News CBS All Access Wants Emmys For Star Trek: Discovery

[picard_2305]

All the headline reports on the screener packaging make me cringe. Better actors got overlooked in the past, such as Patrick Stewart, Brent Spiner, Connor Trineer, Rene Auberjonous. And if Soneqa Martin gets a win, I will just curl up and curse the world, as her acting is bland and her character awful and hate to see that get recogition over the better actors.

 

[picard_2305]

Let me be clear: I don't think it is the worst show on TV. It just didn't work for me. It had good actors and a lot of money spent on it, but never seemed to have a clear vision of what it wanted to be, beyond wanting to ride the coat tails of TOS.

I tried so hard to like this show but it is an abomination to the good name of Trek.

If it respected TOS more instead of trying to be everything Star Trek ain't, I might like it more

 

[Qonundrum]

Let me be clear: I don't think it is the worst show on TV. It just didn't work for me. It had good actors and a lot of money spent on it, but never seemed to have a clear vision of what it wanted to be, beyond wanting to ride the coat tails of TOS.

^^this

But with the staff turnover carousel in season 1 now alleviated, maybe season 2 will improve.

 

[Qonundrum]

All the headline reports on the screener packaging make me cringe. Better actors got overlooked in the past, such as Patrick Stewart, Brent Spiner, Connor Trineer, Rene Auberjonous. And if Soneqa Martin gets a win, I will just curl up and curse the world, as her acting is bland and her character awful and hate to see that get recogition over the better actors.

I'd include Avery Brooks in the list as well, but also keep in mind that - unlike the 1990s and earlier - sci-fi was not seen as a genre worthy of awards for anything other than great make-up or special effects. I'd be nice if there were retroactively handed awards.

Sonequa Martin-Green is not bad by any measure, but it's the stories that are a letdown to the actors, who then have to do more to make iffy scripts watchable. In that regard, it'd be no less true that the TNG cast all deserve multiple awards for making season 1 not suck anywhere as bad as it otherwise would have...

 

[Vger23]

All I can do is hope they have worked out whatever bugs that plagued season one, and give us a show that is Emmy worthy. Something that competes with Lost in Space, Westworld and others.

I think this is extremely fair to say.

I don't think there's any denying that S1 was buggy and uneven (as have most Trek first seasons).

The difference is in the fan reaction to this fact. There have been those who have expressed support, hoping that it gets set on course and realizes it's potential as other Trek series have, and there are others who are not only content to pound away mercilessly at it, but seem hell-bent on hoping it burns as fast and painfully as possible.

I always thought that option one is what "fans" of things do. I don't know why a fan of anything would hope for it to fail or be opposed to it receiving recognition. "I hate who my team took in the first round, and now we've started the football season 1-3 and the coach has made some bad decisions...man I hope these guys lose every single game going forward and the team moves to Wichita. And I'm going to be miserable about everything they do, even if they turn it around." Makes no sense. None.

I guess the difference for me is that I found a way to be entertained and see the potential despite the unevenness, and others just focus on the negative and can't get past it.

I'm looking forward to see what they do with S2.

 

[picard_2305]

I'd include Avery Brooks in the list as well, but also keep in mind that - unlike the 1990s and earlier - sci-fi was not seen as a genre worthy of awards for anything other than great make-up or special effects. I'd be nice if there were retroactively handed awards.

Sonequa Martin-Green is not bad by any measure, but it's the stories that are a letdown to the actors, who then have to do more to make iffy scripts watchable. In that regard, it'd be no less true that the TNG cast all deserve multiple awards for making season 1 not suck anywhere as bad as it otherwise would have...

Am I only one who thinks season 1 of TNG is not that bad, yes it is weaker than the later seasons and there are some right clunkers but there were some gems in it.

 

[ozzfloyd]

TNG S1 "not that bad"
DSC S1 "an abomination"

Rigggghhhhhht...

 

[BillJ]

TNG S1 "not that bad"
DSC S1 "an abomination"

Rigggghhhhhht...

I enjoyed TNG season one far more than Discovery season one. There was a sense of a weird and wild universe out there in early TNG. Discovery just hung on continuity nods. They had a chance to do weird and wild with the Spore Drive, but gave us a monotonous trip to the Mirror Universe. Boldly going where three other Star Trek shows had already gone before.

For a great take on parallel universes, I recommend Counterpart on Starz. The setup reminds one a bit of "Tapestry" from TNG season five.

 

[Vger23]

I enjoyed TNG season one far more than Discovery season one. There was a sense of a weird and wild universe out there in early TNG. Discovery just hung on continuity nods. They had a chance to do weird and wild with the Spore Drive, but gave us a monotonous trip to the Mirror Universe. Boldly going where three other Star Trek shows had already gone before.

For a great take on parallel universes, I recommend Counterpart on Starz. The setup reminds one a bit of "Tapestry" from TNG season five.

That's a matter of taste. Most would argue, rather successfully, that S1 of TNG is far and away the worst inaugural season in the entire franchise. Aside for my feelings of ENT S1, I'd tend to agree.

DSC's first season is flawed and buggy, but is a frigging masterpiece compared to most of the franchise's kick-off efforts.

I think it's far too easy to be sentimental about TNG S1 (or others) because you are looking at that season in the context of all the other seasons that came after with the levels of success and quality they eventually achieved, and it's nearly impossible to judge it in a vacuum otherwise.

Thankfully, back then, the fans gave it the benefit of the doubt and weren't asses about giving up on it too early.

 

[BillJ]

DSC's first season is flawed and buggy, but is a frigging masterpiece compared to most of the franchise's kick-off efforts.

Outside of "Context is for Kings", I'd rather watch "Code of Honor" than any of Discovery's other episodes.

 

[Vger23]

Outside of "Context is for Kings", I'd rather watch "Code of Honor" than any of Discovery's other episodes.

I'm so thrilled that you're still here, months and months after the last episode aired, telling us all the same story in a different way over and over again.

Thank God, because I was starting to forget how you feel. It's so good to be reminded every 3-4 posts!

 

[BillJ]

I'm so thrilled that you're still here, months and months after the last episode aired, telling us all the same story in a different way over and over again.

Thank God, because I was starting to forget how you feel. It's so good to be reminded every 3-4 posts!

No one is forcing you to read or reply to my posts.

 

[BillJ]

I think it's far too easy to be sentimental about TNG S1 (or others) because you are looking at that season in the context of all the other seasons that came after with the levels of success and quality they eventually achieved, and it's nearly impossible to judge it in a vacuum otherwise.

Missed this part the first time around: season one of TNG is my favorite season of the spinoffs, and always has been. Trek lost something in the transition from Roddenberry. It is dependent on the individual fan whether that is good or bad.

 

[Greg Cox]

For myself, I only stuck with TNG during Season One because, back then, it was pretty much the only game in town. I watched it because it was STAR TREK, but it didn't start getting good until Season 2 or so.

DISCO has gotten off to a much better start so far. IMHO.

 

[Rahul]

DIS is in that weird place, where I think the characters work right from the beginning (well...some from the third episode, when they were finally introduced). They don't have such a large ensemble as all Trek shows before, but the core group of characters - Burnham, Saru, Tilly, Stamets, all work great. And characters like Lorca and Tyler, which were obvious "mystery boxes" instead of "characters" - they were intersting, and we wanted to find out what's their deal. In fact, the only other Trek shows that had the characters work this good right from the beginning were TOS and DS9.

That being said: DIS first seasons' stories and plots - and I mean ALL of them - were shit. And I mean, absolute garbage, beyond any imagination, almost ridiculously bad. It's the worst horseshit Star Trek has crammed out since VOY's "Threshold", and I think even that had a more intelligent and interesting plot. Plot-wise, this season is an abomination. The only half-way watchable episode was the timeloop episode where the Enterprise...erm Discovery repeatedly blew up. And even that was shit compared to any other episode from any other first season of any other Trek show. And the only reason why it was even half-way watchable was because it was essentially a direct remake of one of TNG's better episodes.

It truly baffles the mind. Because the characters all are very lovable, and immediately feel "right": That's our new crew. Period. A worthy new Trek ensemble. And then... they deliver such crude stuff? This complete, utter schlock? And they even manage to deliver the usual Trek dialogue right - make it feel real, and that in the middle of such a gore-filled, ridiculous mockbuster version of a real sci-fi show? I don't get it... It's the characters why I give the next season a chance. But damn - the plots were the weakest Star Trek has ever put out. And I'm generously including "Spock's brain" and "A night in Sickbay" in there, which are both vastly superiour to the overall plotline of DIS season 1!

 

[Vger23]

That being said: DIS first seasons' stories and plots - and I mean ALL of them - were shit. And I mean, absolute garbage, beyond any imagination, almost ridiculously bad. It's the worst horseshit Star Trek has crammed out since VOY's "Threshold", and I think even that had a more intelligent and interesting plot...... But damn - the plots were the weakest Star Trek has ever put out. And I'm generously including "Spock's brain" and "A night in Sickbay" in there, which are both vastly superiour to the overall plotline of DIS season 1!

I respect a lot of your opposing opinions, you are generally very thoughtful.



...But this is some of the most outlandish and ridiculous shit I've read in a very long time.

DSC S1 was far from a gem....but it was infinitely better than the franchise's weaker moments. I think there's some SERIOUS bias laced in here.

 

[Refuge]

When I first got to see TNG Season One I don't remember it being so bad so in that context of a first viewing it got a pass. However it's been subsequent watches that the abysmal acting from them all, just... well, I don't like to say unkind things It still retains a clumsy wonderment about it though.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Trek lost something in the transition from Roddenberry.

The need for a restraining order?

 

[ozzfloyd]

Gene being sidelined is the best thing to happen to the franchise.

 

[Jayson1]

Gene being sidelined is the best thing to happen to the franchise.

And it happened twice! FIrst the "TOS" movies and then "TNG."

Jason