Eh, I suppose I can be convinced to watch. Actually, I’m pretty enthusiastic from everything I’m hearing and seeing regarding the show. I’ve really done a 180 on the series from being about ready to be done with Trek to being really excited about a new entry in the series. Im still a little cautious in my optimism. But I’m hoping all of that will go away in less than twelve hours!
It may be foolish, but I am still so upset that they didn't set the new series further in the future. Why can't they just believe in the premise of the franchise? Why do we have to worriedly go where we've all gone before? I know this is not a startlingly new opinion, obviously. But here's a brand new series that is going to repeat the same mistakes Voyager and Enterprise made. I'm not particularly hopeful here. The show may be good (and I hope it is), but it's not Star Trek. It's just glorified fan fiction.
I think you'd have a less negative opinion if you didn't pre-assume that Discovery is going to "repeat the same mistakes Voyager and Enterprise." We have no idea how the show is going to be or how it will unfold. Bryan Fuller had a particularly story he wanted to tell. CBS' long-term goal is for there to be multiple Trek shows running, and I'm sure that includes shows set in the future.
Wait....its fan fiction because its set in an era you don't like? The Enterprise wasn't the only ship around in this era. There are other stories to be told.
Genuinely buzzing now! Legged it into town after Mass to get latest Star Trek mag which I will read in the bath later! Will stay of internet and away from spoilers till I've watched it on Netflilx when I've finished writing for the day! Amazing personal change of expectations/hope considering I feared the worse after Fuller went! I think casting Isaacs was the crucial turning point for me...Excited now! Excited!
I have been pretty down on STD for a long time, I have liked things like the looks of the uniforms, phasers, communicators etc but the look of Discovery & the Klingon's and then the whole adopted sister thing left a really bad taste in my mouth. The trailers did little for me and I still felt parts of the CGI looked dam cheap. The last week's reaction to the first 2 episodes has given me hope and I am more hopeful that I will like the finished product. I love Star Trek, I adore TNG (despite the rocky first two seasons), DS9 & while I have mixed feelings on VOY/ENT (More so of VOY) I still consider myself a fan of those two. TOS is a totally different kettle of fish due to being born two decades after the show aired and feeling many parts of the show are products of their time that doesn't sit well with me. I do love the TOS main characters and I like the movies that followed the show. I really want to keep on being a fan of Star Trek and while I'm nowhere near as excited as I was for the 2009 movie reboot, I have hope for the new era of TV Trek.
I went ahead and subscribed to CBSAA just in case. It was a pain in the ass for my Fire TV. But it won't take but a single click to unsubscribe, so I'm prepared for anything. LOL
It's like Christmas Eve when you aren't sure what you want and don't know what you're going to get, but you're excited anyway.
In one of the articles that chronicled why Bryan Fuller left, it mentioned how he wanted it to be an anthology series where each season would be a different era (a noble and intriguing, but expensive idea). CBS' compromise was to go with a single, serialized series, and make future decisions on how it performed, It makes sense since there are only 13-15 episodes for most streaming series, and to have multiple so that when one is off the other one is on, would make good business sense to retain subscribers. I also think it makes sense given CBS' affinity for spinoffs.
^^^^ That means you must have watched TOS NUMEROUS times because there's a lot to say about the TNG era - but "Trek at it's best..," isn't a term I'd use. maybe Trek at it's preachiest.
For me it's more like being in 1979 and watching Star Trek getting radically re-imagined again. I'm less shocked with what I'm seeing for Discovery than I was in 79 and seeing the Trek world that I loved completely done away with and completely re-imagined. Unless this series set further in the future features Starfleet crew possessed of nanotechnology that allows them to self transport, emit phasers from their hands, communicate with the ship with no need of a physical communicator, have the ability to be a living tricorder and view all sensor information in their eyes ala' Geordi, then you can keep your "future Trek" because it will be the same tired old shit we had regurgitated ad nauseum in the 90's. When TNG premiered in 1987, my first thought was how utterly fucking cheap it all looked. The communicator is in their Starfleet symbol? That didn't scream "futuristic" it screamed "We don't have to build a prop". My second thought was how completely unadvanced they were in any meaningful way from the original series outside of some completely superficial changes like the uniforms, phasers and communicators. It's been years since I've read the original Star Trek Chronology, but at the end of it, it posits some potential technology in the coming century. IIRC, some of that may have been ships that change shape or something like that. (Anyone with a copy of that book, feel free to chime in). Bottom line, THAT was what the future of the future should be like. It should be extrapolating a future based on the tech available in that world. Look how much the real world has changed in a century of uninterrupted technological progress. Now imagine that in a time when you have access to transporters, replicators, no resource or energy limitations. No, were not going to have a future where the only differences are uniforms, phasers, communicators and the ships have letters from the middle of the alphabet after the registry numbers. But that's what too many "post VOY" fanboys want, and THAT, more than anything else is the embodiment of "worriedly go where we've all gone before" "but it's not Star Trek. It's just glorified fan fiction." So basically like everything from 1987 onward.
I am optimistic but firmly neutral in my expectations. If it's a well written series that slides neatly into established Star Trek mythology, great. If it's a well written series with a totally reimagined dark and gritty approach analogous to NuBSG, great. If it's not well written...well, then I don't care what the hell they do with it. It seems like a lot of Star Trek fans don't agree with me here, but I'll take a Star Trek series that doesn't do what I want it to do but has great writing over a Star Trek series that does exactly what I want it to do mediocrely any day.
It's pretty depressing that a show about going where no one has gone before has a fanbase with many wanting to only go exactly where one has indeed gone before. I can understand the trepidation, but I can't understand the belief - verging on hope - that it won't be as good as Trek gone by so it's almost pointless making it. I hope it knocks all Trek gone by out of the park, not because I don't love them, but because I hope I'm going to see something I love just as much!
But it is firmly going where we've already been. Complete with Klingons, Sarek, Mudd and the Mirror Universe.