Is it common for adult fans to watch Star Trek Prodigy?

I’m 37. I didn’t prioritize this show when it originally dropped, but I wasn’t discounting that I may watch it down the line. It wasn’t that it’s a show primarily aimed at younger viewers, but before the show did drop I was skeptical of the concept of young aliens boarding a derelict with a holo Janeway. I would have thought a show centered on the Academy would be more suitable for Trek aimed at young viewers. But how it’s executed here made so much sense that I get why this show went with the story it had.

It’s ironic that I only started watching a few days before the announcement of LDS’ cancellation. Animated Star Trek is clearly in a bad place and needs all the support. I hope Netflix not only gives this show the boost it may benefit from, but also pick up SNW if possible.

 

Animation is my least favourite genre and even though Janeway is my favourite character from all the Star Trek series. I did find it hard to watch the first time it was released & I didn't finish. But I did rewatch it, when it was released on Netflix & surprisingly I ended up liking it. And now i'm really looking forward to season 2.

 

Animation is not a genre, it's a format. Genre is what kind of story something is -- science fiction, mystery, horror, romance, drama, comedy, etc. There are animated works of every genre, just as there are books of every genre, live-action films of every genre, etc.

 

To answer the OP's question - i'm middle-aged and I am about to go watch Prodigy when I get done with this YouTube video i've got on now.

 

The American Film Institute (AFI) disagrees with you:

"AFI defines “animated” as a genre in which the film’s images are primarily created by computer or hand and the characters are voiced by actors." - source​

In truth, genre is from the French for 'kind' or 'sort' and is used that way in various disciplines.

 

Exactly. Calling animation a genre is just an attempt to ghettoize it as something apart from "normal" film, which is just perpetuating the cultural prejudice against the medium. If Star Trek can be both live action and animated, if Star Wars can be, if Avatar: The Last Airbender or One Piece can be -- heck, if half the animated Disney movies ever made can be redone in live action -- if both formats can be used to tell the exact same story, then it's nonsense to call them separate genres.

Yes, "genre" is derived from a root meaning just "kind" or "sort," but "film" is ultimately derived from a word meaning an animal hide, and we certainly don't mean it that way when we talk about film as an entertainment medium. What's relevant is not where words are derived from, but how they're used in context.

 

Who's 'we'? The AFI has been doing their film thing for 50+ years and they don't think that way.

edit to add: And they use the word exactly like @Starry-eyed did, which is the point. Words have different usages and the Pedant in Residence isn't in charge of how they're used.

 

And we're back. Well, my husband enjoyed it more than I did. I thought it was alright, story-wise and while visually beautiful, it 'felt' at times that I was watching a kid's show.

 

It is a kids' show. That's the whole point. So it sounds like it succeeded.

 

But it's also a Trek show. So if you're a Trek fan, kid or no, you will probably still enjoy it.

 

That's thing, y'know - it's like I was expecting something more but it just didn't quite land with me like it did with my husband.

 

Did you watch the whole season? Most folks say it really hits as the series goes on, characters develop and they learn to become Starfleet cadets. Worth finishing S1, IMO.

 

Not yet. We'll probably watch some more tomorrow. We made it to "A Moral Star, Pts. 1 & 2"