Haters of Star Trek: Discovery - wtf?

What a stupid question. Can we please shut down this thread?

There are MANY options between "hate" and "not hate", especially considereing the general problems with prequels.

This thread is a stupid rhetoric question that deserves no attention...

 

It's a good thing there was no internet back when "The Next Generation" started. It would have been mauled by Trek fans:
- "What is this ugly ship? That's not the Enterprise!"
- "Who is this old bald British guy? He isn't dashing enough to be captain!"
- "100 years after TOS? Who wants to see that?"
- "A psychologist and a teenager on the bridge? Children on the ship?"
etc. etc. Well, we know how that turned out don't we?

 

according to eye witnesses, it was mauled by Trek fans, they just used different channels

paging @Therin of Andor

 

It was by many. And the cast of TOS didn't think too much of the idea either.

 

Pretty much all of those sentiments were raised back then at fan conventions, in fan zines, etc etc...

 

I know, I was around back then. I didn't make this up. But the point still stands. We/they were wrong.

(Well maybe not so wrong about the Enterprise-D… )

 

"All if this has happened before, and all of this will happen again."

 

I don't hate Discovery and I don't understand how people can hate something they haven't even seen yet. That being said, I have some reservations mostly around the prequel concept. I'm just not a fan of prequels myself and I find it an interesting choice to make given the last Trek series was also a prequel and it tanked (largely as a result of bad creative decisions and franchise fatigue but there were people turned off by the prequel idea).

I'm very open to being wrong about my reservations. Heck I disliked DS9 for a season or two but stuck it out and now its my favorite of the Trek spin-offs.

 

WEELLL Jesus H. Kitten Sausage Christ, ain't this a damn shame. Can't even get a decent space show anymore.

 

Well, that's it for me, too. I don't hate the idea of a prequel. I didn't hate Enterprise, either. Its 4th season is as good as the best of any Trek series. I don't hate this show, either.

I do hate the awful ship design, and the CGI they rushed together for the trailer. It looks like something that would have been bad for a video game ten years ago!! CBS needs to farm out this work to someone who can actually do it right.

 

It's really important to forget the trailer. Like, doesn't excist anymore. The people behind the show have already stated that ship design isn't final, this was NOT an indication of what the CGI in the show will look like. So, really, forget about it.

 

Don't forget that lame Julius Caesar/Plutarch reboot by William Shakespeare - the guy had no creativity



Seriously - if the writers are good, and understand how to do a genuinely new take on something - it does not matter how often a story is repeated - they will find the timeless essence of the story, and expose it beautifully anew. The Avengers. Casino Royale. The Lord of the Rings. The Force Awakens. I strongly believe that the only time when things get "stale", is when good writers lose their raison d'etre, and start churning out stuff they are no longer interested in, or no longer understand. When the 'intangible magic' of something is lost - that isn't the fault of repetition itself - it is the fault of the shepherd of the story, no longer understanding his flock.

We would not be reading and re-adapting Sophocles and Euripides 2300 years later, if fresh stories mattered that much. Yes, TOS was innovative - you don't get that very often. But much of fiction is derivative, and still excellent.

I don't even know how fresh Star Trek: Discovery is going to be yet? The fact is we have no idea what crazy ass creative direction Fuller's team will move the series in! I very much doubt it will tread past ground. I very much doubt we will see nothing new! The entire thing speaks of a radical new era and take on Star Trek. A new dramatic format - full arcs - a new focus - lower ranked officers - a new era - pre-TOS - a new writing team - never tried in combat!

 

I myself do not hate it, but I also did not want something pre TOS. I also am dreading the retro look and I am honest enough to say if it does look like he goofy 1960's BS, I am done with it. I am a trek fan but it breaks creditably to me every time they pull that silly 1960's look. Look how bad it looked when they did it in "In a mirror darkly". It Looked dated and incredibility goofy. Its no longer the 1960's, stop making the sets set in the past looked like the 1960's

 

cross-posting this from facebook, b/c i can't think of anything else new to say about this. i am totally stunned with the level of negativity and hostility toward the show. personally, i am totally stoked, and i think it sounds quite awesome.

& i thought "in a mirror darkly" looked *great*.

--personally, i don't get the antipathy toward telling trek stories that predate the original series. i thought (and still think) that ENT had, in theory, maybe the best series premise of them all (the first warp-driven starship to leave earth? yeah, maybe arguably they messed up a bit on execution, but that's a killer premise). re telling some 24th century stories that follow up the end of the dominion war, etc etc - might be fun, and nobody's saying that can't/won't be done eventually, but i totally understand the position of the studio that 90s-era trek got a bit too bogged down in its own continuity - it's off-putting and confusing for new viewers.

i am totally stoked for this new show. sounds to me like a perfect platform to tell some new stories, with a historical era that could allow for some really fun stuff - ie, prominently-featured TOS-era klingons, robots based on the 22nd century design of arik soong, the sheliak, offhand references to captain pike, and maybe some guest appearances from dax (who would have been audrid, i'm thinking, around the era of this show).

the trek universe is a big place, and to paraphrase gene roddenberry - the premise of the series is the galaxy, and there's lot of stories to tell out there. i totally do not get all the negativity.--

 

and - for the record - i absolutely recall the same sort of bizarre hostility and intransigence toward TNG in the late 80s, tons of people walking around conventions wearing this shirt w/ a picture of kirk, spock, and mccoy that said (in a coca-cola font) "trek classic - who NEEDS another generation?" history is repeating itself.

 

And what makes you so utterly convinced it will have this "retro look"?

So far, we have seen a ship that looks a bit more industrial than later designs (like Alien), and a chair that looks like it might also have an older chunky look to it. We do not however know what kind of technology will be in the show at all. We frankly don't know how "duotronic circuitry" operated in TOS. We don't know how their card readers worked, or what density of information was stored on them. We don't know how the viewscreen projected images of faraway objects (presumably highly detailed telescopic sensors, coupled with computer enhancement?)



This show will probably look completely up to date - and as long as you have an imagination, it will ALSO fit with TOS.

Because TOS had 23rd century tablet PCs. It had sentient computers capable of responding to human voice commands. It had matter transportation. It had NASA/Alcubierre-like FTL travel. It had electromagnetic fields capable of deflecting matter-antimatter weapons. It had particle beams. It had hand weapons capable of vaporizing a target. It had computers capable of translating speech in real time. It had medical devices capable of healing a wound without further tissue trauma.

 

Remember all the bru-ha-ha over Deep Space Nine. 'Not REAL Trek.'

 

personally, i am looking *forward* to seeing a Pike-era ship depicted with present-day production values. Can't wait!

 

So, I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying the new show will be a tech manual for all the 60s era tech we didn't have explanations for?

I'm really confused.

Didn't I just see that in a thread?