• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Let's talk about the elephant in the room, this series violates Roddenberry's vision big time

Especially on the 3rd episode most characters, even the leads are often depicted as extremely cranky like a regular crime show on any regular tv script. Roddenberry's vision is not a fixation, it's what genuinely made TNG a phenomenon.
I think it flawlessly matches Gene's vision.
 
That's not really his fault. The show's production staff essentially prodded and pestered him to become associated with the show so that could have the "prestige" of association with the Roddenberry family. What was Rod supposed to do, turn away free money on principal? Would you do that, were you in his position?

I'd do exactly the same thing, on the condition but only if they pick one of my awful adolescent fanfics and turn it into an episode.

But I'd also be prepared for anonymous internet denizens to view it as a fairly venal act.
 
Commander Landry: I see we’re unloading all kinds of garbage today. All right, Starfleet says we have to feed the animals.

Captain Kirk: Well, here's one thing you can be sure of, mister: leave any bigotry in your quarters. There's no room for it on the bridge.

(The difference between Star Trek and Battlestar Trek: The Expanse)

There are many MANY differences between these two shows. And all of the differences are favorable to Discovery: better acting, better writing, more interesting characters, a more interesting story, better antagonists, better direction, better cinematography, better FX, the list goes on.

Things changed when they went to film in the 80s, and elevated Trek with better everything, but that original series is a kids show compared to Discovery.

It's enjoyable for what it is, it's good for its time, but it does not compare to Discovery.

Whoosh!
 
So far the character dynamics and interactions actually remind me most of the first two Kelvinverse movies.

Kor
 
Gene Roddenberry was a genius Show maker. He had a vision. A very brilliant vision about a TV show called Star Trek. And his spectacular vision give a birth of the unforgettable Star Trek TNG. But, people must not to forget. That vision was GR's vision for '80 TV show. If GR still alive today and he want to make another Star Trek, he will have another spectacular vision that basically not the same as his '80 era TV show. Because today is not '80. Today is 2017. Everyone change. Including the visionary Gene Roddenberry (if he still alive and healthy, and still in the same industry).
 
Berman, Braga, Moore, Behr, Piller and Taylor did a better job managing the Trek franchise than Roddenberry. Sorry. I love Gene and what he brought to the world and he'll forever be in my gratitude for it, but come on.

Trek was better off outside his direct control than it was in it. And that's just the way I see it.
 
The Quester Tapes was a huge hit, and I can't wait for the third Andromeda spin off ;)
Planet Earth. Nothing says genius like vain quarrelsome little seed carriers. Gotta be worth a few rams, at least. And Saxon's character was Dylan Hunt. A man frozen in suspended animation who returns to help rebuild civilization. Recycling is genius, too.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
I watched 'Chaos on the Bridge' recently and from memory a number of the actors, producers and execs were of the opinion that had Roddenberry remained in charge, TNG probably would not have made it past the 3rd season. If Roddenberry had not have died, Paramount probably would have got rid of him and sent him a weekly royalties check to shut him up.

Also, i'm glad Discovery isn't giving into the holier-than-thou perfect human nonsense of TNG. I don't want to watch saints who make the right decisions all the time and know everything. As an arsehole who makes bad decisions and knows very little, i don't find it relatable or interesting to watch
 
Last edited:
STD is fine and the Roddenberry had a vision is nonsense. GR wanted to create a space western and other writers fleshed out the universe. I mean good grief TOS violated GR's no conflict rule. STD is better than JJabramprise since they didn't turn iconic roles into cosplay caricatures.
 
Also, i'm glad Discovery isn't giving into the holier-than-thou perfect human nonsense of TNG. I don't want to watch saints who make the right decisions all the time and know everything. As an arsehole who makes bad decisions and knows very little, i don't find it relatable or interesting to watch
I don't find losers who make bad decisions and stuff up every five minutes fun to watch either.
 
At this point I dislike all the characters so much that I'm not sure that I'll be able to appreciate even the sciency stand-alone episodes, assuming those are even coming.

I watched the AfterTrek talk show hosting one of the writers and it literally filled me with anger how he was proud of creating this fake trek, clearly Star Trek couldn't possibly mean any less to him.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top