Spoilers SDCC season 3 news thread!

[Nerys Myk]

Cleveland Booker? All those writers and that was the best name they could come up with for the character? It seems incredibly generic.

Know a lot of Cleveland Bookers?

"Good luck out there... Captain."

Is Pike handing the ship over to Kirk??

Number One is my guess.

 

[David cgc]

Then you should like the third season of DSC because it takes place in the 33rd Century and away from all this.

You keep saying this, and I keep not getting why I'm supposed to think their failure to make use of an existing setting means they'll be really good at exploiting an original setting. It's the same people making the same show. Tighter spandex and smaller tricorders aren't going to change the overstuffed plotting and broadsword characterization, it just means that they won't get automatic "tens" for putting Talosians or red warp nacelles on screen like production-design stunt-casting. No, they'll have to do that by showing T-1000 Borg drones, or Captain Braxton's time police.

replace “star trek” with just about any other long running franchise and you have the current state of the entertainment industry in a nutshell right there.

I know that's the trope, but I'm not sure that's correct. Like, it seems like what we're getting with CBSAA's Star Trek shows is what the Terrible Internet People wanted from the new Star Wars movies. Fanservice, fanservice, fanservice. Luke and Han, kicking ass and making you feel like it's 1980 again and the world is new, but with decades of in-jokes and fan lore. You watch the Short Treks and Picard trailers back-to-back, and you begin with a twelve-year-old shitpost from this board, and end with two characters talking about how they wish the '90s never ended and they could've been kings of syndication television forever. For all the talk about returning optimism about the future, this is very backwards-looking.

Generally people don't seem to be responding that well to pure nostalgia bait. Well enough for the trend not to have died (though we'll see how the Lion King remake shakes out this weekend), but if CBSAA's presentation today was really that indicative of contemporary culture's longing for the familiar, we wouldn't be going five to ten years between each disappointing Men in Black sequel.

 

[BillJ]

You keep saying this, and I keep not getting why I'm supposed to think their failure to make use of an existing setting means they'll be really good at exploiting an original setting. It's the same people making the same show. Tighter spandex and smaller tricorders aren't going to change the overstuffed plotting and broadsword characterization, it just means that they won't get automatic "tens" for putting Talosians or red warp nacelles on screen like production-design stunt-casting. No, they'll have to do that by showing T-1000 Borg drones, or Captain Braxton's time police.


I know that's the trope, but I'm not sure that's correct. Like, it seems like what we're getting with CBSAA's Star Trek shows is what the Terrible Internet People wanted from the new Star Wars movies. Fanservice, fanservice, fanservice. Luke and Han, kicking ass and making you feel like it's 1980 again and the world is new, but with decades of in-jokes and fan lore. You watch the Short Treks and Picard trailers back-to-back, and you begin with a twelve-year-old shitpost from this board, and end with two characters talking about how they wish the '90s never ended and they could've been kings of syndication television forever. For all the talk about returning optimism about the future, this is very backwards-looking.

Generally people don't seem to be responding that well to pure nostalgia bait. Well enough for the trend not to have died (though we'll see how the Lion King remake shakes out this weekend), but if CBSAA's presentation today was really that indicative of contemporary culture's longing for the familiar, we wouldn't be going five to ten years between each disappointing Men in Black sequel.

Overall, I’m higher on what CBS has produced, I liked the Picard and Short Treks trailers, but agree with the point you are making. Nostalgia can only carry the brand so far.

 

[pst]

You watch the Short Treks and Picard trailers back-to-back, and you begin with a twelve-year-old shitpost from this board, and end with two characters talking about how they wish the '90s never ended and they could've been kings of syndication television forever. For all the talk about returning optimism about the future, this is very backwards-looking.

i'm not sure how i feel about the franchise as it stands right now, but i actually didn't see the star trek: picard trailer for the rank nostalgia it could've been. star trek is itself so guilty of just keeping people in stasis because it doesn't matter how old shatner gets, we gotta stuff him in his starfleet uniform, etc. this feels like an attempt to move the characters along, even if we are returning to ones we knew 20-30 years ago. but it's an ongoing franchise and a living, breathing fictional world. picard looks to be pulling in threads from the long dormant prime universe, hitting a few nostalgia buttons, and also forging ahead with a new story. we'll see how it goes, but i was left thinking maybe CBS-AA should've started with this.

 

[fireproof78]

Generally people don't seem to be responding that well to pure nostalgia bait. Well enough for the trend not to have died (though we'll see how the Lion King remake shakes out this weekend), but if CBSAA's presentation today was really that indicative of contemporary culture's longing for the familiar, we wouldn't be going five to ten years between each disappointing Men in Black sequel.

While I agree with your general sentiment the market has not demonstrated a willingness to explore anything beyond that. So, the studios are obliging. Fandom spent years showcasing that they like TOS style Trek, and war stories through fan films and the Kelvin films. Then, the moment they try something a little bit different, fans complain, start petitions, and create negative word of mouth.

Why, if you were a studio, would you produce something new? Why take the risk?

i'm not sure how i feel about the franchise as it stands right now, but i actually didn't see the star trek: picard trailer for the rank nostalgia it could've been. star trek is itself so guilty of just keeping people in stasis because it doesn't matter how old shatner gets, we gotta stuff him in his starfleet uniform, etc. this feels like an attempt to move the characters along, even if we are returning to ones we knew 20-30 years ago. but it's an ongoing franchise and a living, breathing fictional world. picard looks to be pulling in threads from the long dormant prime universe, hitting a few nostalgia buttons, and also forging ahead with a new story. we'll see how it goes, but i was left thinking maybe CBS-AA should've started with this.

I wish I could have your optimism, which is usually something I try to encourage in everyone with this franchise. But, watching that trailer felt like an action/adventure nostalgia romp. So, I am less than enthused, especially with bringing the Borg back. I had really hoped that storyline was dead.

 

[EnderAKH]

Cleveland Booker? All those writers and that was the best name they could come up with for the character? It seems incredibly generic.

Like James Kirk or Leonard McCoy are bastions of originality?

 

[F. King Daniel]

I just don't see how I can possibly have fun with this. I dropped off the board for a couple years when I realized I stopped having the same conversations with the same people over and over again every few months and had started having it every few weeks. I'd squeezed all the juice out of the orange, pumped it back into the orange, and squeezed it out again. I need Trek to be bringing something new to the table. We're the audience, our job is to interpret and contextualize. How am I supposed to watch Star Trek when Star Trek has begun watching itself and no longer requires our participation?

I'm afraid Star Trek has plunged itself into an ever-narrowing gyre. We joke about how Spock shouted a lot in the first couple episodes, they make a prequel where Spock shouts to reference that. Data's supposed to be the new take on the Spock concept, now season 0 Spock sounds indistinguishable from season 1 Data rambling on and on. I worried after STID that the future of Trek would be endlessly remaking the same three greatest hits over and over, like the Batman movies ("Klingons/Romulans," "Khan," "Borg," recast, rinse, and repeat), but this is actually much worse. They're endlessly remaking fan commentary about the same three greatest hits over and over.

I close my eyes after seeing the news from the SDCC presentation and I just see Don Hertzfeldt's Simpsons couch gag where we see the show distill and mutate and distill over and over for millions of years until the only thing left is a pitiable and alien expression of the show's most fundamental elements. I have no desire for this to go on long enough for the ultimate Star Trek series to be a stick figure of Captain Kirk groping a globe saying, "I must teach the new planet to make love" next to a stick figure of Spock saying, "Highly illogical."

I thought the right thing to do when Star Trek was first announced as coming back to TV was to do a square-one reboot. Read the TOS pitch document, and start from that; high-grade futurism combined with ripped-from-the-headlines storylines and strong, relatable characters in a flexible action-adventure genre. We're headed far in the opposite direction with Star Trek existing mostly to remind you of the old Star Trek you liked more.

It's worth pointing out that trailers in particular are going to lean heavily on nostalgia, and emphasise familiar elements perhaps notes than the shows themselves.

 

[BillJ]

Like James Kirk or Leonard McCoy are bastions of originality?

You would expect people to be a little better at it fifty-plus years later.

 

[fireproof78]

You would expect people to be a little better at it fifty-plus years later.

Here's my thing. When people try to come up with future sounding names they sound completely unbelievable. Unoriginal at least feels a little more grounded to me, than something stupid and scifi sounding.

And, no, I don't expect people to be better 50 years later. These people haven't been working on Star Trek for 50 years!

 

[DarKush]

I liked the Picard trailer. I feel better about the show now. That being said, something about the production design felt a bit off. While I was glad to see the return of the TOS-style Romulans (it was a stylistic choice I was also happy to see in Star Trek '09), the makeup looks off for them or the Vulcans. It also looked off for Seven of Nine (seeing her in the trailer was a pleasant surprise; it would be great if there is a DS9 character that also is in the series) . And the color of Data's eyes were off. I liked the look of a lot of the costuming, ships, and Borg cube. Overall, I'm intrigued.

I liked David Ajala in Supergirl. Not a fan of the name "Cleveland Booker". It made me think of Cleveland Brown and then Shepherd Book. I think they could've come up with a better name than that.

I also thought the Short Trek teaser was okay. I am curious to see more exploration of the Pike era and I wouldn't mind if it leads to a spin off show with Pike and Spock or one with Number One in command of another starship. I haven't seen most of Discovery Season 2 yet, and Ethan Peck's Spock voice sounds too deep. Leonard Nimoy's voice was resonant, but it didn't sound so full of bass.

 

[Nerys Myk]

You would expect people to be a little better at it fifty-plus years later.

I'm having a hard time identifying the problem. The names aren't common but not unheard off.

 

[Captain Crow]

"Good luck out there... Captain."

Is Pike handing the ship over to Kirk??

It's Pike dropping off the Captain from the Tribble short to her ship.

 

[Nerys Myk]

No black collars Nod to the TOS pilots?

 

[Lord Garth]

You keep saying this, and I keep not getting why I'm supposed to think their failure to make use of an existing setting means they'll be really good at exploiting an original setting. It's the same people making the same show. Tighter spandex and smaller tricorders aren't going to change the overstuffed plotting and broadsword characterization, it just means that they won't get automatic "tens" for putting Talosians or red warp nacelles on screen like production-design stunt-casting. No, they'll have to do that by showing T-1000 Borg drones, or Captain Braxton's time police.

You're making a lot of assumptions. Until we actually see any episodes from the third season, all we're really doing is comparing our hypotheticals.

But, even though I'm looking forward to them, I can see your point about the Shorts and the Picard Trailer.

 

[Kpnuts]

At this point it would be more "diverse" to have a new straight white male character on the show. Especially considering you know, there aren't any, since Pike left. Incredible.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Life is so hard.

 

[Antediluvia]

Is there a non-region locked preview for the Short Trek? Us Canucks get screwed everytime

 

[pst]

At this point it would be more "diverse" to have a new straight white male character on the show. Especially considering you know, there aren't any, since Pike left. Incredible.

something’s incredible.

 

[donners22]

Is there a non-region locked preview for the Short Trek? Us Canucks get screwed everytime

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Locutus of Bored]

At this point it would be more "diverse" to have a new straight white male character on the show. Especially considering you know, there aren't any, since Pike left. Incredible.

You are reply banned from this thread, as per your warning here. If you continue only posting about this one-note grudge against women and feminism and continue derailing threads you will continue receiving warnings. Move on.