New Star Trek Series Premieres January 2017


Television

351 to 400 of 461 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

GreenDragon1133 wrote:
Corathonv2 wrote:
Ramarren wrote:
Orville Redenbacher wrote:
Oh no women captains and robots!?

Snip

So there are very few positions. Qualification for those 13 posts are incredibly selective. Starfleet also has to make decisions about those postings with an assurance their Starship Captains wouldn't suddenly need to turn the ship around, run weeks out of their way, to reach a starbase where a replacement captain can come aboard. A female officer might find that need (marriage or pregnancy).

Yes that is a sexist attitude. It is not an attitude that would make sense in a late 20th/early 21st century (real world) navy. But, if women served in the navy in 1800 - where circumnavigating the globe took weeks or months, would it have made...

There was at least one irish, female, pirate, captain. She defeated sexism by pushing her boyfriends into a murder shaft in her castle whenever they got bossy. The whole medieval, renaissance, colonial super period was nonsensical. Lewis Carroll was trying to parody that whole, "Because I said so" mindset, and people are just now, "getting it".


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm not a Star Trek fan. My favorite Trek movie buy a wide stretch is GALAXY QUEST (yeah I know it's not REALLY a ST movie but...) followed by WRATH OF KHAN and UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY.

I'm not a huge fan of he orignal series or Next Generation (wildly uneven. When it's good it's GREAT. When it's not...ehhhhhh). My favorite ST series is actually DS9.

That being said, 3 episodes in and I'm enjoying DISCOVERY quite a bit. Maybe it's because I'm not invested in the minutia at all and dont care about the Klingon redesign or the continuity. I'm just enjoying this character's journey and the unfolding situation.

I'm going to keep watching.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Wow. Those new klingons look awful. No more ties to the original fuman chu. It's like they went to war against facial hair... based on Wert's review above, and the fact that it's not on Netflix in Canada, I say poo on this new Star Trek show.

Ok, it's on the SPACE channel, and I quite like it, so I UN-POO this. Other than the female lead having a dude's name is annoying (director's signature), and the Klingon redesign is mildly annoying... I like the themes and where this is going.

I have the feeling that Star Fleet and their forced assimilation are the bad guys and the Klingons seeing their culture unrecognized and placated as something everyone must tolerate were the good guys.

Now that I think of it, the Marvel Inhuman show gives me a similar vibe: royal family is evil and force human slaves into the mines vs. Maximus the CG liberator who actually tries to explain the princess why her family is evil.


Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
I have the feeling that Star Fleet and their forced assimilation are the bad guys and the Klingons seeing their culture unrecognized and placated as something everyone must tolerate were the good guys.

I don't think that's what they're going for. The Klingons represent conservatism. They care about things like Purity. The Federation represents liberalism. They just want a universe where everybody lives together in peace and harmony. They fail to understand the Klingons, can't imagine why not everyone would want diversity and integration, fail to understand that even saying, "We come in peace," seems like a sneaky trap to Klingon ears. The war is a tragedy born of mutual incomprehension.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been an avid Star Trek fan since the 1970s, and I have to say that I'm really loving Star Trek: Discovery so far. (All of three episodes in.)

Yes, the "Mary Sue" origin story for Michael Burnham is a little annoying, but I am cautiously hopeful that it will make more sense as time goes on.

I am also very much a fan of the decision not to be slavishly beholden to some of the Star Trek Original Series canon. TOS was very progressive for its day... but its day was 50 years ago, and much of its writing and attitude shows.

Plot continuity for TV series in the '60s was also not that much of a consideration, as it was intended to be episodic and ephemeral: there were no home video players, no syndication deal, and none of the writers could ever have known that they were working on such an important piece of pop culture. So, I don't think it's always fair to take throwaway lines from the Original Series and then etch them in granite.

(I'm a little less forgiving with subsequent series, as by then, the writers knew what they were working with.)

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
I have the feeling that Star Fleet and their forced assimilation are the bad guys and the Klingons seeing their culture unrecognized and placated as something everyone must tolerate were the good guys.
They fail to understand the Klingons, can't imagine why not everyone would want diversity and integration, fail to understand that even saying, "We come in peace," seems like a sneaky trap to Klingon ears. The war is a tragedy born of mutual incomprehension.

The third episode seems to hint at a really rotten side of Star Fleet. Michael is in her own view a fallen angel reminiscing on the good old days at the academy, early years as an officer, etc. and while she's aware she was the cause of 1100+ deaths, she's quick to get recruited by a similarly minded warlike captain who does not shy from experimenting on monsters or his own people. War against Klingons justifies all that dirt to happen. All under a veil of peace and acceptance agenda.

I wouldn't be surprised if we later see an evolution of the Klingon resistance against star fleet and see Michael join those rebels, providing her character evolves a bit. Now she's learning the consequence of shoot first ask later.


Anything is possible, but I really doubt we'll see an evil Federation oppressing the noble Klingons twist. I mean, if you think people are getting bent out of shape about visual changes to the Klingons or minor continuity violations, can you even imagine the response?

It's quite possible the Federation won't be cast as the pure shining city on the hill, but not the outright villains of the piece.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

I really like that new alien dude with the evolved fear response! :)

He's Michael's conscience and will probably be her true agent of change in the show...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
It's quite possible the Federation won't be cast as the pure shining city on the hill, but not the outright villains of the piece.

Ground well-seeded by DS9...

Sovereign Court

Cole Deschain wrote:
thejeff wrote:
It's quite possible the Federation won't be cast as the pure shining city on the hill, but not the outright villains of the piece.
Ground well-seeded by DS9...

I always felt like ST series were the galaxy through the federation's eyes and that DS9 was the federation through the galaxy's eyes. I doubt this time around the federation will be some type of monstrosity. Its been said that the Klingons represent a certain group of folks in our current political climate that the writers most definitely disagree with.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Without the time to write a longer post, I am enjoying the series so far.

Pan wrote:
Cole Deschain wrote:
thejeff wrote:
It's quite possible the Federation won't be cast as the pure shining city on the hill, but not the outright villains of the piece.
Ground well-seeded by DS9...
I always felt like ST series were the galaxy through the federation's eyes and that DS9 was the federation through the galaxy's eyes. I doubt this time around the federation will be some type of monstrosity. Its been said that the Klingons represent a certain group of folks in our current political climate that the writers most definitely disagree with.

I'm probably just reading too much into things, but I did notice the Discovery's registry is NCC-1031. (spoilers for other Trek series)


I have to admit...
The third episode was much better than the first 2.
I agree that the first officer has some great character development, where the main character is concerned.
Kind of Abe Sapiens to Michael's Hellboy.
I'm cautiously hopeful.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:

I have to admit...

The third episode was much better than the first 2.
I agree that the first officer has some great character development, where the main character is concerned.
Kind of Abe Sapiens to Michael's Hellboy.
I'm cautiously hopeful.

Almost literally.

Saru is played by Doug Jones, who also played Abe Sapien in the Hellboy movies.


I just watched a YouTube video on the propulsion system, the "Spore Drive", using a kind of fungal spore that generates a quantum entanglement between locations, allowing the ships to travel at near instantaneous speed. Is this really a thing on the show? Because if it is it's the final nail in the coffin of my having any interest in this program whatsoever.

Spore Drive??


DungeonmasterCal wrote:

I just watched a YouTube video on the propulsion system, the "Spore Drive", using a kind of fungal spore that generates a quantum entanglement between locations, allowing the ships to travel at near instantaneous speed. Is this really a thing on the show? Because if it is it's the final nail in the coffin of my having any interest in this program whatsoever.

Spore Drive??

They are trying to come up with a way to exploit the spores' natural qualities.

I don't understand why that would be "the nail in the coffin" for you. Star Trek may not have been the show that invented technical mumbo-jumbo, but it made it famous.


It's just that and other continuity they've trampled underfoot. I'm a huge Trek fan, and this show just makes me angry. I can't enjoy it at all.


I still have mixed reactions when watching the show. On one hand I like the visuals and effects. Though not too sure about the Spore drive. On the other beyond a few characters their is no real standout in terms of real characters. Except maybe Michael imo. Captain Lorca to me comes across as another stereotypical Trek character. After all

Spoiler:

nothing can go wrong with keeping the Phasers set to kill resistant, smashes through armor plate easily, mindless space monster on the ship.
..nothing at all. Maybe the Orville has spoiled me. Or maybe the writers don't seem to really want to shake things up. Or maybe just maybe I have seen it all before. I will give it more chances before though before writing it off.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
DungeonmasterCal wrote:

I just watched a YouTube video on the propulsion system, the "Spore Drive", using a kind of fungal spore that generates a quantum entanglement between locations, allowing the ships to travel at near instantaneous speed. Is this really a thing on the show? Because if it is it's the final nail in the coffin of my having any interest in this program whatsoever.

Spore Drive??

So it is the Jaunt Drive from the Mirror Universe Novels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Tales Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I think from continuity we can take it that the development of the spore drive is not successful or maybe it turns out to be too dangerous or otherwise unusable.


GreenDragon1133 wrote:
So it is the Jaunt Drive from the Mirror Universe Novels.

Or the Infinite Improbability Drive from HHGttG.


Damon Griffin wrote:
GreenDragon1133 wrote:
So it is the Jaunt Drive from the Mirror Universe Novels.
Or the Infinite Improbability Drive from HHGttG.

Or the Inversion Drive from Diane Duane’s The Wounded Sky (which has the added benefit of being this same era). Plus, we do know elements of her work made it into canon, so this might be another instance.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
It's just that and other continuity they've trampled underfoot. I'm a huge Trek fan, and this show just makes me angry. I can't enjoy it at all.

I'm a huge Trek fan as well and I quite enjoy it (so far). Are there continuity issues? Maybe, but I don't care too much especially regarding TOS (that might make me a bad Trekkie, but given how bad the visuals were even in the early 80's when I got to watch it for the first time, I just can bring myself to rewatch it, so my own Star Trek Canon actually excludes TOS pretty much and starts with TNG).

It's a shame that you can't at least give it a try, because you just might find it more enjoyable than you expect it to be, if you could.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
WormysQueue wrote:
I'm a huge Trek fan as well and I quite enjoy it (so far). Are there continuity issues? Maybe, but I don't care too much especially regarding TOS (that might make me a bad Trekkie, but given how bad the visuals were even in the early 80's when I got to watch it for the first time, I just can bring myself to rewatch it, so my own Star Trek Canon actually excludes TOS pretty much and starts with TNG).

Same. Huge fan, but a ton of the original series stuff was changed, first with the movies, then with Next Generation, etc. And I'm fine with some of that, because sometimes the original material was pretty dire. "Brain, brain, what is brain?" :)

Some of the original series episodes contradicted each other, and the contradictions kept going in the movies (Spock has a brother?) and in the various series (We don't use money! I'll pay for your drinks! Wait, what?).

As long as the basic premise remains intact, I'm fine with a little change, and nothing I've seen in Enterprise (which was pretty darn reviled when it was airing) or in Discovery so far annoys me a tenth as much as that old drunk hippie they called Zephram Cochrane for the movie, who was *wildly* different in character from the Zephram Cochrane we saw in the original series. :)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was SO impressed by Episode 104 you cannot believe.

I'M NOT CRYING OVER A [SPOILER], YOU ARE

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

When Canon gets in the way of a story, ignore canon. Some nerd will no-prize a solution.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
When Canon gets in the way of a story, ignore canon. Some nerd will no-prize a solution.

If you want to make a story without running afoul of canon, don't set it in an established franchise just to get a cheap boost in popularity.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Ramarren wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
When Canon gets in the way of a story, ignore canon. Some nerd will no-prize a solution.

If you want to make a story without running afoul of canon, don't set it in an established franchise just to get a cheap boost in popularity.

As Set said, then they should have stopped Star Trek part way through the Original Series. Certainly shouldn't have done Next Generation.

All long running series have conflicts with canon. Keep them relatively minor, avoid sacred cows, but don't tie yourself too tightly to decades old bad decisions or technical limitations.


thejeff wrote:
Ramarren wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
When Canon gets in the way of a story, ignore canon. Some nerd will no-prize a solution.

If you want to make a story without running afoul of canon, don't set it in an established franchise just to get a cheap boost in popularity.

As Set said, then they should have stopped Star Trek part way through the Original Series. Certainly shouldn't have done Next Generation.

All long running series have conflicts with canon. Keep them relatively minor, avoid sacred cows, but don't tie yourself too tightly to decades old bad decisions or technical limitations.

It isn’t how Discovery runs afoul of TOS that’s the issue. It’s how Discovery runs afoul of TNG, DS9, and Enterprise which managed to somehow not run afoul of each other. Ramarren is right. They could have told any story they wanted with any antagonists they wanted. But by calling it Star Trek and making it part of that shared history, it has an obligation to that shared history. Right now, it’s coming across as some fanfiction involving a race at another point in time that has nothing to do with Klingons in the 23rd century that the execs wouldn’t let them run unless they reskinned them as Klingons in the 23rd century. This isn’t some minor canon conflict; this is Vulcans are boisterous jokers and always have been.

Unless the later episodes have somehow explained how we go from Enterprise to here in such a way that it’ll make sense when we get back to TNG. I wouldn’t know, since the DVD box set isn’t out yet, so I can’t truly discuss this series beyond the one episode that actually got aired.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want to keep a open mind and enjoy the show. The more I watch the more it's hard for me to do. in terms of creating organic characters they have learned nothing. The head of security comes across as both a trope and a stereotype. Nothing says that person really is in the wrong line of work. When going up against a alien species that is resistant to Phaser fire, fast, quick, outclasses humans by a factor of ten, can smash through hull plating like cardboard.

Spoiler:
Thinking she can go up against said alien creature not only alone. While ignoring all advice to the contrary. Have to keep up the stereotype of the dumb, arrogant, head of security. I thought Tasha Yar death in TNG was a complete waste. This is even worse. Commander Landry knew how dangerous the creature could be. Why the hell go up against it alone.
All because they have to keep up caricatures in the Trek universe.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You forgot desperate. Which overrules all your complaints.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Bear sized water bear. Who knew?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wasn't terribly impressed with Episode 4.

Spoiler:
Pacing was off: Far too frenetic. We didn't really get any time to feel or understand any of the characters' motivations.

Story was much too cluttered: While I understand the desire to tell the A-Starfleet/Burnham and B-Klingons/Voq stories, cutting back-and-forth between them in this episode really didn't work for me. The A/B storytelling works best when the two stories are somehow parallels of each other, but I really didn't see any parallels there.

Cmdr. Landry's death: The writers killed off yet another major female character for no good reason, and before we ever really got to know her. The character's motivations for doing something so blatantly reckless are just unfathomable, and the script gave us nothing to make her actions relatiable.

Burnham's motivations were inscrutable: She seems to have made a hunch, rather than a scientific hypothesis, and then staked her own life—and the life of Cadet Tilly—on that hunch by releasing the containment field... after it had killed Landry.

Burnham's ruse of a fake-apology to Saru just to test his visible fear-response served pretty much no purpose other that to drive more enmity between them. I'm all for establishing inter-personal conflict in a series like this, but that move really seemed like she was being a jerk for the sake of jerkiness.

Capt. Georgiou's will: So... who managed to run back to the Captain's ready room aboard the Shenzhou to grab Georgiou's 200-year-old telescope, pack it up into a crate, download her will, and then hang onto it for six months before sending it off to Burnham? That made no sense whatsoever.

The Klingons eat their fallen enemies? OK, I guess... but that's never been mentioned before. I had also been hoping that the Klingons had captured and Capt. Georgiou and had given her medical treatment, to use a a future bargaining chip... but I guess not.

Bottom line: This ep had quite a few good ideas, but perhaps too many, and none of them were fleshed out or paced propertly.

Still, a lot of good genre series start out with a bunch of weak episodes, so I'm keeping my mind open on this one. (I'm looking at you, Star Trek: The Next Generation... and you, too, Babylon 5!)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fabius Maximus wrote:
You forgot desperate. Which overrules all your complaints.

Writing a character who is desperate is one thing.

Doing something so stupid resulting in

Spoiler:
her death and quite possible Michael and everyone else on the ship is dumb. At the very least have a group of security guards, hell just two extra guards would have made a difference.

I have seen properly written desperate and overconfident characters in other TV shows, movies etc. Commander Landry actions and the final result was and is terrible writing imo. It's a level of recklessness and thoughtlessness that could have possibly endangered the entire ship. No amount of desperation justifies that.

I'm being on this version of Star Trek because they have had plenty of time to get the formula correct.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Try to separate your perspective from Michael's and seeing the issue from Landry's. Michael has spent the last 6 months in prison. Landry has been fighting a war, probably seeing friends and maybe family die. Now one of the key resources of the Federation is under threat and she feels the need to do something.

People frequently do rash and stupid things, no matter how smart or well-conditioned they are otherwise. Sometimes even the best training cannot help to suppress these impulses.

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Fabius Maximus wrote:
People frequently do rash and stupid things, no matter how smart or well-conditioned they are otherwise. Sometimes even the best training cannot help to suppress these impulses.

And her training *might* have taught her that she can overcome anything, through sheer determination, and that the weapon was only as strong as the soldier wielding it and that there was no such thing as 'give up' or 'run away.' In which case, what seems ludicrous to us in our chairs, seems totally reasonable, maybe even honorable and just and right, to the person who received this training.

As with so many situations, if she'd actually won, for whatever reason, somehow stumbling upon a weakness in the enemy, perhaps, she'd be a hero.

Or maybe she just watched too much later season Buffy or whatever, where the answer to every fight with an enemy that kicked your ass with contemptuous ease in the first act is to charge at it again in the third act with the exact same tactics, but a newfound determination to win, which somehow always works, for some absurd reason. :)


Fabius and Set I get the point your trying to make I still disagree.

I could understand acting on impulse if she knew nothing of the creature abilites.

Spoiler:
Except She knew what the creature could do. Ignored any attempt to stop her from doing something essentially suicidal. If at least the writers had the character have some backup. It was a dumb death imo. From a character who should have known better.
I could even understand if Landry was a wet behind the years first time being head of Security. One could blame inexperience on her actions. Yet even that can't be used as a excuse as the writers made the character look very experienced.

Many Star Trek fans

Spoiler:
are starting to get tired of useless character deaths. Many were so angry at Tasha Yars death that they retconned the character back into the series.
Speaking for myself I want to see characters act like real people. Not a specific hard to believe way because the script calls for them to act like that.

If this was the first or even second attempt at a Star Trek series I would be more forgiving. Instead it seems they want to repeat the mistakes of the past. While thinking the fanbase will just watch anything because it's Star Trek. I will give it a few more episodes yet so far I can't help but be disappointed.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Malfoy senior is a badass, I love him even more now


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:
Malfoy senior is a badass, I love him even more now

If it's one thing that will keep me watching it's Jason Isaacs. He is a good actor.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Thing From Another World wrote:
Hama wrote:
Malfoy senior is a badass, I love him even more now
If it's one thing that will keep me watching it's Jason Isaacs. He is a good actor.

I wonder why you don't give Lorca a hard time. He did a similar thing to Landry in the very same episode, it just didn't backfire as badly.

I agree that

Spoiler:
Landry didn't need to die to get the point across. It probably would have been even better for her story if she'd had survived. But that doesn't change the fact that her decision was entirely human. "Real people" don't act like Vulcans.

Btw, Denise Crosby wanted out because she felt the writer's room didn't know what to do with her character anymore.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Tectorman wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Ramarren wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
When Canon gets in the way of a story, ignore canon. Some nerd will no-prize a solution.

If you want to make a story without running afoul of canon, don't set it in an established franchise just to get a cheap boost in popularity.

As Set said, then they should have stopped Star Trek part way through the Original Series. Certainly shouldn't have done Next Generation.

All long running series have conflicts with canon. Keep them relatively minor, avoid sacred cows, but don't tie yourself too tightly to decades old bad decisions or technical limitations.

It isn’t how Discovery runs afoul of TOS that’s the issue. It’s how Discovery runs afoul of TNG, DS9, and Enterprise which managed to somehow not run afoul of each other. Ramarren is right. They could have told any story they wanted with any antagonists they wanted. But by calling it Star Trek and making it part of that shared history, it has an obligation to that shared history. Right now, it’s coming across as some fanfiction involving a race at another point in time that has nothing to do with Klingons in the 23rd century that the execs wouldn’t let them run unless they reskinned them as Klingons in the 23rd century. This isn’t some minor canon conflict; this is Vulcans are boisterous jokers and always have been.

Unless the later episodes have somehow explained how we go from Enterprise to here in such a way that it’ll make sense when we get back to TNG. I wouldn’t know, since the DVD box set isn’t out yet, so I can’t truly discuss this series beyond the one episode that actually got aired.

Nah, just retcon stuff. It’s faster and easier, Star Trek is all imaginary anyway.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Tectorman wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Ramarren wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
When Canon gets in the way of a story, ignore canon. Some nerd will no-prize a solution.

If you want to make a story without running afoul of canon, don't set it in an established franchise just to get a cheap boost in popularity.

As Set said, then they should have stopped Star Trek part way through the Original Series. Certainly shouldn't have done Next Generation.

All long running series have conflicts with canon. Keep them relatively minor, avoid sacred cows, but don't tie yourself too tightly to decades old bad decisions or technical limitations.

It isn’t how Discovery runs afoul of TOS that’s the issue. It’s how Discovery runs afoul of TNG, DS9, and Enterprise which managed to somehow not run afoul of each other. Ramarren is right. They could have told any story they wanted with any antagonists they wanted. But by calling it Star Trek and making it part of that shared history, it has an obligation to that shared history. Right now, it’s coming across as some fanfiction involving a race at another point in time that has nothing to do with Klingons in the 23rd century that the execs wouldn’t let them run unless they reskinned them as Klingons in the 23rd century. This isn’t some minor canon conflict; this is Vulcans are boisterous jokers and always have been.

Unless the later episodes have somehow explained how we go from Enterprise to here in such a way that it’ll make sense when we get back to TNG. I wouldn’t know, since the DVD box set isn’t out yet, so I can’t truly discuss this series beyond the one episode that actually got aired.

Nah, just retcon stuff. It’s faster and easier, Star Trek is all imaginary anyway.

Sure, but part of my enjoyment of Star Trek is the lore and how the series keeps building on itself. So if I have to forcefully forget too much of what's already been established, then that runs the risk of negating the whole point of bothering with this series in the first place. Which isn't a problem if it's a separate series or explicitly an alternative timeline, but they went out of their way to say that this is the prime timeline.

I do however have hope in the novels. They managed to make the Temporal Cold War make sense, so I remain confident that after this first season comes to a close, we will have a better cohesion between Discovery and the rest of the franchise than what we have right now.


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Tales Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Am I the only one who's annoyed by the silly effect that has the whole ship spinning along its longitudinal axis before jumping with the spore drive? Why would it even do that?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

First episode back was pretty great, although it lent rather heavily on fanservice to do it and then either outright confirmed or very heavily almost-confirmed every fan theory of note about the show.

I did like the fact that this is suddenly Part 3 of a story that began 50 years ago this year with "The Tholian Web" and continued 13 years ago with ENTERPRISE's "In a Mirror, Darkly". Suddenly a show that was trying rather hard to separate itself from prior incarnations of the canon suddenly spun round and jammed itself right in there.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I'm dropping this show. Completely.

Scarab Sages

Paizo Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

A little behind on my reading.

Ramarren wrote:

A little harder to get around the already established TOS canon that women were not *allowed* to be Starfleet captains at that point

Stupid? Yes. Sexist? Yes. But it was explicitly established. The difficulty in any prequel is in trying to keep true to the source. I can live with this one only because our society would make this a really unpalatable piece of history...but it strikes me as revisionist.

Number One in the original pilot, "The Cage", was female.

That means she will one day be captain. That is not sexist.

If you are referring to Janet Lester's ranting about Kirk's 'all boy's club' in "Turnabout Intruder", take into account that she was insane.
Also, cadets are broken into groups of 6 or so at the academy.
It could be that all of the males in Kirk's group have made captain but for whatever reason the females did not.
Just because you are on the command path does not mean you won't wash out.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There's also the fact that the USS Saratoga, in the opening scenes of Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, was captained by a woman.


I wanted to give the show a chance and part of me still does a big part of me not so much.

The first really big mistake imo. Saying that Klingons are meant to be Trump supporters. Trying to get a new show of the ground one does not make the extreme rookie mistake of angering part of the fanbase on purpose.

Attempts at making Klingon sound as racial ethnic as possible is silly. There is a reason why they never tried to go out of their way to do so in previous versions of Trek because it's a fake language. When I hear Kligon spoken by male characters they all sound like Fat Albert with a throat infection. I feel like giving them all some Fishmerman Friend to clear their throats. So far the only spoken Kligon I like is when it's voiced by female actors.

The Spore Drive that almost no one except a few Trek fans and the creator really wanted. Good idea that felt too much like a badly disguised Deux Ex Machina imo.

What really may do it for me is the whole "we want to do our own thing and not be bound by the previous Trek canon". To as Werthead has pointed out they not only bound themselves to current canon they thought we would not notice. I guess when rating fall any previous promises made get thrown out the window.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Ignoring for a moment what actor Jason Isaacs (Captain Lorca) has had to say, here is what the showrunners of ST:D said:

co-showrunner Aaron Harberts wrote:

The allegory is that we really started working on the show in earnest around the time the election was happening. The Klingons are going to help us really look at certain sides of ourselves and our country. Isolationism is a big theme. Racial purity is a big theme. The Klingons are not the enemy, but they do have a different view on things. It raises big questions: Should we let people in? Do we want to change? There’s also the question of just because you reach your hand out to someone, do they have to take it? Sometimes, they don’t want to take it. It’s been interesting to see how the times have become more of a mirror than we even thought they were going to be.

The thing about the war is it takes Starfleet and the Federation and forces them to examine their ideas and ethical rules of conflict and conduct. It provides a backdrop to how we want to be as a society and that analysis and self-reflection is new for Trek. They’ve done it in certain episodes in the past, but this is a true journey for the institution in itself.

co-showrunner Gretchen J. Berg wrote:
In times of stress and conflict it can bring out the best of us and the worst of us. But it ultimately brings out the best in our Starfleet officers.
co-showrunner Aaron Harberts wrote:
North Korea is in our thoughts as we finish the series. What began as a commentary on our own divided nation — in terms of Trump supporters and non-Trump supporters — has blown out to North Korea and how we’re right on the brink. [The U.S. is] actually right at the place where Starfleet finds itself in episode one and we couldn’t have anticipated that happening. But how do you end conflict when both sides have such strong opinions?

Unless there is some other interview out there that I've missed, this is what they actually said, not what online outlets and magazines have posted as attention-grabbing, click-baity headlines. The showrunners didn't attribute last election's strong currents of isolationism and racial purity as big themes in the show. They didn't attribute those themes to "Trump supporters"; they didn't claim the show's Klingons were based on "Trump supporters". Science fiction frequently recasts our real world political and social events and movements in order to shine a mirror, to spark discussion. From the beginning, Trek has often attempted to do this, sometimes more skillfully than others. If the "Trump supporters" in the fanbase have ignored this until now -- because they enjoy space opera, or just enjoy sci-fi action, or for whatever reason -- that's their prerogative. But they can't act like this is something new to Trek (or other sci-fi).

---

Whether you like the Klingon re-re-redesigns or not, I'm pretty damn sure how the actors speak is mostly influenced by their fake teeth appliances, not some "attempts at making Klingon sound as racial ethnic." I would imagine even experienced actors who are skilled at real world accents would have difficultly delivering clear and dramatic lines with those mouthfuls of teeth. The show's makeup department seems to use smaller dental prosthetics for the women actors, which I'd also guess would be less difficult with which to deliver their lines.

---

As for the spore drive? When I first started watching the show, I began asking myself why Bryan Fuller, the writers, the showrunners, and the execs were making these seeming changes to canon. Some of those changes seem like simply taking advantage of better set building, better makeup techniques, better CGI/practical special effects, and a significantly bigger budget. But things like the spore drive and this latest twist on where the ship is now makes me think they are striving for something deeper. My personal guess is one of the questions they are trying to answer, or at least explore, is why the Trek universe has developed as it has. Ideas like: why haven't there been more incursions between our universe and where USS Discovery is now? What are the realistic ramifications if a massive game changer like the spore drive were introduced (and not ignored, like the stupid intergalactic transporting introduced in nuTrek)? Klingon society in ST:TOS through ST:DS9 largely depicts Klingons as religious, but not as religious zealots; has their society and religious beliefs largely been that way, or were they more extreme (either more religious or more secularist)? And if so, what happened to change it?

While Bryan Fuller isn't involved with the show anymore, he is a huge Trek fan and deeply respectful of the canon. He wrote and worked on DS9 and Voyager. This show was built on his love of Trek and the writers have been drawing from his extensive notes on world-building and lore. I think most everyone involved with this show has respect for the canon and legacy. I think they want to tell good stories with new/interesting takes on Trek themes, and sometimes, those attempts will come up short or land poorly... just like has happened in all previous iterations of Trek.

---

I'm not a Trekkie/Trekker, but I enjoy the show. It isn't perfect, but I find it a compelling, well-acted new iteration of the franchise and certainly better than most of what is also available on TV. I'd argue it hits the ground running better than the first season of all the other versions of Trek, including my fav, ST:DS9.

I'm sorry that you don't enjoy it, Thing.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
I'm not a Trekkie/Trekker, but I enjoy the show. It isn't perfect, but I find it a compelling, well-acted new iteration of the franchise and certainly better than most of what is also available on TV. I'd argue it hits the ground running better than the first season of all the other versions of Trek, including my fav, ST:DS9.

I am a 'Trekkie,' from way before someone decided that Trekkie was out and Trekker was in, and I'm really enjoying Discovery. (Granted Deep Space Nine was my favorite Trek series, and it really pushed the boundaries past the 'ship of exploration' tone of the original series and Next Generation, so I'm fine with a 'Federation at War' series.)


After doing some research of my own I admit to being mistaken about the Trump Supporters = Klingons. I don't particularly hate the Spore Drive I do think it went from prototype to working model way too fast and imo it worked too well except for when the plot calls for it to fail. I can live with how Klingons language sounds even if it annoys me to no end to hear it. I do think them using the Mirror Universe is a cheap ploy to get more viewers.Then again it might be CBS insisting it. I don;t hate it and will probably watch more episodes. I would by lying if I said it's my favored version of Trek.

351 to 400 of 461 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Television / New Star Trek Series Premieres January 2017 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.