Lorca: Fans Will Have To Adjust

[ihno]

Then DISCOVERY is not for you. It's trying to attract new mainstream viewers, not the old trekkies.

Yes, I know and I think I already said or at least implied that.

Though it wasn't just the "Star Trek"-me that felt insulted by JJTrek and Enterprise.

But that's another point to be sceptical about the success of the series. If they alienate the old fans there won't be just praise out there on the social media.

edit: and as for the "attract new viewers": it failed both with Enterprise and with JJTrek - one was cancelled, the other underperformed and here is a point where I could repost what I posted in the first place.

 

[Fateor]

Then DISCOVERY is not for you. It's trying to attract new mainstream viewers, not the old trekkies.

Stargate Universe tried that.

At which point they learned that abandoning a significant portion of your fanbase to try to attract new viewers is idiotic.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Though it wasn't just the "Star Trek"-me that felt insulted by JJTrek...

I'm with you on that. While the AbramsTrek films were OK, I thought the pacing (at least for the first two films) was way too fast for a movie that I hoped would be one to savor. While I don't hate roller-coaster-ride thrilling films, I don't find them very memorable.

Of the three Kelvin Universe films, I think the third one was best -- maybe because Kurtzman and Orci had little or nothing to do with the screenplay. That screenplay had a logical and deliberate-paced flow to it, with enough time to allow a person to think about and consider what they are experiencing, rather than simply "experiencing".

From what I've seen and heard about Discovery, it seems to me that it will not have the same break-neck pacing, and it appears that it will allow the viewer time to think (and give reason to do so).

 

[mos6507]

Translation:
I miss the days I could just criticize whatever I wanted, however I wanted - and call an actor or producer anything I wanted to online (IE F**king idiot, or Talentless Hack); and their response would still be kind/courteous and they'd still entice me to watch the show. This era of an actor actually stating their upfront/honest opinions in response to the bile some members of fandom post is disconcerting because it means they might actually tell me how they feel about some of my comments; and my fragile Superfan ego can't really handle that.

Sorry to disrupt your strawman tirade, but Isaacs is just digging a bigger hole for himself. Stop defending him.

I stand by my opinion that he should keep his pie-hole shut.

He's free to express his opinion but in the end it will probably just create a lot of bad PR for CBS. It's not his job to crusade for the show, especially not in the bull-in-a-china-shop way he's been doing it. There's no way to resolve flamewars once they start. The only way to avoid them is to just stay out of the fray in the first place. Haters are gonna hate, period.

It was stupid when Bob Orci did it and it's just as stupid for Isaacs to do it.

 

[Roald]

Stargate Universe tried that.

At which point they learned that abandoning a significant portion of your fanbase to try to attract new viewers is idiotic.

That's why Casino Royale didn't work! It tried to modernize too much and attract a bigger audience, see where that got them!

Oh wait...

Can we stop bringing up SU each and every time to 'prove' re-invention doesn't work...... there are sooo many instances where it paid off, so stop making SU the undeniable rule.

 

[CorporalClegg]

SU didn't work because it was shit.

 

[Jedman67]

SU didn't work because it was shit.

This

 

[ihno]

I'm with you on that. While the AbramsTrek films were OK, I thought the pacing (at least for the first two films) was way too fast for a movie that I hoped would be one to savor. While I don't hate roller-coaster-ride thrilling films, I don't find them very memorable.

Of the three Kelvin Universe films, I think the third one was best -- maybe because Kurtzman and Orci had little or nothing to do with the screenplay.

Yes, I liked the third movie more than the first two too.

That screenplay had a logical and deliberate-paced flow to it, with enough time to allow a person to think about and consider what they are experiencing, rather than simply "experiencing".

I have only seen it once. There were still some silly things (not as silly as Picard's Argomobile though) but there were some nice things that stood out to me: I liked this city and I also liked the talk of Kirk and that admiral - which I guess has to do with the pacing of the movie like you say.

From what I've seen and heard about Discovery, it seems to me that it will not have the same break-neck pacing, and it appears that it will allow the viewer time to think (and give reason to do so).

I have heard "dark and gritty" a bit too often for my taste. And if the makers say "it might be a little bit more gritty than the Trek you know" you know* it'll be bad lighting, psycho-wrecks, and a "bad mood"-attitude all over it (because that's "more adult" and "intelligent") - like the Superman-DC-movies, which I also haven't seen only once.

And as for that I have the impression that the time of "dark and gritty" is over or losing its appeal and that Disco my be too late with a BSG mimicry-style.

*this generalization - like in normal conversation - represents my opinion like when I say "Schnaps tastes bad".

 

[cultcross]

Stargate Universe tried that.

At which point they learned that abandoning a significant portion of your fanbase to try to attract new viewers is idiotic.

You're obsessed with SGU comparisons. SGU was a convoluted premise based on lots of existing Stargate lore, and then the opening episodes were badly written and poorly plotted. That's why it failed. It seems almost the opposite approach to Discovery, although obviously the wiring quality remains to be seen. But they are going with a simple premise based on already famous elements of the franchise, and playing up the space adventure/dream of the future angle. Quite different from SGU.

 

[Noname Given]

Sorry to disrupt your strawman tirade, but Isaacs is just digging a bigger hole for himself. Stop defending him.

I stand by my opinion that he should keep his pie-hole shut.

He's free to express his opinion but in the end it will probably just create a lot of bad PR for CBS. It's not his job to crusade for the show, especially not in the bull-in-a-china-shop way he's been doing it. There's no way to resolve flamewars once they start. The only way to avoid them is to just stay out of the fray in the first place. Haters are gonna hate, period.

It was stupid when Bob Orci did it and it's just as stupid for Isaacs to do it.

Show me on the doll where the evil Star Trek actor's comments raped your childhood.

Again, it's a just a TV show. Stop saying he has a right to voice his opinion, but really shouldn't do so because it will somehow critically injure some Star Trek superfan's ego. I doubt it's creating any bad PR in that, since if you're right and "Haters gonna Hate" - said Haters wouldn't like anything he says at this point regardless. So in the end it wouldn't matter what he said to those fans.

And BTW - since he's a paid actor on the show, IT IS his job to "Crusade for the show" as he gets paid (and probably a nice chunk of change) to perform as a character in it.

In the end, we'll have a ringside seat in that it ST: D doesn't boost CBSAA subscriptions as predicted - CBS will respond by retooling or cancelling the show. To them in the end, the ROI on their business plan for CBSAA is all that matters. Remember these guys (hell any Network Exec.) would broadcast an old style 1950ies era Test Pattern if they thought people would tune in or pay to watch it.

"What's Good" in any form of entertainment is always subjective. There's never a 100% right or wrong way to do something - Star Trek included.

 

[mos6507]

"I doubt it's creating any bad PR"

That's your opinion, but CBS' is the only one that matters. Time will tell.

 

[BillJ]

The "prime timeline" thing f.e.
This is obviously not "prime timeline".

Then don't treat it as such. I'm not. But, there just aren't that many people that care. They are shooting for Game of Thrones/Walking Dead viewers. Not geriatric Trekkies.

"I doubt it's creating any bad PR"

That's your opinion, but CBS' is the only one that matters. Time will tell.

Not enough people care to matter.

 

[Kemaiku]

No one cares what fans think anymore. The general audience will decide on Discovery, and they'll judge it as any other TV series.

 

[Fateor]

That's why Casino Royale didn't work! It tried to modernize too much and attract a bigger audience, see where that got them!

Casino Royale sucked, it was 45 minutes of people playing poker.

Can we stop bringing up SU each and every time to 'prove' re-invention doesn't work...... there are sooo many instances where it paid off, so stop making SU the undeniable rule.

All the one's that worked were reboots.

 

[Roald]

Casino Royale sucked.
All the one's that worked were reboots.

Even though it's no fun discussing something with someone who can only argue in subjective absolutes, read 'm and weep:

https://www.google.nl/amp/s/amp.cin...ead-to-a-phenomenon-according-to-the-producer

 

[CorporalClegg]

Except that didn't get "darker and edgier" so much as it become Fasterer and Furiouserer.

And Fateier..er.

 

[ihno]

Then don't treat it as such. I'm not. But, there just aren't that many people that care.

WelI, I just don't like being lied to in such an obvious manner. You may tell me now that I should not not like being lied to but anyway...

They are shooting for Game of Thrones/Walking Dead viewers. Not geriatric Trekkies.

Yes, you are the second person who informs me about a fact that I had implied in my initial postings. Thank you.

 

[Ithekro]

Around 2012 to 2014 one thought was to show Hollywood the anime Space Battleship Yamato 2199 as an example of how one should do a remake/reboot of a TV series that updates the 40 year old content while staying true to the feel of the show.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Fanservice?

 

[Kor]

Around 2012 to 2014 one thought was to show Hollywood the anime Space Battleship Yamato 2199 as an example of how one should do a remake/reboot of a TV series that updates the 40 year old content while staying true to the feel of the show.

There's more leeway with animation, as the whole medium is already an abstraction/stylization of how the stuff would "really" look. The appearance of a live action setting is taken at face value.

Kor