Poll: How are you watching Star Trek: Discovery?

Subscribe
  1. BenCozine's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2012
    Messages
    175
    1 Week Ago  Oct 6, 2017, 7:41 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1751

    NeoRutty said: View Post
    think the term you're looking for is "inclusive".

    I believe the point of Star Trek's future is that people of different races and genders aren't captains or engineers or doctors because it's PC, but because we've moved past the stupid crap that leads to our current problem of inequality.

    So maybe stop worrying about it being "PC" and enjoy a future where two women of different ethnicities are in charge of a ship without question.
    Star Trek TOS was very "inclusive" and that was a huge part of why it was so amazing and lasting.



    PS. Please do not feel like you have the right to read into my opinions and attempt to shame or judge me because of what you think or feel, your feelings and opinions are on you, I am very offended at your personal attack and judgement on me.
  2. astroboy's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2010
    Messages
    4,508
    1 Week Ago  Oct 6, 2017, 7:48 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1752

    glunark said: View Post
    And heroes was suposed to have a new cast every year, stuff like that never lives past the writing stage.
    Isn't true detective like this? Different cast/setting every year?

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  3. RPF Premium Member
    Member Since
    Aug 2002
    From
    Launch Bay Alpha
    Messages
    12,765
    1 Week Ago  Oct 6, 2017, 9:25 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1753

    Yep Season 3 is greenlit as well.

    Time will only tell if Nic P. can bring it back to the greatness of the first season, as the Second season was awful


    astroboy said: View Post
    Isn't true detective like this? Different cast/setting every year?

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  4. SethS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2016
    From
    Los Angeles
    Messages
    1,635
    1 Week Ago  Oct 6, 2017, 10:47 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1754

    MrSouthpaw said: View Post
    @SethS
    You're basically describing TOS > TOS movies. No need to do that again.
    Not quite. More like if you had the TOS for one story, then jumped to the movie era with say Chekov for another story, the lowest ranking member, now in command. Then you jump to the 24th century and Chekov came to help with the refit but got pulled in on one more mission. There'd be some over-arching story for all 3 eras... and it wouldn't actually be Chekov.

    But saying you can't do it because you can't top Kirk and co is an argument against everything post TOD, so that makes no sense.

    astroboy said: View Post
    Isn't true detective like this? Different cast/setting every year?

    Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
    Also American Horror Story, American Crime Story, Fargo, Fued... season-long anthologies are gaining steam.
  5. RPF Premium Member NeoRutty's Avatar
    Member Since
    Feb 2013
    From
    Vancouver, BC. Canada
    Messages
    3,863
    1 Week Ago  Oct 7, 2017, 12:59 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1755

    BenCozine said: View Post
    Star Trek TOS was very "inclusive" and that was a huge part of why it was so amazing and lasting.



    PS. Please do not feel like you have the right to read into my opinions and attempt to shame or judge me because of what you think or feel, your feelings and opinions are on you, I am very offended at your personal attack and judgement on me.
    Please don't feel like you have the right to read into my opinions of your opinions to guilt me because of what that made you feel.

    That said, if by "the PC is strong in this one" is your reasoning for it potentially NOT being poor, and wasn't meant as a negative, then I apologize.
  6. Member Since
    Oct 2014
    From
    WA state
    Messages
    1,750
    1 Week Ago  Oct 7, 2017, 1:35 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1756

    SethS said: View Post
    Not quite. More like if you had the TOS for one story, then jumped to the movie era with say Chekov for another story, the lowest ranking member, now in command. Then you jump to the 24th century and Chekov came to help with the refit but got pulled in on one more mission. There'd be some over-arching story for all 3 eras... and it wouldn't actually be Chekov.

    But saying you can't do it because you can't top Kirk and co is an argument against everything post TOD, so that makes no sense.



    Also American Horror Story, American Crime Story, Fargo, Fued... season-long anthologies are gaining steam.
    It's close enough that Trek doesn't need to do it again in a single series. We saw Kirk interact with former Captain's crew including Spock, command the ship himself with that crew member, and nearly pass the refit off to Decker. We also saw Sulu get his own ship. Which, imo, actually makes more sense for an anthology as the new ship model demonstrates the new era.

    If it "makes no sense" it's only because you've grossly misquoted what I said. I never said "you can't top Kirk and co".

    I actually said Shatner and Co., referring to the real life performers. And I said you couldn't top how they demonstrated the march of time. Which you chose to cut out of the quote for some reason. We see these people play the parts when young, age, play the parts older, and even interact with newer younger crews, including TNG itself. We see those younger crews go on their own adventures. I really don't think anyone is going to outdo that in a single series.

    Maybe Trek shouldn't aspire to be another "me too" anthology. That's the kind of unoriginal thinking that caused STD to become another "me too" prequel.
  7. SethS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2016
    From
    Los Angeles
    Messages
    1,635
    1 Week Ago  Oct 7, 2017, 2:38 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1757

    MrSouthpaw said: View Post
    It's close enough that Trek doesn't need to do it again in a single series. We saw Kirk interact with former Captain's crew including Spock, command the ship himself with that crew member, and nearly pass the refit off to Decker. We also saw Sulu get his own ship. Which, imo, actually makes more sense for an anthology as the new ship model demonstrates the new era.

    If it "makes no sense" it's only because you've grossly misquoted what I said. I never said "you can't top Kirk and co".

    I actually said Shatner and Co., referring to the real life performers. And I said you couldn't top how they demonstrated the march of time. Which you chose to cut out of the quote for some reason. We see these people play the parts when young, age, play the parts older, and even interact with newer younger crews, including TNG itself. We see those younger crews go on their own adventures. I really don't think anyone is going to outdo that in a single series.

    Maybe Trek shouldn't aspire to be another "me too" anthology. That's the kind of unoriginal thinking that caused STD to become another "me too" prequel.
    I accidentally clipped your quote. Settle down and stop acting like I am calling out your IQ and taste or something.

    You're missing the point of my idea-- but I'm admittedly describing it in a very simple sense, so that's surprising. Wasn't really the point of the thread so I didn't go deep. Not that it really matters. I'm not going to waste time defending a germ of an idea I have against some angry internet dude over a giant IP property that only a small handful of people will ever get to touch.

    But this is representative of the general Trek problem, and Discovery.

    Try a new spin on something old, Trek fans lose their minds. Do something completely different, and they cry about it. Do something not different enough and they complain. There is no way to please every fan.

    You can't even post a simple opinion or idea with out some Treklier than thou fanboy telling you that you are wrong because you don't share their exact opinion. It's all over this thread. Trekkies aren't as bad as Whovians, but they are easily in the top 5 worst fandoms when it comes to online discussions.

    I foolishly thought since the prop forums were full of fun cool people maybe the rest of the site was too-- clearly not the case.
  8. Member Since
    Oct 2014
    From
    WA state
    Messages
    1,750
    1 Week Ago  Oct 7, 2017, 1:29 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1758

    SethS said: View Post
    I accidentally clipped your quote. Settle down and stop acting like I am calling out your IQ and taste or something.

    You're missing the point of my idea-- but I'm admittedly describing it in a very simple sense, so that's surprising. Wasn't really the point of the thread so I didn't go deep. Not that it really matters. I'm not going to waste time defending a germ of an idea I have against some angry internet dude over a giant IP property that only a small handful of people will ever get to touch.

    But this is representative of the general Trek problem, and Discovery.

    Try a new spin on something old, Trek fans lose their minds. Do something completely different, and they cry about it. Do something not different enough and they complain. There is no way to please every fan.

    You can't even post a simple opinion or idea with out some Treklier than thou fanboy telling you that you are wrong because you don't share their exact opinion. It's all over this thread. Trekkies aren't as bad as Whovians, but they are easily in the top 5 worst fandoms when it comes to online discussions.

    I foolishly thought since the prop forums were full of fun cool people maybe the rest of the site was too-- clearly not the case.
    Not once have I directed any criticism toward you as a person. But you have about 4-5 insult/implications in this post. I think you're the one who needs to "settle down".

    Your idea is easy to understand. I just think it has points to critique. Mostly the fact that Trek itself, all the series, is already basically one giant anthology showing the progress of time from Archer to Janeway. Why do we want to revisit several eras in a single show?

    Maybe they should make good Trek shows and stop trying to appeal to people with cheap gimmicks and "new spin" ideas. As far as different, fans liked DS9 well enough. It's cited as having some of the best episodes, and is probably about as different as a Trek show could be from the others.

    I never said your idea was "wrong". I basically said we already saw it.

    Considering your post, how you're over-generalizing Trek fans in a negative way, do you think you meet your own definition of "cool people"?
  9. SethS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2016
    From
    Los Angeles
    Messages
    1,635
    1 Week Ago  Oct 7, 2017, 3:22 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1759

    Cool people? I have no idea what you're talking about. Regardless of your intent, I thought you were rude and I certainly met that in kind. Either way, this is a giant waste of time and off-topic so I'm dropping it as of now.
    Last edited by SethS; 1 Week Ago at 3:27 PM.
  10. Axlotl's Avatar
    Member Since
    May 2001
    Messages
    2,327
    1 Week Ago  Oct 7, 2017, 4:59 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1760

    Star Trek: Discovery.

    Dividing Star Trek fans since 2017.
  11. PotionMistress's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jul 2011
    From
    Midwest USA
    Messages
    1,344
    1 Week Ago  Oct 8, 2017, 10:47 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1761

    Fourth episode in and some of the high hopes that I was beginning to feel are already waning. I’m not even sure where to begin, but the more I see of this, the more alienated I am feeling. I know so many have said this, but this just isn’t Trek. This is more like Space Wars Galactica. It’s somber, it’s brutal, the characters are all morose and unlikable, it’s disjointed and flashy and there’s barely anything in it at all that can be associated with what was Trek.

    While I like hearing a little of the Klingon language, I’m already sick of having to read their entire dialog. If I wanted to read a TV show, I’d buy the book. Plus, the Klingons don’t even act like Klingons. A coy female Klingon? I don’t think so. Don’t they have universal translators in this time? Couldn’t we be hearing their dialog through one for artistic license and ease of viewing?

    Torturing creatures seems to be this crews’ pastime. This is beyond anything that any crew of an Enterprise in any timeline would do. Even in war.

    Would it be so difficult to throw in at least one small morsal of something familiar....a crew member of a species we already know, or a prop that can be referenced in one of the other series? Would it be that hard or expensive to do to give Trek lovers something to cling to? Jeez.

    And that sappy last-second save of some outpost was pathetic.

    The special effects are well done, granted....it's a high-tech ship...I get it. But it shouldn't be better than the script or the characters. Putting glitter on a turd doesn't make for good art.

    Ugh! I’m out of thoughts right now. Sigh!
    Maybe I just need to see a few more episodes.
    Last edited by PotionMistress; 1 Week Ago at 11:01 PM.
  12. RPF Premium Member CessnaDriver's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2005
    Messages
    9,541
    1 Week Ago  Oct 8, 2017, 10:59 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1762

    PotionMistress said: View Post
    Fourth episode in and some of the high hopes that I was beginning to feel are already waning. I’m not even sure where to begin, but the more I see of this, the more alienated I am feeling. I know so many have said this, but this just isn’t Trek. This is more like Space Wars Galactica. It’s somber, it’s brutal, the characters are all morose and unlikable, it’s disjointed and flashy and there’s barely anything in it at all that can be associated with what was Trek.

    While I like hearing a little of the Klingon language, I’m already sick of having to read their entire dialog. If I wanted to read a TV show, I’d buy the book. Plus, the Klingons don’t even act like Klingons. A coy female Klingon? I don’t think so. Don’t they have universal translators in this time? Couldn’t we be hearing their dialog through one for artistic license and ease of viewing?

    Torturing creatures seems to be this crews’ pastime. This is beyond anything that any crew of an Enterprise in any timeline would do. Even in war.

    And that sappy last-second save of some outpost was pathetic.

    The special effects are well done...it's a high-tech ship...I get it. But putting glitter on a turd doesn't make good art.

    Ugh! I’m out of thoughts right now. Sigh!
    Maybe I just need to see a few more episodes.

    Well, I commend you for giving it a chance, I couldn't bring myself to, getting too old to be open minded. LOL
    I guess it's good it is clearly not fitting in with all the past TV series, I would have gotten sucked in. That would make it even harder to deal with all this war war kill kill stuff.
  13. RPF Premium Member Cameron's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2010
    From
    Irvine California
    Messages
    1,165
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 12:35 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1763

    This last episode and the new "drive" would be beautifully served in a future post TNG Trek series. I am now thinking that would have been a fantastic use of this series. Replace the Klingons with a new interstellar enemy and let everything else pretty much remain the same. I am still enjoying it on a few levels but the things they could do with this if it was future Trek could be amazing. I think Id be ok if this ship got time jumped into the future into an uncharted area of space as well. Now that would be a very interesting twist.
  14. robn1's Avatar
    Member Since
    Aug 2007
    From
    Woodbridge, VA
    Messages
    6,418
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 2:38 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1764

    PotionMistress said: View Post
    ...Torturing creatures seems to be this crews’ pastime. This is beyond anything that any crew of an Enterprise in any timeline would do. Even in war...
    This whole plot point feels like it's lifted from Voyager's "Equinox".


    PotionMistress said: View Post
    ...Would it be so difficult to throw in at least one small morsal of something familiar....a crew member of a species we already know...
    They have several humans.
  15. DavidS's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2005
    From
    South East
    Messages
    1,352
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 4:03 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1765

    Spore drive...........


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  16. 8 perf's Avatar
    Member Since
    Mar 2002
    From
    Leland, NC
    Messages
    651
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 5:42 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1766

    PotionMistress said: View Post


    Would it be so difficult to throw in at least one small morsal of something familiar....a crew member of a species we already know, or a prop that can be referenced in one of the other series? Would it be that hard or expensive to do to give Trek lovers something to cling to? Jeez.
    As I understand it, Harry Mudd figures prominently in 5 upcoming episodes.
  17. BlobVanDam's Avatar
    Member Since
    Dec 2011
    From
    Sydney, Australia
    Messages
    778
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 7:54 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1767

    I thought the idea of a spore drive was silly, but a spore drive that can only be successfully navigated by a giant tardigrade monster?

    IMO this is not only bad Trek, and not only bad scifi, but bad television in general. The only character I find remotely likable is Doug Jones' character, and that's because it's hard not to like Doug Jones. A lot of the contrived drama comes from making every character act like a jerk to each other with every interaction, to the point that it's hard to care about what happens to any of them. The Klingon scenes are tedious to sit through, with all of the subtitles, and slow empty dialogue. I just don't care. If not for the connection to previous Trek, what reason do I have to care about any of these people?
    I find the whole show poorly written, and derivative. It's like they tried to throw a whole bunch of popular shows into a blender, and not one of those was actually Star Trek.

    But even if I disregard that this has anything to do with TOS era, even if I disregard this has anything to do with Trek, I'm genuinely struggling to find any entertainment value in this show whatsoever on its own merits.
  18. Bryancd's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2002
    From
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Messages
    7,619
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 8:48 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1768

    The Tardigen/Spore drive screams Navigator/Spice.
  19. Member Since
    Jun 2008
    From
    Northern England,UK
    Messages
    1,811
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 8:49 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1769

    The 3T's

    Truely Terrible Trek.

    I thought the opening pilot was hugely problematic with the most moronic decisions I'd ever witnessed in the Star Trek universe ,but no, I actually think this one out did it.
    But before I get to that I do get it. What they are trying to do with the series , making it a kind of dark space version of "Game of Thrones" with lots of treachery and conflict amoungst the ranks of Klingons and humans alike ( and a cast member killed rather bloodily every week) because thats what will make it all edgy and thrilling and get fans posting praise for it on multimedia.

    No it won't. Not a chance in hell.

    What will really amaze people and get them talking is just how idiotically stupid just about every concept and character decison is in this series.
    Spore drives???? A f***ing bunch of fruiting mushroom allows instantaneous travel to anywhere in the galaxy ???!!!!!!! NO. Not in this universe, or yours or anyboby elses unless they are doing some serious things with other sorts of illegal mushrooms that allow you to think that concept is cool. Dune rip off.

    Where the head in charge of security ,who has already seen the creature destroy the sister ship, horrifically slaughtering people and klingons alike and by tearing through hull metal like its tisue paper (and incidentally calls it the "RIPPER" ) then decides to speed up research by ******* saying she will sedate it first BUT DOESNT WAIT TO SEE IF THAT HAS ACTUALLY WORKED before openning up the containment pen ????!!!

    I actually cheered when she died.

    And then MIcheal frightens it back into containment by turning up the lights?

    Then opens it up again so she can release the spores rather than beaming them in? (they can after all beam the creature directly into the spore forest ). AND they then decide to just copy the exact same proceedure that got everybody killed the first time on the other ship by plugging the creature into a brightly lit spore containerroom where its impailed on spikes without changing a single thing that I could see?

    And Starfleet ,at a time of war ,leaves its dilithium mines undefended by any starships?

    And what the hell was the captains strategy at the end? The " let the people rush out into the flaming debris field because I fought directly over them " maneuver.

    Everything about this series is already like a mirrorverse of a traditional Star Trek.It contradicts just about every value and concept that most people who like and love Trek respect.
    It is also contains some of the most infantile and pathetic attempts at writing emotional beats I have ever seen in a series. Listening how they try to explain these decisions away in the "After Trek" almost has me throwing things at the screen). I despise just about everything they have done with this series (including the Klingons new dietary habits).
    This is not Star Trek.
    And how the *****ng hell did they manage to get the TELESCOPE off the wreck so it can be sent to MIcheal and yet still leave it floating there so the Klingons can study Starfleet tech???
    Last edited by CutThumb; 1 Week Ago at 8:55 AM.
  20. Angelus Lupus's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 2010
    From
    Kent, UK
    Messages
    2,328
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 9:06 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1770

    As others have said, I could easily forgive 60, maybe 70 percent of the look/feel of this if they'd set it ~75 years after the last TNG film. Voyager's return, and all the scientific data they brought, plus natural advances in tech? Throw in the changed political climate after the Dominion, Romulan/Reman, Klingon in-fighting stuff... It woulda made a lot more sense.
    It really needs (needed) to be said, repeatedly to the producers: If you want to show us new stuff, don't make it a prequel unless you've got a very specific time-period to slot it in. Even then you're probably looking a a mini-series or special. 10 or so years ago you could have done the adventures of the Enterprise B, or the C. Before Enterprise fans were repeatedly asking for a Captain Sulu series. Between the TOS movies and TNG is a much more 'grey' area to set something... especially if you had the Ent-B, or, more likely, Ent-C patrolling the Beta Quadrant. Also, it would be far easier to make minor updates to the late-movie/early-TNG sets ad still keep the look. Flat, touch-screens where they had translights and monitors/green-screen and it wouldn't even look that different.
  21. RPF Premium Member The Mad Professor's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2012
    From
    Tampa Bay Area, FL
    Messages
    6,951
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 9:37 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1771

    I truly hope the saucer section is uninhabited, because "Activate Spore Drive Sick Spins Fidget Spinner Mode" seems like it was designed specifically to keep the janitorial staff busy as hell. I hope they have a damned good inertial dampening system in that thing because otherwise, anyone in there is gonna wind up as chunky salsa smeared on the outer bulkheads. But hey, it LOOKS cool, so screw it.

    Another point: Real smart, Starfleet. Make an integral part of the drive mechanism look just like the one section of a Federation starship that is targeted most often because it has the biggest profile.

    Also, making the Klingons eat Georgiou? Dick move, writers. Dick move.
  22. Member Since
    Jun 2008
    From
    Rocky Point, NY
    Messages
    2,290
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 10:13 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1772

    CutThumb said: View Post
    The 3T's

    Truely Terrible Trek.

    I thought the opening pilot was hugely problematic with the most moronic decisions I'd ever witnessed in the Star Trek universe ,but no, I actually think this one out did it.
    But before I get to that I do get it. What they are trying to do with the series , making it a kind of dark space version of "Game of Thrones" with lots of treachery and conflict amoungst the ranks of Klingons and humans alike ( and a cast member killed rather bloodily every week) because thats what will make it all edgy and thrilling and get fans posting praise for it on multimedia.
    Early on one of the producers, I think it was Gretchen Berg, said how much they all admired GOT and I just knew we were going to get GOT in space and it seems like that is coming to pass.

    They really need to get rid of the sub-titles. You spend all of your time trying to read the dialog and miss what is happening on the screen. They sometimes don't even give you enough time to read it before they show the next line.

    Don't get me started on the spore drive.
  23. Member Since
    Jun 2008
    From
    Rocky Point, NY
    Messages
    2,290
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 10:16 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1773

    We need another option added to the poll.

    People who have signed up but have cancelled/planning to cancel because they don't like what they have seen so far.
  24. RPF Premium Member The Mad Professor's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 2012
    From
    Tampa Bay Area, FL
    Messages
    6,951
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 11:15 AM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1774

  25. Mola Rob's Avatar
    Member Since
    Apr 2005
    From
    Beyond the fringe.
    Messages
    1,903
    1 Week Ago  Oct 9, 2017, 12:17 PM - Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017) #1775

    As soon as the Klingon frog people appeared and started their blah blah blah poo, blah poo blah poo blah I shut it off, these Klingon's are lifeless and they drain what little energy the show has when they're on screen.

    Also, I'm not going to waste my time watching a Trek series that's so idiotic that it has a spore drive that can send the ship to any point in the universe at any time. Sounds like a dumber version of the blink drive from Dark Matter, actually the show looks kind of like Dark Matter as well, only not as interesting.

Similar Threads

  1. Star Wars Celebration 2017--Orlando, FL
    superjedi, Conventions and Prop Parties
    Replies: 205
    Last Post: Apr 24, 2017, 4:52 PM
  2. Discovery Museum NYC Star Wars Exhibit--Blaster Prop Question
    kitbasher, Star Wars Costumes and Props
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Dec 6, 2015, 10:37 AM
  3. Star Wars Greeblie Discovery Thread
    SofaKing01, Star Wars Costumes and Props
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Jul 25, 2014, 7:41 AM
  4. Star Trek & Star Trek: Into Darkness... To Tour With Live Orchestras
    The Mad Professor, Entertainment and Movie Talk
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Apr 15, 2014, 6:23 PM
  5. Star Trek Movies, As Ranked By Star Trek Con-Goers
    Vivek, Entertainment and Movie Talk
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: Aug 13, 2013, 11:07 AM