Star Trek Discovery
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
I find the number of posts declaring that the new series is a disaster, that they have made all the same mistakes as in the past etc, absolutely mind blowing. How can anyone write the series off before it's even been made, based on one trailer featuring only an unfinished CGI ship? We just need to wait and see what it's like. I love speculation, and I think people who are concerned about the series are as entitled to their views as anyone else, but it's where judgements have already been made on almost zero evidence that bothers me.
Personally, I'm looking forward to the series very much and I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy it. I'm one of those who was hoping it would be prime timeline, so I'm happy about that. My choice would be something set after the end of Voyager, perhaps well after the end, but I'm open minded to any other timeframe.
Then again, if I could make any trek series, I'd start a new timeline and make something that started around the end of DS9, with the Dominion winning the war. It would follow the transformation of the remnants of the Federation into an organised resistance force, and explore the possibilities of a Dominion puppet government installed on Earth. Doubt that'd be very popular, but there you are.
Personally, I'm looking forward to the series very much and I'm pretty sure I'll enjoy it. I'm one of those who was hoping it would be prime timeline, so I'm happy about that. My choice would be something set after the end of Voyager, perhaps well after the end, but I'm open minded to any other timeframe.
Then again, if I could make any trek series, I'd start a new timeline and make something that started around the end of DS9, with the Dominion winning the war. It would follow the transformation of the remnants of the Federation into an organised resistance force, and explore the possibilities of a Dominion puppet government installed on Earth. Doubt that'd be very popular, but there you are.
This is the modus operandi, standard operating procedure, for hardcore Trekkies.
I watched a YouTube analysis of Discovery this morning. The reviewer had extrapolated the entire premise of the series from a 30 second CGI teaser, that was rushed out to put in front of fans at SDCC. I shouldn't be surprised at this after all these years, but it still amazes me that people can fill in blanks and connect dots that aren't there yet.
It doesn't really matter to me what they do with the new series, as long as they confound the preview prognosticators.
In fairness, the predictions are based on more than a 'thirty second teaser'. The ship depicted, and the likely time period are relevant concerns from that trailer, but that's not all we have. We have also learnt that it will be prime timeline, likely feature 'familiar faces' at some point, is largely being written/run by Trek alumni and the show runner has done little but fanboy the hell out of old Trek in public since getting the job.
I will not write off the show, nor announce that I shan't watch it, or be generally dramatic about it. I will watch it whatever we learn between now and January, and I will be going in ready to love it. But that doesn't mean the things we've learnt and seen so far aren't, if I'm brutally honest, a little disappointing. I was very excited by the prospect of the new show, especially after Beyond and instead of the trickle of information developing and building on that, I'm instead having to try to keep my excitement alive by telling myself "could still be good, could still be good, we don't know much yet, could still be good". That's a shame. And it isn't an unacceptable feeling either.
I will not write off the show, nor announce that I shan't watch it, or be generally dramatic about it. I will watch it whatever we learn between now and January, and I will be going in ready to love it. But that doesn't mean the things we've learnt and seen so far aren't, if I'm brutally honest, a little disappointing. I was very excited by the prospect of the new show, especially after Beyond and instead of the trickle of information developing and building on that, I'm instead having to try to keep my excitement alive by telling myself "could still be good, could still be good, we don't know much yet, could still be good". That's a shame. And it isn't an unacceptable feeling either.
All that is "onscreen" is the teaser. The rest is just talk. Anything can and probably will change between now and January.
I can't wait for the next teaser. The predictions will be entertaining.
Those are your views and concerns, which are fair enough, it's the factual declarations that the show will be terrible that are starting to annoy me.
Oh no, because it all hinged on you being happy. Darn.
Ha, ha, something like that, yeah!
What? No love for Colonel West and his assurances that Klingon chronometers can be cleaned?
Last edited:
Colonel West preceded Odo. If you want to look for stunt casting in TUC, try Dorn.What? No love for Colonel West and his assurances that Klingon chronometers can be cleaned?
I knew that of course. I suppose my point was, I love how Star Trek actors sometimes appear before the role they most become associated with too. Because fans watch over and over, even discover Star Trek in completely the wrong order too, the squee can sometimes be non-linear.Colonel West preceded Odo. If you want to look for stunt casting in TUC, try Dorn.
Wouldn't object to Jeffrey Combs or Michael Dorn finally playing a role sans make-up. And virtually any major cast regular who more recognisably played a human, in some deep and heavy.
Last edited:
Ah. So you're saying (in jest) that Odo is the actual stunt casting?
Now you come to mention it, funny how you never see that extended edition of Star Trek VI no more.Ah. So you're saying (in jest) that Odo is the actual stunt casting?
Proof of time-travel is being covered up.
Why do Trekkies seem to hate other Trek fans/alumni so much?
Setting it in the Kelvin timeline wouldn't have solved anything. The three new films have shown that they're not able to truly differentiate the two universes from each other. In ST09, we got Leonard Nimoy and about a million TOS references. In STID, we got Khan, Carol Marcus, Klingons, more Leonard Nimoy, numerous references and scenes ripped straight out of Wrath of Khan as well as more TOS references. In STB, we got a whole bunch of ENT, a five-year mission, the Enterprise-A, even more Leonard Nimoy, footage of the original cast, and even more TOS references. The Kelvin timeline isn't the solution to all of old Trek's problems, it's old Trek disguised in a new skin. It feels like wasted potential to be quite honest.
Maybe the best option would have been to create a whole new third universe with no strings attached and no nonsense exposition trying to make it comprehensible, just reboot everything and don't try to appease to nostalgia and old Trek while also trying to do new stuff, maybe they should have done that, but they didn't.
I'm very excited we're going Prime rather than Kelvin. Writing decides the quality of a show, not the timeline or setting.
Last edited:
You should have seen the cinematic dissection of the Star Wars Episode 7 first trailer. Rather hilarious and nitpicky.This is the modus operandi, standard operating procedure, for hardcore Trekkies.
I watched a YouTube analysis of Discovery this morning. The reviewer had extrapolated the entire premise of the series from a 30 second CGI teaser, that was rushed out to put in front of fans at SDCC. I shouldn't be surprised at this after all these years, but it still amazes me that people can fill in blanks and connect dots that aren't there yet.
It doesn't really matter to me what they do with the new series, as long as they confound the preview prognosticators.
So, if I follow your argument correctly, you would like Kelvin timeline if was less like TOS?Why do Trekkies seem to hate other Trek fans/alumni so much?
Setting it in the Kelvin timeline wouldn't have solved anything. The three new films have shown that they're not able to truly differentiate the two universes from each other. In ST09, we got Leonard Nimoy and about a million TOS references. In STID, we got Khan, Carol Marcus, Klingons, more Leonard Nimoy, numerous references and scenes ripped straight out of Wrath of Khan as well as more TOS references. In STB, we got a whole bunch of ENT, a five-year mission, the Enterprise-A, even more Leonard Nimoy, footage of the original cast, and even more TOS references. The Kelvin timeline isn't the solution to all of old Trek's problems, it's old Trek disguised in a new skin. It feels like wasted potential to be quite honest.
Maybe the best option would have been to create a whole new third universe with no strings attached and no nonsense exposition trying to make it comprehensible, just reboot everything and don't try to appease to nostalgia and old Trek while also trying to do new stuff, maybe they should have done that, but they didn't.
I'm very excited we're going Prime rather than Kelvin. Writing decides the quality of a show, not the timeline or setting.
At least with BEY it felt like it was taking the characters on their own journey rather than just apping plot points. But, the fact of the matter is, these films will constantly be judged as to whether or not they are "worthy" to be called "Star Trek." It's like those measuring sticks at the fair for rides-must have this many references, Shakespeare quotes and speeches to be a Star Trek movie.
Don't recall saying I 'hated' anyone.Why do Trekkies seem to hate other Trek fans/alumni so much?
Trek was on TV from 1987-2005. It did well enough, but started to get old. Personally, I watched VOY and ENT out of habit, hoping for something like DS9 to emerge, but they were hell bent on being episodic. ENT started to get better, but it was too late. They followed the same formula for 16 or so years and it wore thin. ST09 came out only 4 years after the last episode of ENT and 6.5 after NEM. I think this means you are exaggerating a little. There really is nothing else out there other than Dr Who that has had such a long run and even it had to take a break before coming back stronger.
The mistakes of the past were really following the same formula for too long. DIS is not going to be episodic in nature. This is a stated deviation from BermanTrek formula. Any mistakes they make now are going to be new. I am eagerly awaiting this show and hoping it turns into a strong franchise. I am hoping for a continued string of shows that tell a story and then move on. So a few years of DIS then a few years of the next crew. I do not want to see a story artificially extended just because the show is doing well. Tell your story and move on to the next Trek.
I agree. About as silly as people declaring they will surely enjoy the series after seeing a 30 second teaser.
