Poll How positive are you about Discovery now?

[BillJ]

YOu don't need to like it. But you need to notice it introduces to a few things: first and foremost the characters, second the tone, and small snippets of plot to keep people excited and guessing.

The DIS-marketing does none of that.

The only thing we find out in that trailer is some names and that the lead is a douche. The Discovery trailers introduce us to the main character and the tone and bits of plot. Or do you think the Klingon stuff is there just because?

Not sure I see the difference to be quite honest?

 

[Rahul]

The only thing we find out in that trailer is some names and that the lead is a douche. The Discovery trailers introduce us to the main character and the tone and bits of plot. Or do you think the Klingon stuff is there just because?

Not sure I see the difference to be quite honest?

Yeah. He's a 'douche'. You don't have to like him. But at the same time, you already know his character way better than Burnhams'. ("someone who has a score to settle" is not a characterization)

 

[KirkusOveractus]

Just watch this:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

YOu don't need to like it. But you need to notice it introduces to a few things: first and foremost the characters, second the tone, and small snippets of plot to keep people excited and guessing.

The DIS-marketing does none of that. It shouldn't copy this trailer (it's it's own, specific thing), but it SHOULD make us familiar with those few things (character, tone, and story). Instead we have s'plosions!

In your posts, you failed to answer. You deflected and asked me to watch something which I've seen a lot of times! But you didn't answer as to what you gleaned from it.

From the DSC trailers, I know that Burnham is in Starfleet, has communicated with Sarek (and knew him when she was a young girl), has had contact with Klingons both in a person-to-person situation via EVA as well as via some form of ship-to-ship combat. Another Captain asks her help in stopping the war with the Klingons that she had a part in starting.

From that, I gather she's a headstrong First Officer that was up for her own command, and instead somehow starts aggressions with the Klingons, giving the overall tone one of a peaceful spacefaring group a war that they don't want ("Starfleet doesn't fire first!")

Our story is one of Burnham's journey through a decision she made not going well and how to rectify it, while exploring her own faults.

I think that's what I picked up from the trailer...

 

[BillJ]

Yeah. He's a 'douche'. You don't have to like him. But at the same time, you already know his character way better than Burnhams'. ("someone who has a score to settle" is not a characterization)

Burnham is a professional officer, raised by Vulcans. If she was pulling that kind of emotional non-sense, you'd be complaining about them showing her being too emotional and not pulling off Vulcan self-control.

There is a definite flavor of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" to all of this.

 

[Rahul]

Okay, one final thing:
It seems what I said came (again) across as way too negative for some people here. I feel I need to make clead: I'm not hating DIS, nor do I think it will necessarily be bad (although I believe it will be a bit hockey - at least for S1). My biggest worry is the general lack of interest outside the hardcore fan base.

To illustrate my point:
http://io9.gizmodo.com/all-the-new-and-returning-shows-coming-to-tv-this-fall-1798322234

A new article that came just a few seconds ago online. About literally ALL new genre shows this fall. 'Discovery' is included with the following description by the (admittedly biased) author:

Oh, Star Trek: Discovery. This show has had a rough road to the small screen, and it’s not even staying on the small screen long before moving to a permanent home on the even smaller screen (while the show’s premiere will be on CBS, it’s mostly going to live on CBS’ new streaming service, CBS All Access). We continue to live in hope that the show, which takes place 10 years before the original series and focuses not on the captain but on the First Officer of the USS Discovery, will finally reestablish Star Trek as groundbreaking television. But the reason it’s a “hope” and not a “surety” is the sheer number of stories about CBS’ handling of this show, including the loss of Bryan Fuller as showrunner. We’ll obviously watch it, because it’s Star Trek... but we also watched the early seasons of Enterprise out of loyalty, and we all know how that turned out.

None of the user comments (at this point) are about Discovery. Everyone is talking about other shows listed there, because they are (at the moment!) way more interesting than DIS to talk about. Including people having Star Trek characters as avatars. And I have to admit, I feel a little bit of the same indifference about DIS at the moment.

 

[Noname Given]

Don't forget, STNG was a wild card. Its numbers were generated over a weekend on syndication, and much harder to find--at least at first--for people than GoT is. The fact a sequel scifi show did so well off a network is astounding.

RAMA

^^^
ST:TNG was hardly 'hard to find' in 1987. Every station that scored it to broadcast was loudly proclaiming when it would premiere - and Paramount was doing everything is could to help local station advertise the premiere of ST:TNG. If you didn't know what channel or what day/time it was airing; you didn't watch (or didn't own a TV.)

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Yeah. He's a 'douche'. You don't have to like him. But at the same time, you already know his character way better than Burnhams'. ("someone who has a score to settle" is not a characterization)

There is a very wide spectrum of media other than "trailers" (but including the trailers) that has told people quite a bit about Burnham's background.

We know she's was raised on Vulcan (something that was alluded to in a trailer when we saw her as a child), she's smart enough to excel at the Vulcan Science Academy, and her specialty is Xenoanthropology (which is helpful, considering Star Trek is about "seeking out new life and new civilizations"). She is also a First Officer who has worked closely under her Captain for 7 years, and she seems to be a very capable officer considering her Captain thinks she should begin to think about getting her own command (again, something we learned in a trailer).

We've also learned from the trailers that the first season has something to do with a Federation Re-Engagement with the Klingon Empire, an Empire that at the beginning of the series is in disarray (the trailer references the re-engagement and the disarray). From other official PR sources, we learn of Burnham's personal connection to the Klingons.

 

[Noname Given]

So then, tell me who's Burnham?
Beyond the colour of her skin or that she has a connection to Sarek.
What's she like as a person? Why should we care about her? What's her story? What's her character? And what has anything of that to do with the klingons?

That's something a good trailer should make clear. For literally any other property, wether it's "Stranger Things" or "Guardians of The Galaxy", the trailers tell you at least something about their characters and stories.

I now want you to tell me the same things about Discovery. See if you can do this.

You know what Star Trek fans knew of Picard PRIOR to the premiere of "Encounter at Farpoint" back in 1987? That he was played by a British actor, was older and was balding.

 

[BillJ]

None of the comments (at this point) from users are about Discovery. Everyone is talking about other shows listed there, because they are (at the moment!) more interesting than DIS to talk about. Including people having Star Trek characters as avatars. And I have to admit, I feel a little bit of the same about DIS at the moment.

I think some of it is ax-grinding over All-Access, but also I think some of it is the simple fact that Star Trek is now competing with shows that get every bit as much money as Trek for promotion and production.

Trek simply isn't the big game in town anymore. It will have to compete with lots of good sci-fi on TV for eyeballs.

 

[KirkusOveractus]

I think some of it is ax-grinding over All-Access, but also I think some of it is the simple fact that Star Trek is now competing with shows that get every bit as much money as Trek for promotion and production.

Trek simply isn't the big game in town anymore. It will have to compete with lots of good sci-fi on TV for eyeballs.

Will it need to compete with Minority Report? That had eyeballs in it, the movie at least!

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

You know what Star Trek fans knew of Picard PRIOR to the premiere of "Encounter at Farpoint" back in 1987? That he was played by a British actor, was older and was balding.

I remember a specific mention (maybe in Starlog or some other source) of the fact that he didn't like children.

 

[Rahul]

There is a very wide spectrum of media other than "trailers" (but including the trailers) that has told people quite a bit about Burnham's background.

We know she's was raised on Vulcan (something that was alluded to in a trailer when we saw her as a child), she's smart enough to excel at the Vulcan Science Academy, and her specialty is Xenoanthropology (which is helpful, considering Star Trek is about "seeking out new life and new civilizations"). She is also a First Officer who has worked closely under her Captain for 7 years, and whose Captain thinks she should begin to consider her own command (again, something we learned in a trailer).

We've also learned from the trailers that the first season has something to do with a Federation Re-Engagement with the Klingon Empire, an Empire that at the beginning of the series is in disarray (the trailer references the re-engagement and the disarray). From other official PR sources, we learn of Burnham's personal connection to the Klingons.

Here's the thing though:
You could show people this one GotG trailer. And they immediately knew whether they liked it or not. They knew what it was, how it was, and usually already had an opinion about it.

Now, that was arguibly a remarkably fantastic marketing campaign for this movie, which was also a very unique movie. But the comparison stands: I have virtually seen ALL marketing material for DIS. And I can not tell you wether I like it or not at this point, or what the final product will really be in the end. And that's a problem.

(So, that were my final words for now. Best wishes)

 

[BillJ]

And that's a problem.

I don't see that as being a problem for me, at all.

 

[RAMA]

^^^
ST:TNG was hardly 'hard to find' in 1987. Every station that scored it to broadcast was loudly proclaiming when it would premiere - and Paramount was doing everything is could to help local station advertise the premiere of ST:TNG. If you didn't know what channel or what day/time it was airing; you didn't watch (or didn't own a TV.)

Actually, it was..for general viewers. The hardcore fans would find it, but lots of people didn't even know such shows could exist in syndication or what it even was. I still have magazine comments somewhere where people say they couldn't find the episode during the week or in a different city. This is opposed to the GoT being shown on one well-known channel.

RAMA

 

[KirkusOveractus]

Here's the thing though:
You could show people this one GotG trailer. And they immediately knew whether they liked it or not. They knew what it was, how it was, and usually already had an opinion about it.

Now, that was arguibly a remarkably fantastic marketing campaign for this movie, which was also a very unique movie. But the comparison stands: I have virtually seen ALL marketing material for DIS. And I can not tell you wether I like it or not at this point, or what the final product will really be in the end. And that's a problem.

(So, that were my final words for now. Best wishes)

If you can tell the final product from a few minutes of clips, then you're really good and a film or TV studio should hire you! It isn't a problem of not knowing the final product from marketing materials, since the trailers and clips are not supposed to divulge the final product. It isn't a problem either that you can't tell if you like it or not. It's how you view it and everyone will have a different opinion. But you still haven't answered completely how much you knew of the movie from the trailer.

 

[RAMA]

I remember a specific mention (maybe in Starlog or some other source) of the fact that he didn't like children.

Tom Shales the critic called Picard grumpy in the pilot. lol

 

[Noname Given]

Actually, it was..for general viewers. The hardcore fans would find it, but lots of people didn't even know such shows could exist in syndication or what it even was. I still have magazine comments somewhere where people say they couldn't find the episode during the week or in a different city. This is opposed to the GoT being shown on one well-known channel.

RAMA

No, it wasn't - Paramount had a BIG ad campaign across multiple markets, in a number of magazines that weren't just Variety or TV Guide. I had plenty of casual friends who had never really been interested in Star Trek, but knew I was telling me about 'this new Star Trek show' they saw advertised on TV - and letting me know just in case.

 

[RAMA]

No, it wasn't - Paramount had a BIG ad campaign across multiple markets, in a number of magazines that weren't just Variety or TV Guide. I had plenty of casual friends who had never really been interested in Star Trek, but knew I was telling me about 'this new Star Trek show' they saw advertised on TV - and letting me know just in case.

They actually advertised on competing major networks! Which I am sure confused even more people!

 

[BillJ]

No, it wasn't - Paramount had a BIG ad campaign across multiple markets, in a number of magazines that weren't just Variety or TV Guide. I had plenty of casual friends who had never really been interested in Star Trek, but knew I was telling me about 'this new Star Trek show' they saw advertised on TV - and letting me know just in case.

I even remember People magazine having an article on TNG.

 

[Noname Given]

They actually advertised on competing major networks! Which I am sure confused even more people!

People weren't confused. 1987 wasn't some 'dark time' where people didn't understand what was a Network station and what was a local station. Again, my point is - if someone was even slightly interested, there was more then enough info on where to watch in your area - PLUS since it was syndicated - TNG episode were being repeated multiple times during a week. So, even if you didn't VCR it, you had a chance to catch it on another day/time.

That was especially true for the premiere episode "Encounter at Farpoint".

In a way it's the same for ST: D. Once you sub to CBS All Access you can catch up on any episode you missed that was released previously (assuming they don't start pulling episodes after a certain short period like a month or so.)