Discussion in 'Star Trek: Discovery' started by Groppler Zorn, Aug 5, 2018.
Which is completely unfair but unfortunately a reality.
I think that's completely fair.
If they wanted to be judged purely on their own merit - they should have created an original property.
By using a pre-existing franchise IP, you already have a big, built-in audience that you normally wouldn't have. But they of course will have expectations for the show, and can turn their back on it if it doesn't meet them.
For example, I'm checking out DIS because of the Star Trek label and legacy. And I find a lot of things to critizise of the show, and seriously want it to improve to stay as a viewer. But yet, if it didn't have the Star Trek label, I at this point would have already abandoned it. I'm still a paying customer. Because I give this particular show a LOT more chances to prove itself than I would for a no-name show. Because of the expectations I have regarding a "Star Trek" show.
Your reaction is fair. However, even if it was an original program it would be compared to Star Trek and other scifi properties. Comparison is inevitable, which means standing on its own merits is impossible. That's the unfair part.
Your expectations are yours and I won't argue against that. But, I also don't share them. I watch Discovery for different reasons, not because "Star Trek."
I actually liked DIS a great deal, but I think if it had not been for Jason Isaacs performance the show would have augured in hard. Lorca may have saved Trek on the small screen. They'll have to resolve that gap in season 2, but I am pretty hopeful from the previews.
And that's WHY he was cast in the role. The Producers like him too. - Just saying.
My sentiments exactly.
Star Trek: Discovery may have got me to start watching because it's Star Trek but I keep watching because it's Discovery.
During the fifth season of VOY, I started enjoying the series less. Between a season with some episodes I reacted pretty badly to and Ron Moore's falling out with Brannon Braga at the beginning of the sixth season (where I immediately took Ron Moore's side as soon as the story broke out online), I stopped watching. Having stopped watching once, it became a lot easier to stop watching ENT. Six episodes in, I was out.
I'm still watching DSC because I like it. If I ever don't like it anymore and stop watching, well... it's been nice knowing all of you. Maybe we'll run into each other in GTD or some other forum.
Dangit, was gonna just say, "Came for Star Trek, stayed for Discovery," but you beat me to it! I'm definitely with you though, I was PISSED by the end of VOY, and I could only get through the first few episodes of ENT as well.
However, modern me will watch any episode of VOY for a laugh, and I'm almost done with ENT! It's a very entertaining mess of a show lol.
Same. I got up to a few episodes of ENT season 1 when it was being broadcast, and never tuned back in again. I didn't try it out again until years later when I got Netflix and found after season 2 it got really good.
I gave up on ENT pretty quickly when it first aired and Nemesis killed my interest in trek completely for quite a while. It takes more than something having Star Trek in the title for me to give it my time. Like others have said, I watch and enjoy Discovery for being Discovery.
I enjoyed Jason Isaac's performance as well. But he wasn't the only reason why I enjoyed the series. The leading lady was another reason.
Oh I thought that many of the folks on the show gave a great performance. Stamets, Saru and Tilly became some of my favorite Trek characters. Not bad for a first season show. SMG gave a great performance, but I did fell the writers could have helped her out a bit more, in a few cases. Just like with Walking Dead, she managed to do more with less. It would be great to give her more to work with.
In my statement I just mean Isaacs helped create a character, to me, that was the standout character and he really was fulcrum about which all atttentions pivoted. The Klingons and other antagonists could not provide that (What was the name of explody Vulcan guy, or Klingon Leader #3.. etc)
Discovery is new and in a very good way. It's like nothing we've ever seen in the Trek franchise before.
Not at all. As it goes on it becomes more and more prosaic and repetitious of Trek's worst habits. There's nothing really new or innovative here.
Perception is everything.
I tend to agree with both points here, although I’d suggest that context is also very important as well (even if it’s “for kings” hehe).
Given that DSC is trying to create the context of a Star Trek show, i think it does that to a greater or lesser extent depending on how you look at it. In some ways it does fall back on established Trek tropes and iconography. In other ways I think it wildly misses the mark in what I suspect to be an attempt at innovation. I think it’s not successful enough in each case.
But that’s just my twopence worth
Same here. I like the fact that there is room for more in the Trek universe as well. And, even if this Trek isn't for everyone the fact that it is doing well enough means more Trek. I fail to see the downside here.
I think the Picard series is also going to be completely left-field too. I mean they're talking about Shakespearean and Beckettian influences - that's going to be some emotionally deep social commentary and drama.
And I am also looking forward to Tarantino's Star Trek! If it's anything like Pulp Fiction, Inglorious Basterds or Django Unchained or Kill Bill, it will be great!!!!
I'm hoping we get to see Picard solving some universal mystery. He's left the Enterprise behind and set off on some deeper calling in his twilight years. Last thing I want is Picard solving disputes and getting buried in political machinations
As if that's ever actually going to happen.
Separate names with a comma.