Which newer Trek franchise do you prefer, Discovery or the Kelvin movies?
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
How is it serious and childish at the same time?
I personally always want more of a show, but I could see the benefits. If the story is well told, the amount of time it takes doesn't matter as much.
Orville - not even close...
Tough to say. I like Discovery's core concept more but Beyond is the best individual thing to come out of either yet.
Unfortunately Discover is still in the unrealized potential category for me.
Unfortunately Discover is still in the unrealized potential category for me.
I know there are people here who deplore the though of opinions of. fans influancing the shows and movies, but next season the producers will have the benefit of consumer feedback in the form of viewer thoughs and social media. Which could result in major changes in what is produced.
Including anayisis of postings here.
Including anayisis of postings here.
I sure as fuck hope not. Fanwanky feedback is worse than anything the writers would cook up on their own.
I love them both. I love Kelvinverse films for being fun and nostalgic, even though they can be painfully stupid at times. I love Discovery for being different and involved with fascinating characters.
Star Trek as a franchise hasn't been this good since the early 90s.
Star Trek as a franchise hasn't been this good since the early 90s.
While I feel the opposite. One change I see advocated in fan posting on various websites and in reviews is the show need to "lighten up," this would be the first (of many) suggestion I personally would want the production team to adopt.
Bringing the war with the Klingons to a swift conclusion is another common fan desire TPTB should seriously consider. More along too non-war related "traditional" missions.
You might think of it as fanwanky, but when the fans are right, the fans are right.
Recall Vger23, it was just such fanwanky feedback that resulted in Leonard Nimoy being given many more lines and much more screen time during TOS.
Last edited:
I prefer Classic Star Trek. Bring back Enterprise!
I see a lot of people who like the show just as it is. "The Fans" in this case are the usual vocal minority. Not at all concerned.
Also, as has been confirmed multiple times, there was never an intent to draw the war arc out beyond the first season. That's not due to gripes and feedback, that was the plan all along.
I'm very supportive of a multiple arcs series. Ditch the war and do exploring next season. Diversity is key here.
But it ain't because The Fans.
Who other than the show's fan (aka "the viewers") should TPTB be looking too? Focus internally into the echo chamber that is their writer's room, with no external input from the fan base?
Not just long term trekkies, but also the fans they've ackuired over the last few weeks.
The old saying goes "the customer's always right." Especially today, when the customer is one button push from a dozen other hot new shows.
Not just long term trekkies, but also the fans they've ackuired over the last few weeks.
The old saying goes "the customer's always right." Especially today, when the customer is one button push from a dozen other hot new shows.
Well, again I think you're possibly missing my position here.
The fans of Discovery generally seem pleased with the show. It's been renewed and it's created a massive influx of subscriptions.
1. Since Trek fans (not DSC fans...but the broader group) are so disjointed in what they want, how they want it, what they value, what they love, what they hate, etc, to run around and try to please them is not feasible nor advisable.
2. I've rarely, if ever, seen franchise fans who have a true sense of what makes good drama. I mean no insult to anyone, but the standard fan's ideas about where the franchise should go are generally embarrassingly bad. Star Trek fans are particularly horrific at it.
3. Fans aren't quite the same thing as customers by definition. The fans at a football game might want the team to pass the ball far more than they do, but ultimately the players and coaches aren't responsible for running the plays the fans want or for playing the quarterback the fans prefer, etc. They're just responsible for winning. Fans can vote with their viewership and ticket purchases...but the coaches and owners aren't looking to the fans to inform them on those operational or strategic elements.
I look at television and movie franchises the same way. If the producers and writers start taking major cues from the fans, they might as well bury the show right there. The last thing in the world I want is for the showrunners trying to please the fan base. Just make a good damn show and let the chips fall where they may.
If the franchise had listened to the fans, 85% of Trek never would have gotten made.
They will look at ratings, and follow their general outlines with minor modifications based upon some feedback.
The problem with "what the fans want" is that is isn't consistent and never is. I credit DISCO's production staff for sticking with their intended storylines despite some of the harsh criticism ("not real Star Trek" and "doesn't feel like Star Trek."
). I would rather allow them the opportunity to put forth the whole season since that is their intention is using the season to tell a whole story.
The problem with both STD and the Kelvin movies is bad writing, and by that I mean poor character development and too much content crammed, with an emphasis on special effects and action.
The reason for that involves the point that these shows operate as tent-poles with international markets. That's why they resemble Hollywood blockbusters, which have the following features:
- Large amounts of money at stake, which is why they need to target international audiences. For the movies, that means marketing at roughly the same cost as production, especially given competition with other studios and high ticket prices. For STD, that means relying on Netflix to cover a show that costs around $8 million an episode, making it per season as expensive as a Hollywood tent-pole flick;
- Heavy emphasis on spectacle, especially CGI and action scenes, to make the shows look expensive;
- The inclusion of diversity to gain the attention of that international audience, stir "buzz" in media to support marketing, etc., but trying to stay within the PG sweet spot for movies to get the largest viewing audience available;
- Plots that are easy to follow so that the shows can cut across various cultural groups, but crammed with content involving action, etc., to make the shows look expensive. The results include story lines that are done hurriedly and lack of character development, among others.
And the writing problems cannot be resolved easily for these reasons plus the point that production time has to be kept as short as possible. Hence, prequels, sequels, spinoffs, remakes, reboots, etc.
In which case, one expects producers to listen to what will be most profitable, and that may or may not involve listening to groups of fans.
The reason for that involves the point that these shows operate as tent-poles with international markets. That's why they resemble Hollywood blockbusters, which have the following features:
- Large amounts of money at stake, which is why they need to target international audiences. For the movies, that means marketing at roughly the same cost as production, especially given competition with other studios and high ticket prices. For STD, that means relying on Netflix to cover a show that costs around $8 million an episode, making it per season as expensive as a Hollywood tent-pole flick;
- Heavy emphasis on spectacle, especially CGI and action scenes, to make the shows look expensive;
- The inclusion of diversity to gain the attention of that international audience, stir "buzz" in media to support marketing, etc., but trying to stay within the PG sweet spot for movies to get the largest viewing audience available;
- Plots that are easy to follow so that the shows can cut across various cultural groups, but crammed with content involving action, etc., to make the shows look expensive. The results include story lines that are done hurriedly and lack of character development, among others.
And the writing problems cannot be resolved easily for these reasons plus the point that production time has to be kept as short as possible. Hence, prequels, sequels, spinoffs, remakes, reboots, etc.
In which case, one expects producers to listen to what will be most profitable, and that may or may not involve listening to groups of fans.
I will never understand this point of view. I have found great character development in both.
I wouldn't expect them to.
Similar threads
- Poll
