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
So I watched...
The desert scene was dumb: "We must follow the Prime Directive" apparently by walking for miles out in the open while being watched, then using advanced weapons, calling in a spaceship and disappearing in a beam of light!
The Klingons are just... overly designed to the point where I can't tell individuals apart (aside from the random albino) and the prosthetic teeth make them all sound like they're talking with a mouth full of marbles. The subtitles might help, if not for the fact that they expect us to be reading them, and simultaneously listening to background dialogue and watching the rest of the scene. And the Klingons have cloaking? Not at this point in time they shouldn't. The whole thing with the coffins was weird.
A huge light and you can't do anything about it? maybe you shouldn't have windows for viewscreens! "Viewer off" ring a bell? How about shutters/bulkheads? All the ship designs are stupid, there's obvious JJ trek influence everywhere. You can't just throw in TOS bridge sounds (with TMP Red Alert for some reason) and claim continuity.
So Spock has an adopted sister we never heard about? Stealing ideas from Star Trek V is not the way to endear fans. Speaking of stealing ideas.. Is it just me or did it seem like we've seen at least 2/3 of this first story before? Orphan killed in alien raid, raised by another culture (Worf), long-dormant enemy re-appears (TOS:Balance of Terror, and TNG:The Neutral Zone). Let me do a solo space-walk, in my First Contact looking suit (that's TMP). First officer insubordination, locked up, escape and save the day? That's JJ trek and many more. Even the flashback to Vulcan school with the outcast child is Spock's own backstory. Then the 'coming up' teaser that has "Character sent off to prison, recruited for a mission" (so.. Star Trek Rogue One?) or the guy complaining about Starfleet not caring about the guys on the ground (not only seen in Mudd's Women, but also a large part of the fan-series, Intrepid)
Aaand the crew..... again with the aliens we never saw in TOS, TNG, DS9 or VOY. You want a blue guy on the bridge? There's Bolians. That 'sensing death' race... so stupid. And can someone tell me what Daft Punk is doing on the bridge?

I want to like it, but it's making all the same prequel mistakes as Enterprise. It would have been so easy to set a new series 50-100 years after the last TNG movie. Then you could fill it with all the new tech, aliens and political/diplomatic problems you want.
 
It's at least as good a start as TNG, DS9 and the other two, canon failures and plot holes not withstanding. 2017 audiences aren't going to pay to see velour, Ware Theiss underboob and crystal buttons no matter where it stands in the timeline. It's a Sci Fi show made to to entertain not to become a new religion. Yes the Orville is Star Trek Lite this is Star Trek Heavy and dark but both seem very watchable.
And what was with the Daft Punk crewman?


As a purist of sort, I don't need strict adherence by any means. Simply make it looks like it fits. That can leave a lot of leeway.
I like to use the example of the American musclecars now, many are inspired directly by the original designs, they are recognizable.
A Camaro or Mustang today are the sixties designs brought forward to great success.
 
Its kinda neutral, not really bad, not really good. Why is she called Michael? The holograms annoyed me, not just because they are a century too soon, but that they walk around and lean on things in a room they are not in. If we only see one person as the hologram why do they seem to get a whole room so that they have complete spacial awareness? Does their holographic room create solid walls they can lean on?
 
You whine about me going on a soapbox when I respond to your questions. You whine when I don't give your nonsensical thoughts any consideration (saying a fictional character is an example of a literary trope = mixed race people are sad....WTF?!). You whine when I try to engage you off the public board because you want a safe space with "neutral language."

Just put me on ignore then.

Let's say I cribbed the whole thing from Women At Warp...So what? I'm not ashamed of learning new concepts every day. That's why I listen to Mission Log and Women at Warp, so I can find new meanings in Trek and learn from other people's perspectives. It's more like their article jogged my film school memory, but that's neither here nor there. Nor does it have any bearing on the validity of the argument.

I find it very interesting that you're so consumed by an argument that we'd all moved on from, and that you're still googling it even though you acted like you understood it enough to deny it.

Using a small connection to Trek in order to expand your argument to social progressive commentary is not appropriate. It's not really about Trek at that point, it's just using Trek to preach about your social or political beliefs. Considering the last time you railed on about how you wanted your conversation about feminism. One would think you would be eager to begin a topic about your beliefs.

Falsely claiming someone lacks reading comprehension so you can ignore their post is not "consideration"....it's a cop-out.

You sent me an insult PM. Telling you to stop PMing me is a justified response.

Copy-pasting arguments sort of shows you aren't really aren't doing any careful consideration of what you're reading. You failed to address my points about the wiki list and instead decided to claim I couldn't read because you couldn't address the points raised.

Now that I discovered the source of your argument you're trying to cop-out again and act like you've moved on. Just so you can try and insult me again as "consumed" when I'm really just answering you post for post.

I have no problem debating, when people want to communicate like adults. But you seem to want to resort to insults no matter what. You did it before, you're doing it now. I think you should take your own advice and hit that ignore button if you can't control yourself.
 
Using a small connection to Trek in order to expand your argument to social progressive commentary is not appropriate. It's not really about Trek at that point, it's just using Trek to preach about your social or political beliefs. Considering the last time you railed on about how you wanted your conversation about feminism. One would think you would be eager to begin a topic about your beliefs.

Falsely claiming someone lacks reading comprehension so you can ignore their post is not "consideration"....it's a cop-out.

If this is off topic and doesn't belong in the thread - I shouldn't be discussing it anyways. Why do you keep pressing the issue if it's not at all relevant?

I have, in fact, presented evidence that you have poor reading comprehension. Not the least of which is pointing out the absurdity of your jumping to the conclusion that pointing out the use of a literary trope somehow makes a judgement on the mental status of all mixed ethnicity people.

More explicitly, twice now you have repeatedly misstated my positions as the exact opposite of what I have written.
1)
I say:
Some of those identities already are. They're just under served. I don't think Trek "needs" to tell those stories, but when they do, I'd like them to do better.
LGBTQIA is a checklist of groups you want served. So, yes. You do want Trek to fill your alphabet quota. Gene died very shortly after making that promise. Stop dancing on his grave.


LGBTQIA is actually just what the acronym is. Not a checklist. I explicitly said it was not a checklist multiple times. Yet here we are.
2)
Source quote:
The tragic mulatto is a stereotypical fictional character that appeared in American literature during the 19th and 20th centuries, from the 1840s.[1] The "tragic mulatto" is an archetypical mixed-race person (a "mulatto"), who is assumed to be sad, or even suicidal, because they fail to completely fit in the "white world" or the "black world".[1] As such, the "tragic mulatto" is depicted as the victim of the society in society divided by race, where there is no place for one who is neither completely "black" nor "white". This trope was also used by abolitionists in order to create a mixed-race, but white-appearing, slave that would serve as a tool to express sentimentality to white readers in an effort to paint slaves as "more human"
(bold added for emphasis)
You:
According to your own reference a "Tragic Mulatto" must be sad or depressed, or possibly even suicidal concerning their mixed-race heritage.

Not the discrepancy between "assumed to be" and "must be" which changes the meaning, as well as noting that the source of the conflict is between the individual and society, not an internal struggle with one's heritage.

3)
Nobody thinks there should be a literal quota. That's not what's being said.
Tell you what, exactly how much alt-lifestyle should there be? Say in a cast of 10 characters. How many should be alt and how often should they display that trait?


You sent me an insult PM. Telling you to stop PMing me is a justified response.
Right, I gave you your safe space away from the horribly sexist word "mansplaining."

I didn't respond to your posts in this thread or others after that. I didn't PM again. You're the one who wanted to come after my opinion and blow it up on the forum.

Copy-pasting arguments sort of shows you aren't really aren't doing any careful consideration of what you're reading. You failed to address my points about the wiki list and instead decided to claim I couldn't read because you couldn't address the points raised.

Because your point about the wiki list is dumb and nobody in their right mind would think that concluding that mixed race people are sad is the logical extension of Spock being included as a representative of a trope.

But since you insist on being proven wrong publicly, I'm going to use what someone else wrote in this thread to demonstrate the point about the trope.
I find that very unrealistic. Even during Spock's time, his being half-human was extremely frowned upon, only his father being an ambassador gave him any credence. They didn't want to let Spock into the science academy because he wasn't full-blooded Vulcan. Somehow, having human, any human, being taken seriously and given a Vulcan upbringing makes no sense at all.

The Vulcans frowned upon his half human heritage. Gee, that seems as if he fits in neither the "human world" or the "Vulcan world" completely and that the show derives some narrative conflict from that.

Now that I discovered the source of your argument you're trying to cop-out again and act like you've moved on. Just so you can try and insult me again as "consumed" when I'm really just answering you post for post.

I have no problem debating, when people want to communicate like adults. But you seem to want to resort to insults no matter what. You did it before, you're doing it now. I think you should take your own advice and hit that ignore button if you can't control yourself.

Dude, we're all talking about Discovery now. You're the one that keeps dragging it up.
 
Apparently it started early here so dvr only caught the second half. which... For a show you're counting on to bring subscribers counts as malpractice.

Of the half I saw... Quite a few major issues, but honestly it was ok enough that I'd probably give it at least another episode or two to pull me in if it was free.

Didn't suck me in enough to subscribe though.
 
The Vulcans frowned upon his half human heritage. Gee, that seems as if he fits in neither the "human world" or the "Vulcan world" completely and that the show derives some narrative conflict from that.

Except they're not, at least so far, and I can't see how they would. She's not living among the Vulcans. In fact, it seems like her entire Vulcan training was pointless because she walked out of the academy, right into Starfleet where she lies, betrays her captain, tries to mutiny and this is supposed to be the character we're rooting for? Seriously? Why have her be attached to Vulcan at all? Why have her be attached to Spock at all? It makes no sense.
 
Watched it with my 14-year old son. We both didn't care for it..

Opening scenes with Captain and Number 1 was plain clunky, as we're most their scenes together. No chemistry. Drawing a Starfleet symbol in the sand to get rescued? Really?

I couldn't get past the re-imagining of the Klingons. I wanted to like them but just could not...

Will NOT be subscribing to CBS to watch show.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Vivek, can we have a poll attached to this thread inquiring as to how many members signed up for CBS All Access AFTER watching the premiere episode on network television, and how many signed up prior? Just curious, and I think others may be as well.

What I am reading around the web, including Reddit and even the Star Trek Reddit is mixed at best. Seems pretty split down the middle on fan reactions from praise to utter disgust on episode one. Also, from the majority of what I read, most are refusing to subscribe to All Access.

I have no intention of payng for All Acess, and if CBS thought the episode they aired in any way enticed fans on the edge of joining, or new fans who never watched Trek...I think they failed.

Curious to see how "taking a knee" to support the NFL protest will impact the show going forward. I won't get political, but I will say as a veteran...sure it's your right, but there are better ways to protest rather than showing utter contempt and disrespect for your country. There is nothing brave about taking a knee. End rant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be interested in a subscribed before/after poll, although it would be misleading. Brian already said he subscribed before, but liked the episode so probably would've subscribed after if he hadn't. Maybe if you had all three options to choose from? Before, after, never. I'd even include a... "Would probably watch if it were free."
 
Last edited:
Except they're not, at least so far, and I can't see how they would. She's not living among the Vulcans. In fact, it seems like her entire Vulcan training was pointless because she walked out of the academy, right into Starfleet where she lies, betrays her captain, tries to mutiny and this is supposed to be the character we're rooting for? Seriously? Why have her be attached to Vulcan at all? Why have her be attached to Spock at all? It makes no sense.

Clarification: I was quoting you on Spock "being frowned upon" for being half human, and how that demonstrates that his character is an example of the trope. I didn't mean to imply anything about Michael. Though I agree with your assessment of her character so far. The depiction of exactly how much Vulcan influence she has in her thinking was wildly uneven (notwithstanding the fact that there were flashbacks and we expect some natural progression).

Tying her to Sarek is totally unnecessary and feels like it exists only to tie it to TOS in the laziest of ways.
 
Clarification: I was quoting you on Spock "being frowned upon" for being half human, and how that demonstrates that his character is an example of the trope. I didn't mean to imply anything about Michael. Though I agree with your assessment of her character so far. The depiction of exactly how much Vulcan influence she has in her thinking was wildly uneven (notwithstanding the fact that there were flashbacks and we expect some natural progression).

Tying her to Sarek is totally unnecessary and feels like it exists only to tie it to TOS in the laziest of ways.

Well, Vulcans have always seemed a little "racist" to me anyhow, at least in the sense that they don't seem particularly happy to have humans (or presumably other non-Vulcans) participating in their ceremonies, etc. Everything from Amok Time to Star Trek III, whenever humans get involved, they seem a bit stand-offish, like they're looking down their noses at humanity and doing it under protest. A lot of that comes from Roddenberry's clear humanocentric views, that humanity has to go out and save the universe from itself, but that's just how Vulcans have appeared to me, when when watching TOS in first run.

But yes, anything having to do with Sarek in this series is just a cheap ploy to appeal to traditional Trek fans.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd be interested in a subscribed before/after poll, although it would be misleading. Brian already said he subscribed before, but liked the episode so probably would've subscribed after if he hadn't. Maybe if you had all three options to choose from? Before, after, never. I'd even include a... "Would probably watch if it were free."

I didn't and won't. Granted, I wouldn't no matter how good Discovery was, simply because I disagree with the whole business plan, but after seeing it, there's no chance in hell.

- - - Updated - - -

Watched it with my 14-year old son. We both didn't care for it..

Opening scenes with Captain and Number 1 was plain clunky, as we're most their scenes together. No chemistry. Drawing a Starfleet symbol in the sand to get rescued? Really?

I couldn't get past the re-imagining of the Klingons. I wanted to like them but just could not...

Will NOT be subscribing to CBS to watch show.

It was just dumb. If you want to get in without being seen by the natives, you do not wander through their village and then make weird markings on the ground, you get beamed in right next to the well, do your thing in 30 seconds and get beamed out again in the dead of night. And if the ship can't detect their signal through the storm, how the heck are they going to see this giant symbol on the ground?
 
I haven't watched the next episode, was planning to tonight. Yes, the pilot was trying to be a hook but that means some drama and a cliff hanger, not n ideal opportunity to showcase character development. Im going to be curious to see what the tone of the show is by the fourth or fifth episode. I agree fans will be reluctant to sign up but if the show finds some vocal support there is plenty of opportunities for CBS to see subscription growth over the next few months. That's the beauty of this kind of service, it's not one and done, it's perpetual.
 
I'd be interested in a subscribed before/after poll, although it would be misleading. Brian already said he subscribed before, but liked the episode so probably would've subscribed after if he hadn't. Maybe if you had all three options to choose from? Before, after, never. I'd even include a... "Would probably watch if it were free."

Another option, how many cancelled after the first show?
 

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