News coming 8/10?

[CRM-114]

I'm definitely intrigued. I hope Discovery will be good, and brings TV Trek into the modern world. I've never believed there's only one right way to do Star Trek, and if the show is fresh and inventive, great. If not, and proves to be no good, then at least they might be trying something new, instead of just the same old, same old. I'm willing to wait until January before I heap praise or rain down condemnation on the new show.

I also think way too many people overvalue canon (which is better termed, "Continuity"). Continuity is important, but too many people give continuity an undue place of supremacy, as though that alone is what determines or motivates good Trek writing. I'm not suggesting continuity has to be broken, but it can be bent a little.

If the new show doesn't have a perfect 1960s-era Trek aesthetic, the world will not end and the franchise will not die a quick, senseless death. Frankly, that's a very inappropriate, if not outright stupid, gauge for the quality of a series' storytelling. Star Trek can be reinterpreted like any other creative endeavor, and has always reflected the era in which it was produced to varying extents. I don't pretend that it's sacrosanct.

 

[JeffinOakland]

The damn thing doesn't even exist yet. Let's wait until it comes out to heap condemnation on it.

 

[Mudd]

I would hope that having a more universally accessible protagonist would be of higher priority than those. I mean, I actually believe that is probably the case.

Yep. Why in the fuck would they ever give a minute's thought to making the lead an alien?

 

[TrekE]

I'm surprised, and maybe a little disappointed, with another prequel series. I assumed Trek would move forward and show the future. But fine, whatever. As long as the stories are good and the acting is good and the production quality is good, that's what matters.

I'm much more concerned about the CBSAA issues. It's like people at CBS don't understand the concept of what streaming is. The idea of subscribing to a premium service and then also being subjected to commercials is stupid. And the rumor about the episodes only being available for a short time is even more egregious. When I'm on vacation in January and miss the release of an episode because I'm busy sightseeing... sorry, I just don't get to see that one? What the heck is the point of a streaming service if content isn't available on demand? Can you even DVR something that you plan to watch on your iPad later? I've never tried to record something off Netflix because what is the point, the episode is still available on demand.

 

[Annorax849]

I'm definitely intrigued. I hope Discovery will be good, and brings

I also think way too many people overvalue canon (which is better termed, "Continuity").

I somewhat agree, but I've also noticed that on this forum it seems like people undervalue it.

 

[mos6507]

Making it look like it was made in the 1960's is simply silly to me and always will be. Its limiting and does nothing but make it look foolish.

IMHO, NOT making it look like the 60s is a big reason why Enterprise failed and why stuff like Star Trek Continues gained such mindshare. There's nothing wrong with being intentionally retro. Sure, you lose the "plausible future" aspect, but so much of Trek's foundation is no longer so plausible anymore anyway. Anachronisms have been with Trek for a long time anyway (Meyer era Trek in particular).

 

[Mirror Mirror]

IMHO, NOT making it look like the 60s is a big reason why Enterprise failed and why stuff like Star Trek Continues gained such mindshare. There's nothing wrong with being intentionally retro. Sure, you lose the "plausible future" aspect, but so much of Trek's foundation is no longer so plausible anymore anyway.

No,ENT failed because of its writing. There were many, many bad calls in ENT, but the look did not kill the show, the look did not make the stories disliked. Personally, the look was one of the few things it did have going for it.

 

[Annorax849]

I strongly disagree with the position many here have about canon being a burden that should be ignored, but I also think it will be relatively easy to be mostly loyal to canon without being too limited.

Don't include direct contact with Romulans, Klingons have flat foreheads (and like I said earlier, I really don't mind if that one's ignored), vessels have different insignia, and don't involve races that haven't been officially contacted yet (Ferengi, Borg, Dominion).

Other than that, they actually have a lot freedom. On the pre-existing side they can include Cardassians, Breen, Xindi, etc. And they can include major new races if that's where the story goes.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

No,ENT failed because of its writing.

We have a winnah.

 

[uniderth]

I think the look of Enterprise wasn't too bad. In fact I think it's better that it didn't look too much like Star Trek because, not only did technology change in 100 years, but alien technologies were combined. So it should have looked vastly different than Star Trek.

 

[Enterprise is Great]

The damn thing doesn't even exist yet. Let's wait until it comes out to heap condemnation on it.

Now that's just crazy talk...

 

[angry apple panda]

So excited.

To me, it really doesn't matter what era the show takes place in. It's about the stories and characters. Frankly, canon and world-building come second, although they are of course important. I am also happy for a more diverse cast, both in race and gender as well as aliens. It all sounds like your regular, forward-thinking Star Trek to me.

 

[Commander Richard]

A female lead

I was thinking about this yesterday and figured it would happen.

 

[TheFlutteringHorde]

It always amazes me how a show whose original series basically "Status Quo is God" engraved on the back of each episode has become such a magnet for internet nerdrage over canon violations.

 

[angry apple panda]

I think the look of Enterprise wasn't too bad. In fact I think it's better that it didn't look too much like Star Trek because, not only did technology change in 100 years, but alien technologies were combined. So it should have looked vastly different than Star Trek.

The look was pretty good. They went with an aesthetic that tied it to our time slightly more. The sets were great. Maybe the design of the ship on the outside could have looked slightly more primitive, and maybe they could have resisted adding in analogues of future Trek equipment that weren't just the same thing with a different name. But yeah, all in all, I like the look of Enterprise.

I agree with what a lot of others said: the show didn't have great writing. The arcs felt awkward and forced. There are good episodes, and I do kind of enjoy it as background noise, because it's Trek and as a hopeless uberfan I can't outright hate it, but it just felt like such a secondary series to everything else. It wasn't taken in interesting directions, and that had nothing to do with the look and feel, nor the setting.

Star Trek lives and dies on its writing. The best episodes reflect this. The world-building is just the glitter on top of the whole thing that makes everything look slightly more sparkly. Discovery has a good writing team; I have a good feeling about this.

 

[Annorax849]

It always amazes me how a show whose original series basically "Status Quo is God" engraved on the back of each episode has become such a magnet for internet nerdrage over canon violations.

I'm not sure where any "nerdrage" appears in this thread, but whatever. To be fair, I get the impression the fanbase was already interested in world-building aspects by the 70s, although canon wasn't as much of an issue back then, of course.

 

[The Wormhole]

Klingons have flat foreheads

Not all of them, as Enterprise revealed.

vessels have different insignia

TOS didn't even faithfully adhere to that, McCoy wore the Arrowhead during his earlier mission to Capella IV, despite it being before he served in the Enterprise. None of the officers in the bar in Court-Martial served on the Enterprise, and they all had the Arrowhead on their uniforms.

 

[johnjm22]

Even though TNG is my favorite series, I never liked the design aesthetic of that era. The NCC-1701-D and the Romulan Warbirds looks cool , but everything else is pretty bleh; especially the clothing and clunky props.

I think the TOS Movies are the best looking Trek ever in terms of aesthetic. If the new series looks like an updated version of that I'll be pretty happy with that element of the show.

 

[uniderth]

Not all of them, as Enterprise revealed.

I'll agree that not all of them, but Enterprise hardly solved that. No Klingon with any honor would go through life with a flat forehead cause by a human virus. They would all have gotten cranial reconstruction. So Enterprise's "explanation" doesn't hold much water.

TOS didn't even faithfully adhere to that, McCoy wore the Arrowhead during his earlier mission to Capella IV, despite it being before he served in the Enterprise.

I don't think there is a flashback in that episode so how do you know what he wore?

None of the officers in the bar in Court-Martial served on the Enterprise, and they all had the Arrowhead on their uniforms.

Yep. So one explanation is that Kirks era was a time of transition from ship unique emblems, to standardized. Thus ten years earlier there would be even less standardization.

 

[TalonCard]

This time period is...unexpected. Thoughts and speculation:

I wouldn't rule out a new universe being created as part of the events of the first season...it seems likely that Fuller was just speaking figuratively, but he had to have known the implications of those particular words...

This event is very mysterious...something Trek fans would recognize, but hasn't been depicted before. I've only seen one suggestion for the Vulcanian Expedition so far; that would be my favorite. Also possible: the time barrier being broken as per "The Cage".

The setting means that if Discovery follows the tradition of having a character from the previous series make a cameo in the first episode, they have their pick of any of the Enterprise cast or the (affordable) members of the 2009 film... My guesses (in order of most to least likely): Scott Bakula, John Billingsley, Jolene Blalock, Bruce Greenwood, Zachery Quinto, Linda Park, Cynthia Blaise, Jacob Kogan, Whoopi Goldberg. If they decide to include an actor playing an ancestor or descendant of an established character, who knows?

I know that many will just shake their heads, and while it won't make or break the series for me, I do love me some continuity. So one of my first thoughts was "But how will they make it consistent with the established look from 'The Cage' through 'Where No Man Has Gone Before'?! Surely they won't be putting goose-neck lamps and beige turtlenecks everywhere!" Possible solutions:
Ignore it, and skip straight to a TOS-inspired 21st century television look. (Duh.)
Acknowledge it in a throwaway line and move on "You don't like the uniform? Would you rather wear the turtleneck?"
Make it just close enough to handwave while not going full 60s (There's enough variation in costume in the two pilots that this could certainly work.)
Assume the pilot versions of the Enterprise are an exception to the general Starfleet rule. (We only ever saw the Enterprise in the pilots, and a handful of other ships with the older stuff in season 1)
Portray the Discovery as a ship with a uniform and aesthetic distinct from the rest of Starfleet. (Definitely doable if it's a joint Federation/Klingon mission.)
Assume the Enterprise in the two pilots has the newest tech and uniforms, being the flagship, whereas Discovery is an older ship with a different style.
Assume the Enterprise in the two pilots has older (but serviceable!) tech and uniforms, being an older ship compared to the newer Discovery.
Pull a Rogue One and just do the exact same style but with a larger budget.
Assume there's a wide variation in uniforms and gear from starship to starship (this was certainly true both in TOS season 1 and during the Generations-DS9 Season 6 era.)

This is so weird, but so exciting too!

TC