Poll How positive are you about Discovery now?
- Thread starter Mage
- Start date
It bothers me too, but it won't ruin the show for me.
No.
I think it was fatigue because it became so repetitious. By the time DS9 and VOY tried something different (the Dominion War and Seven of Nine) viewers had other things to watch.
The continuity will likely be a poor fit. But there's infinitely more to Trek than that. It can be incompatible with the other shows and still be awesome.
This is a non sequitur. Fidelity to continuity has nothing to do with quality.
I think obviously after STLV the excitement is at a fever pitch. We're hearing all the right things, and it looks sensational. I've noticed a trend towards much more positive comments on twitter in the last 2 weeks, with the more negative comments simply being about canon, which to me means absolutely nothing in terms of criticism. The naysayers are simply running out of things to try and dislike. I derive great amusement from it.
RAMA
RAMA
OH! FOX hates science fiction... "blub"
(Firefly, i still love you.)
(Firefly, i still love you.)
It's got toilet jokes so that's good for like 9 seasons on FOX.We'll revisit this when Fox pulls the plug on The Orville.
I will bet good internet currency Discovery goes first given it's production costs.We'll revisit this when Fox pulls the plug on The Orville.
I get that you apparently have some personal stake in Discovery succeeding.
But maybe you should go look around forums other then Trek BBS, because if you did you would find the general feeling about Discovery is not a positive one...
We all know from Enterprise/Star Trek 2009 days that for a large section of fans who post here, nothing is more important than continuity.
Funny thing is that I shared the trailer on a couple of other forums, and it got nothing but positive responses. Suppose it depends on where you go.
They're missing the point. Take a look at the videos in my sig, if any of it mattered as much as they like to think, Trek's already broken beyond repair.
I completely agree. It's a cognitive dissonance. Some are readily prepared to accept that Klingons looked different in TOS, TMP, TSFS, TNG etc, and come up with convoluted explanations for this, but them looking different in Discovery makes the show unwatchable.
It reminds me of Bernd Schneider and his meltdowns over the NX-01 and the size of the JJ Enterprise.
I don't feel that that's a good excuse for knowingly and deliberately contradicting what's been previously established. Frankly, I think "because we can" or "because it needed to be changed" are better excuses than "Star Trek already has lots of continuity mistakes." That said, I doubt that they would change anything of particular significance. No point sweating the small stuff, I suppose.
Every incarnation of Star Trek has knowingly and willfully changed continuity and designs to suit them. I'd argue "it looked like that before" isn't a good enough reason to stifle innovation and creativity.
Slavish recreations of what has gone before isn't what I'd expect of a new Star Trek series. That's what fan films are for.
I always go back to that TMP novelisation - Star Trek isn't supposed to be a "historical document" of the future, it's a dramatisation. The window dressing is just that.
Last edited:
Exactly!
Yeah...what about real money?
For one thing, the business models are different. Mcfarlane's show easily goes first; when it quickly stops reaching its target numbers it will be bleeding money quickly.
