I like how they are making a cool Trek for Kids show, and taking full advantage of how it is fully cg so we can include non biped ayys to show how diverse life in the galaxy really is.
Yeah if there's any strength of the show, it's that someone on the creative team was clever enough to think, "Hey you know, you could actually do a crew with ayyliums like how Trek fans have been wanting for decades now."
I'm watching it now, going to finally finish it after having started it a couple of times before. Show is pretty good so far.
>Why did it fail?
Premiere felt like too much of a Clone Was knock-off and too many people dismissed it. Plus people thought the nickelodeon connection meant it was gonna be less serious and more kid-friendly. All that said,
is correct and I hope the show finds more of an audience on netflix.
Production is over. Netflix is only burning through what's left.
>Why did it fail?
Premiere felt like too much of a Clone Was knock-off and too many people dismissed it. Plus people thought the nickelodeon connection meant it was gonna be less serious and more kid-friendly. All that said,
is correct and I hope the show finds more of an audience on netflix.
Wasn’t it just topping the charts on Netflix all around the world the other week?
Even if it ends after S2, it’ll have a respectable episode count of 40 which is good for NuTrek.
Lower Drecks killed it. Not because it was better (obviously not), but simply because it came out first, and conditioned Trek fans into accepting lazy vulgar pastiche as animated Trek, making PRO look kiddy by comparison.
If PRO were the first animated Trek since TAS, more people would have checked it out and would be willing to watch it.
>Both shows are competing for the same audience: Trekkies.
Bullshit. LD is clearly aiming for adult casual Star Trek fans who want to turn their brain off and watch a stupid cartoon. The last thing Trek that tried to please Trekkies was Nemesis.
>Nemesis
I’d still argue that was Beyond. It’s full of subtle little references but it doesn’t pat itself on the back for including them. It’s pretty much a Star Trek: Enterprise epilogue movie.
Simon Pegg is the man.
1) It's not dead yet, it's just mostly dead. You see, there's a big difference between being mostly dead and all dead, because there's only one thing you can do with something that is all dead.
2) It was on Nickelodeon. Spongebob is the only show allowed more than 2 seasons.
I found it mildly dull. But the failure of Prodigy to catch on is not isolated to the show itself.
Speaking broadly, Star Trek as a whole was never the mainstream blockbuster property that Paramount wants it to be. It's for nerds, and I mean that in the best way. Modern Trek is mostly obsessed with recalibrating the show for the wider masses. The task was handed to people who were reverent of the brand and the job, but not the genre. The results have been awkward.
Nevertheless, Paramount kept doubling down, and practically built an entire streaming service around Star Trek. Now they've run out of money, old trek fans are tapped out and tapping out, and things have to go. Netflix isn't rescuing the show, they're just paying for already-finished episodes that Paramount decided not to air. It's the kind of small, cheap bet that Netflix makes often.
Prodigy is a luxury that might have kept going, were the rest of the Star Trek empire stronger. But even in that case, this show would not have been the one to make the next generation of trekkers. It's too sexless, guileless, and safe for that. Again, trekkers are nerds, even the little ones. They're a little curious. They want to be confronted and challenged a bit with things they ought not to see. It's way easier to get a kid like that into TOS.
>It's too sexless
That’s just straight-up not true. >guileless
It has more intelligent writing than all other NuTreks. >safe
The show changed the status quo twice so far and even blew up the hero ship. That’s not safe.
>Conterpoint: modern Trek is mostly obsessed with strip mining the past of the franchise.
Sure. Where did I intimate otherwise? >Also, you want sex on a kid´s show?
It's not about what I want, it's about what kids want, which is sometimes divorced from appropriateness and understanding. When I was a kid, I didn't understand sex. But I sure was curious about what was going on with Kirk and Orions.
Again, it's not about what I want. It wasn't even a criticism. I just observed that this is not the show that's going to be the gateway for new fans. If I were tasked with getting a kid into Star Trek, I wouldn't show them Prodigy, I'd show TOS.
>Speaking broadly, Star Trek as a whole was never the mainstream blockbuster property that Paramount wants it to be. It's for nerds, and I mean that in the best way.
Disagree, Star Trek has always had this reputation for being this hard sci-fi property that only appeals to nerds or smart people because it's technical and scientific but when I watched the shows for the first time, I was very surprised that this was far from the case?
The sci-fi is usually relegated to just being technobabble exposition and even fantasy plot devices, most of the stories were really more about the characters trying to deal with moral dilemmas. It wasn't always action heavy (usually) but it definitely had mass audience appeal, it wasn't hard to get into at all.
It's not 100% about the scifi, but it's what distinguishes it. It's what the writers built their stories on. It's how that particular fandom identifies itself.
I'm not a trekker. I'm a complete casual. I've just been close enough to its periphery to understand what those fans are, and why that fandom persists in a way that other good shows do not. This is where I think Paramount made a mistake. They thought they could turn the average viewer into a trekker. That's just not going to happen with most, so the amount of money they were spending on new Trek was not justified.
>This is where I think Paramount made a mistake. They thought they could turn the average viewer into a trekker. That's just not going to happen with most, so the amount of money they were spending on new Trek was not justified.
Nah, the mistake Paramount made was producing Star Trek series that tried to exclusively appeal to old fans. Picard, Lower Decks, and Prodigy are kind of reliant on people already having seen the previous shows and that entry barrier is daunting considering the amount of episodes required to watch. Only shows that don't have this issue are Discovery (which is pretty divorced from the main appeal of the franchise) and Strange New Worlds (which is solid but it still has its fair share of "remember x from this old series?" moments).
This isn't even an issue exclusive to Star Trek. Other franchises like the MCU or Star Wars have this entry barrier because most of their recent entries are too reliant on people have knowledge of the old stuff which makes it difficult for newcomers to just hop right in.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Eh, the previous knowledge requirements are quite toned down on PRO, even more compared to the other shows. Certainly there, but not leaving you wondering what is going on.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Nah, the mistake Paramount made was producing Star Trek series that tried to exclusively appeal to old fans
I consider the current era of trek to have started with the JJ movies, which was a reboot. Discovery was stand alone. Picard and Lower Decks were the course correction.
I think they wanted new fans. They just couldn't recreate that kind of fan, or even understood the capacity to be that kind of fan was limited.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I consider Beyond the end of Star Trek. It’s rather fitting that Trek died with Nimoy.
Paramount+ shows are just fanfiction that is either a self-referential farce or just straight up terrible. I don’t care how many fossils they dig up, it’s not fricking Star Trek.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I don’t care how many fossils they dig up, it’s not fricking Star Trek.
That I agree on. Like I said, they gave it to people who respect the job title, not the genre. To Paramount itself, Star Trek is just the name. They'll put on a show about respecting the people, the legacy, and the fandom. But the moment one says something potentially negative about the brand, they'll throw him under the bus, even if it's William Shatner.
5 months ago
Anonymous
To be fair, there are many other reasons why one would throw William Shatner under the bus
>If I were tasked with getting a kid into Star Trek, I wouldn't show them Prodigy, I'd show TOS.
Really? I tried to get into TOS as an adult but I just can't. Wouldn't the TOS movies be a better try?
Probably misread the "recalibrating" concept.
Interesting point. We got to se one of the probaly healthiest romantic relationships on the franchise go on for all of 22s.
>what was going on with Kirk and Orions
Nothing was going on because Kirk never slept with any. You’re confusing him with Pike… but so do most people who have never seen TOS and have a distorted idea of what Kirk was like.
The Orions around Pike were figments of powerful aliens' imagination. Kirk did encounter a real Orion slave girl in that episode with the asylum. Of course, she tried to seduce him, which is how it often worked for Kirk as a character. And sometimes for McCoy, as well. McCoy had crazy game for an old, surly doctor.
>Speaking broadly, Star Trek as a whole was never the mainstream blockbuster property that Paramount wants it to be. It's for nerds, and I mean that in the best way.
Disagree, Star Trek has always had this reputation for being this hard sci-fi property that only appeals to nerds or smart people because it's technical and scientific but when I watched the shows for the first time, I was very surprised that this was far from the case?
The sci-fi is usually relegated to just being technobabble exposition and even fantasy plot devices, most of the stories were really more about the characters trying to deal with moral dilemmas. It wasn't always action heavy (usually) but it definitely had mass audience appeal, it wasn't hard to get into at all.
Why did the Borg appear in this show? Didn't Picard S3 establish that there was one cube left that was struggling to survive after the events of Voyager but in Prodigy, the Homestar crew just run into a stray cube floating around
They needed to get info on the Living Construct, and boy it was a dissapointing how.
Again, it's not about what I want. It wasn't even a criticism. I just observed that this is not the show that's going to be the gateway for new fans. If I were tasked with getting a kid into Star Trek, I wouldn't show them Prodigy, I'd show TOS.
[...]
It's not 100% about the scifi, but it's what distinguishes it. It's what the writers built their stories on. It's how that particular fandom identifies itself.
I'm not a trekker. I'm a complete casual. I've just been close enough to its periphery to understand what those fans are, and why that fandom persists in a way that other good shows do not. This is where I think Paramount made a mistake. They thought they could turn the average viewer into a trekker. That's just not going to happen with most, so the amount of money they were spending on new Trek was not justified.
This was Kurtzamn´s grand plan. Just be happy he hired people that care for this one.
It's too early to say Star Trek: Prodigy failed. It's being given a second chance with Netflix, so wait and see.
I like how they are making a cool Trek for Kids show, and taking full advantage of how it is fully cg so we can include non biped ayys to show how diverse life in the galaxy really is.
Yeah if there's any strength of the show, it's that someone on the creative team was clever enough to think, "Hey you know, you could actually do a crew with ayyliums like how Trek fans have been wanting for decades now."
I'm watching it now, going to finally finish it after having started it a couple of times before. Show is pretty good so far.
Production is over. Netflix is only burning through what's left.
Best trek show since DS9.
>Why did it fail?
Premiere felt like too much of a Clone Was knock-off and too many people dismissed it. Plus people thought the nickelodeon connection meant it was gonna be less serious and more kid-friendly. All that said,
is correct and I hope the show finds more of an audience on netflix.
Gotta be honest, every time I see pictures of Prodigy it reminds me of the Rebels show
Why did this thread fail?
Because it´s a troll thread.
because he's trying to push a political message and we're kind of (starting to) grow out of falling for that bait finally
Kids don't like Star Trek
I loved Star Trek as a kid.
>zoomer couple
>it's just a minority with facepaint on!
Oh, cool. Someone who's never seen Star Trek before!
Wasn’t it just topping the charts on Netflix all around the world the other week?
Even if it ends after S2, it’ll have a respectable episode count of 40 which is good for NuTrek.
Lower Drecks killed it. Not because it was better (obviously not), but simply because it came out first, and conditioned Trek fans into accepting lazy vulgar pastiche as animated Trek, making PRO look kiddy by comparison.
If PRO were the first animated Trek since TAS, more people would have checked it out and would be willing to watch it.
>Lower Drecks killed it
Thats a totally different audience and demo, dummy. It's not like LD would ever air on Nickelodeon.
>Thats a totally different audience and demo
Not exactly. Both shows are competing for the same audience: Trekkies.
Lower Decks was aiming for the Rick and Morty audience.
>Both shows are competing for the same audience: Trekkies.
Bullshit. LD is clearly aiming for adult casual Star Trek fans who want to turn their brain off and watch a stupid cartoon. The last thing Trek that tried to please Trekkies was Nemesis.
>Nemesis
I’d still argue that was Beyond. It’s full of subtle little references but it doesn’t pat itself on the back for including them. It’s pretty much a Star Trek: Enterprise epilogue movie.
Simon Pegg is the man.
Nemesis only pleased Sir Patrick and Brent´s egos.
>non-human protagonists.
This was the biggest mistake of this series, alien species only exist to lose against a human or submit sexually.
I want to lick her alien pussy so bad, bros...
She might not even have one.
10/10 would worship as My Diviner
Of the better results using anything v4.5
Plenty of counerpoints to that that I can´t post here.
It did. Entered the yop 10 in several territories.
IS THAT THE BAD GUY FROM THE STAR WARS?
1) It's not dead yet, it's just mostly dead. You see, there's a big difference between being mostly dead and all dead, because there's only one thing you can do with something that is all dead.
2) It was on Nickelodeon. Spongebob is the only show allowed more than 2 seasons.
>Mumbles
I thought it did fairly well on Netflix?
I found it mildly dull. But the failure of Prodigy to catch on is not isolated to the show itself.
Speaking broadly, Star Trek as a whole was never the mainstream blockbuster property that Paramount wants it to be. It's for nerds, and I mean that in the best way. Modern Trek is mostly obsessed with recalibrating the show for the wider masses. The task was handed to people who were reverent of the brand and the job, but not the genre. The results have been awkward.
Nevertheless, Paramount kept doubling down, and practically built an entire streaming service around Star Trek. Now they've run out of money, old trek fans are tapped out and tapping out, and things have to go. Netflix isn't rescuing the show, they're just paying for already-finished episodes that Paramount decided not to air. It's the kind of small, cheap bet that Netflix makes often.
Prodigy is a luxury that might have kept going, were the rest of the Star Trek empire stronger. But even in that case, this show would not have been the one to make the next generation of trekkers. It's too sexless, guileless, and safe for that. Again, trekkers are nerds, even the little ones. They're a little curious. They want to be confronted and challenged a bit with things they ought not to see. It's way easier to get a kid like that into TOS.
>It's too sexless
That’s just straight-up not true.
>guileless
It has more intelligent writing than all other NuTreks.
>safe
The show changed the status quo twice so far and even blew up the hero ship. That’s not safe.
Conterpoint: modern Trek is mostly obsessed with strip mining the past of the franchise.
Also, you want sex on a kid´s show?
>Also, you want sex on a kid´s show?
NTA but putting Gwyn in a slave outfit wouldn’t kill anyone.
Best I can do for you. Sorry.
>Conterpoint: modern Trek is mostly obsessed with strip mining the past of the franchise.
Sure. Where did I intimate otherwise?
>Also, you want sex on a kid´s show?
It's not about what I want, it's about what kids want, which is sometimes divorced from appropriateness and understanding. When I was a kid, I didn't understand sex. But I sure was curious about what was going on with Kirk and Orions.
Two main characters make out at one point. What else do you want?
Again, it's not about what I want. It wasn't even a criticism. I just observed that this is not the show that's going to be the gateway for new fans. If I were tasked with getting a kid into Star Trek, I wouldn't show them Prodigy, I'd show TOS.
It's not 100% about the scifi, but it's what distinguishes it. It's what the writers built their stories on. It's how that particular fandom identifies itself.
I'm not a trekker. I'm a complete casual. I've just been close enough to its periphery to understand what those fans are, and why that fandom persists in a way that other good shows do not. This is where I think Paramount made a mistake. They thought they could turn the average viewer into a trekker. That's just not going to happen with most, so the amount of money they were spending on new Trek was not justified.
>This is where I think Paramount made a mistake. They thought they could turn the average viewer into a trekker. That's just not going to happen with most, so the amount of money they were spending on new Trek was not justified.
Nah, the mistake Paramount made was producing Star Trek series that tried to exclusively appeal to old fans. Picard, Lower Decks, and Prodigy are kind of reliant on people already having seen the previous shows and that entry barrier is daunting considering the amount of episodes required to watch. Only shows that don't have this issue are Discovery (which is pretty divorced from the main appeal of the franchise) and Strange New Worlds (which is solid but it still has its fair share of "remember x from this old series?" moments).
This isn't even an issue exclusive to Star Trek. Other franchises like the MCU or Star Wars have this entry barrier because most of their recent entries are too reliant on people have knowledge of the old stuff which makes it difficult for newcomers to just hop right in.
Eh, the previous knowledge requirements are quite toned down on PRO, even more compared to the other shows. Certainly there, but not leaving you wondering what is going on.
>Nah, the mistake Paramount made was producing Star Trek series that tried to exclusively appeal to old fans
I consider the current era of trek to have started with the JJ movies, which was a reboot. Discovery was stand alone. Picard and Lower Decks were the course correction.
I think they wanted new fans. They just couldn't recreate that kind of fan, or even understood the capacity to be that kind of fan was limited.
I consider Beyond the end of Star Trek. It’s rather fitting that Trek died with Nimoy.
Paramount+ shows are just fanfiction that is either a self-referential farce or just straight up terrible. I don’t care how many fossils they dig up, it’s not fricking Star Trek.
>I don’t care how many fossils they dig up, it’s not fricking Star Trek.
That I agree on. Like I said, they gave it to people who respect the job title, not the genre. To Paramount itself, Star Trek is just the name. They'll put on a show about respecting the people, the legacy, and the fandom. But the moment one says something potentially negative about the brand, they'll throw him under the bus, even if it's William Shatner.
To be fair, there are many other reasons why one would throw William Shatner under the bus
>If I were tasked with getting a kid into Star Trek, I wouldn't show them Prodigy, I'd show TOS.
Really? I tried to get into TOS as an adult but I just can't. Wouldn't the TOS movies be a better try?
>make out
Its a brief, dry kiss.
Lots of eyefricking tho
Probably misread the "recalibrating" concept.
Interesting point. We got to se one of the probaly healthiest romantic relationships on the franchise go on for all of 22s.
>what was going on with Kirk and Orions
Nothing was going on because Kirk never slept with any. You’re confusing him with Pike… but so do most people who have never seen TOS and have a distorted idea of what Kirk was like.
The Orions around Pike were figments of powerful aliens' imagination. Kirk did encounter a real Orion slave girl in that episode with the asylum. Of course, she tried to seduce him, which is how it often worked for Kirk as a character. And sometimes for McCoy, as well. McCoy had crazy game for an old, surly doctor.
Kirk was not the womanizer people make him out to be.
The pop culture image. The same about him being an impulsive hothead.
>Speaking broadly, Star Trek as a whole was never the mainstream blockbuster property that Paramount wants it to be. It's for nerds, and I mean that in the best way.
Disagree, Star Trek has always had this reputation for being this hard sci-fi property that only appeals to nerds or smart people because it's technical and scientific but when I watched the shows for the first time, I was very surprised that this was far from the case?
The sci-fi is usually relegated to just being technobabble exposition and even fantasy plot devices, most of the stories were really more about the characters trying to deal with moral dilemmas. It wasn't always action heavy (usually) but it definitely had mass audience appeal, it wasn't hard to get into at all.
Why did the Borg appear in this show? Didn't Picard S3 establish that there was one cube left that was struggling to survive after the events of Voyager but in Prodigy, the Homestar crew just run into a stray cube floating around
They run into a dormant Borg cube. They mention how Janeway’s neurolytic pathogen crippled the collective.
They needed to get info on the Living Construct, and boy it was a dissapointing how.
This was Kurtzamn´s grand plan. Just be happy he hired people that care for this one.
Can we take a minute to discuss how fricking on-point and wonderful the voice casting/directing/acting is in this show??
Fricking, The Diviner was voiced by John Nobe. Mutha fukin' Denthor.
>John Nobe
John Noble*
Love the voice direction, like making Rok´s voice lower after Time Amok.
I thought it was fun how Prodigy made the antagonists have the Kirk/Spock dynamic.
It was nice to see Dal being (mostly) up to the challenge.
>antagonists have the Kirk/Spock dynamic
So gay?
Well, kinda.
I could fix Star Trek.
OP is sick from space flu, don’t listen to him.
Cute
Go fast, thread.
Poorly made shit for toddlers.