Well, I like The Orville. So, that's exactly how I meant it. It's fun and interesting. I like Discovery for other reasons. It doesn't need to be fun in the same sense as The Orville. If anything, I'd say that Discovery needs to learn from The Expanse a bit--but not be a clone of that either. But, no, I don't think Discovery should strive to be more like The Orville. That wouldn't work.
I don't get what's supposed to be anachronistic about flip communicators or viewscreens? One is a commincation device that can work alone, without a commincation tower network, into space!!! And as long as people will have computers (they will for a long time), a "viewscreen" will always be the best way to access information. Hell, a real life starship bridge in 300 years will probably have a good, old paper printer on it. In this regard TOS is probably still more on the money than every new iteration of Trek since then - they had one! (You're not wrong about anachronisms! The clunky data-tapes that store almost no information are a good example. I just don't get why you chose THESE particular things as examples - because they are IMO the most likely to actually become true exactly as envisioned!)
^ Clearly, you're not familiar with the direct brain image transmissions that will be invented in about 50 years. No screen and no holograms are necessary. It's all in your brain! Now, what comes after that is where it starts to get strange!
Didn't say that it was a start over scenario. Simply that there are other factors that might have impacted technological development. Regardless, I enjoy both TOS and Discovery's takes on the tech. You mean you have to use your hands? That's like a baby's toy
This is one of the biggest challenges facing Trek: the end for endless novelty. Plenty of Trek stuff is still way, way beyond us, such as the transporter and warp drive, but that's all taken for granted, so the show has to come up with superficial ways to look "futuristic." That's particularly problematic when the franchise doubles down on its own past.
Well, obviously, I was referring to the very first version. As for paper, who needs that with brain implants that store perfect 4D (not a typo) replicas of everything you need?! And that's for biologicals that weren't replaced by AIs already (aka antiques!)
I used to dream of finding the real enterprise D in orbit waiting to beam me up when I was a kid. Quite literally dream of that. Sadly kids don’t get to have Trek anymore, now it’s all squick.
This is actually part of why I think the movies should come out more than every four years. To you and me, four years is nothing. But to a child? Four years is half or a third of their life. To a teenager, it's the difference between being a freshman in high school and a freshman in college. It's too long. Hopefully, they make the new cartoon.
It would have been better to keep DSC and the new shops as is, and leave the Constitution class ships looking as it did.
Pretty much. I got into Trek at the age of seven in 1994 via the first six films. After watching the movies, it was quite exciting to learn later in the year that there was going to be a brand new Trek film out, and that it would feature both Kirk AND Picard. Say what you will of the TNG films, but for a kid it was always exciting to have a new Trek film every two years, most of them occurring during grade school. It's not surprising that nuTrek lost that momentum waiting too long for the first sequel.
Wait, what?? You're telling me that Discovery ISN'T an actual working starship??? *falls to knees and wails, charlton heston in the planet of the apes style*