While the choices they made cosmetically aren't my favorite, my complaints are more about the story choices they made.
Rating for US Premiere
- Thread starter MvRojo
- Start date
While the choices they made cosmetically aren't my favorite, my complaints are more about the story choices they made.
I was just using asthetics as an example in that one case. Otherwise, about 85% of what fans are ripping DSC for is present in TWOK.
The issue is the story isn't even finished, or half way through....or heck I hindisght even started yet since the two episodes were more like a prologue that provides background.
After two years, those episodes should have grabbed me and refused to let go. But they didn't they were just tedious.
Everyone's mileage will vary.
There was definitely heart and warmth between the crew of The Shenzhou - pretty much mirroring that between Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest. That was very evident in the first two episodes of ST: D and it mirror STII:TWoK quite well in that regard. Especially in regard to what it cost the 'ma
Like the rest here, no I didn't get a sense of 'optimism' from the TWoK story. It was a man on a vendetta for revenge; and at the end, it cost Kirk and Co. a dear friend that (when the movie ended) we weren't certain was going to return. (Yes, it was hinted at, but at the end of the film - not certain.) We did see Kirk come to terms with some aspects of his younger days and the decisions made then, and with getting older.
Remember, ST: D is (past the prologue that we've seen now) a 13 episode arc. We may finally see some of this 'optimism' at the end; but it's a different story form for Star Trek in that we won't see a 'reset' to any status quo; which has been a staple of the franchise.
Maybe in the end, people will find they don't like that type of storytelling format from Star Trek, but I enjoyed these two episodes more than any of the Berman era Star Trek pilots from 1987-2001; so I'm interested enough to keep watching and see where it goes.
Im just pleased that it's a new format and a new approach. Like DS9- take a risk and do something different! I'm supportive of that...and patient to see the story and characters develop.
As much as I like The Orville, I feel like I'm watching TNG or VOY beat-for-beat. It's actually uncanny how much the style and pacing mirrors those two series.
I meant discovery actually. But in regards to ds9 everyone who loves ds9 says avoid the first two seasons outside of a select few (duet for example) like a plague. Paradise lost is the most relevant episode of trek to today, for example. That's season three I think.
"Homefront"/"Paradise Lost" are from season four.
Missed this before. I meant Discovery, they've had two years to make these two episodes we just saw. They had two years to make something that would grab me.
I've seen all of Deep Space Nine.
That's the two, should have remembered that.
Says....who? What series is more relevant to today? Lets put It this way. Everyone in my age group (20-30) whenever I've tried to get them to watch watch TNG can't stomach it. TOS is hit or miss based on episode. Everyone who I show ds9 starts watching it on their own. Maybe its a generational thing. People have an issue with the weekly reset, which even ds9 had in the beginning of course. They feel there's no consequences , that everything will always get wrapped up by the end. Oh look Geordie got used as a sleeper agent by the romulans and had to see counsellor troi. And the next week? Yeah no follow up.
Whoops, miscommunication. Sorry about that. Honest question, how long did the other pilots get worked on prior to their release? Trek doesn't exactly do well in that regard anyway.
TNG was in development in similar fashion and they also took about 2 years to produce the pilot that was shown in 1987.
TNG was announced in mid-October of 1986. At that time, it was nothing but a title and a signed contract with Roddenberry to produce it. It premiered less than one year later.
There had been earlier talks between Paramount and other potential producers and distribution partners, which generated absolutely nothing that was applied to TNG.
There had been earlier talks between Paramount and other potential producers and distribution partners, which generated absolutely nothing that was applied to TNG.
So far less time. Thanks, good to know.
Um, it was first pitched to FOX before that October announcement - and had been in pre-development (and also took used a lot of what they had done for the aborted 'Star trek Phase II' project that was ultimately turned into ST:TMP.
ST: D was announced in December 2015 and principal photography began in January 2017 (14 months later.) They had the first two episodes completed (ie edited and ready to show) by May 2017. So 18 months for ST: D from announcement to finished pilot as opposed to 11 since the announcement to pilot for TNG. More time, yes - A LOT more time? Hardly.
At this time (of the ST: D pilot airing) - they had 12 episodes done (ready to air); 2 in Post, and the final episode completing principal shooting.
Doing Star Trek was shopped around, to networks and potential executive producers. Nothing of TNG was in those early proposals. Roddenberry wasn't even involved at that point.
And for the 10 months Bryan Fuller was involved - he was paying more attention top his EP duties on "American Gods" then "Star Trek: Discovery" (Fuller seems to like to leave that fact out in interviews over why he an CBS parted ways.)
And? That isn't the viewers fault. Kurtzman and company had nearly two years to put this together, and have served up an underwhelming product so far.
Do they have an original idea anywhere in this freaking show?
http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/09/amanda-grayson-coming-to-star-trek-discovery-harberts-reveals/
http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/09/amanda-grayson-coming-to-star-trek-discovery-harberts-reveals/