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
Another option, how many cancelled after the first show?

Well, likely no one as it was on CBS broadcast. And if you have a free week you will likely hang on the watch the next two episodes.

- - - Updated - - -

I didn't watch it, I didn't intend to watch it, and showing the Federation ship firing the machine gun phasers of the JJ verse definitely makes me not want to watch it!

Its ALL JJ verse. But once you accept that it's actually a really good prequel to the '09 film.
 
The whole roll-out of this series has been one blunder after the other. And now we have the show itself......

The intro was horrible. Schematics and some hands reaching out for each other? Forgettable music that is book ended by music from TOS? How about a ship flying through space and you show it near stuff like planets and nebula, etc with some uplifting music that makes you think of exploration.

Others have already ravaged the Desert scene enough. Just ridiculous and poorly thought out. The aliens knew they were there the whole time. They didn't come back until the pair had left.

What are they doing with Green's character? She kind of jumps back and forward from Vulcan to Human. Not sure what's going on here. I keep wanting to compare her to Sybok from ST5.

I really don't like Sense-Death Guy. I hate the stilt-look. How did this guy get into starfleet? Shouldn't his race be afraid to go into space? The whole "I want to leave, instead of explore." thing is gonna get really old fast for people who actually paid to see rest.

The rest of the characters were bland.

The guy playing Sarek looked like he was keeping his eyes only half-open the whole time. Voice just wasn't right.

One of the bridge crew looks just like Lobot.

And I think another bridge crew had a robot head with some screens in it. Did they have to wait another generation for Soong to crack artificial faces?

The Klingons were a mess. The overdone mouth prosthetics made them all sound terrible. The over-designed elements of everything completely counters the notion of austere warriors who take no part in comfort or fancy things.

Lens-flare everywhere....of course.

The pacing was a bit too slow.

Overall, I was not impressed. I have no reason to pay CBS $6 a month for this. If it comes to Netflix I would watch it then.
 
Did you guys only get episode 1? I was able to watch the first two...
Yeah, anyone who hasn't subscribed to CBS All Abscess got to see only the first episode.

I found the first episode interesting enough to make me want to see more, but not enough to pay for that privilege. If this were being broadcast on their network channel I'd watch, but unless All Abscess fails and they air it there or move it to Netflix, that first episode is all I have to go on. I don't at all like the Klingon designs--WAYYY too heavy-handed with the makeup and costumes--but I thought they got the Klingon attitude right. Other than that, it didn't at all feel like Star Trek to me. Some of the trappings were there (sound effects in the "Bridge" scenes, for example), but for me it confirmed the people responsible for producing this don't really understand what makes Trek special. I'm not sure I do either, to be honest, but I'm not trying to convince people that I do.
 
Regarding the opening desert scene in the first episode...

If this is the rebooted universe, and they were trying not to violate the Prime Directive by being seen....

Why didn't they do what they always do in the Kelvin timeline and hide the entire Starship on the planet somewhere?

Couldn't they have buried the entire Starship in the sands of the desert?

:facepalm :wacko

Boy..it almost writes itself!
 
So did every lead character in the JJ verse wind up on the latest, greatest ship in the fleet by getting thrown in the brig? First Kirk, now Michael, how original, how inspiring.

Yep. And supposedly she is being imprisoned for life as a consequence of her attempted mutiny in episode 2. I don't think "for life" means what they think it means.
 
Haven't seen it yet, but I am looking forward to it. Despite the overwhelming negative reaction here, it's doing pretty well on social sites - including Rotten Tomatoes.
 
Well I saw both episodes and I have to say that Iiked it much more than I expected to, with the caveat that I still can't get over the hyper-Klingon look. I loved that their dialog was almost exclusively in Klingon, I loved the references to Kayless and Stov-a-Kor, the deathcry and all. They really projected how different Klingons are. But the makeup and costumes were just way too over the top to keep continuity with what we know as Klingons, and I'm just not OK with that.

I thought the acting, music and sets were well done. The character of Michael was excellently portrayed, and I want to find out more about who she is and why Sarek is involved with her life. The Science Officer guy was ok, but I would have preferred if he had been an Andorian or Telerite or some already known species. I agree....way to JJTrek/StarWars/Lensflarey! I'm also skeptical about all the holograph projections which seem completely unnecessary.

I have a few more minor gripes, but overall, I think that I will like this. But it only skims the surface of what I regard as Star Trek.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I watched Part One of the Pilot and thought it was well produced, with a lot of money thrown at the project (at least for the Pilot, which is just a gigantic teaser) and a cast that was what you would expect for a show today. What I object to is stopping the episode dead and telling the potential viewers of the series that they have to pay to see any more episodes! As much as I'd like to see another ST that might be good, I'm sorry, but Homey don't play Network Blackmail. No thanks!
 
Yep. And supposedly she is being imprisoned for life as a consequence of her attempted mutiny in episode 2. I don't think "for life" means what they think it means.

We already know it doesn't, they showed a "This Season on Discovery" thing at the end of the second episode and showed her getting out of it and onto the Discovery. Spoilers, anyone?

- - - Updated - - -

Haven't seen it yet, but I am looking forward to it. Despite the overwhelming negative reaction here, it's doing pretty well on social sites - including Rotten Tomatoes.

Where people are probably being paid to post positive reviews.
 
I enjoyed it and will watch more. We have it on Netflix in Australia so I just get it as part of my regular subscription so it costs me nothing extra to watch it. As for the Klingons, well I am not that attached to them as a race to care about the changes but I can see the objections people have.
Then again, I just binge watched Enterprise for the first time on Netflix and actually like that far more than I expected. Maybe my tastes are changing as I get older....

Cheers

Tony
 
We already know it doesn't, they showed a "This Season on Discovery" thing at the end of the second episode and showed her getting out of it and onto the Discovery. Spoilers, anyone?

- - - Updated - - -
Not sure if serious. :confused. I was being sarcastic, and spoilers are everywhere in this thread anyway.


Where people are probably being paid to post positive reviews.

Correct:cheers
 
Where people are probably being paid to post positive reviews.
I'm fairly certain that my social media friends aren't being paid to post positive reviews. CBS All Access also had it's biggest day for sign-ups (which probably isn't saying much).
And there are plenty of legitimate, reputable, sites out there giving it positive marks. Of course, we can discount anyone and anything by making broad accusations with no basis in fact.

The reviews give me hope. Mostly because most of them aren't whiny fanboys mired down in 50 years in continuity who can't face fact that times have changed. While it's great to respect the old Trek, there has to be a reasonable amount of letting go of it. Trust, me I don't like the change in the Klingons, either - but, they sure changed from TOS to the movie series. I think the Discovery is butt ugly - but, it probably fits the TOS style more than anything else we've seen in the show.

I didn't watch TOS first run, I wasn't alive - but, I remember watching reruns with huge enthusiasm - I remember talking with my uncle about the series as a kid. I saw all the movies first run and loved and hated them to varying degrees. Sunday at noon was TNG as a kid... I gave DS9 and Voyager all a shot, but they didn't keep my interest. I'm not sure if I saw a full episode of Enterprise. JJ Trek had its moments - but, like many - I wanted more of what made Star Trek, Star Trek - but, there was still plenty to enjoy.

I'm at the point where I want a Star Trek series to watch and enjoy again. The emblems don't have to spot on, the canon doesn't have to match perfectly - I don't care if it's Prime or JJ, I just want something good and wondrous. It doesn't need to be mired down by so much fanboy nonsense that we're more worried about stilly details rather than the big picture.

I'm glad the reviews I've seen have been mostly positive. I've seen one or two come across my feed that even went and subscribed... maybe I will, too. I need more sci fi television. This and The Orville (which I have a strong like/hate relationship with) can fill that need for me. I'm crossing my fingers and I'm not gonna let some Alex Jones type ruin anything for me by spouting conspiracy theories.
 
My hypothesis on why the Klingons look different.


Strap yourselves in, because it also involves T'Kuvma's entire "'We come in peace' is a lie" spiel.


The humans, specifically Archer, had a habit of meddling in Klingon affairs, ostensibly for the greater good at the time, but still... they're meddlesome.


One of the outgrowths of Starfleet meddling was Arik Soong's reactivation of the Augment program, which led the Klingons to experiment with it themselves, leading to the Augment virus that threatened the entire Klingon race, but was halted by Phlox at the expense of the Klingon head ridges. This could have been extrapolated out as the humans trying to destroy the Klingon way of life by removing that which readily identified them as Klingon, instead making them look more human. To a warrior race steeped in tradition and honor, this would be a major blow at the very heart of the Klingon Empire. This explains the "Remain Klingon" statement used by T'Kuvma to rally the Great Houses together.


Now, this part is pure speculation, but I'm willing to bet that in the intervening century between Enterprise and Discovery, the Klingons fractured because of disagreements on what to do, and while they were debating, they engaged on a eugenics program of their own to try and separate the Augment DNA from their own DNA by hyperstimulating traditional Klingon DNA, which would explain why they all look more like genetic throwbacks than the Klingons we all know.
 
Setting aside continuity problems, the new Klingon faces, while intersting in still photos, actually seem less believable and less articulate than TNG/DS9 Klingons. The prosthetics seem way too thick and don’t move in a natural way.

Also, I found it unnecessary for them to speak Klingon the whole time. The series has already established for decades that aliens speak their own language and the audience hears English. There’s no real upside to abandoning that convention after the heavy lifting has already been done to establish it.


And, since I’m started...front windows are idiotic in a ship that can go light speed. Most of the time there would be misleading. Not to mention that your field of concern is going to be well beyond eye visual range. That’s why you have viewscreens.

also, sympathetic vibrations doesn’t work the same in space. Is the ship vibrating in sympathy with a “loud” subspace signal?

And how does the Vulcan neck pinch work for a human? I always thought the in universe explanation was that Vulcans are capable of releasing small energy through their fingers? This isn’t the first Trek to stray from that, I think both TNG and DS9 ignores that as well, but it’s a bit silly. Pinching people in the neck doesn’t really cause that to happen.


and, is Lt. Kirk on the Farragut during this?
 
And how does the Vulcan neck pinch work for a human? I always thought the in universe explanation was that Vulcans are capable of releasing small energy through their fingers? This isn’t the first Trek to stray from that, I think both TNG and DS9 ignores that as well, but it’s a bit silly. Pinching people in the neck doesn’t really cause that to happen.

I think it's less about "energy" and more about knowing exactly where to pinch as well as having the strength to do it. Vulcan strength (approximately 3x that of humans thanks to higher gravity) could render someone unconscious for hours. McCoy, despite knowing exactly where to pinch (thank you medical knowledge and Spock rattling in his head), could not pull it off because he was an older human. His strength was just not up to the task. Plus, aside from that one mention, the "energy" explanation was pretty much discarded.

Burnham, on the other hand, had spent most of her life on Vulcan, exposed to their gravity, which forced her body to grow stronger just to move around. In an Earth normal gravity, she should exhibit more strength than a human her size and build should have. Unfortunately, it wasn't up to par with Vulcan strength, which explains why the neck pinch only worked for a few minutes.

and, is Lt. Kirk on the Farragut during this?

Most likely, yes.
 
Unless this is the Kelvin-verse, which honestly, makes a lot more sense, in which case Kirk is off somewhere failing up toward joining Starfleet.

The reviews give me hope. Mostly because most of them aren't whiny fanboys mired down in 50 years in continuity who can't face fact that times have changed. While it's great to respect the old Trek, there has to be a reasonable amount of letting go of it. Trust, me I don't like the change in the Klingons, either - but, they sure changed from TOS to the movie series. I think the Discovery is butt ugly - but, it probably fits the TOS style more than anything else we've seen in the show.

This.
 
Is it being a whiny fan boy to be upset at the focus on darkness/war? When Trek (right there in the title) is about a journey of driving curiosity to the stars?
Don't you get enough of that in ten million other franchises?
Sure have some fights now and then, I enjoy it, but it should only serve as obstacles to the driving mission of exploration, to boldy go, seek out new life, etc. That IS the mission statement of Star Trek.
I just don't get it. I will never get it. This is perversion of Trek.
 
I only became a Trek fan shortly before ST'09 came out, and this show is still an insult to the prime universe and its fans imo. Previous Trek series managed to respect the past. Even Enterprise comes out looking rosy compared to this.
The basic point is, they shouldn't claim it's prime universe and then give us something that's absolutely not. Don't set a show in an era if you have no intention of honoring it. They could have set it post-Nemesis/Voyager and had none of these issues. If you don't want to respect the universe, don't play in it.
Besides all of that, this show misses the point of Star Trek at its very core.
 
Besides all of that, this show misses the point of Star Trek at its very core.

Is it being a whiny fan boy to be upset at the focus on darkness/war? When Trek (right there in the title) is about a journey of driving curiosity to the stars?
Don't you get enough of that in ten million other franchises?
Sure have some fights now and then, I enjoy it, but it should only serve as obstacles to the driving mission of exploration, to boldy go, seek out new life, etc. That IS the mission statement of Star Trek.
I just don't get it. I will never get it. This is perversion of Trek.

I won't answer for JD, but here's my take.

I don't disagree with you on what Trek should be about. I'd love stories that got back to exploration-- but I think it's myopic to say that's the ONLY thing Trek was about and that this is a perversion. On the surface, in a literal sense, yes, most of TOS and TNG was about exploration. BUT-- thematically, narratively, and tonally, Trek was social commentary. That commentary was hidden inside adventure stories to avoid being pedantic. TOS and TNG used the concepts of finding alien races with issues to mirror issues happening during the times the show aired.

While problems (like racism and sexism) unfortunately don't go away, times do change, and how we as a media-consuming society take in those stories also changes. I've said in the Orville thread that the main reason I like it is because it emulates the TNG model so well. But there's a reason Trek died with Enterprise-- that model got tired, and it didn't evolve. You can't be socially relevant and not keep your narrative keeping with the times.

The Battlestar Galactica remake basically proved this. Social commentary coming in the form of made up aliens with silly names and foreheads just wasn't cutting it. We can attack the grimdark desires of Hollywood for sure-- but when I saw BSG and heard Ron Moore say it was everything Trek wouldn't let him do, that made sense. It was no longer the cold war and civil rights movement era of the TOS, or the fall of Communism and peace-mongering of the TNG 80s/90s -- we were fighting the war on terror, we were a nation that was now rocketing down the road of being split into to strongly opposing party lines that leads to where we are now. BSG told scifi stories about what it meant to be human, just like Trek, but it did it through parallels to the Iraq war, terrorism, etc. It was fitting to the era it aired.

Back to fanboys-- the hardcore fandom that I find annoying and bothersome are the types who look at Star Trek in a literal way, and seem to only want more of the same thing. There's plenty of fanboy in me that doesn't like uneven warp-nacelled ships, or a human doing a nerve-pinch, or using the wrong insignia, or giving a 23rd century ship an OPS bridge position-- but that's just the details. And while attention to detail and unified concepts is one of the things that made old school Trek great, it's just set-dressing for a bigger concept. I have a lot of problems with fandom in general now (see my rant in the Harry Knowles thread), but there's people in this thread who decided months ago this show sucked and they would hate it because it was clearly not the same thing that they liked. And it comes out, and big shocker, they hate it. And even bigger shocker, I bet they'll keep posting here week after week complaining about a show they hate, that they continue to watch.

But again-- it's that literal take on Star Trek that defines what the show should be to them that I take issue with. As much as I love all the details, to me, the core of Star Trek is being social commentary hidden inside a sci-fi adventure that promotes unity. That is the important part... and HOW that core conceit is told HAS to be something that changes with time.

Could they do that with more exploration and production design that's keeping with continuity-- sure. Is Discovery going to pull that off? Too early to fairly tell.

But just because they change things up to an unfamiliar place doesn't mean the show should be damned before it even airs. I'm not requiring anybody to like it. I'm a life long Trekkie and I despise Voyager. But to incessantly whine and bitch about Discovery being wrong just because it's not what you expected it to be is... well-- valid if you really don't like it. But hardcore fandom does that negging at such an extreme level to the point of shutting down people who disagree.

I like Discovery, I post as much, and the response is not "That's your opinion, here's mine." It's me being quoted and told NO WRONG NOW LISTEN TO MY TRUTH WHICH IS THE ONLY TRUTH. And I think that's crap.
 

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