How is/isn't Discovery Star Trek?

Discussion in 'Star Trek: Discovery' started by seigezunt, Sep 11, 2018.

  1. Arpy

    Arpy Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Cap's experience, like mine, was not that of the majority of people in his situation. Broadcast television reached the overwhelming majority of people. Did it reach you in Suborbital Gotham?
     
  2. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
  3. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    In what way? I really don't understand how you manage to come away from what I wrote with an understanding opposite of what I've said. I already said that growing up in the 1970s, my family had two TVs, one color and one black and white. We had perfect access to the three networks and PBS. With no aerial ourselves, that was it. Our access to broadcast television in the 1970s was, if anything, neither exceptional nor wanting. We were really very typical Americans.
     
  4. Arpy

    Arpy Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    What part? Suborbital Gotham? Your avatar is of a sci-fi Joker.

    Your lack of access to broadcast television free via “rabbit ears” is exceptional. For the forty years I’ve been on this Earth, until rabbit ears stopped working, you did not need to pay for cable(s) to access broadcast television. Were there parts of Idaho in which a TV antenna was sufficient? In the 70’s or later?
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018
  5. Refuge

    Refuge Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2016
    I couldn't agree more. Of course it was freely available in first run incarnations on the platform (er... TV) the channels/stations/networks provided up until Discovery . Yep there was advertising. Yep some countries had/have a TV license or fee. Star Trek used to have access to the 'everyman' audience with a TV if he or she chose to simply watch. Now I have to join Netflix and pay a fee. I know people who (gasp) don't want to pay for Netflix. They miss out. So for a show that speaks for the human condition, diversity, equality etc., the audience has lost equal availability unless of course... they pay extra.
     
    CaptainMurdock likes this.
  6. Zod

    Zod Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Location:
    NY
    I know I may be slammed for this but I never bought into Gene's vision in the first place. Sure you can cure disease and poverty and get rid of all money because nobody needs it any longer. It sounds great, sign me up! However, the notion that humans no longer have conflicts among each other seems like nonsense to me. That would need a further evolution of humanity that may never ever happen. So when DS9 came along I was thrilled as it was darker and there was conflicts among the regular cast and they would at times make piss poor decisions. So to me Discovery is just fine as far as that goes.

    My issues have been with the uneven pace, the Klingon story arc and the very notion that a starfleet officer would commit mutiny in the way she did in violation of her training and her oath. It just didn't seem like that should happen. I didn't mind the alternate universe stuff all that much. I have high hopes that season two will improve on the stories.
     
  7. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    What lack of access are you talking about, man? I never at any point said that we didn't have access via rabbit ears. We had access via rabbit ears even after getting cable, FFS, and most certainly prior. At no point did we need an aerial for network access. We would have needed an aerial that we didn't have to access independent stations in the metropolitan areas on the river to have watched Star Trek at regularly scheduled times instead of catch as catch can as we had to, but that's another question altogether.

    Unless and until you can clarify in a way that makes sense, I can only assume that you've conflated me with another poster or in some other way misread what I've said.
     
  8. XCV330

    XCV330 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2017
    Location:
    XCV330
    For the price of a burger and fries.
     
    nightwind1 likes this.
  9. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    I think you are referring to me. I do not know if my case is exceptional. I grew up in the 90s and (to the best of my knowledge and experimentation) antenna was not sufficient. Or, my parents always paid for access. I certainly could not get channels on the little TV, ears or no ears.

    Regardless, my general experience was TV was not "free" to access. Again, I'm glad the majority of people (apparently) had a different experience.

    But, even if that was the case, as noted by several others, TV is not free and the advertising schemes that use to support such things are no longer a solely viable business model. If that were so then streaming would not be where media giants such as CBS, ABC, and Apple would be trying to break in to.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018
    CorporalCaptain likes this.
  10. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    These two statements are incongruous.
     
    fireproof78 and Agony_Boothb like this.
  11. Zod

    Zod Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Location:
    NY
    I don't think so. Conflict comes from more than just what I listed. Eliminate what I suggested and you remove some of what causes conflict but I am sure others will remain and we will create new ones. Its about the human brain. Many of us seek conflict where none is needed or even should exist. Over relationships, ego, jealousy and many many more. We may end war, disease, poverty and even control the weather but it will take more than these external things to change how humans behave and think overall.

    Now I would love to be wrong but I just don't have ANY faith in humanity as a whole. Technology will give us those things but our ability to mess things up will remain. I wish I would be around to be proven wrong lol
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018
  12. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    If you're going to accept conflict and poor decision-making, then you have to accept the possibility that someone amongst the hundreds of thousands of officers -over the course of a century might mutiny.
     
    fireproof78 and Zod like this.
  13. Zod

    Zod Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Location:
    NY
    That's a good point and I do. We saw starfleet officers in Next Gen and DS9 and Voyager all going rogue. It just felt wrong with THIS character in the limited time getting to know her. What I am saying is it felt wrong and kind of forced. That could be just the way it was written for me. I didn't buy it.
     
  14. Yanks

    Yanks Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Location:
    NX01 Bridge
    A little late to this one, but Discovery certainly is Star Trek.

    I have no problem with the appearance of the show. It's to be expected with our current technology and CGI capability. Kingons have been a matter of creative talent forever so I don't really mind that they look different in STD. I mind how different they look. Probably my biggest issue with STD.

    I do have my issues with Discovery. I have my issues with all incarnations of Trek and all the movies, so this is no out of the realm of normal for this trekkie. I would dare say, as a participant on Trek message boards for over 10 years, that I'm not alone in that position.

    I certainly did not want Discovery to be a prequel to Star Trek. I wanted something after Nemisis. But I don't make those decisions and will not hold Discovery in abeyance because of when it exists. It exists.

    I rated all the episodes of Discovery and to my surprise, it rated higher than any Trek season 1 I've rated. I have not rated Star Trek yet. I did NOT like how they wrapped up this season and rated the closer appropriately. I don't know that I can look at the numbers and say STD was better than the other season 1's because it was all serialized; the others obviously were not. I can say for the most part I enjoyed watching and rewatching Discovery. Some really good characters and actors.

    I believe they've made some needed changes to the creative staff, heard some leginimate complaints from the fans and I'm really looking forward to season 2.
     
    Vger23, Agony_Boothb and XCV330 like this.
  15. Captain Killy

    Captain Killy Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2018
    As to people having to pay for Trek.

    Well, lets see...

    NuBSG: Sci-fi network, in order to watch it you had to pay for a cable subscription and possibly a cable package that included the sci-fi network if it didn’t come basic.

    Stargate: SG1: Started on Showtime which required a preminum cable package and later moved to sci-if network which (in my region at least) required basic cable.

    Stargate Atlantis: Sci-fi network, basic cable.

    Farscape: Sci-if network, basic cable.

    Game of Thrones: HBO, premium cable package.

    Daredevil, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Iron Fist: Netflix subscription.

    Let’s face it, a good chunk of the genre programming over the past 20 years has been pay to view. Which is a good thing really as most, if not all the above shows would probably not have survived as long as they did on broadcast TV.

    So why having to buck up $10.00 to binge watch 13 episodes of Discovery over the course of one week hocks off so many people is rather beyond me TBH. I mean really $10.00 to binge an entire season is a hell of a lot cheaper than a 4 to 6 month cable subscription.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2018
  16. Kemaiku

    Kemaiku Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    All of those aired completely free in the UK shortly after the US broadcast. We *aren't* getting Dsicovery on anything but Netflix here, it's the first one that requires payment.

    And being so subpar compared to literally any of those shows, that's ridiculous.
     
    Refuge likes this.
  17. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    Ah yes. As we know, if Discovery was considered "good" then no one would complain about paying for it up front.:shrug:
     
  18. eschaton

    eschaton Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    I have no problem paying for TV. I don't have a broadcast TV at all. I get everything via streaming.

    But consider that Netflix costs $10.99 per month My kids use Netflix on an almost daily basis. I'm actually not a big TV guy (more of a reader and gamer) so I use it more sparingly, but use it to watch old Trek, some other sci-fi shows, science and nature documentaries, and occasionally a movie or two. So I get tens of hours of viewing for the whole family per month for $11.

    In contrast, CBS All Access costs $5.99 with commercials, or $9.99 without commercials, per month. When I subscribed during Season 1, there was nothing other than Discovery I was interested in watching. Therefore, I was paying for just DIS. I am willing to do this again for Season 2, since it's four episodes per month the show is on the air, but not for the Short Treks.

    So that's my issue, personally. I have no problem paying for Trek, but I don't like that I'm basically forced to pay for a whole slew of other content I have basically no interest in in order to get Trek. Netflix just gives me a lot more bang for my buck. If Netflix cost like $40 per month or something, it would of course be a different calculation.
     
  19. Captain Killy

    Captain Killy Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2018
    So what you do, is you wait until the season is done and you binge watch the entire thing in a week. The argument that you have to subscribe for several months of content that you have no desire to watch is a false one.
     
  20. eschaton

    eschaton Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Yeah, you're right. I just wish there was a streaming service out there with just sci-fi content and nothing else. It's like a more narrow version of the issue with "basic cable." What drove up the price so high was sports - because the different major leagues demanded big fees to carry their games, which resulted in ESPN and the like being very expensive. The cable companies thought the solution to this was to basically force everyone to subscribe to the sports channels, effectively subsidizing those who would not pay the full price. So we all pay to watch the NBA or whatever even if we have no interest in it whatsoever.