Is it common for adult fans to watch Star Trek Prodigy?
- Thread starter Kristine
- Start date
Extremely. Though I found the dreams planet unsettling and haven't returned.
We already know it's better. It's also less silly and ridden with internet language than the other series. And truly funny.
Yeah...no.
I enjoy it but it has its extremely silly moments especially with Prong. I can't take him seriously.
I enjoy it but it has its extremely silly moments especially with Prong. I can't take him seriously.
Nobody ever said a kids' show couldn't be smart or sophisticated -- and it horrifies me that anyone would think to equate "for children" with "inferior in quality." It just means it doesn't have graphic violence, sexual content, or profanity. And in the case of Prodigy, it means that it's focused on young characters in a coming-of-age story.
Merged two new threads that were basically the same topic from different angles.
The overarching plot - done much better than the schizophrenic and made-for-shocks plots of for example Picard - is a unique strength of Prodigy within the Star Trek TV series. A result of longterm planning, which is a necessity for animation, as well as the lack of constant changes in creative direction (as happened with Picard, Discovery in its first seasons and also to the Star Wars sequel trilogy, for example).
It may have its silly/humorous moments, but then TOS, TNG, DS9 etc also have their silly elements (possibly to a larger degree, looking at TNG S1 alone this is a strong candidate to be much sillier than Prodigy ever gets). Prodigy does not seem to be any worse than "adult" Star Trek in that regard.
I suspect it may not have done that well with its supposed core audience - children - though. Star Trek isn't hip, nor is linear TV and even streaming has heavy competition from the likes of Tiktok and Youtube. Quite possibly adult fans make up the majority of the viewers, in spite of the lukewarm response the series has gotten on forums like this one.
Disclaimer: I have only seen season 1.
About equal right now.
I would have thought that mine would stand as a separate thread, as its main point was that Prodigy is superior to the other shows, but I understand and respect why you merged them.
Digressing, in "Preludes", the Vindicator says that the Vau N'Akat's "last remaining Construct" was planted aboard the Protostar. This suggests that the Vau N'Akat had created more Constructs. Did I miss a part in the show where this was explained, e.g., what was their original purpose, how many were there, and what happened to the others?
Who is Prong? Not being sarcastic; I can't think of a character whose name sounds like that, so I genuine don't know who you're talking about.
Edit: Oh, Jankom Pog I think.
I completely agree. It's more a gripe about the "labelling" of things. It being a "kids show" seems to inhibit the wider popularity of the show that I think it deserves.
Does it? If you want a show to be popular in the future, it's important to get kids interested in it in the present. Older fans aren't immortal, after all. Star Wars and Doctor Who are both intrinsically aimed at children at least as much as adults, and they're two of the biggest, most enduring franchises out there. Star Trek: TOS didn't become hugely popular until it was in syndicated reruns, which were frequently shown in daytime and thus were able to hook a whole generation of children, myself included. Roddenberry intended it to be the first non-anthology science fiction drama aimed at adults, but it was the young viewers who embraced it in the '70s and gave it enduring multigenerational appeal.
Sure, there's a segment of genre fandom that's self-conscious and determined to act all grown up and disdain anything meant for kids, but that's just their insecurity talking. Franchises that welcome young viewers are the ones that gain devoted fans for life.
I agree that that's how it should work. But the fact that Prodigy was the only new series that Paramount cancelled after just one season, and disowned, would tend to support my theory that the powers that be labelling it a "kids show" does limit its popularity, considering how good many of us think it is. As would the enormous popularity of Star Wars and Doctor Who, which are not labelled "kids shows."
I know it's Rod's favorite, which isn't surprising to me. :-)
I know it's Rod's favorite, which isn't surprising to me. :-)
Star Wars has long been labelled a "kid's show." It was considered lesser fair at the time it was made, and Lucas still called it a franchise for kids, including when he was making Clone Wars.
The fact is, the numbers didn't support Prodigy's continuation, and it didn't move up until it was cancelled and people became fearful of not seeing it again. So, suddenly, with the illusion of scarcity, it became popular.
I don't pay much attention to labels. if a show looks interesting to me, I watch it and don't care if someone that I don't know thinks it's for kids. I officially turned "old as dirt" recently, but even before that, I didn't take any real stock in what others said a show was meant for.
Evidently, the audience was too old and too uninterested in buying toys to keep the show alive on Paramount+. I'm 40 and it's my favorite series.
Similar threads
