Consolidated Trailer Thread

[Admiral Bear]

CBS keep saying "Oh, Netflix have paid for Discovery, so it's not costing us a penny", but does anyone know exactly how much Discovery Netflix have paid for? Because at $10m+ an episode, if Netflix have paid for more than one season, I can see comparisons being made between Discovery/Netflix and what Cuthroat Island did to Carolco back in the 90s.

 

[cultcross]

Plus, this was a time in the prime universe where different ships had different insignias.

That's never actually been canonically established and wasn't the original intention either. TOS showed non enterprise crew with the Delta, and in every other context since it has been used as the symbol for Starfleet without on screen explanation, including pre-TOS (The USS Kelvin and Franklin uniforms were prime timeline). Even Enterprise used a delta design for Starfleet's patch. Really the anachronism here begging explanation is the use of other patches on TOS and IAMD.

Quite apart from all that, it is the franchise's most enduring logo, there was no way they weren't going to use it.

 

[{ Emilia }]

CBS keep saying "Oh, Netflix have paid for Discovery, so it's not costing us a penny", but does anyone know exactly how much Discovery Netflix have paid for? Because at $10m+ an episode, if Netflix have paid for more than one season, I can see comparisons being made between Discovery/Netflix and what Cuthroat Island did to Carolco back in the 90s.

One trailer is out and people are already wondering if Netflix will go bankrupt because of this show.
I love this forum.

I do wonder, can Discovery cause the Dow Jones to crash?

 

[SPCTRE]

I do wonder, can Discovery cause the Dow Jones to crash?

it can't, remember, there is No Money in the Future™

 

[RAMA]

Looking at the like ratios on the various DSC trailer sources...looks like a big hit. One of them has 28,000+ likes and only a few hundred dislikes.

Currently still the #1 trending video on Youtube as well.

 

[RAMA]

Orville definitely looks better based >>>only on the trailers<<<.

Seems a bit humorless and bland to me. It's really hard for me to watch a trailer where they go OH NO KLINGONS and get excited.

Looks like the Discovery is not the main ship in the pilot?

One is a parody and is supposed to be funny, one is an action-adventure drama. The production values simply aren't going to be the same, DSC is far superior there.

 

[Mudd]

I like The Orville trailer, but if you presented it as Star Trek I'd just say "looks like something from thirty years ago done on a much lower budget."

IOW, like a fan film.

A very cleverly designed fan film, though. Folks making TNG-era fan films should take a good look at elements of the set design on McFarlane's show.

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

Watched this trailer and I'm so hyped...

For The Orville.

I've never been so glad I don't have a Netflix subscription.

 

[Four Lights]

Being in the UK I could only find the Netflix trailer that would play for me last night. Underwhelming would be one word to describe what I saw. Having managed to now see the CBS one though, I'm much more hopeful. It feels a lot more traditionally 'Trekky' with its intense orchestral soundtrack. Netflix's having only had some awful whiny band music in the background instead.

 

[RAMA]

Watched this trailer and I'm so hyped...

For The Orville.

I've never been so glad I don't have a Netflix subscription.

My biggest criticism of the trailer: Will my 65" TV be enough for this beautiful show! I will desperately need a 4k source video for it too.

RAMA

 

[Jarvisimo]

For anyone interested, the academic book Television and Serial Adaptation
by Shannon Wells-Lassagne may provide some context to the feelings we are all having, and does discuss some of Fuller's work:



In addition, it's good to talk about Fuller's self-described "fanfiction" approach, for example in discussion with Alan Sepinwall:

Hannibal is a character who’s had a long and successful run in other media. Why do you think this one didn’t connect with a larger audience?

Bryan Fuller: I wanted to be very authentic to the tone of the books, and very authentic to Thomas Harris. And I think there is a version of Hannibal, say if you cast James Spader, or Hugh Grant as Hannibal Lecter, and leaned into the slightly campier, more accessible aspects of the films that we began to see in the later movies, then that might have connected in a way that pop culture understood Hannibal. But I chose to go back to the source material and make it as genuine to the source material and my fanfiction approach as I could, and give it a level of sobriety and dignity, even I look at the show as a very black comedy. It was very literary, it was very pretentious, and very niche. I can’t say I’m terribly surprised that it didn’t find an audience. Initially, there was a lot of fatigue with the character, and people felt the character was played out, and I heard from countless people how they weren’t even interested in seeing the show because they weren’t interested in Hannibal Lecter again. But the casting of Mads Mikkelsen as Hannibal Lecter gave us, for me, the best version of Hannibal Lecter. But perhaps not the most commercial.

Or with Complex:

I was just talking with a writer friend of mine this morning about Hannibal and Will's relationship, and how whatever sexual energy could exist is sublimated through other outlets. For instance, I was re-watching the sex scene in "Naka-Choko," and it’s like Alana is less an object of desire for both men and more a way to mediate their connection.

We frequently refer to her on set as Geneviève Bujold between two Jeremy Irons's. We went through that phase where we used her kind of like a proxy for their intimacy, but I'd say the homoeroticism is more me just cackling in the editing room, as opposed to something that the characters are genuinely feeling when they're in the room with one another. Will Graham is a heterosexual character, and Hannibal Lector is the devil and would probably be able to eroticize everything from his perspective because he’s in awe of the human condition. Of course, that’s not to say that they’re going to be falling into bed—I’ll leave that to the online community. They’re doing what we’re doing with the show, because the show for me is very much fan fiction of these characters that I adore. So that’s why I’m very respectful and appreciative of fan fiction and fan art that positions these characters in ways you wouldn’t see them on the show.

You can read further about that online, in several articles and posts. For example, KT Torrey of Virginia Tech:

Throughout the series’ three-season run, Hannibal showrunner Bryan Fuller has asserted that he regards the show as fanfiction: an affectionate remix of elements from Thomas Harris’ novels Red Dragon and Hannibal Rising, as well as from previous adaptations of those works. Hannibal, then, is transparent about being one of many “proliferations of shared sources” that comprise the “metaphorical archive” of the fandom’s fiction (De Kosnik 119). In positioning the series as fanfiction, and he and his team as fanfiction writers, Fuller claims the identity and ethos of not just a fan, but a feminine-gendered fan, those most maligned and oft-mocked in many media depictions of fandom. With that ethos in hand, Hannibal-as-fanfic has chosen to intertextually and ardently acknowledge both the practices and the affect of its primarily female fandom—allowing Fannibals to see some part of themselves, of their fannish identity, reflected back with love from within the series itself.

Of course Fuller isn't in charge of the show anymore, but I think we have to let go of 'canon' as a reason for disappointment or enthusiasm - this is an adaptation, and it is doing something different, starting from Fuller's own fan-ish lens (and experience of much creative development since working for the franchise in the 90s).

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

My biggest criticism of the trailer: Will my 65" TV be enough for this beautiful show! I will desperately need a 4k source video for it too.

RAMA

I wanted pretty pictures on my big TV too. I bought Speed Racer from the Wachowski sibs. Was under no illusion that the film would be any good, but my, was it pretty!

Although if you want to see those Klingons? (I thought they were a bunch of Kralls from Beyond) on a big screen, we have different definitions of beauty.

 

[RAMA]

I wanted pretty pictures on my big TV too. I bought Speed Racer from the Wachowski sibs. Was under no illusion that the film would be any good, but my, was it pretty!

Although if you want to see those Klingons? (I thought they were a bunch of Kralls from Beyond) on a big screen, we have different definitions of beauty.

Yes I know, you want Star Trek Continues on screen, you think it's perfectly fine to replicate 60s cardboard sets in 2017...you want Star Trek to remain the cheap looking step-child...blah blah blah. Tedious in the extreme.

Yeah, the Klingons look fantastic, easily the best we've seen. No more 70s heavy metal outfits and hair band skull caps.

RAMA

 

[{ Emilia }]

Yes I know, you want Star Trek Continues on screen, you think it's perfectly fine to replicate 60s cardboard sets in 2017...you want Star Trek to remain the cheap looking step-child...blah blah blah. Tedious in the extreme.

I see some of that criticism. But there are ways to criticize design choice without having you accuse people of wanting a cheap 60s look.
I really love the way the JJTrek movies have updated the old uniforms for example, without leaving the roots too far behind. Doesn't look cheap at all.

Yeah, the Klingons look fantastic, easily the best we've seen. No more 70s heavy metal outfits and hair band skull caps.

I prefer the STID Klingons. More facial expressions, less prosthetics.

 

[Tomalak]

I genuinely can't understand why anyone is capable of forming an opinion of the series based on that trailer, aside from a purely visual, aesthetic level.

It was just a snapshot to show some of the characters, the look and the aliens on the show.

I thought it looked pretty Star Trekkie with loads of Trekkie aliens saying Trekkie things. It had Vulcans and Klingons and ships and people shouting on the bridge. On that basis, bring it on. I can't wait to see the pilot.

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

Yes I know, you want Star Trek Continues on screen, you think it's perfectly fine to replicate 60s cardboard sets in 2017...you want Star Trek to remain the cheap looking step-child...blah blah blah. Tedious in the extreme.

RAMA

I have no problem with how it looks aside from the aforementioned Klingons. Those look like prosthetic make-ups that would diminish or even conceal actor performances, and my knee-jerk reaction is that these will be animalistic and unnuanced characters, rather than anything with depth and complexity. In this one regard, I do prefer characters like the TOS Kang, Koloth and Kor as opposed to what came afterwards. But the look of the show isn't an issue for me, it's the tone of the characters that we got from that trailer, just didn't do anything for me, and for a show named Discovery, the trailer was utterly lacking in a sense of wonder or exploration.

From that trailer, I can draw three assumptions.

1) The show's going to be crap.
2) CBS need to fire whoever puts together their trailers.
3) CBS want this online experiment to fail.

It could be any or all three. I'm optimistic. I think it's option 2.

 

[{ Emilia }]

I thought it looked pretty Star Trekkie with loads of Trekkie aliens saying Trekkie things. It had Vulcans and Klingons and ships and people shouting on the bridge.

Yeah, there are certainly major elements of the formula that they didn't dare change. I wonder if the audience will still be excited by people shouting on starship bridges.

 

[Tomalak]

Yeah, there are certainly major elements of the formula that they didn't dare change. I wonder if the audience will still be excited by people shouting in starship bridges.

If there isn't someone shouting "fire phasers" and "warp speed" it ain't Star Trek.

That's logical captain.

It would be like Star Wars without the Force!

 

[jamestyler]

Being in the UK I could only find the Netflix trailer that would play for me last night. Underwhelming would be one word to describe what I saw. Having managed to now see the CBS one though, I'm a lot more hopeful. It feels a lot more traditionally 'Trekky' with its intense orchestral soundtrack. Netflix's having only had some awful whiny band music in the background instead.

I was lucky to get the full trailer ungeoblocked on our site (link in sig for the curious!). Thankfully from here, though it was a bit of a mad rush so can't even remember who posted it. All I remember is being ill and wanting to go to bed - wrote the post at 4pm and no clue if it even matches up

 

[Jedman67]

Anyone who thought this would have any resemblance visually to TOS, this show is not for you. Go watch Star Trek Continues or New Voyages.
Anyone who thought the events would match up to the Pike era; this has been described by the showrunners and producers as a "re-imagining"; "a new Star Trek"; "a TOS 'Prequel' " - it's a reboot in all but name.
If you want to think of it as taking place in the Shatner/Nemoy TOS timeline, go ahead; it'd be much more accurate to say that it takes place in it's own timeline, conveniently labeled "Prime" so as not be confused with the 2009 film-series timeline, but it's certainly not going to match up with TOS and TNG tit-for-tat.

Star Trek is dead. Long live Star Trek!!