Star Trek: Discovery (2017)

[Angelus Lupus]

So basically they've decided "Lets take this well-loved franchise with an established theme of a hopeful future and re imagine it based on this totally different genre that's flavour of the month?":facepalm You just know that decision was made by a committee of suits that haven't ever watched Star Trek or Game of Thrones, but they have looked at the audience figures.... At least they didn't pick The Walking Dead, to try and base it on. :rolleyes

 

[MooCriket]

I'm starting to wonder how many people are going to sign up for CBS All Abcess not because they really want to see this show, but just because they want to see how good or bad it's going to be. Also, is anyone putting odds on whether or not airing the pilot episode on network television will result in a spike in subscribers, a minor blip, or make no difference at all? opcorn

I wager that it will be a 50/50 split. I'll watch the first episode, after that...I'll see if Amazon Prime picks it up, or eventually Netflix US. I'm not going out of my way to watch it, and I will not be paying for CBS all access...ever.

Somehow, I think I will have no problem streaming episodes around the web regardless. With all it's production issues, and issues alienating true/die hard fans of the franchise, I doubt it makes it a second season.

 

[clancampbell]

I like the look of the Klingons....much more alien.....their costumes are better now too, although very reminiscent of Necromongers, the old Klingons had the same outfits for like 100 years or something....from ST:TMP all the way to the TNG movies.....

Rich

 

[Angelus Lupus]

While I agree that it would have been nice to see some variation in the Klingon costume from TMP through TNG and DS9, this has gone just a little too... demonic, especially with the gothic architecture. The Klingons were meant to be Space-Russians, and when they were allies, Space-Vikings. Now I'm seeing some weird Buffy/Blade Vampire monster in a cathedral?

 

[cboath]

The article i read didn't say GOT based - it said GOT level of character deaths.

Just playing devil's advocate....but this is supposedly early on in earth's space travels, right? People ARE going to die. Also, if it's successful (which seems to be a long shot at this point) helps keep costs down. Anyone gets too expensive - they die. Traveling to new world - civilized or not - would bear a lot of danger in reality. yet, the number of characters that die in, TNG, for example was 1.5 over 7-8 years and 3-4 movies? Yar in year 1 'to show the danger' and then no one else really til Data at the end of the last movie, though, that wasn't quite the same thing as a brand new data was there to fill in. I don't think anyone of consequence in the TOS or TOS movies died either. Spock, doesn't count as he returned in the very next outing. Closest relevant death would be Kirk's kid but i'm not sure even that qualifies. Space is a dangerous place. The farther back you go (pre-TOS, or TOS era, or especially Enterprise era) is more dangerous. You could argue there's much more safety by the time of TNG, but not enough that only one person dies....and in a cheesy living tar pit or whatever it was. Massive attacks from the likes of the borg, and everyone gets through just fine.

 

[MrSouthpaw]

Yes, people will die if you put a giant window on a bridge on a spaceship.....:rolleyes

Really though, I could skip deathing-up Star Trek. This is not the early days of Starfleet, it's far past ENT on the timeline. It's only 10 years before Kirk Spock and the Enterprise. The rigors of space travel are well known to humanity at this point in the Trek timeline. A timeline they are just destroying.

And how much impact will each death have if Sense-Death Guy is just gonna tell us "Hey, Death is coming."...another in a long list of reasons why I don't like that character.

Also, due to a variety of reasons a main-cast member is not going to get killed off all that often. But crew members do get killed all the time, that's how "red-shirt" became a thing.

 

[Riceball]

Quick question here, have they actually defined what 10 years before Kirk even means? When you think of it, there's at least 3 ways that that statement could be interpreted, it could be 10 years before Kirk got command of the Enterprise, 10 years before Kirk joined Starfleet, or even 10 years before Kirk was even born; each interpretation pushes the timeline back and can help things (a little) depending on which interpretation they mean.

 

[CessnaDriver]

TOS always depicted risks, entire ships lost in the name of exploration, killing of Spock in the first season would have been disastrous for the show.

 

[Zombie_61]

Yes, people will die if you put a giant window on a bridge on a spaceship.....:rolleyes...

Not to mention putting the bridge right in the middle of the big round part of the ship like a bullseye on a target. :facepalm

 

[jlee562]

I honestly just think that the audience today has kinda gotten over the GoT style kill-offs. E.G. the massive drop off that TWD experienced post season six finale. The drop off has been about 4.5 million people since its peak. And of course the 11.3 mil the show still gets is more than respectable (downright admirable in this day and age), but killing characters off seems like a strange way to build viewership for a show that is going to be under a microscope. "Pay us to get emotionally invested in a character that won't be around next season! Won't it be fun to guess?!?"

 

[CessnaDriver]

Just make the new gay character your favorite. They wouldn't dare after making so much ado about it.

 

[AJTaliesen]

Spoiler alert: the show itself may be among the first casualties.

 

[dascoyne]

 

[jettajeffro]

"Star Trek Discovery Will Spark Debate and Adhere to Canon"

http://trekmovie.com/2017/07/06/ale...covery-will-spark-debate-and-adhere-to-canon/

 

[SmilingOtter]

Channeling Darmok....

Taylor on the beach, screaming and beating hands in the sand.

:thumbsup

:lol

 

[BlobVanDam]

"Star Trek Discovery Will Spark Debate and Adhere to Canon"

http://trekmovie.com/2017/07/06/ale...covery-will-spark-debate-and-adhere-to-canon/

While I wouldn't trust Alex Kurtzman's word on anything, even assuming that's somehow all true, that only accounts for the writer's room. It's already pretty clear that the design department ignored the memo. Either that, or we're getting canon semantics that would even make Enterprise blush.

 

[MrSouthpaw]

"Star Trek Discovery Will Spark Debate and Adhere to Canon"

http://trekmovie.com/2017/07/06/ale...covery-will-spark-debate-and-adhere-to-canon/

He rambles on like a politician trying to sound helpful, but saying nothing of actual substance.

It sounds like a nice system for respecting canon, continuity checks. But we all know there is no indication that they are doing anything like this.

 

[Sluis Van Shipyards]

At least Enterprise looked like a plausible first step. This show doesn't even look like they're trying to stay in the real ST universe!

 

[jettajeffro]

https://geektyrant.com/news/star-trek-discovery-hires-super-fans-to-fact-check-show-details

 

[SmilingOtter]

There's more to continuity and canon than just events.

It'd be funny if they were absolute purists, and were only shown the scripts - no storyboards, concept art or anything else visual... imagine the looks on their faces when they first saw the trailer.