Second season has 1.5k user ratings on RT versus almost 2 mln new subscriptions on CBS AA and many more on Netflix worldwide. So I would not draw such far-reaching conclusions from such a small unrepresentative sample.
Can DC's "Rebirth" teach DSC lessons?
- Thread starter ISS_Einstein
- Start date
Second season has 1.5k user ratings on RT versus almost 2 mln new subscriptions on CBS AA and many more on Netflix worldwide. So I would not draw such far-reaching conclusions from such a small unrepresentative sample.
It's not about any single version as more "pure" than the rest. Rather, it's about looking at the best, most iconic *storytelling* that Trek has done over the years, and finding common threads in that.
Arguably so, although it's hard to be sure about this because everyone's experience is anecdotal. Just the other night I was catching up with a couple of old friends who are also Trek fans, and I asked if either one was watching DSC. The answer was no... but one was enthusiastically in the midst of a TOS rewatch with her boyfriend (as I happen to be doing with my girlfriend, too!), and the other asked if I'd seen The Orville.
(Note for anyone thinking I might be talking about "old fogey" fans here: both of these people are Millennials.)
Great! Then that's a good starting point for figuring out what makes certain stories work so well. Trek doesn't have to be Just One Thing (nor does the DC Universe, obviously!)... but it does need to have creative integrity about whatever it tries to be.
I completely agree with your basic points. I just can't agree that DSC has been living up to this standard, or even coming close, except for a handful of standout episodes. Calling the storytelling "a little sloppy" is like calling the Atlantic Ocean "a little wet."
Not unless it explicitly changes established continuity. A shift in storytelling style may or may not involve a reboot, and vice-versa.
But the Marvel cinematic universe and the DC TV shows very much do concern themselves with continuity. It's just internal continuity, specific to their own fictional universes... not the continuity of the source material. If DSC were presenting itself as an adaptation of Star Trek, rather than as part of the same overall narrative, that would be a whole different ball of wax.
While I agree that Trek doesn't have to be just one thing (and something I think Kurtzman is trying to do by giving different shows for different audiences), I think listening to what the fans want is a terrible idea. It just screams of absolute disaster.
Well, the great thing is that you and I have the right to have our own opinions when it comes to things. We don't have to like the same things. We don't have to agree ever. We just should be polite to one another. I like Discovery (even if I may find it flawed). You don't. Cool by me.
Someone from several years ago had a supposed quote from Roddenberry, "if I listened to fans, Star Trek would be shit."
Wise words.
Posted this in a different thread:
Read in the voice of Professor Crater.
I think my initial impression two years ago was the right one. Guess we'll find out.
Last edited:
They've already been down the bizarre alternate timeline route in season one. It would be redundant to explore another alternate history.
(Although Kurtzman was involved with Fringe, which did exactly that)
They did? Refresh my memory.
You know, the one Lorca was from and they spent several episodes there?
Different thing. That's an alternate universe, not a changed timeline.
How can you know they're not the same? Early plans for Trek's 700th episode would have featured William Shatner as Tiberius Kirk and using convoluted means, established the split between the Prime and Mirror universes a la the Kelvin timeline.
They didn't make it, so it's not relevant. Let's focus on actual precedents that apply like Yesterday's Enterprise or Tapestry.
It shows authorial intent, so I think it has some validity. How can we prove the mirror universe isn't the result of some temporal tampering?
No, it doesn't. When it actually gets made then there will be some intent.
The Mirror Universe is whatever the writers say it is in a film or episode that is actually made. Otherwise, Spock killed JFK.
An author rejecting an idea is also authorial intent.
And since all incursions with regards to the Mirror Universe involve Wizard of OZ like funhouse mirror character distortions cued to those actually interacting with the Mirror Universe, how do we know if its even a real universe at all and instead a cosmic MMORPG set up by a godlike being/race?
Agreed almost on every count.
That's some serious rationalizing bullshit right there, my man.
I think mos6507 needs to let people speak for themselves. I happen to like the show. If I didn't like it, I would've stopped watching by now. I don't watch shows I don't like or am not interested in. I eventually stopped watching VOY. I stopped watching ENT after six episodes. I stopped watching Andromeda half-way through the first season. I didn't watch The Orville after the first season. I'm still watching Discovery. I haven't stopped watching yet.
If CBSAA puts out a Star Trek series I don't like, I'll stop watching, I won't post about it, you won't hear from me. I was scarce in the ENT Forum. I literally posted in the Kelvin Forum only once during the year Into Darkness came out and only because I've been here since 1999 and I knew there might be some posters who'd want to know my take (I didn't like it). So I posted it, so people could see what I thought, and then I was out of there. Gone! Some people responded to my thoughts but I never replied to them. Because I don't post in or hang around forums devoted to things I don't like.
If someone else wants to do things differently from the way I've historically done them, then fine. But I only came back to TrekBBS because of Discovery. Otherwise, my time here was done. I was just one of those posters who used to post "way back when" who some people missed and that's it. I was a regular the first 10 years of the board, a moderator for six of them, and overall my time on the board had already run its course. A long time ago. I like the show and that's why I'm back. Otherwise, why the Hell would I need this for?
Nothing is more arrogant than someone thinking, "How can you possibly have an opinion different from mine?" I wonder how people can think certain things all the time. Why they have the opinions they have puzzles me a lot sometimes. Other times it doesn't. But the key difference is: I accept that they don't see things the same way I do. I don't say, "Oh, they're only just pretending to like something. I know they really don't." Before someone says, "But you've said you don't think some YouTubers hate Discovery as much as they say!" That's true. But the last time I checked, posters here don't get paid for posts and likes, the same way some YouTubers get paid for clicks. Completely different animal. Otherwise, this board owes me two decades of back pay!
I'm just glad that in this forum, there are a lot of people who like the show as much as I do. But I have some friends and some family who also like the show and they definitely don't post here. Positive blogs and YouTube reviews of Disco also exist. Believe it or not. So it's NOT a case of "no one likes the show except people who post on TrekBBS." It's an exaggeration to say that. Unrelentingly negative opinions are just as exaggerated as unrelentingly positive ones. I at least have the awareness to realize there are extremes on both sides instead of just the one I disagree with.
Agreed. There's plenty of Trek I was ambivalent about to the point of not watching it in first run. I didn't watch all of DS9 (less than a full season, then very spotty after), VOY (one full season, then almost nothing) or ENT (about half a season, and then some S4 episodes that were tie-ins) in first run. I've since watched DS9 (fantastic) and ENT (better than I gave it credit for), but still can't get through VOY, even all these years later.
I don't watch Star Trek series unless, you know....I like them. And, as whacky as it may seem to some apparently, I really like DSC...so I watch it. Again, I know it's amazing and weird...but that's how I roll.
Also, mos6507's claim that TrekBBS is the only place you see positivity about the series is extremely flawed. The series seems to be generally well received (not a slam-dunk, but generally well received) by both audiences and professional critics. CBS appears happy with the business results. As usual, there are a loud, small, very vocal group of people who are going to "take to the interwebs" to mount their fight...but I haven't found that at all to be indicative of the general feeling out there. In fact, I find TrekBBS to be the most balanced and reasonable place to see discussion of the show, from multiple perspectives.
Last edited:
I started watching DC's Titans the other day, and damn that is a dour show. Out of interest, here is what TOR.com wrote:
The grim tone is blandly predictable, considering Titans was created by Geoff Johns, Akiva Goldsman, and Greg Berlanti. Johns’s Teen Titans run is full of melodramatic angst and violent dismemberment. Goldsman is responsible for such “gritty takes” as the Star Trek: Discoverypilot, The Dark Tower, and Transformers: The Last Knight. And Berlanti’s Arrow also started out as a gritty, murdery, not-Batman show—but it at least has developed into a joyful exploration of the weirder corners of the DC Universe
The desaturated, joyless, hyper-serious take is in line with the Zack Snyder movies ... Clearly there’s someone at Warner Bros. who believes superhero fans want realistic depictions of *checks notes* alien space princesses, shape-shifting goofballs, goth demon daughters, and circus acrobats turned colorful crime fighters. And clearly, some people do. However, Snyder’s movies have consistently underperformed expectations, and maybe that’s because for all their violence and solemnity, they’re actually as about as edgy as a bowling ball.
The desaturated, joyless, hyper-serious take is in line with the Zack Snyder movies ... Clearly there’s someone at Warner Bros. who believes superhero fans want realistic depictions of *checks notes* alien space princesses, shape-shifting goofballs, goth demon daughters, and circus acrobats turned colorful crime fighters. And clearly, some people do. However, Snyder’s movies have consistently underperformed expectations, and maybe that’s because for all their violence and solemnity, they’re actually as about as edgy as a bowling ball.
And Rolling Stone:
Fuck Batman.”
This is a thing Dick Grayson, a.k.a. Robin, declares midway through the first episode of Titans, the new live-action drama about the popular DC Comics team.
“Fuck Batman,” he says, mere moments after dragging a defeated foe’s face along a row of broken glass to add injury to injury.
“Fuck Batman” he says, one episode before he smugly plunges garden shears into the genitals of one opponent and throws razor-sharp projectiles into the eyeballs of several others.
“Fuck Batman” is meant to establish that the former Boy Wonder has turned against his old mentor, that he’s in search of his own identity and way of fighting crime. It’s also clearly meant by the creative team behind Titans (including Akiva Goldsman and Geoff Johns, who wrote the first episode from a story by them and Greg Berlanti) to inspire shock and awe among the DC fanboys: Holy shit, Robin just said “Eff Batman!” It’s the sort of thing a petulant teenager — which Robin in this version of the story is not supposed to be (he’s working as a detective for the Detroit PD when we meet him) — might say to sound cool or fearless. But really, it makes him sound like he’s trying way too hard.
This is a thing Dick Grayson, a.k.a. Robin, declares midway through the first episode of Titans, the new live-action drama about the popular DC Comics team.
“Fuck Batman,” he says, mere moments after dragging a defeated foe’s face along a row of broken glass to add injury to injury.
“Fuck Batman” he says, one episode before he smugly plunges garden shears into the genitals of one opponent and throws razor-sharp projectiles into the eyeballs of several others.
“Fuck Batman” is meant to establish that the former Boy Wonder has turned against his old mentor, that he’s in search of his own identity and way of fighting crime. It’s also clearly meant by the creative team behind Titans (including Akiva Goldsman and Geoff Johns, who wrote the first episode from a story by them and Greg Berlanti) to inspire shock and awe among the DC fanboys: Holy shit, Robin just said “Eff Batman!” It’s the sort of thing a petulant teenager — which Robin in this version of the story is not supposed to be (he’s working as a detective for the Detroit PD when we meet him) — might say to sound cool or fearless. But really, it makes him sound like he’s trying way too hard.
It's not that I think dour things are offensive, I just think they are incredibly boring, and after brief flirtations with total nihilism in adolescence, we learn as adults to get over that kind of pessimism as a matter of necessity, and realise that in order to be happy, you have to embrace fun, joy, etc, unashamedly - enjoy humor, earnestness, joy, beauty - and even the camp; after being conditioned to do almost anything to avoid looking 'dorky' in our horrible schools).
I'm trying not to point fingers at DSC, as I don't think it helps things, but season one was more than a little similar to Titans, complete with "fucking cool" - I swear constantly, fuck you very much, but that line just sounded so fucking forced. Considering DSC was originally touted as more colourful, less stately and stolid than TNG allegedly was (section of the forum's words, not mine, I love TNG), season one was probably less joyful and beautiful than any Trek I've seen.
You can't go through your whole life avoiding what is genuinely joyful or inspirational, just because you think it might look dorky, when it's emotionally right - thats the way someone who will always be a slave. If DC and Marvel can make a success out of their actual identity, then Star Trek can, even if you have to force it on ignorant audiences who think they want Synder Trek, drip feeding them a little more joy like past Trek did. Lectures from bent Admirals to honest Starfleet Captains about Section 31 being necessary, can go fuck itself - I have read hundreds of history, philosophy and political books and wouldn't be confident presenting a message like that to audiences - I would rather the show stick to naval battles and high adventure, instead of trying to be profound and failing to even reach TOS or TNG.
I started watching DC's Titans the other day, and damn that is a dour show. Out of interest, here is what TOR.com wrote:
The grim tone is blandly predictable, considering Titans was created by Geoff Johns, Akiva Goldsman, and Greg Berlanti. Johns’s Teen Titans run is full of melodramatic angst and violent dismemberment. Goldsman is responsible for such “gritty takes” as the Star Trek: Discoverypilot, The Dark Tower, and Transformers: The Last Knight. And Berlanti’s Arrow also started out as a gritty, murdery, not-Batman show—but it at least has developed into a joyful exploration of the weirder corners of the DC Universe
The desaturated, joyless, hyper-serious take is in line with the Zack Snyder movies ... Clearly there’s someone at Warner Bros. who believes superhero fans want realistic depictions of *checks notes* alien space princesses, shape-shifting goofballs, goth demon daughters, and circus acrobats turned colorful crime fighters. And clearly, some people do. However, Snyder’s movies have consistently underperformed expectations, and maybe that’s because for all their violence and solemnity, they’re actually as about as edgy as a bowling ball.
And Rolling Stone:
Honestly, I think it's safe to say this - dour wallpaper-is-peeling-off-every-wall superheroes-are-assholes they-broke-their-hip-and-are-in-chronic-pain type depression-fest shows are just not that entertaining. Most people have enough shit to deal with in life - chronic illness, horrible work, etc, and want to be inspired by a vision - I think it's part of Marvel and Star Wars cinematic success.Fuck Batman.”
This is a thing Dick Grayson, a.k.a. Robin, declares midway through the first episode of Titans, the new live-action drama about the popular DC Comics team.
“Fuck Batman,” he says, mere moments after dragging a defeated foe’s face along a row of broken glass to add injury to injury.
“Fuck Batman” he says, one episode before he smugly plunges garden shears into the genitals of one opponent and throws razor-sharp projectiles into the eyeballs of several others.
“Fuck Batman” is meant to establish that the former Boy Wonder has turned against his old mentor, that he’s in search of his own identity and way of fighting crime. It’s also clearly meant by the creative team behind Titans (including Akiva Goldsman and Geoff Johns, who wrote the first episode from a story by them and Greg Berlanti) to inspire shock and awe among the DC fanboys: Holy shit, Robin just said “Eff Batman!” It’s the sort of thing a petulant teenager — which Robin in this version of the story is not supposed to be (he’s working as a detective for the Detroit PD when we meet him) — might say to sound cool or fearless. But really, it makes him sound like he’s trying way too hard.
It's not that I think dour things are offensive, I just think they are incredibly boring, and after brief flirtations with total nihilism in adolescence, we learn as adults to get over that kind of pessimism as a matter of necessity, and realise that in order to be happy, you have to embrace fun, joy, etc, unashamedly - enjoy humor, earnestness, joy, beauty - and even the camp; after being conditioned to do almost anything to avoid looking 'dorky' in our horrible schools).
I'm trying not to point fingers at DSC, as I don't think it helps things, but season one was more than a little similar to Titans, complete with "fucking cool" - I swear constantly, fuck you very much, but that line just sounded so fucking forced. Considering DSC was originally touted as more colourful, less stately and stolid than TNG allegedly was (section of the forum's words, not mine, I love TNG), season one was probably less joyful and beautiful than any Trek I've seen.
You can't go through your whole life avoiding what is genuinely joyful or inspirational, just because you think it might look dorky, when it's emotionally right - thats the way someone who will always be a slave. If DC and Marvel can make a success out of their actual identity, then Star Trek can, even if you have to force it on ignorant audiences who think they want Synder Trek, drip feeding them a little more joy like past Trek did. Lectures from bent Admirals to honest Starfleet Captains about Section 31 being necessary, can go fuck itself - I have read hundreds of history, philosophy and political books and wouldn't be confident presenting a message like that to audiences - I would rather the show stick to naval battles and high adventure, instead of trying to be profound and failing to even reach TOS or TNG.
Variety is the spice of life. I like franchises that aren't beholden to nostalgia and allow their series to chart their own paths and/or choose decontruction where it comes to addressing their franchise roots. However, I can see why TNG fans don't like Disco so much. As someone who grew up on TOS and knows how dark that show could be, I appreciate Disco a lot.
I also found Titans quite enjoyable, but then I bought the comic when it first appeared on the stands and don't personally see the characters as cartoons for kiddies. And like Disco, Titans successfully launched DC Universe, so DC fans get to enjoy more Young Justice. They get to enjoy Doom Patrol and will get to enjoy the upcoming Swamp Thing, Star Girl, Harley Quinn and more. I don't really see the downside here other there being more and more content to watch on my unchanging budget of time.
Last edited:
