EW:No main characters are safe
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
http://all-that-is-interesting.com/recut-trailers
Nearly every movie or show can have a trailer cut together to make it look however you want - they're meant to be sales pitches for the product, not an accurate representation of the nuances of the finished film.
As you ludicrously suggest, you need to actually watch it to get that.
Watch it? What are you saying?
Three decades is a helluva lot better than three seasons.
The fact that a main character isn't guaranteed a happy ending after 42 minutes helps drama. That's the trouble with every episode with a main character or the ship in danger (95% of Trek eps it seems.) You know they're really not in jeopardy,
Jadzia's and Trip's deaths were such surprises they didn't help in this regard. If you had an ep where the hook/urgency of the plot is Cmdr. X is a hostage and at the end he is killed or even long-term wounded, that would be very good to heighten the suspense of every ep thereafter. It would remove the surety that everything will be resolved happily by the end of the ep.
ENT succeeded a bit with poor T'Pol being affected by her addiction and child. This seems very rare in Trek that people are even feeling something in the next episode based on a prior one. Especially with some of the crap and trauma those people go through.
Jadzia's and Trip's deaths were such surprises they didn't help in this regard. If you had an ep where the hook/urgency of the plot is Cmdr. X is a hostage and at the end he is killed or even long-term wounded, that would be very good to heighten the suspense of every ep thereafter. It would remove the surety that everything will be resolved happily by the end of the ep.
ENT succeeded a bit with poor T'Pol being affected by her addiction and child. This seems very rare in Trek that people are even feeling something in the next episode based on a prior one. Especially with some of the crap and trauma those people go through.
I'm sure everyone is having a completely measured reaction to this generally unsurprising and uncontroversial news...
Would've been nice to see Kirk's reaction to Rand no longer being on the Enterprise, either from transfer or death, as it was pretty clear there was something going on between them.
My hope is that they approach Discovery somewhat like the writers of True Detective approached their second season, which in my opinion was way underrated. The characters feel more like protagonists in a novel and less like your standard TV show cast. The stakes feel real and when a character dies in the middle of the series you don't get the feeling it's because the actor wanted to leave the show, but because it actually furthers the story.
Although I haven't seen True Detective, I completely agree with the point. If the show can feel like a well plotted story which happens to include character deaths or departures, that's great and I'm totally on board. What I'm less keen on is either the 'writing out Terry' type death, or gratuitous killing for manufactured 'who will die next?!' suspense (looking at you, TWD). I'm reasonably confident it won't be like that, currently.
If the writers of Discovery approach it somewhat like True Detective they better be looking at the first season only.
And as a fan of the novel series A Song of Ice and Fire and it's TV adaptation, I welcome Star Trek: Game of Captains' Chairs. May it be just as groundbreaking and successful.
And as a fan of the novel series A Song of Ice and Fire and it's TV adaptation, I welcome Star Trek: Game of Captains' Chairs. May it be just as groundbreaking and successful.
I prefer the first season of TD, too, but I wanted to liken it more to the second season, because it has a bigger cast of characters like I imagine Discovery will have also. And it actually features a main character death, whereas season one doesn't, IIRC.
But yes, I agree. If Discovery's writing will try to emulate what they are doing on Game of Thrones or True Detective, we are in for an amazing show. Maybe even the best Star Trek ever. And I don't mean character deaths, but the quality of the dialog, the plotting, the themes and the maturity of the whole thing.
Whose to say that death will be the only way for main characters to leave? Transfers and promotions happen all the time in the military. I always found it disengenous that Riker would even be given the option of turning down a promotion and command. That isn't how it works. You go where you're sent.
Obviously that's not how it works in Starfleet, though. At least not if you have a father with an important position in Starfleet or a famous captain-friend.
But surely when he's turned down his 47th promotion Starfleet will have had enough and order him to move aside and let a new officer take his place?Obviously that's not how it works in Starfleet, though. At least not if you have a father with an important position in Starfleet or a famous captain-friend.
Everybody keeps reacting as if this approach to TV story plotting is a recent innovation of big cable dramas in the Las fifteen years.
In fact, what's being described is exactly what producers like Bochco were already doing in the 1980s and Trek wasn't - which consigned Trek to irrelevance as adult drama then.
The change is decades overdue.
In fact, what's being described is exactly what producers like Bochco were already doing in the 1980s and Trek wasn't - which consigned Trek to irrelevance as adult drama then.
The change is decades overdue.
This is something I was hoping the new movies would do. Not that I want the crew massacred, but I like that feeling that nobody is safe. The Walking Dead had that going on really well for a few seasons.
I'd love the idea, but only if it doesn't look too obvious that its doing "no one is safe".
Still I think it's better than the hero bubble where you know the main characters are to come out perfectly all right. What's the point in putting the ship or a character in peril each week, if we know they're always going to find a way out at the end of the episode.
It's also how they do it. Trek tends to use the going out in heroic style that was cliché, a trope. It's hard to really get a reaction from it.
Dax's Trip's And Data's death was an example. What happened with Dax and Data got a meh from me, and from what I heard about Trip's--it was a total waste. It was basically 'the show's going to end so lets have an heroic death, or an actor is leaving the show, let's write out the character and give them an heroic death' type of thing.
GOT was shocking because it was pretty creative in how it did it. Ned Stark was a Picard type character that was killed for doing the right thing. Later, even the other characters remarked how his being naïve got him killed.
The Red wedding--no one saw that coming. It was shocking and took out some main characters that we liked and were used to, and thought they had a lot more to do in the show.
Still I think it's better than the hero bubble where you know the main characters are to come out perfectly all right. What's the point in putting the ship or a character in peril each week, if we know they're always going to find a way out at the end of the episode.
It's also how they do it. Trek tends to use the going out in heroic style that was cliché, a trope. It's hard to really get a reaction from it.
Dax's Trip's And Data's death was an example. What happened with Dax and Data got a meh from me, and from what I heard about Trip's--it was a total waste. It was basically 'the show's going to end so lets have an heroic death, or an actor is leaving the show, let's write out the character and give them an heroic death' type of thing.
GOT was shocking because it was pretty creative in how it did it. Ned Stark was a Picard type character that was killed for doing the right thing. Later, even the other characters remarked how his being naïve got him killed.
The Red wedding--no one saw that coming. It was shocking and took out some main characters that we liked and were used to, and thought they had a lot more to do in the show.
I think the fact that death is a real possibility is good. Having studied the history of exploration, it is interesting to note the number of participants who died or were killed during the explorations. Ranging from leaders of expeditions such as Ponce de Leon, Ferdinand Magellan, de Soto to the common soldiers.
Even in modern times, the space programs have had a number of deaths, including those participating in two shuttle missions to other space missions.
Allowing for deaths to occur in Discovery to me will be more realistic.
Even in modern times, the space programs have had a number of deaths, including those participating in two shuttle missions to other space missions.
Allowing for deaths to occur in Discovery to me will be more realistic.
Similar threads
