Personally I still don't see that as evidence, but each to their own I guess.
First Impressions?
- Thread starter johnar
- Start date
I enjoyed it enough to watch it again, I don't see it being a hit with nonfans, especially if they have to pay to see it. This is how I expect a futuristic Starfleet to look in 200 years, from my 2017 perspective.
Neither do I, but I understand the comparison. It doesn't look like 60s Trek, it looks modern. Where have we seen modern production values in Trek before? The JJverse movies. Doesn't mean that in narrative terms they fit in with them, but even when discussing those movies alone I think people confuse the difference between narrative changes (timeline) and visual changes (modern production).
First impressions.
It would have been nice if the representatives of the Klingon houses had softened the blow of the Klingon redesign. One could have had the long hair we're familiar with and another one's armor could have resembled the TNG era. Maybe throw in a TOS sash or mustache. For independent houses with no contact they all got the memo, we're all shaving our heads now and armor is hot this season. I did like the differences that they showed. One guy had "war paint" makeup and their armor was all unique. I liked the variety in their ship design. (Are we going to call that thing the "Bird of Pray", 'cause it looks like a cathedral?)
Storywise, I thought all the elements were good but they weren't woven into a thread very well, it was more like a pile.
The weakest part was Michael. They kept talking about her conflict between following her emotions or logic, but none of that was present dramatically. She was completely decisive and without hesitation dramatically. Show, don't tell.
Her backstory was distracting. At first I thought her parents got blown up by Klingons, then they say that no one has seen the Klingons in 100 years, then she's getting blown up in a Vulcan learning pit in a different, unrelated incident. Maybe I just missed the line of dialogue that makes all that work, but first impressions; This is messy story telling. Sonequa Martin-Green was good though.
Saru was a surprise. I expected him to be a more alien character, but he was very casual.
The end seemed like a mess too. So Georgiou has a plan to put a warhead on a little thing and fly it into the big ship. Then Michael walks in and they have a big, dramatic conversation with the slow zoom ins where she's really determined to take T'Kuvma alive and is completely against using a warhead. Then the Klingons start gathering their dead with a tractor beam and Georgiou sends them a warhead without comment from Michael. What's the difference?
Of course it was all BS because Michael turns her phaser to kill and shoots T'Kuvma about two minutes later.
I guess this is supposed to be her logic/emotion conflict, but she never seems conflicted, just inconsistent.
It's kind of hard to get on board with a character who is wrong about everything, disobeys every order and who's motivation seems almost random. The mystery is why she's considered such an asset and how she ever achieved the rank of commander in the first place. The little trailer for episode three seems to have Lorca pulling her out of jail because she's so indispensable?
It would have been nice if the representatives of the Klingon houses had softened the blow of the Klingon redesign. One could have had the long hair we're familiar with and another one's armor could have resembled the TNG era. Maybe throw in a TOS sash or mustache. For independent houses with no contact they all got the memo, we're all shaving our heads now and armor is hot this season. I did like the differences that they showed. One guy had "war paint" makeup and their armor was all unique. I liked the variety in their ship design. (Are we going to call that thing the "Bird of Pray", 'cause it looks like a cathedral?)
Storywise, I thought all the elements were good but they weren't woven into a thread very well, it was more like a pile.
The weakest part was Michael. They kept talking about her conflict between following her emotions or logic, but none of that was present dramatically. She was completely decisive and without hesitation dramatically. Show, don't tell.
Her backstory was distracting. At first I thought her parents got blown up by Klingons, then they say that no one has seen the Klingons in 100 years, then she's getting blown up in a Vulcan learning pit in a different, unrelated incident. Maybe I just missed the line of dialogue that makes all that work, but first impressions; This is messy story telling. Sonequa Martin-Green was good though.
Saru was a surprise. I expected him to be a more alien character, but he was very casual.
The end seemed like a mess too. So Georgiou has a plan to put a warhead on a little thing and fly it into the big ship. Then Michael walks in and they have a big, dramatic conversation with the slow zoom ins where she's really determined to take T'Kuvma alive and is completely against using a warhead. Then the Klingons start gathering their dead with a tractor beam and Georgiou sends them a warhead without comment from Michael. What's the difference?
Of course it was all BS because Michael turns her phaser to kill and shoots T'Kuvma about two minutes later.
I guess this is supposed to be her logic/emotion conflict, but she never seems conflicted, just inconsistent.
It's kind of hard to get on board with a character who is wrong about everything, disobeys every order and who's motivation seems almost random. The mystery is why she's considered such an asset and how she ever achieved the rank of commander in the first place. The little trailer for episode three seems to have Lorca pulling her out of jail because she's so indispensable?
I didn't like her in TWD, and had little hope of liking her in DSC.
But I ended up liking her!
So what would have been better, fan pandering?
Really the first season of TNG was garbage, so I think sometimes you have to give something time to develop and grow, because a lot of this just seems like "fan boy" complaints to me.
I enjoyed the first two episodes. Were they perfect? No. It there something to build on. Definitely.
Visually the show is top grade, however, they could dial back the effects and spend more time on the characters. The only character I loved straight off was Captain Georgiou. Burnham is starting to grow on me, and the science officer could be interesting. Everyone else was a place holder.
The Klingons were a bit of a caricature of their previous incarnations. The producers clearly want Klingons+ and by altering their appearance and behaviour from earlier shows they hope to entice younger viewers.
Right now it's style over substance. Whether that will change in following episodes remains to be seen, but I'll keep watching for now.
Visually the show is top grade, however, they could dial back the effects and spend more time on the characters. The only character I loved straight off was Captain Georgiou. Burnham is starting to grow on me, and the science officer could be interesting. Everyone else was a place holder.
The Klingons were a bit of a caricature of their previous incarnations. The producers clearly want Klingons+ and by altering their appearance and behaviour from earlier shows they hope to entice younger viewers.
Right now it's style over substance. Whether that will change in following episodes remains to be seen, but I'll keep watching for now.
I think trying to recapture what has gone before leads to shows like Voyager, afraid to take risks as their viewers dwindle. Each new Trek show has failed to even reach the numbers of its predecessor, since TNG. A shake up is needed because the 'long standing appeal' stopped translating into viewers. Personally, I think what you're asking for, a modern recreation of Trek with its heart intact but ready for a new generation is exactly what the JJ movies were, but I'm guessing by how you started your post that you don't agree. I can't tell based on the pilot whether Discovery fits the bill too, there's a lot of promise there, things to build on and improve, but some real flashes of what I was hoping for.
First impression - why the hell is Commander Burnham a first officer of a starship? She leaves the bridge during a crisis to ask her dad how to do her job?! She fights with the science officer. And she commits mutiny.
She didn't call Sarek for help on how to do her job. She needed strategical/tactical information that he had regarding Vulcan first contact experiences with the Klingons.
I don't know, but I can't wait to see what she does next!
My impression was meh...... 1st episode was kind of tedious n a hard watch just imo. 2nd was much better
Moved slow and honestly if I didn't know it was Trek the uniforms wouldn't tell me that. They don't fit the universe, again subjective and IMO. Should've went w a Kelvin or updated Pike era uni
I paid for 1 month, so they have that long to keep me interested. Agree typical non fan is NOT paying for this. Should be on free cbs if they wanted to grow fans
Moved slow and honestly if I didn't know it was Trek the uniforms wouldn't tell me that. They don't fit the universe, again subjective and IMO. Should've went w a Kelvin or updated Pike era uni
I paid for 1 month, so they have that long to keep me interested. Agree typical non fan is NOT paying for this. Should be on free cbs if they wanted to grow fans
Second impression - it didn't take place "at the edge of the universe."
She went to speak to someone with very relevant and critical tactical information. That's a very sensible thing to do.
She has disagreements with the science officer, but human adults do that in a workplace.
She did commit mutiny, and was charged, convicted and imprisoned for it.
Nor did the Wrath of Khan, where they stole the tagline from. Enterprise didn't 'travel beyond our galaxy' either. It's marketing.
Sarek was an ambassador, what reason would there be to expect he uniquely would have very relevant and critical tactical information? (I would expect that early Vulcan interaction with the Klingons would be taught at Starfleet Academy, by the way.) This moment didn't have a huge impression on me initially, but as I thought about it more it just came across as a "Daddy I need help" moment that would not be done for a male character.
What would an ambassador have to say on how Vulcan maintains peace with another power? I think he's exactly the right person to ask!
We had almost the exact same beat with Spock and Spock!Prime in ST:ID. "I need help dealing with this issue, wise mentor character"
This is a very accurate assessment imo. Actors were atrocious, especially the captain and the Klingons could not have been any more boring and uninteresting. Gowron, now theres a guy we wanted to watch. Compare Gowron to these soulless mindless automotons.
Its amazing how bad Trek keeps falling flat on its face. Also the battle scenes with the Klingon ships were awful camera shots. TNG battle scenes looked really cool.
Watched it with an open mind.
The first 10 mins of The Vulcan Hello was quite promising, although the dialogue was terrible. No Starfleet Captain would be sarcastic like to their bridge officers, even if they were doing it for humour, but I did quite like that Michelle Yeoh did it. It was about the only bit of characterisation in the first two episodes. But then I thought, why bother giving her character when she's not going to make it past the pilot, something CBS had already telegraphed in spades.
After the first 10 mins, the whole episode just imploded into a huge morass of "I've had more fun watching paint dry." It was so slow, so much exposition, far too much very dull Klingon stuff. Again, why build up T'Kvuma, or whatever he was called, as the main villain only to kill him at the end? SMG's acting was slightly better than in the trailers, but I don't like nor am I interested in her character from what I saw across the two episodes. The fact that "ooh, look, she's mutinied!" doesn't give her any depth. The fact that she did was so ridiculous, especially as she's been raised Vulcan. Spock would never have done that against Kirk. Which reminds me, I just sat there thinking "this is just a black woman playing cadet Kirk from Abrams Trek 2009."
Forced myself to watch the second episode in case it got better. Was slightly better paced with more action, but again, too much of the Klingons, and the fight aboard the Klingon ship was straight out of Trek 2009 aboard Nero's ship.
Didn't like the holo communicators. They wern't around around until the latter seasons of DS9, which is about 100 years in the future, so presumably this show isn't canon. Also, as I've seen pointed out elsewhere, the Klingons didn't achieve cloaking technology for another 10 years.
I'd write more, but I really don't remember much of it. It was so interminably dull, empty, and boring, I came away feeling nothing after 2 hours, other than the desire not to watch any more of it. It was like a big box wrapped up in shiny paper given to us on Christmas Day, except you unwrap it, open the box, and there's nothing in it. While being passable sci-fi for the masses, the show's so empty and devoid of anything to do with Star Trek that if it wasn't behind a paywall, it might actually get a decent audience. But that's a moot point.
CGI was nice on the surface, but it was so Abrams Trek, I tried to ignore it.
Not that I liked it at all, but I'm surprised it's getting such a rough ride on here. If a large percentage of the die hards don't like it, STD is certainly already in the abyss.
The first 10 mins of The Vulcan Hello was quite promising, although the dialogue was terrible. No Starfleet Captain would be sarcastic like to their bridge officers, even if they were doing it for humour, but I did quite like that Michelle Yeoh did it. It was about the only bit of characterisation in the first two episodes. But then I thought, why bother giving her character when she's not going to make it past the pilot, something CBS had already telegraphed in spades.
After the first 10 mins, the whole episode just imploded into a huge morass of "I've had more fun watching paint dry." It was so slow, so much exposition, far too much very dull Klingon stuff. Again, why build up T'Kvuma, or whatever he was called, as the main villain only to kill him at the end? SMG's acting was slightly better than in the trailers, but I don't like nor am I interested in her character from what I saw across the two episodes. The fact that "ooh, look, she's mutinied!" doesn't give her any depth. The fact that she did was so ridiculous, especially as she's been raised Vulcan. Spock would never have done that against Kirk. Which reminds me, I just sat there thinking "this is just a black woman playing cadet Kirk from Abrams Trek 2009."
Forced myself to watch the second episode in case it got better. Was slightly better paced with more action, but again, too much of the Klingons, and the fight aboard the Klingon ship was straight out of Trek 2009 aboard Nero's ship.
Didn't like the holo communicators. They wern't around around until the latter seasons of DS9, which is about 100 years in the future, so presumably this show isn't canon. Also, as I've seen pointed out elsewhere, the Klingons didn't achieve cloaking technology for another 10 years.
I'd write more, but I really don't remember much of it. It was so interminably dull, empty, and boring, I came away feeling nothing after 2 hours, other than the desire not to watch any more of it. It was like a big box wrapped up in shiny paper given to us on Christmas Day, except you unwrap it, open the box, and there's nothing in it. While being passable sci-fi for the masses, the show's so empty and devoid of anything to do with Star Trek that if it wasn't behind a paywall, it might actually get a decent audience. But that's a moot point.
CGI was nice on the surface, but it was so Abrams Trek, I tried to ignore it.
Not that I liked it at all, but I'm surprised it's getting such a rough ride on here. If a large percentage of the die hards don't like it, STD is certainly already in the abyss.
So my two cents here and yeah it may contain some spoilers so consider that fair warning.
I have been waiting a long old time like most Trek fans for a new series I feel Star Trek is best served in this manner, now I will go on record as saying I didn't hate the JJ verse, didn't love it, it was more action scifi ala Star Wars in Star Trek clothes but for what it was and being in an alternate time-line I can live with it, and it keeps the Trek name alive.
So onto Discovery and I'm going to start with what I did like: The Story while not perfect was enjoyable and perhaps key it felt like Trek and with the Klingons being isolationist and remaining Klingon this very Nationalistic tone perhaps speaks greatly to a number of us in 2017 with the various political situations going on. The Character of Michael again speak of someone afraid of loosing those they love and the trauma that goes with it. Add to that we got to spend some time among those Klingons so they arent just the bad guys we get to somewhat understand or get a look at what is motivating them at this time again with the Xenophobic talk of mixing with filthy Andorians I think again yeah on point.
Was the story perfect No, but I wasnt expecting it to be, but there was more story in these episodes than I've gotten from the JJ films so its a marked improvement and allayed one of biggest fears that it would be too consumed with the action (its early days yet so it might but hopefully not). The episode got me to care about the characters so in that regard it did really well and given when we meet these characters they have all been serving together for seven years the Chemistry the actors all had was on point again really pleasantly surprised.
As a result I will keep watching Discovery, being in the UK I'm lucky as its Netflix so I dont have that issue. So they have my attention and fingers crossed this storytelling keeps building on these two episodes......
No onto my dislike and what I frankly feel is Discovery biggest issue speaking as a long term fan of Trek, It's set in the wrong century, when it was announced that Discovery would take place ten years before TOS I cringed like many of us likely did. Firstly that makes thing cannon heavy, secondly no one was expecting them to stay true to the aesthetic of a pre- TOS era (Although given just how well loved Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II and Star Trek continues were before the fan film regulations they could have done it and as long as the writing was on point have certainly gotten the CBS subscriptions they need).
From the design of the ships, the Uniforms and yes the Klingons which my initial thought was don't they look sort of similar to the Gouald from Stargate SG1 well at least from an armor sort of way (and I actually liked that bit of the design) felt well felt like it belonged in the late 24th if not early 25th Century. From a story perspective as well given Trek history its not hard to buy the Klingons getting into a hissy fit and becoming isolationist and given Klingon history its not hard to imagine that they may have started playing around with eugenics and genetics as a way to make a more perfect Klingon in the time gap between Voyager and now lets say the 25th Century.
Throughout watching these episodes the only thing that kept taking me out of the story every now and then was remembering that this is meant to be pre-TOS, yet with a few changes here and there this show I think works infinitely better if it had been set in the 25th Century, but that is only my opinion and I am sure there are those who loved every aspect of it.
But for me that is my biggest issue with Discovery is that the story has me interested but it would work so much better at least from my Trekkie point of view if it had simply been set in the 25th Century and it then gives Discovery to really Go Boldly into a new era of Trek.
I have been waiting a long old time like most Trek fans for a new series I feel Star Trek is best served in this manner, now I will go on record as saying I didn't hate the JJ verse, didn't love it, it was more action scifi ala Star Wars in Star Trek clothes but for what it was and being in an alternate time-line I can live with it, and it keeps the Trek name alive.
So onto Discovery and I'm going to start with what I did like: The Story while not perfect was enjoyable and perhaps key it felt like Trek and with the Klingons being isolationist and remaining Klingon this very Nationalistic tone perhaps speaks greatly to a number of us in 2017 with the various political situations going on. The Character of Michael again speak of someone afraid of loosing those they love and the trauma that goes with it. Add to that we got to spend some time among those Klingons so they arent just the bad guys we get to somewhat understand or get a look at what is motivating them at this time again with the Xenophobic talk of mixing with filthy Andorians I think again yeah on point.
Was the story perfect No, but I wasnt expecting it to be, but there was more story in these episodes than I've gotten from the JJ films so its a marked improvement and allayed one of biggest fears that it would be too consumed with the action (its early days yet so it might but hopefully not). The episode got me to care about the characters so in that regard it did really well and given when we meet these characters they have all been serving together for seven years the Chemistry the actors all had was on point again really pleasantly surprised.
As a result I will keep watching Discovery, being in the UK I'm lucky as its Netflix so I dont have that issue. So they have my attention and fingers crossed this storytelling keeps building on these two episodes......
No onto my dislike and what I frankly feel is Discovery biggest issue speaking as a long term fan of Trek, It's set in the wrong century, when it was announced that Discovery would take place ten years before TOS I cringed like many of us likely did. Firstly that makes thing cannon heavy, secondly no one was expecting them to stay true to the aesthetic of a pre- TOS era (Although given just how well loved Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II and Star Trek continues were before the fan film regulations they could have done it and as long as the writing was on point have certainly gotten the CBS subscriptions they need).
From the design of the ships, the Uniforms and yes the Klingons which my initial thought was don't they look sort of similar to the Gouald from Stargate SG1 well at least from an armor sort of way (and I actually liked that bit of the design) felt well felt like it belonged in the late 24th if not early 25th Century. From a story perspective as well given Trek history its not hard to buy the Klingons getting into a hissy fit and becoming isolationist and given Klingon history its not hard to imagine that they may have started playing around with eugenics and genetics as a way to make a more perfect Klingon in the time gap between Voyager and now lets say the 25th Century.
Throughout watching these episodes the only thing that kept taking me out of the story every now and then was remembering that this is meant to be pre-TOS, yet with a few changes here and there this show I think works infinitely better if it had been set in the 25th Century, but that is only my opinion and I am sure there are those who loved every aspect of it.
But for me that is my biggest issue with Discovery is that the story has me interested but it would work so much better at least from my Trekkie point of view if it had simply been set in the 25th Century and it then gives Discovery to really Go Boldly into a new era of Trek.
Also can Saru possibly be any more of a coward. Not a good look for one of the main characters.
Similar threads
- Locked
