David Mack is GUSHING about it...this should settle it

[RAMA]

The Huffington Post picked some of this story up

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...008e4b0390a1564dcb4?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003

 

[Mudd]

HuffPo is still online?

Huh.

 

[kirk55555]

I'm glad he's happy, but one person's opinion means nothing about the quality of a show. It would be hard if not impossible to find a bad show without fans, so I don't see how David Mack's opinion settles anything. All it means is that he likes the show, nothing more or less.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I think CBS is very confident, and wants the audience to see it to make their own determination. I don't blame them for being tight lipped, even if it is unusual.

Yes; that's the impression I get. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that CBS is confident in the quality of the show.

That is to say, I do NOT get the impression that they have reason to think that the critics' reviews will generally be bad, and thus they are embargoing those reviews for that reason.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

I'm glad he's happy, but one person's opinion means nothing about the quality of a show. It would be hard if not impossible to find a bad show without fans, so I don't see how David Mack's opinion settles anything. All it means is that he likes the show, nothing more or less.

I trust the novelists. They know their Trek.

 

[uniderth]

Wait, so this series is based on water? Where the hell was that?!?!?!?!

That's violates canon!
#NotMySeaTrek

 

[KirkusOveractus]

That's violates canon!
#NotMySeaTrek

So they will have a cannon, which would violate canon!

 

[ozzfloyd]

David Mack is very hit or miss when it comes to good story idea's so I can't really use his opinion as a barometer for quality.

I'll take his opinion over yours any day.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

That's violates canon!
#NotMySeaTrek

Hmmm. SeaLab Trek 2255: The Animated Series

Who voices Captain Hank Murphy? With Harry Goz unfortunately passed away, I vote H. Jon Benjamin.

 

[pst]

I think CBS is very confident, and wants the audience to see it to make their own determination. I don't blame them for being tight lipped, even if it is unusual.

generally, this behavior by studios means the exact opposite, though. remember when paramount was spooked about star trek beyond, then early reactions were positive, so they lifted the embargo early?

the jealous guarding of "spoilers" is a straw man. and we're not talking about a movie here, it's not like knowing the basic premise or what discovery looks like is going to ruin the tension. it's bizarre.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

It's just natural to be stoked about something you're involved in beyond a reasonable degree.

Precisely my point.

 

[kirk55555]

I trust the novelists. They know their Trek.

Just because someone can write a good Trek story (and Mack definitely can) doesn't mean I think they're some final authority on Trek. I doesn't hurt to have their approval, but I don't personally consider it something to end a discussion. Based off what I've seen my opinion of Discovery is the exact opposite of Mack's, which doesn't make his opinion mean less but his approval doesn't change my problems with the show.

 

[Michael]

Even if we assume some people's assumptions here are correct and the studio execs do actually fear negative reviews before the premiere, who could really fault them? I mean, in the current climate where critics and clickbait hacks just love to tear new stuff to shreds (or, alternatively, hype it to no end) and where many folks seem to take seriously Rotten Tomatoes scores, YouTube clicks and retweets, I can see how they wouldn't want to risk the success of their multi-million dollar production on some reviewers.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

Just because someone can write a good Trek story (and Mack definitely can) doesn't mean I think they're some final authority on Trek. I doesn't hurt to have their approval, but I don't personally consider it something to end a discussion. Based off what I've seen my opinion of Discovery is the exact opposite of Mack's, which doesn't make his opinion mean less but his approval doesn't change my problems with the show.

I'm not saying you're guilty of this, but it does seem like a lot of people are willing to take the word of clickbait/tabloid internet pages like Midnight's Edge or Gizmodo, and repeat their half-truths, outright lies and rumors as if they're fact, but refuse to believe the words of people like David Mack, who is in a unique position of knowing far more than we do and not having any reason to eagerly promote it.

I know it's a very subjective thing, but I don't see how what we know so far doesn't have everyone excited. Unless, of course, they define Trek by surface issues like visuals, make-up and aesthetics.

 

[Jadeb]

Let's not forget a key distinction between Discovery and previous Trek shows. They're asking people to pay for it, and pay a good bit for it. (I hadn't realized until today that CBS All Access requires a full-year subscription.) That makes it seem even odder to me that they wouldn't want positive reviews to come out beforehand.

 

[pst]

I'm not saying you're guilty of this, but it does seem like a lot of people are willing to take the word of clickbait/tabloid internet pages like Midnight's Edge or Gizmodo, and repeat their half-truths, outright lies and rumors as if they're fact, but refuse to believe the words of people like David Mack, who is in a unique position of knowing far more than we do and not having any reason to eagerly promote it.

it's difficult to take someone with such a close relationship to the production as an objective opinion. and worse that CBS seems not to want objective opinions before the show airs.

 

[kirk55555]

I'm not saying you're guilty of this, but it does seem like a lot of people are willing to take the word of clickbait/tabloid internet pages like Midnight's Edge or Gizmodo, and repeat their half-truths, outright lies and rumors as if they're fact, but refuse to believe the words of people like David Mack, who is in a unique position of knowing far more than we do and not having any reason to eagerly promote it.

I know it's a very subjective thing, but I don't see how what we know so far doesn't have everyone excited. Unless, of course, they define Trek by surface issues like visuals, make-up and aesthetics.

Yeah, its subjective. I don't really read articles about the show, I just look at the trailers and officially released stuff to form my opinion. I mean, I'll still watch it regardless of reviews or my own opinion because its ST, and that's where my mostly already formed opinion will finalize, not because of another person's opinion, even someone like Mack.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

it's difficult to take someone with such a close relationship to the production as an objective opinion. and worse that CBS seems not to want objective opinions before the show airs.

Again, and I'm getting fucking tired of repeating this...HE HAS NO RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PRODUCTION. HE'S JUST WRITING A TIE-IN NOVEL.

Geez Louise, did you think Diane Carey and JM Dillard were involved in DS9 or VGR or ENT's production?

 

[pst]

Again, and I'm getting fucking tired of repeating this...HE HAS NO RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PRODUCTION. HE'S JUST WRITING A TIE-IN NOVEL.

Geez Louise, did you think Diane Carey and JM Dillard were involved in DS9 or VGR or ENT's production?

he said himself that he's been in the loop from early on. that's closer to the production than i am.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

he said himself that he's been in the loop from early on. that's closer to the production than i am.

But he has had no hand in creating it. His role is the same as any other tie-in novelist. He just had more access to behind-the-scenes material than usual because he needed to make this novel consistent with the season's arc, not just the pilot's script.