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
Voyager lost me with the Q. The muskets were an allegory. You SAW musket as a representation of the actual Q weapons. Then they used Voyager to replicate more. And it worked. Proving that the only thing dumber than Voyager's captain was Voyager's writers.

Never watched another episode after that. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
 
I got All Access the cheaper version before watching cause I knew curiosity would get the better of me, it was cheap, and I can write it off on my taxes. I will cancel the hot second STD is done proving to them that their plot did not work as a gateway to watch crap CBS shows.

And if we're sharing our person Trek pitches--

I'd love to see an anthology series about one ship over a long stretch of time. Start in the TOS era with an exploratory adventure. Season 2 is the TOS movie era, with the JR officers from season 1 now as the senior staff. Season 3 jumps to the 24th century and the ship is pulled from mothballs and given a refit cause the Dominion War is in need of ships. Maybe there's a Vulcan on the crew, or somer other long-0lived species that can stay with it the entire time.
 
And if we're sharing our person Trek pitches--

I'd love to see an anthology series about one ship over a long stretch of time. Start in the TOS era with an exploratory adventure. Season 2 is the TOS movie era, with the JR officers from season 1 now as the senior staff. Season 3 jumps to the 24th century and the ship is pulled from mothballs and given a refit cause the Dominion War is in need of ships. Maybe there's a Vulcan on the crew, or somer other long-0lived species that can stay with it the entire time.


Fuller wanted to do an anthology that would have spanned the different eras but I guess it fell apart when he left:

https://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=249677&p=4288558&viewfull=1#post4288558
 
Last edited:
SethS
You're basically describing TOS > TOS movies. No need to do that again. No cast could outdo Shatner and co at demonstrating the march of time. They should stop anything 'in the past' anyways because it's just another form of prequel...at least until you get to a time after VOY.

I would still prefer they just do a straight up post-VOY Trek series. A ship stuffed with all that tech from Future Janeway, Borg, and Delta species. Galaxy-wide exploration. TNG/DS9/VOY crew all look the right age for cameos as the older version of their characters. No story restrictions, having to 'fit into' known timelines. Just a blank slate to tell new stories.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A friend of mine had an idea of a Trek show that was based on/in Starfleet Academy and was something of an anthology. His idea was that we would follow a class of Starfeet cadets as they would "study" historical lessons on the holodeck. Each episode or several episodes could be set in a different period with only the cadets, possibly the instructors, and the Academy sets the only continuing thing. So with each lesson you'd have the cadets taking on key roles in various famous (but not necessarily something we've seen) events throughout Starfleets history. The Academy format would allow the producers to change the whole cast out, if they wanted to, every few years or so by saying they graduated and introduce us to a new class. Likewise, if a cast member was let go or decided to leave then their character could be said to have graduated early or washed out, or whatever.
 
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.
 
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


Isn't true detective like this? Different cast/setting every year?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
@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.

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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"?
 
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:

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