no connection to the Doctor or the audience would have never worked. It wouldn't even have worked as well if she had turned out to be The Rani or Rassilon. Michelle Gomez's take felt so authentic.

It's been too long for me to remember any exact quotes and I don't feel like digging them up but Moffat was often talking about how he wanted more diversity and such in interviews. He was talking about how he wanted a female Doctor long before it happened. All of the showrunners for new Who have been ultra liberals. I don't think you're allowed to work in entertainment anymore unless you are one. There's been other stuff in the show that bothered me before that but I love Doctor who so much that I stuck with it until it became painful. You can even see hints of it in Matt Smith's era with how often River liked to shit on men.

 

[Derangel]

I get that, but you know what? To me she so encapsulated the spirit of the character from the original run I didn't care. They never explained why they genderbent Missy and that's fine, because she was true to the character. The Doctor, we all know they did it for the sake of doing it. (Oh, and in last week's episode they introduced--out of the blue--a previously-unknown incarnation of the Doctor, who probably would've been before or after the second, and made her a black woman. I don't care, the show's kind of a fairly tale now instead of sci-fi. but I bet they did it with "let's piss off the seething tide of racists the writers probably assume watch the show" in the back of their heads. (Actually this new-old Doctor was kind of badass.)

I bet there's more to that reveal than meets the eye. Either she's the previously hinted at pre-Hartnell version of the Doctor or she's not actually an incarnation of the Doctor. Having her just be a future version is too obvious.

It's been too long for me to remember any exact quotes and I don't feel like digging them up but Moffat was often talking about how he wanted more diversity and such in interviews. He was talking about how he wanted a female Doctor long before it happened. All of the showrunners for new Who have been ultra liberals. I don't think you're allowed to work in entertainment anymore unless you are one. There's been other stuff in the show that bothered me before that but I love Doctor who so much that I stuck with it until it became painful.

I wouldn't call Moffat "ultra liberal" at all. He's "90's liberal". Most of his "liberal" ideas are stuck in the 90s. I don't believe him for a moment about wanting a female Doctor long ago. He had a chance with both Smith and Capaldi, show runners are involved in casting. There were calls for a female Doctor ever since Tennant announced he was stepping down. With Moffat's abysmal writing of women and his pretty bad understanding of what makes a strong female character, I don't buy his claims.

 

[1_rick]

I bet there's more to that reveal than meets the eye. Either she's the previously hinted at pre-Hartnell version of the Doctor or she's not actually an incarnation of the Doctor. Having her just be a future version is too obvious.

She used a TARDIS design that was a throwaback to the first-second Doctor era: old-school white walls with the roundels, and the console looked more like it did way way back then, so most likely not a future version.

Never mind that it totally screws up the show lore, though.

 

[GhostCow]

I bet there's more to that reveal than meets the eye. Either she's the previously hinted at pre-Hartnell version of the Doctor or she's not actually an incarnation of the Doctor. Having her just be a future version is too obvious.



I wouldn't call Moffat "ultra liberal" at all. He's "90's liberal". Most of his "liberal" ideas are stuck in the 90s. I don't believe him for a moment about wanting a female Doctor long ago. He had a chance with both Smith and Capaldi, show runners are involved in casting. There were calls for a female Doctor ever since Tennant announced he was stepping down. With Moffat's abysmal writing of women and his pretty bad understanding of what makes a strong female character, I don't buy his claims.

I mean you could be right but when you say 90s liberal I can't help but think of this kind of stuff being nearly as bad in the 90s until the anti-PC crowd beat it back so hard that it didn't come back until the 2010s rebranded as SJWism. I remember being a middle school kid already noticing this kind of stuff and already thinking it was stupid and making fun of how most shows have to have at least one diversity character even when it doesn't make sense. The first show I noticed it in was the Mystic Knights of Tir Na Nog.



Why was there a black guy cast to be a knight in a fantasy version of ancient Ireland? It makes no sense

 

[Derangel]

She used a TARDIS design that was a throwaback to the first-second Doctor era: old-school white walls with the roundels, and the console looked more like it did way way back then, so most likely not a future version.

Never mind that it totally screws up the show lore, though.

Pretty sure they've dropped hints about there being a pre-Hartnell version and that version being female has been a common fan theory. That said, the show has never been shy about massive retcons, no matter how much it messes things up.

I mean you could be right but when you say 90s liberal I can't help but think of this kind of stuff being nearly as bad in the 90s until the anti-PC crowd beat it back so hard that it didn't come back until the 2010s rebranded as SJWism. I remember being a middle school kid already noticing this kind of stuff and already thinking it was stupid and making fun of how most shows have to have at least one diversity character even when it doesn't make sense. The first show I noticed it in was the Mystic Knights of Tir Na Nog.



Why was there a black guy cast to be a knight in a fantasy version of ancient Ireland? It makes no sense

Well, it is fantasy. Fun fact: There was a second season of the show planned but it was canceled and it's budget was given to PR: Lost Galaxy.