Star Trek Discovery

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The spore travel thing was a massive mistake, imo. This series is set before TOS, and they introduce tech that is beyond anything in TNG, set over a century later? It's a pretty dumb anachronism.

Also, if Burnham ends up as the only character we're actually supposed to like and or sympathize with, this show is in a lot of trouble.

Star Trek is full of those things. Trans warp drive only didn't work in Star Trek Iii because Scotty removed the parts. How come we didn't see that (aside from the Borg) in TNG.

Also whose to the say the Iconian Gateway wasn't a magic mushroom ride?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Or maybe what the Iconians discovered years ago and the basis for the Gateway tech?

That could go all sorts of places, maybe they find a more existential threat than the Klingons down the road they have to deal with or they get trapped somewhere?

Oh no we're caught in the Delta Quadrant and its 70 years to get home . . . oh wait.

[GoinAllTheWay]

What was up with the new Captains eyes? Missed that part.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

What was up with the new Captains eyes? Missed that part.

he has eye damage and needs they take time to adjust to the light. I assume it has something to do with the onboard experiments more then anything else.

[OutOfTheCube]

Man, you guys need to chill and just let the story play out.

"Super fast spore travel! Ugh, they don't have that in TOS! This show sucks! I mean, they've already shown it's top secret, highly experimental, and extremely dangerous, I can't imagine any reasons why they wouldn't be using it ten years later"

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm assuming you're talking about the movie which ranked as one of the worst video game movies of all time and a prime example of Chris Roberts gone insane?

as soon as I saw the shaved Kilrathi and the ships dipping on take off because of gravity I was like, I'm out.

I was more thinking the video game. I had forgotten about that movie.

It has that alone in space, top secret, former traitor, Captain of questionable morals, annoying wingman, that was the plot of of wing commander 2.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GGG

I was more thinking the video game. I had forgotten about that movie.

It has that alone in space, top secret, former traitor, Captain of questionable morals, annoying wingman, that was the plot of of wing commander 2.

As a side note that Wing Commander 2 story line was amazing.

you disgraced and sent off to a lonely space station as a traitor. An Admiral that absolutely hated you and wanted to get rid of you. the real traitor bombing the Concordia, Prince Thrakath lurking around kicking your butt. An amazing confrontation with the traitor who's brother had died because of you. a final battle using torpedo's to destroy the Kilrathi head quarters and you had to fight Thrakath in a blindingly fast fighter with like 8 neutron canons who could kill you with two shots.

The only thing that made it better was the Special Operations where maniac returned with a prototype fighter that had a dumb fire nuclear missile that you had to fire and then shoot to set it off but it killed everything.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by OutOfTheCube

Man, you guys need to chill and just let the story play out.

"Super fast spore travel! Ugh, they don't have that in TOS! This show sucks! I mean, they've already shown it's top secret, highly experimental, and extremely dangerous, I can't imagine any reasons why they wouldn't be using it ten years later"

I have been surprised by how ready to hate this show so called Trekkies have been, its so frustrating. Every single series takes time to find its groove and identity, I for one love seeing it go darker.

Not to say I think the first three episodes are excellent TV, but considering I still watch the Walking Dead, you can bet I will be watching this series for as long as its on TV.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Thor

I have been surprised by how ready to hate this show so called Trekkies have been, its so frustrating. Every single series takes time to find its groove and identity, I for one love seeing it go darker.

Not to say I think the first three episodes are excellent TV, but considering I still watch the Walking Dead, you can bet I will be watching this series for as long as its on TV.

Because they think it's good when actually most of it is pretty bad. If you ignore the first two seasons (generously) what did TNG bat in terms of good episodes? 60%? DS9 maybe about 65-70 because of the Dominion war (which even had it's serious lulls). It's a relatively mediocre actual show across its iterations but the universe is neat.

[CliffFletcher]

Well I'm out. Not only is it impossible to imagine a show with less fidelity to Star Trek - angsty, cynical, grimdark - it's just badly written. The pacing is leaden. The dialog full of cackhanded exposition. It's trying to be adult, but the premise is boilerplate YA, with the misunderstood protagonist being ostracized as the new kid in school. We're supposed to believe a crew of military and science professionals has the social climate of school anime - all snark and sarcasm and sneering. Did I mentioned the leaden pacing?

I guess we'll see how far top-notch production values and the name recognition of a popular franchise can carry a show. I give it two seasons.

[OutOfTheCube]

Okay, bye.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Thor

I have been surprised by how ready to hate this show so called Trekkies have been, its so frustrating.

What would you say are the five essential elements of Star Trek in its previous TV iterations?

[OutOfTheCube]

There's always this dumb notion that Star Trek must be hope and optimism! Yet everybody's favorite episodes are the dark ones where Picard gets kindapped and turned into a Borg and nearly obliterates earth. Or where Sisko lies and conspires and basically is accessory to war crimes to draw an unwilling party into a galactic war. Or where Kirk and others have to choose to sacrifice a woman's life for the future of humanity. And everyone's favorite movie is the one where a maniac is out for revenge and steals a super weapon and is only foiled by the death of a beloved character.

Dark Star Trek is awesome. It's always been the best of it.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by OutOfTheCube

There's always this dumb notion that Star Trek must be hope and optimism! Yet everybody's favorite episodes are the dark ones where Picard gets kindapped and turned into a Borg and nearly obliterates earth. Or where Sisko lies and conspires and basically is accessory to war crimes to draw an unwilling party into a galactic war. Or where Kirk and others have to choose to sacrifice a woman's life for the future of humanity. And everyone's favorite movie is the one where a maniac is out for revenge and steals a super weapon and is only foiled by the death of a beloved character.

Dark Star Trek is awesome. It's always been the best of it.

Strongly disagree.

Best Star Trek are the ones that make you think and feel. Sometimes those are dark but very frequently they aren’t. They’re just smart and poignant and deal with otherworldly life forms and situations that relate to the viewer. Picard playing some stupid flute while being transported to another world in a memory box in what amounts to little more than a dream makes us think of family and sacrifice and love. It was about showing us that emotion transcends race and species. That being 100 million light years from earth 400 years in the future people would still have similarities and act with humanity like we do.

That’s not dark. That’s classic sci-fi.

Dark and gritty is, IMO, fundamentally not Star Trek. It’s too bad this show felt the need to copy that trend we’ve seen in the last 10 years from other series.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

What would you say are the five essential elements of Star Trek in its previous TV iterations?

Hmm not sure about 5, but cast chemistry, writing and loads of patience as all the series have their ups and downs.

I loved TNG, took me a while to warm up to DS9, Voyager liked a lot about half way in to first season, and Enterprise just never felt right, although I did enjoy it.

I just wonder if we had the internet and FB when TNG came out, if this hostility was around as well but we didn't see it; that first season was pretty bad with some few standout episodes. For me even mediocre sci fi is always better than most of the stuff you find on TV.

I have no idea how I will feel about this new series at the end of this season, but I am not furious about the first few episodes and leaping off the boat screaming bloody murder about the show.

Again, the tastes of the fans is pretty diverse now with all the generations of fans, the huge library of movies and diverse series that have come before STD.

Maybe people just expected another TNG type show, or hoped for it, but we will not get a cast like that again with the impatience of the modern TV viewing audience, back in the early 90s the quality of TV shows as a rule is nothing like what we get today so people are far more picky, justifiably so, with what they choose to watch.

I just love sci fi and will watch every single episode of pretty much any sci fi series, with very few exceptions. So by all means give up and stop supporting a new ST series based on 2 or 3 episodes, that's fine with me; I'll stick with it in the hopes we get another great ST series, hell I still give The Walking Dead a chance and its pretty brutal in parts.

[Thor]

By the way I also think you can agree with both Cecil and OoTC and be a ST fan

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Thor

I just wonder if we had the internet and FB when TNG came out, if this hostility was around as well but we didn't see it; that first season was pretty bad with some few standout episodes. For me even mediocre sci fi is always better than most of the stuff you find on TV.

I remember everyone discussing in school how awful TNG was when it first started, but it was the only scifi on TV so we stuck with it long enough for it to get good.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Thor

I loved TNG, took me a while to warm up to DS9, Voyager liked a lot about half way in to first season, and Enterprise just never felt right, although I did enjoy it.

I just wonder if we had the internet and FB when TNG came out, if this hostility was around as well but we didn't see it; that first season was pretty bad with some few standout episodes.

I understand that other Trek series took a while to smooth out the kinks. But they never changed their basic premise - they just got better at doing what they were trying to do. These are what I consider the five essential elements of Star Trek:

* Science and exploration
* Ethical dilemmas around science and interaction with other species
* Generally optimistic view of humanity
* Ensemble cast that demonstrates comradery
* Kids and parents can watch together

Every other series had these elements, and demonstrated them from the outset (even if the delivery could be shaky). With Discovery, I don't care if it gets better at what it's trying to do, because I have no interest in the kind of show it wants to be - a darker Expanse with better production values.

Originally Posted by Thor

Maybe people just expected another TNG type show, or hoped for it, but we will not get a cast like that again with the impatience of the modern TV viewing audience, back in the early 90s the quality of TV shows as a rule is nothing like what we get today so people are far more picky, justifiably so, with what they choose to watch.

And I'm one of those picky viewers. To me, 80 per cent of TV is absolute garbage, 15 per cent is decent but probably not worth my time, and 5 per cent is good enough to watch. Though as someone who only watches 4-5 hours of TV a week (and much of that from back catalogues of older shows), I don't have time to watch even most of the very best stuff. Of the new Star Trek shows, Orville makes the cut and Discovery doesn't.

[CaptainCrunch]

Addressing the whole human utopia idea of Roddenberry's is tough.

He visualized a future where mankind didn't worry about money and spent their lives working to the betterment and advancement of mankind

He visualized a future where racism didn't exist

He visualized a future where the environment on earth had basically been saved.

He visualized a future where diplomacy trumped war and the Navy so to speak were peaceful explorers.

Then he put the prime directive in place to stop it.

But at the same time even in the original series there were massive conflicts to it, because it just wasn't realistic as a frame work of a TV show

They had greedy humans, Harry Mudd for example a smuggler and con man, In the movies you had a whole underground of smugglers and rogues, for example in the Search for Spock, when McCoy was trying to get smuggled to the genesis world and offered money to get there.

You had multiple examples of racism, Balance of Power illustrated that man hadn't gotten over his racism. Look at how the humans reacted to the Kllingon's in The undiscovered country.

The devil in the dark showed that while man was concerned about the environment on their home world, they didn't care about the exploitation of other worlds and didn't care all that much about the preservation of wild life.

You always got a sense in the original series that while man talked a big game they were all to willing to quickly go back to their barbarian roots when it served their purpose.

You had it in TNG as well.

You had scientists that were willing to tear Data apart even though he was a sentient being, you had thinly veiled racism against the Klingons.

Frankly Roddenberry's vision would have never worked in a TV show except to make humanity uniformly unlikable. The preachy arrogant neighbour who stuck their nose where it didn't belong, and were fairly eager to show off their weapons and advanced tech when diplomacy failed.

What I liked about DS9 is it answered the question of what man would be like as you got further away from the center of your civilization. What man would be like when confronted by the un winnable and how far would we go in selling out our ideals to survive. Even in TNG to gain a short term victory over the Borg they were so willing to corrupt a civilization and nearly paid the price later.

With DS9 it showed that when not under the prying eyes of the center, mankind was just as racist, xenophobic, brutal, win at any costs and greedy as they'd always been, and that's why I loved that series.

With Discovery, my sense is that this series would work logic wise with 2 small changes.

Move it 10 years into the future after the end of the dominion war, when Star Fleet tried to go back to their ideals and in their first encounter with possible war, lost their way again.

Make the Klingons a different race, and have the klingons still reeling from their losses during the dominion war, and their attempts to liberalize their society.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Oh no we're caught in the Delta Quadrant and its 70 years to get home . . . oh wait.

At least Lorca!=Janeway