top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 267 points 1 year ago (40 children)

Furthermore, Variety claims that Ellison’s goal is to turn Paramount into a MAGA-friendly environment, with content in the TV and movie divisions expected to be more “America-centric” and geared toward “the middle of the country.”

RIP any future Star Trek property.

  • source
  • hideshow 40 child comments
  • [–] 153 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    "OMG, when did Star Trek get so political?!"

    Um... 1966.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago

    So hilarious and so apt... I will absolutely laugh at the idea of, well what's effectively been a socialist utopia for the vast majority of contexts in it, and the show that broke the interracial kiss barrier. (on top of inter species/galaxy ones... but obviously far more shocking at the time that a white guy kissed a black woman, than a white guy sleeping with a bunch of green aliens.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Good luck with South Park and painting Matt Stone as Anti-Semitic. Fucking pieces of shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    America-centric?

    Mother fucker it’s already America-centric, just look at the space Christian angels episodes of discovery to see how American it is.

    Oh well, more Americans shooting themselves in the foot for foreign media to step in and replace them. Guess this is the century of China if America is giving up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Wasn't that supposed to be her mom?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I reckon we could get 4 seasons into a Terran Empire based series before the MAGAs figure out they're being made fun of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Star Trek: Ferenginar will probably be on the list to be made and the pilot episode will be called Make Fereginar Great Again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    MAGA would see the Ferengi aversion to war, xenophobia, and genocide as "too woke".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    "Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, Nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people, as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people...will become as nasty and as violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon."

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 7 points 1 year ago* (14 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    I remember having multiple discussions with a guy I knew who was adamant about various works of fiction, including the original Star Trek TV series, and how, in his view, if they have any kind of subtext to them, that it was not intentional and it's entirely in the eye of the beholder, meaning, that people just make it up as they go.

    These included, but were not limited to: OG Star Trek, Dune (book), LoTR (books), and even the NARNIA series. I mean, Narnia. I think I first read them around the age of 10 or 11, and the Christian parallels practically hit you between the eyes it is so obvious. Even to a kid...I mean, I'm pretty sure Lewis has gone on record with the clear intent on proselytizing his faith via that series.

    I wish I was joking, and this guy read most everything when it came to old sci-fi stuff. If that is his take on reading all those classic sci-fi stuff, I was just gobsmacked as to what he was getting out of it.

    I have the feeling that there might be more people like him, but I just don't get it. Even things like WWE have the basic outline of the hero's journey to them, FFS.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah, I know the guy could be an intentional contrarian just because he thought that was the way to show his intelligence. And I think he is on the spectrum. But I don't think he was kidding or merely being contrarian about this. Probably why I talked about it to him so much. Sure, many things have multiple interpretations, and I often thought that some pretty basic English lit teachers thought there were "rules" to how to interpret literature and that there were "correct" answers to what something like Old Man and the Sea "means". I can understand rejecting that.

    But rejecting that even things as blatant as Narnia and Star Trek are not intentionally conveying a message? Mind-blowing. I don't even understand why you'd be all that interested in fiction of any kind at that point.

    And yeah, as you point out, this kind of obvious intelligence in one way, but a glaring of lack of intelligence in others is highly problematic in the moral sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, I found it weird for sure and I did have so many questions. I don't see him any more. I still think about it even now, even though these conversations were maybe 10 years ago, LOL.

    I think part of it was his stubbornness to admit being even a little bit wrong in a prior statement?

    I mean, as you point out, OG Star Trek is something that even as a relatively young and sheltered kid who didn't see much TV, I'd watch them at relatives houses in syndication and even I could "get it". It fairly smacks you over the head now that I'm an adult. How some of this got past the censors still looking for any kind of subversive content is beyond me. I'm assuming the network censors just saw aliens and checked out mentally, or maybe were the type that cannot really handle abstractions of any sort....

    As to that last paragraph, absolutely right. It's one thing if people struggle with social cues and so on and it's quite another for people just faking human emotions in order to exploit others.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    All of those series you mentioned have easily found interviews with their creators where they specifically say what subtext they were intending when they made them. You can disagree with the subtext, but was intentionally put there. That's some willful ignorance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Yeah. I'm pretty sure I asked him about that supposed wager between Tolkien and Lewis and how they kind of goaded one another to write fiction containing new myths that had, at root, the "true myth", in their view which was related to Christ, since they were both Christians.

    I also asked him about original myths themselves - do they contain allegory, etc? I think he may have conceded that, but for some reason, seemed to want to have some kind of arbitrary delineation between ancient myths and virtually everything else.

    I don't pretend to understand. I was utterly baffled by it. I remember asking about The Matrix, too - was that just a lot of cool FX and well-choreographed fight scenes? The answer was something I don't remember, but I know I was baffled by it...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Narnia and Dune are so up-front about their messages that after a couple books it stops being subtext and just becomes text, so they're technically correct there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Well, Narnia hits one like a 2x4 square between the eyes. 🤣

    I remember reading the first Dune book during the first invasion of Iraq and the parallels between the two were very interesting I have to say. Not sure how much the author meant, but it was sure weird...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I mean the Author meant nothing to parallel a war that happened 25 ish years after the book was released. Dune 1965 first Iraq war 1990. Any similarities are all on you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Ha, yeah, of course it was not about the particulars of the first Iraq war which happened decades after the book was written. I'm talking more about the struggle in a desert planet with a people that are being oppressed by colonizers while there is a struggle for a resource that the planet has a lock on that virtually everyone needs. Not to mention all the Islamic references and influences...I had not read the book before 1990 and had only seen Lynch's Dune prior to that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 99 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    Well, I just canceled my paramount+

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Same.

    We're quickly spiraling into a Star Trek evil timeline origin.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    In my parallel timeline, David Ellison doesn't run Paramount. Harlan Ellison does.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Star Trek would have been very different under Harlan Ellison.

    So we went to the commissary and shoved in around the Writers' Table.

    What I did not know was that the Writers' Table was right behind the Producers' Banquette. That was my first big mistake. As it turned out, it was also my last big mistake.

    Oh, what fun, sitting there with intellectual companions, cutting up touches and laughing at the drolleries! Born again: the Algonquin round table. Wit beyond compare. And, naturally, as the youngest member of the group, striving to make my mark as worthy of their camaraderie, their respect, I suggested a droll, witty lunchtime conceit . . .

    Two things you must know. First, I do a terrific Mickey Mouse imitation. Absolutely phonographically perfect. If the publishers of this book had the money, they ought to bind in a record, one of those little plastic jobbies, so you could hear my spectacular Mickey imitation. When I tell this anecdote in person, it really enhances a lot. But just pretend you can hear it, okay?

    The second thing you need to know is that the Producers' Banquette had filled up with Roy Disney and the other heads of the studio, behind me; a fact of which I was unaware; a fact no one bothered to impart.

    At the top of my voice I suggested, "Hey, listen, what a kick! Why don't we do a porn Disney flick?"

    Everyone smiled. "It'll be terrific," I said. Loudly. "I mean, everyone knows, for instance, that Tinker Bell does it . . . what they don't know is how she Does It." They all looked at me expectantly. "She flies up the head of the penis and flaps her wings like crazy," I said, proud as hell of myself at this bit of fantasy. Everyone chuckled.

    I went on, oblivious to the sudden hush all around me in the commissary. "I'll be Mickey, and I'll be the director; John, you do a good Donald, so you can be the male porn lead, sort of a duck-style Harry Reems; Mary, you can be Minnie, the female lead; and Albert, you can be Goofy . . . and Goofy, of course, is the producer."

    Their smiles were frozen; the way the smiles of bit players get frozen when they see the monster creeping up behind the hero in a horror flick.

    "Hey, gang!" I squeaked in my terrifically accurate Mickey voice. "Everybody ready to shoot the ultimate Disney flick? The film that rips the lid off the goody two-shoes hypocrisy that lies sweltering beneath the surface of G-rated true-life adventures? Okay, you guys, let's get that hand-held Arriflex right down there between Minnie's legs! I wanna see closeups of quivering labia!"

    A silence as deep as that at the bottom of the Cayman Trench.

    I went on, oblivious, carried along by my enthusiasm. In Donald's quack I said, "Goddam sonofabitch! Pluto, get outta there, you're steaming up the lens!"

    As Goofy, in the dumbest voice possible, I said, "Yuck, yuck, yuck . . . hey, fellahs, I'm a highly-paid, extremely-inept producer person . . . c'n I play, too?"

    As Mickey: "Fuck off, Goofy, fuck off! Get those Seven Dwarfs in here . . . I don't care ff they don't wanna gang-bang a mouse, tell 'em they're under contract . . . and fer chrissakes, Minnie, will you take off those damned shoes?!"

    The meal came. Everyone addressed their plates like inmates of the Gulag Archipelago. When lunch was over, everyone vanished very quickly. I was confused, but felt good. What a nice little shtick I'd invented. Wished they'd joined in. Oh well.

    Went back to my office. Noticed first that my name had been whited-out in the parking slot. Upstairs, the secretary and her paperback were gone. On my desk: twelve sharpened #2 Dixon Ticonderoga pencils and a pink slip.

    I had been fired after working for the Disney empire for a total of four hours, including lunch.

    The lessons here cannot be avoided.

    Big business is humorless.

    And . . .

    At Disney, nobody fucks with The Mouse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 87 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    It is morally correct to pirate Paramount content then complain about how shit it is anyway.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    And to cancel your paramount+ subscription

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] 15 points 1 year ago (8 children)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Thats what an arrs stack is for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I've never seen a company who's advertising goes so far the wrong way. It makes me want to cancel it and I don't even subscribe.

    They don't even have enough content to fill a billboard, let alone a whole streaming service.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    check their upcoming movies...

    Do I have to pirate them? I rather carry on pretending there isn't another paw patrol movie

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    There are paw patrol movies now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 83 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Sounds like we need a Paramount boycott

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 158 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Seeing that list of stars, I didn't even need to open the article to see if Paramount was just conflating anti-genocide with anti-semitic.

    They are, in case it wasn't immediately clear.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 1 year ago

    And Mel Gibson is not on the list. That fact alone shows that this list has nothing to do with antisemitism.

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Boycott, divest, sanction. Paramount about to get the Disney treatment.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    At some point you just have to boycott all media. Did you know if you torrent you basically achieve that and still get to enjoy movies? This is why it is a moral duty to torrent.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago*

    This past September, the company became the first major Hollywood studio to publicly reject a high-profile letter — signed by stars including Stone and Bardem — that urged a cultural boycott of Israeli film institutions accused of engaging in “genocide and apartheid” against Palestinians. Warner Bros. later took the same position.

    Ah, so not antisemitic, but "antisemitic". Imagine blacklisting Jewish signers as "antisemitic". Seems the Paramount execs are the actual antisemites.

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    And by "antisemitic", they are still going by the hilariously outdated notion that maybe last held sway in the 90s, and that means "not sufficiently subservient to just whatever the fuck Israel wants to do"?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Um, it's holds quite a lot of sway all the way to 2025, sadly. It's not outdated because things are getting worse. In the 90s nobody would have agreed with that definition. Yasser Arafat was an extremely popular dude in the 90s. He won the Nobel peace prize because of how popular his work was in the 90s. But he would have been considered hands down antisemetic by today's modern BS definition.

    Not everything that is bad is from the past. Some of these things are recent developments. The strangle hold of Israel on US politics is an increasing problem more than it is an outdated past problem.

    Also support for Lebanon was very popular in the 90s. Just watch a Kids in The Hall sketch. The 90s doesn't deserve to be maligned with the assumption that all views from then must be worse than the views we have now. You clearly never lived in the 90s.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Heh. I most definitely did live in the 90s. I'm talking about how until being able to talk directly to one another at scale, the old notion of "antisemitic" mostly held sway over us and it was a fantastic way to silence a lot of/most of dissent about Israel. Back when a handful of broadcast networks, cable networks, and newspapers were able to gatekeep nearly all discussions about Israel.

    These days, that definition is openly mocked, even on corporate news, no less. Just witness the exchange between Stephen Miller's wife and Cenk Uygur. Stephen Miller's wife tried that nonsense and Cenk was able to rebuke her w/o having his mic cut off.

    Not all aspects of being able to do an end-run around gatekeepers is necessarily a good thing, of course. So yeah, not everything from the 90s vs now is good or bad, it very much depends.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Oh man. Star Trek is the only tv show I watch. I guess it is time to sail the high seas.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Admirable tbh. Unfortunately Severance and The Bear still have me in their clutches haha

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    No wonder South Park is trying to speedrun their contract with Paramount

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What are the odds that Mel Gibson isn't on that list

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Soon to be rebranded as Paramaga, to cater to "the middle"

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    The Paramaga

    Oh, lol/fuck, imagine if that is the name that will stick to the ICE&co. troops in the future (a bit like "Nazi" has later become to be the default term, wiki/Nazism#Etymology).

    It's better than 'sockfaces' (like Brownshirts ... or black/blue/gold/silver/red/green/greyshirts) tho they sure do love their sock-faced anonymity in their "public service".

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›
    51 comments in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post