If Discovery was set ten year before *anything* TOS, would it make more sense?

[Dukhat]

You bolded the wrong part of my quote. The emphasis should have been "on a consistent basis." Unless we're going to see these Mondasian Cybermen in more than just this one episode (like we only saw TOS styling in anything other than "Relics" or the two mirror ENT episodes), my point still stands.

 

[Tuskin38]

You bolded the wrong part of my quote. The emphasis should have been "on a consistent basis." Unless we're going to see these Mondasian Cybermen in more than just this one episode (like we only saw TOS styling in anything other than "Relics" or the two mirror ENT episodes), my point still stands.

You forgot an episode

 

[Mudd]

But the issue isn't that we were taken by surprise by the look. The issue is that it looks out of place.

No, it doesn't.

 

[Dukhat]

You forgot an episode

Thanks, forgot "T&T."

 

[fireproof78]

No, it doesn't.

Agreed. The look doesn't look out of place, because we don't have the full context of its place. When the first season ends, then I'll reevaluated it and probably be ok, if it was entertaining.

TMP still doesn't feel or look like Star Trek to me, though. So, I might be wrong.

 

[Lieut. Arex]

I failed to notice any instance where the use of TOS styles by on e of the modern shows caused excessive or even any discomfort among the highly sophisticated and more evolved "modern" audience.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

I get it. In 1966 when budgets were tighter for an unknown little show called "Star Trek" so that (and the aesthetics of the time) decided what the sets, uniforms, etc looked like, so now in 2017 with a huge fan base and more confidence in what can be achieved they have more money to throw around. But why then set the series in the same timeframe as the original show but then change every little thing about it and brand it a "reimagining"? Call it what it is, a reboot--at least that explains all the choices that have been made and I'd be a little more invested in the show.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I personally want these fixes in the visual continuity to be implemented:

- Steamboats in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer should look like Enterprise-D shuttlecraft.
- Human whaling ships after 1986 should look like Klingon Bird of Prays.
- Pre-Enterprise human spaceships should have looked like Borg spheres. Damn government cover-ups.
- Post-1967 human ships should resemble Captain Braxton's timeship, and hippies should dress in DS9 crew pyjamas.
- After Roswell, FBI agents should dress like Ferengi.
- The captain's narrative chart should be redrawn to look like Primer's.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

You bolded the wrong part of my quote. The emphasis should have been "on a consistent basis." Unless we're going to see these Mondasian Cybermen in more than just this one episode (like we only saw TOS styling in anything other than "Relics" or the two mirror ENT episodes), my point still stands.

Not much of a point. Capaldi's Doctor takes place in the present, Baker's Doctor takes place in the '70s and '80s. It's not the same. But whenever Doctor Who has shown something from that era it always looked the same; exactly like Star Trek has done so far with TOS. So it's my point that still stands.

 

[Ralphis]

While I personally am fine with a visual re-imagining and have no problem with what they're doing...

... I have wondered if the producers and those in charge had forgot, or just didn't realize, that there were a couple of episodes of TOS (The Menagerie/The Cage) with elements set a decade before the time of the 5-year-mission, and just thought the 2250s was free game to do whatever they want with. OR... even though it's set in the Prime Timeline, they used the Kelvin Timeline dates for some reason, and Discovery is set in like 2249.

I've felt for a while that a 2240s setting would give you the best of both worlds. With the timeline split occurring in 2233, you could blend the aesthetics of what we saw on the Kelvin with the iconic elements of TOS.

But all of that said, again, I personally am totally fine with what they seem to be doing with DSC. Just make it good, baby!!

 

[fireproof78]

I get it. In 1966 when budgets were tighter for an unknown little show called "Star Trek" so that (and the aesthetics of the time) decided what the sets, uniforms, etc looked like, so now in 2017 with a huge fan base and more confidence in what can be achieved they have more money to throw around. But why then set the series in the same timeframe as the original show but then change every little thing about it and brand it a "reimagining"? Call it what it is, a reboot--at least that explains all the choices that have been made and I'd be a little more invested in the show.

The budgets on TOS, especially the pilot, where actually consistent with most shows, at least according to Shatner.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

TOS had a generous budget and did a really good job with the standing sets. The art has evolved since then.

 

[psCargile]

You know how a western looks like the decade it was filmed in, but doesn't quite match the photographs from the 19th century?

Same thing with Trek.

 

[Lieut. Arex]

Avoiding the issue of matching the look of the era on a weekly basis is one reason, were I in charge I'd make Discovery a civilian vessel, something akin to Cousteau's Calypso doing that making her a refit warship, you could give it classic bones, but hang any skin you liked on it, the crew could wear damn near anything from the jump suits we saw on colonists on Janus VI to Jamie Finney's sailor suit, without causing a ripple in visual continuity, just match the original look once in a rare while, as the other modern shows did and rock on keep doing your own thang

 

[uniderth]

What I could get behind is if the Shenzhou is an older ship with and older aesthetic and uniforms. Then the Discovery blazes in with the classic aesthetic and uniforms. I could get behind that.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

What I could get behind is if the Shenzhou is an older ship with and older aesthetic and uniforms. Then the Discovery blazes in with the classic aesthetic and uniforms. I could get behind that.

We're not going to see a carbon copy of the TOS aesthetic no matter what, so I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[fireproof78]

We're not going to see a carbon copy of the TOS aesthetic no matter what, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Indeed.

 

[Dukhat]

Not much of a point. Capaldi's Doctor takes place in the present, Baker's Doctor takes place in the '70s and '80s. It's not the same. But whenever Doctor Who has shown something from that era it always looked the same; exactly like Star Trek has done so far with TOS. So it's my point that still stands.

Nope. The production values of 60's Doctor Who and 2017 Doctor Who are totally different, even though it takes place in the same universe. Just because an occasional episode threw in the original K9 and the Mondasian Cybermen does not mean that they have the exact same feel of the episodes they originally featured in.

My point was that people complain that DSC does not look like TOS, as if they actually expected that it would.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

My point was that people complain that DSC does not look like TOS, as if they actually expected that it would.

Nope. Your original point, before you decided to change it, was a TOS/Who analogy with the argument that and I quote, that "new Who will never, ever try to look like it did back then" which is totally wrong and preposterous:

Even the new Doctor Who is in the same continuity with the original '60's show. The issue, though, is that new Who will never, ever try to look like it did back then on a consistent basis even though it's the same universe.

Remember?

The production values of 60's Doctor Who and 2017 Doctor Who are totally different, even though it takes place in the same universe. Just because an occasional episode threw in the original K9 and the Mondasian Cybermen does not mean that they have the exact same feel of the episodes they originally featured in.

Of course the production values of 60's Doctor Who and 2017 Doctor Who are totally different because 60's Doctor Who is set in the 60's and 2017 Who is set in 2017. But each time they use something from the 60's it looks like it did in the 60's!

They even use exactly the same salt and pepper shakers with plungers as villains for fuck's sake! Why do they do that? Because they respect their past and aren't ashamed of it! Now it's the third time now I've proved you wrong on your old vs new Doctor Who analogy, so move on!

 

[fireproof78]

The Daleks are a copyrighted design, contractually obligated to appear in each season of DW.