September 24th, 2017: CBS Television will premiere the newest Star Trek series, Discovery, at 8:30 PM Central Standard Time (US). Live long and prosper.

6 years ago

Comment has been collapsed.

Ugh. I meant to make a hype thread for this, but didn't get the free time to do so.
Well, haven't had a chance to watch it yet, either..
I just hope it doesn't make the mistakes of Enterprise, or go with an approach similar to the over-the-top, action-driven style of the Kelvin universe.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I loved it.

Trek pilots haven't been that great traditionally, but these (treating the two episodes as a single pilot) were strong.

We still have a lot of characters to meet - only a few of the main cast were in the episodes, and we haven't even gone onboard the titular ship yet - but the pending conflict with the Klingons and the foreshadowed tension between Lorca and Burnham should be interesting.

I really hope it does well; it's been too long since Trek was on TV.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

My thoughts, just expressed elsewhere:I hate the aesthetics., I hate the lens flare/dutch angles, I hate the changes to established canon (although there are opportunities to fix some of them) I hate the lack of military protocol/discipline (feels very 21st century thumbing-nose-at-authority teevee). The acting is spotty, a lot of the characters grate on me (If any Lt.Commander had given that much lip to their XO in any other ST series they'd have their ass hauled to their quarters and rightly so! WTF?)
However...I am hoping it gets better. I hated Enterprise at first too.

There are going to be some things I will not get over, like the fact that everything looks way more technologically-advanced than even DS9/VOY era and that the bloody warp nacelles for some reason went from cylindrical to rectangular and then back within 10 years.

I mean, it's not like any Star Trek tv show that has come before;at least TNG through VOY were consistent with uniforms, tech, ship designs, and overall aesthetics. Enterprise did look newer but that's primarily due to the advances in video technology, and their coveralls/"wet-navy ship in space" aesthetic for NX-O1 and early Starfleet made sense.

I hope the massive changes to Klingon culture and phenotype and ship design make sense eventually. I did love that all their dialogue was in Klingon, finally. And they did the death scream, which literally everyone I was watching with (viewing party) collectively leaned forward with anticipation and sat back, nodding satisfactorily.EVEN IF IT'S ESTABLISHED IN A SEASON 1 EP OF TNG THAT KLINGONS CONSIDER THE DEAD BODY AN EMPTY VESSEL AND DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM!

As for the main character...she's certainly being set up to be a Mary Sue.I also feel like she suffers from bad writing.Like her spiel about "discovery", it felt shoehorned in there so Kurtzman could say "See? We included that for you trekkies. Now stfu nerds so we can show BIG ASSPLOSIONS! PEWPEW!"

6 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1.
They are spitting on canon and also on common sense the Sarek hologram has a seat on the desk and the holographic subspace communication didn't exist until DS9

6 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

EVEN IF IT'S ESTABLISHED IN A SEASON 1 EP OF TNG THAT KLINGONS CONSIDER THE DEAD BODY AN EMPTY VESSEL AND DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM!

Actually, the Discovery episodes do offer an explanation for that. T'Kuvma had a whole scene explaining that, with a line along the sentiments of 'Yes, the warrior who dies in bed is an empty vessel, of only flesh and blood. But the warrior who dies on the battlefield is blessed.' Add in his obsession with collecting bodies that none of the other Klingon houses appeared to share, and it gives the strong impression that it was his own personal variation to the belief. Hence, one can assume that the death scream was less to send off a dying warrior (as per the established norm), and more his own ship's way of acknowledging a lost warrior.

At the very least, that works well enough to explain that matter. Far more eye-roll-worthy was all the great houses (but one) signing off so readily to having a new emperor. Please. Canon clearly establishes that the great houses can't ever agree on anything, and don't yield to anyone without cause. There's no justification as to why T'Kuvma was worth yielding to like that- certainly, he didn't do anything particularly charismatic. Unless it's a parallel for the Trump election (play off the most shallow elements of bigotry and say nothing of substance), I can't follow the rationale.

Unfortunately, the two episodes combined to form the content of a single episode of another series. The rest felt like tech filler, or the art team patting itself on the back without concern to the effects on the plot flow.

But yeah; The show seems to be taking the cinematic approach to things- shiny offerings with some cool moments, but which leave you with an empty feeling afterward. There's some cool plot potential hinted at, but the fact that that entices me more than anything in the original two episodes isn't a positive sign for the series actually being able to pull those plot points off in a satisfactory way.

The show really could go either way at this point- which is an unfortunate way to start a series we've been waiting on for so long.

6 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Please be kind enough to do as I did and use spoiler tags where appropriate, hoss.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Didn't realize you'd intended that section to be a spoiler (rather than a tangent), given that all of this was revealed in the trailers beforehand. Certainly, I'm obsessive enough about spoilers that I wouldn't ever reveal anything intentionally, but it's a bit hard telling what's actually a spoiler here.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Seems I don't need to watch it (expected that)

hate the aesthetics.,

due to Paramount's alternative license

hate the lens flare/dutch angles

JJ's shit company at it

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

JJ's shit company at it

Lol no, just the the snap-bang nonsense due to the short attention span of millenials here.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I, for one, love JJ's take. At least the first one.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Second one wasn't too bad either, no?

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Oo yeah, with Cumberbach? That one was dope too.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yeah. And hey, the last few ST movies before were just some wannabe action flicks anyways, JJ did this part right at least.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What bothered me the most was the lack of creativity. I mean really? No contact with the Klingons for 100 years until now? Did they steal that from Battlestar Galactica (both series) when the Cylons came back...

But overall, it wasn't bad. Just not sure whether I think it's all that good either. Always hard to tell where something is going from just the Pilot though. I thought TNG started awfully stiff and it got much better by the 2nd season.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No contact with the Klingons for 100 years until now? Did they steal that from Battlestar Galactica (both series) when the Cylons came back...

No, they stole that from the Romulans, in both TOS and TNG. In Balance of Terror, there had been no contact with the Romulans in a century. In the Neutral Zone, there had been no contact in over 50 years.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This is not Star Trek.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I just finished watching episode's 1 and 2 and its not bad its better then what i expected, only thing i don't like is the women in charge everything else is logical...

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I could have lived with "I don't like that woman in charge".
But "only thing i don't like is the women in charge. everything else is logical..."? Ouch.
If you are serious about that, Star Trek was never meant for you.

6 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I have no way of knowing what Necro actually ment but just going by the phrasing I would assume they ment they do not like both women in charge otherwise they would have said they don't like (the fact) that there are two women in charge.

Honestly I'm getting so sick of all this BS :(

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The "everything else is logical" part emphasizes that it was most likely a misogynist statement. A lot.
Sad that people still have such a mindset. That they mind strong women in Star Trek, out of all shows, is almost hilarious though.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Not sure if he really minds them being women, he probably just dislikes the two characters?

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Why would he then claim that everything else is "logical"? The only part that can be "illogical" in his context, is that women are in command.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No idea, was just a wild guess. Sometimes meaning is really lost in translation.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Lemme guess you're a woman...if your looking for something wrong with what i said then you have problems...btw i know star trek since its beginning...im not insulting anyone, just saying i don't think its "right/logical" that its always woman in charge...(everything white male is now considered racist/sexist)...

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Not a woman. And I don't think that you were insulting, just that the quality of your communication skill is quite ... underwhelming. And that your statement seemed misogynistic, they way you presented it.
Considering your follow up, it doesn't seem that I was all wrong. With both assumptions.

Not that I really care, but maybe you might want to reveal us how and where you see "always woman in charge"?
And no worries, you'll see plenty enough men in STD in higher positions.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So I get it , i'm a retard and you have no life...

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Meh. I never liked Star Trek but decided to give Discovery a go because it's on Netflix & there is fuck all worth watching on it anyway. It thought it was okay. I'll probably continue to watch it as filler when I have no horror movies or crime documentaries to watch(Still half way through the Forensic Files collection!).

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If you wanna see Star Trek, go watch "The Orville" - Discovery was kinda disappointing :/

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

LOL Orville is ridiculous and stupid, effects are nice doh...

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

A bit stupid indeed, but it does get better with episode 2 and 3. Feels more like Star Trek than Discovery does.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Ya i watched Orville up to ep.3 and i like it for sure its crazy ass humor from Seth MacFarlane is always ridiculous and stupid
but that's his style...its good but Star Trek is also good compared to most of todays crap...

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 3 years ago.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Converstions on bridge are just stupid... +comedy doesnt fit here...

Gave it a chance, but still disapointed... thats ST for the meme generation...

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Still after 3 episodes it's the Michael Burnham show.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 4 years ago by Khazadson.