• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Discovery at SDCC - Consolidated Thread

starmike said:
Ok, you really need to look at it another way. TOS was designed in the SIXTIES. They had no concept of anything, we were lucky to get what tech we did, even down to the pseudo-clipboard Kirk used on the bridge.

So, if you can understand that it was literally IMPOSSIBLE for the team to either predict the future or implement it based on budget, then it should make your life easier.

I'll put it another way - in 50 years, THIS show will probably look dated. Would you defend Star Trek 2067 or stick with your assertion of consistency?
Click to expand...

Or you look at in another way. The current design team has full access to all the original designs on screen can actively model their new designs on the older show with a few minor updates and tweaks...you know, like they did with all the props. And it does make sense since DSC is supposed to be happening before TOS and all. So no, the TOS designers don't need to see the future, the DSC designers just need to respect the past. But apparently that's not only incomprehensible, it was also impossible for them to do.
 
Overgeeked said:
Or you look at in another way. The current design team has full access to all the original designs on screen can actively model their new designs on the older show with a few minor updates and tweaks...you know, like they did with all the props. And it does make sense since DSC is supposed to be happening before TOS and all. So no, the TOS designers don't need to see the future, the DSC designers just need to respect the past. But apparently that's not only incomprehensible, it was also impossible for them to do.
Click to expand...

You want TOS. It won't ever happen again.

EVER.

Accept it. Star Trek has moved on and grown up.
 
Well, I certainly didn't see anything promising in that first trailer - dialogue-wise, I mean.
 
It could be, but I'm really hoping that they do something different and still adhere to what makes Star Trek what it's been.
 
starmike said:
You want TOS. It won't ever happen again.

EVER.

Accept it. Star Trek has moved on and grown up.
Click to expand...

Ugh. I dislike TOS. It's my least favorite TV series. I'm not trying to get TOS back, I just think the designs should be relatively consistent with the time they're set in. They want to set in 10 years prior to TOS, fine, then model the new designs after the TOS designs. Updated and tweaked, sure, but don't design the the ships to look like they're from 20 years after VOY and claim it's pre-TOS. Don't want to make the effort to model the old designs? Fine, don't set the new show 10 years prior to TOS. From a design standpoint, it makes no sense. It looks like the Federation lost several decades of technological advancement within a few short years. That throws me out of the fiction. The designs look great, but they in no way look like they're contemporary with TOS, like at all. They look like it's the decades after VOY...because they are, in the real world.
 
The fact that they're flying around in space ships is enough to "throw me out of the fiction" if I were to take it as seriously as you do.

You got an odd avatar for someone who "dislikes TOS." You could at lest have gone for a post-TOS picture of the actor.
 
Overgeeked said:
Ugh. I dislike TOS. It's my least favorite TV series. I'm not trying to get TOS back, I just think the designs should be relatively consistent with the time they're set in. They want to set in 10 years prior to TOS, fine, then model the new designs after the TOS designs. Updated and tweaked, sure, but don't design the the ships to look like they're from 20 years after VOY and claim it's pre-TOS. Don't want to make the effort to model the old designs? Fine, don't set the new show 10 years prior to TOS. From a design standpoint, it makes no sense. It looks like the Federation lost several decades of technological advancement within a few short years. That throws me out of the fiction. The designs look great, but they in no way look like they're contemporary with TOS, like at all. They look like it's the decades after VOY...because they are, in the real world.
Click to expand...

Ok, and if they did, then the show would get laughed off TV.
 
Overgeeked said:
Ugh. I dislike TOS. It's my least favorite TV series. I'm not trying to get TOS back, I just think the designs should be relatively consistent with the time they're set in. They want to set in 10 years prior to TOS, fine, then model the new designs after the TOS designs. Updated and tweaked, sure, but don't design the the ships to look like they're from 20 years after VOY and claim it's pre-TOS. Don't want to make the effort to model the old designs? Fine, don't set the new show 10 years prior to TOS. From a design standpoint, it makes no sense. It looks like the Federation lost several decades of technological advancement within a few short years. That throws me out of the fiction. The designs look great, but they in no way look like they're contemporary with TOS, like at all. They look like it's the decades after VOY...because they are, in the real world.
Click to expand...
Genuine question and not trying to be argumentative-if it was a reboot, new timeline, or in the Kelvin timeline, or they give an in-universe explanation for the differences in apperances, would that be acceptable?

Because, at this point, I genuinely believe that no explanation will be sufficient.
 
Tenacity said:
Depends on how you do it.

Dub over all uses of the word "Klingon," use something else that has a similar mouth movement.

Digitally remove the traditional Klingon symbol and replace it with something else.

Wouldn't that be about all?You can't say that information hasn't be released, either officially or through leaks. While there are holes in the complete picture, enough is available for people to have some good ideas of what's going on, and to comment on what they know.
Click to expand...
No, there really isn't. This like people hating on a black stormtrooper or nitpicking how inconsistent Han Solo's appearance was from the trailer. All we have is designs and no story to back it up or give it context.

Good grief, look up the comments made about Star Wars while it was in production and how much many of the crew hated it.
 
fireproof78 said:
Genuine question and not trying to be argumentative-if it was a reboot, new timeline, or in the Kelvin timeline, or they give an in-universe explanation for the differences in apperances, would that be acceptable?

Because, at this point, I genuinely believe that no explanation will be sufficient.
Click to expand...

How do you explain (in-universe) why science fiction show B looks like it was designed 50+ years after show A, when in-universe show B is set 10 years prior to show A? An alternate timeline would work. Worked for the same problem with the reboot films. Throw a post-TNG ship into a time tunnel and suddenly the tech is advanced. Having Q snap his fingers and roll back the technology between DSC and TOS works too. They're all lame explanations. I know. But there's really no way they will be able to explain it away in-universe without something ridiculous. It's just a hand-wave. Really. But it's still jarring and they look ridiculous sitting next to each other. I don't want TOS, I don't particularly like TOS, and the TOS design screams low-budget '60s. But if the execs really want this new show to be set 10 years before TOS, then it should look like it's set 10 years before TOS. Otherwise it utterly destroys the suspension of disbelief.

My best fix: don't make it a prequel. Set it after TNG. Because that's what the design looks like.

ENT got away with it because there was a huge time gap and they designed things to look basic and functional instead of what we'd think of today as looking high tech.
 
Overgeeked said:
How do you explain (in-universe) why science fiction show B looks like it was designed 50+ years after show A, when in-universe show B is set 10 years prior to show A? An alternate timeline would work. Worked for the same problem with the reboot films. Throw a post-TNG ship into a time tunnel and suddenly the tech is advanced. Having Q snap his fingers and roll back the technology between DSC and TOS works too. They're all lame explanations. I know. But there's really no way they will be able to explain it away in-universe without something ridiculous. It's just a hand-wave. Really. But it's still jarring and they look ridiculous sitting next to each other. I don't want TOS, I don't particularly like TOS, and the TOS design screams low-budget '60s. But if the execs really want this new show to be set 10 years before TOS, then it should look like it's set 10 years before TOS. Otherwise it utterly destroys the suspension of disbelief.

My best fix: don't make it a prequel. Set it after TNG. Because that's what the design looks like.

ENT got away with it because there was a huge time gap and they designed things to look basic and functional instead of what we'd think of today as looking high tech.
Click to expand...
There is no genuine reason you can think of for the advancement of tech? None?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top