Star Trek: Discovery (2017)

How are you watching Star Trek: Discovery?

  • Signed up for CBS All Access before watching the premiere

    Votes: 13 9.1%
  • Signed up for CBS All Access after watching the premiere

    Votes: 13 9.1%
  • Not signing up, but will watch if it's available for free

    Votes: 82 57.3%
  • On Netflix (Non-US viewer)

    Votes: 35 24.5%

  • Total voters
    143
Nothing says seek out new life and new civilizations, exploring in the name of peace and advancing the human condition.
DARK DARK DARK EXPLOSIONS WAR WAR WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eff you CBS Eff you Moonves. I hope this bombs bad. And I swear I'm hearing the SJW speeches in there already.

The problem is, if it does bomb, and it should, they will most likely go "See we knew a new ST show couldn't survive." and use that as an excuse to never put ST on tv again.
 
As I often say in threads regarding STAR WARS, sometimes franchises move into different directions and leave older fans behind in an effort to create a new fan base.
That was what the 2009 Trek reboot movie was supposed to be for--creating a newer, younger fan base. I haven't done the research, but I'm not sure they succeeded.

The problem is, if it does bomb, and it should, they will most likely go "See we knew a new ST show couldn't survive." and use that as an excuse to never put ST on tv again.
I think that's the issue--Discovery isn't on TV...unless you pay extra for it, that is. If CBS were to air this on their "already in place and perfectly watchable" broadcast network I think people would be more willing to give it a chance. But a lot of people, myself included, aren't willing to throw away more of their hard-earned money to watch something that looks so questionable.
 
The problem is, if it does bomb, and it should, they will most likely go "See we knew a new ST show couldn't survive." and use that as an excuse to never put ST on tv again.
One could debate this forever and a day. There are many reasons - one of them is pretty evident in this thread.
 
I think the '09 film did but they lost that good will with Into Darkness.
Agreed, it is odd that if viewed in a vacuum the different Treks variants can be considered decent-ish.

Yet, I made the mistake of watching ST Beyond, followed by The Motion Picture, then season one of Enterprise. And, I just can't watch new trek. It just comes across as flash, bang, noise.

Wrath of Khan has always been my favorite ST movie but I discovered a new appreciation for TMP and realized that the old sense of joy, discovery and wonder has gone out of the ST universe for me.
 
Yep. Lectroids have bigger eyes, but that's about right.

I've been meaning to ask this, but I probably won't like the answer: any idea why someone carved a Starfleet arrowhead shape onto a planet's surface?
 
Yeah I know there are lots of reasons for it, but it does suck Trek get's stomped on so badly compared to it.

I suspect if SW only fans had to suffer what Trek series fans have they would be just as freaked out.

Star Wars isn't set in different times (hundreds of years apart). It's not 'our' world. If you've got hyperspace, your tech isn't going to go too much farther in 30 years or even 100 years. SW just needs to stick to itself, which the OT and ST have done and are doing. Now, if you recall, there were a lot of people who bashed the prequels over tech and design not fitting within the framework when the prequels were released. The difference is that SW then went forward and matched the level of the OT whereas trek jumps all over and pushed the tech of the theorectical 'OT' to well beyond that of TNG or even voyager which tends to then stick out like a sore thumb. I think they'd have all been fine if they stuck with the STTMP enterprise tech level as the 'OT' timeframe and went from there, but they just can't seem to help themselves.
 
Star Wars isn't set in different times (hundreds of years apart). It's not 'our' world. If you've got hyperspace, your tech isn't going to go too much farther in 30 years or even 100 years. SW just needs to stick to itself, which the OT and ST have done and are doing. Now, if you recall, there were a lot of people who bashed the prequels over tech and design not fitting within the framework when the prequels were released. The difference is that SW then went forward and matched the level of the OT whereas trek jumps all over and pushed the tech of the theorectical 'OT' to well beyond that of TNG or even voyager which tends to then stick out like a sore thumb. I think they'd have all been fine if they stuck with the STTMP enterprise tech level as the 'OT' timeframe and went from there, but they just can't seem to help themselves.

That's a really interesting observation. Yes, original cast film trilogy took pains to remain within a believable universe context as far as technology. TNG also held true to that in universe time line but Voyager tossed that out for really advanced tech to drive stories.
 
I assume it's like when a dog marks it's territory by peeing in a bush. Same thing here but to claim the planet.

That seems like the kind of intrusive thing the Klingons might do, not the Federation.

Maybe some Federation member gets stuck on the planet without a working communicator and "phasers" the insignia shape to indicate their location. Although, it looks pretty big... I suppose that would take awhile to make with a hand phaser.
 
Last edited:
That's a really interesting observation. Yes, original cast film trilogy took pains to remain within a believable universe context as far as technology. TNG also held true to that in universe time line but Voyager tossed that out for really advanced tech to drive stories.

But again, it was trek trying to stay ahead of modern day. It wasn't hard at all to set a level for TNG. DS9 largely adhered because it was on like 3-4 years later. Voyager, OTOH, started like 10 years after TNG. Possibly more. A lot changed in that time in regards to our technology. A lot. At that point some of the TNG tech looks a bit dated and to try and stay ahead of today's tech curve they pushed it. And finally, the same thing occurred with Enterprise.. You start up a show post Voyager, and again, the tech jumped in our world. Whatever they come up needs to look believable.to the modern audience.

I get both sides. I can see trying to reign it in for consistency, but you'll have people watch and in the room saying 'yeah, but my phone does that'. Think TOS right now. Or even TNG. Think of of the medical tri-corder. Now...my phone cannot do everything it did, but go back 10 years and it's rather amazing that my phone can do heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen level and i think temperature. So, basing it our own history and timeline, you do kinda-sorta-hafta adjust the tech as you go. That's why going forward works out easily enough and backwards, well, not so much.
 
...I can see trying to reign it in for consistency, but you'll have people watch and in the room saying 'yeah, but my phone does that'. Think TOS right now. Or even TNG. Think of of the medical tri-corder. Now...my phone cannot do everything it did, but go back 10 years and it's rather amazing that my phone can do heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen level and i think temperature. So, basing it our own history and timeline, you do kinda-sorta-hafta adjust the tech as you go. That's why going forward works out easily enough and backwards, well, not so much.
Valid point. Even the people who produced the original series didn't quite push some of the technology far enough. 300 years in our future, and they're still using "tapes" to record and physically transmit data? Of course, we know computers were nowhere near as common in the 60s as they are today, so they couldn't conceive of things being recorded digitally only 40-50 years in their future.

On the other hand, cell phones vs. Communicators? Sure, cell phones can do many things, but without functioning towers and satellites they're pretty much useless as communication devices. Transporters and Warp Drive? We aren't even close. Maybe, someday, not yet. But then, entertainment media that tries to predict the future of humankind almost never gets it right. Assuming we survive, life 300 years in our future would be as unrecognizable to us as our current lives would be to someone from the early-1700s, so they have to make compromises in order to make our future "familiar" in some way.
 
There's a happy medium somewhere between TOS and 2017. The new phaser seems to be well liked, no? I dig it, it's got that "familiar but different" vibe going on. IMHO, the JJTrek uniforms are a good middle ground too (that may be a contentious opinion).

I just can't get over the new Klingons though. They barely even look connected to the JJverse, much less the Prime canon. And I don't even hate the "overly" ornate detailing as much as some. It's just not Klingon. I keep thinking back to Chang and Gorkon. Those were new costumes, but they looked Klingon. Even with Chang's smaller ridges, he still looked like a Klingon.

I dunno who these new guys are though! Tbh, it would bother me way less if they used all this stuff on a new alien species that magically never gets heard from again in the canon.
 
I'm of the "It's an alternate universe version of the TREK universe!", much like I thought about the Abrams' films. Otherwise, I'll overthink just about every detail and make myself crazy trying to mentally 'correct' everything.....
 
Maybe I just have a unimaginative blind spot for Trek, but what I actually want is a very simple comparatively boring and unoriginal idea.

After Nemesis, real time so that next gen characters age with the actors for cameos. But new ship, New crew, same old idea.

I never thought I'd see the day, but I think Hollywood might finally be too creative for me.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top