Is Discovery the most polarizing Trek property ever?

[Mudd]

I'm pretty sure as soon as the callbacks end the same voices would scream:

Yeah, that's nonsense. I don't think you'll find many people who like or hate the show who are in love with all the fanwank.

Harry Mudd's second outing was pretty well done (although the eventual appearance of Stella was too much). If they just did a little of that occasionally, and did it like that, it would be enjoyable.

 

[Hythlodeus]

Yeah, that's nonsense.

I promise you, it is not

 

[BillJ]

I promise you, it is not

Subtle nods done intermittently bring a smile to my face. Bashing me over the head with call backs just tends to irritate me. Everyone's mileage will vary.

 

[Sakonna]

They definitely need to move away from the fanwank for season two. It is like they are constantly jumping up and down going "look! see! it's Star Trek! I tell ya!"

I can also see the argument for leaning into the fanwank -- in the sense that the entire CBSAA business model is built on appealing to the super fans of their various preexisting properties (Trek, Good Wife, Twilight Zone). It seems unlikely that Disco is ever going to pop as a big hit in the culture at large, so, if the superfans are going to pay for this, why not just focus on them and lean into the fandom-pleasing, ENT-season-4-style storytelling?

Not that I think this is necessarily what they SHOULD do -- I think either way could potentially be successful, leaning into or away from the fanwank. I would just like them to pick a lane. Right now I think they're caught in the middle in a way that doesn't serve them. On the one hand, there's a lot of continuity porn: this detailed weaving of a new character into the Spock/Sarak backstory, picking up these very specific plot threads from "In A Mirror Darkly" and "The Tholian Web", hey there's Harry Mudd, etc. On the other hand, they're throwing in robots and technologically augmented people everywhere, holo-communicators and all this other technology that doesn't track well with the other series.

The example I saw that summed it up best for me was some interview where someone was patting themselves on the back for using red for the Klingon transporter beams, as had been (apparently) used previously. There is no reason to be consistent with a minor detail like transporter beam color when everything else is a complete visual reboot! Their attitude to continuity just strikes me as a bit odd and confused, I want to feel like someone behind the scenes has a stronger grasp on what their take here is.

 

[BillJ]

I can also see the argument for leaning into the fanwank -- in the sense that the entire CBSAA business model is built on appealing to the super fans of their various preexisting properties (Trek, Good Wife, Twilight Zone). It seems unlikely that Disco is ever going to pop as a big hit in the culture at large, so, if the superfans are going to pay for this, why not just focus on them and lean into the fandom-pleasing, ENT-season-4-style storytelling?

If I was making a pure dollars and cents decision, I tend to agree with you. Though it seems to strip the show of any creativity.

 

[Sakonna]

If I was making a pure dollars and cents decision, I tend to agree with you. Though it seems to strip the show of any creativity.

I'm not a particular Star Wars fan, so I'm sure there were a billion complaints that fanbase had about this, but "Rogue One" was my favorite of those films. It was a prequel that was rigorous about folding itself into established continuity (visual and otherwise) but also had the most fresh & unique take I'd seen on the Star Wars universe since it's inception. I definitely think it is possible to do something that is super fanwank-y and also good and creative. It's just REALLY, REALLY HARD.

Much harder than just making a sequel (there's a reason TNG went to that concept first). Before Disco's premiere, I had no horse in this race, I saw no reason a prequel could not be as good as a post-Nemesis series. At this point, I'm wishing they had gone with a sequel simply because these writers weren't up to the greater challenge that a prequel represented (not that these writers are bad, just not strong enough to effortlessly dance through this particular minefield)

I also have a whole thing that the themes of Disco actually fit more naturally into the Trek universe post-Nemesis than they do pre-Kirk, so the timeline decision really doesn't serve them creatively on any level, but that's probably another thread...

 

[Hythlodeus]

the problem is that 24th century Klingons are neutered versions of the concept and overused

 

[BillJ]

the problem is that 24th century Klingons are neutered versions of the concept and overused

If you can make major changes to them and drop them in the middle of the timeline with no explanation, then I'm not sure how it would be an issue to do at the end of the timeline where the future is still a mystery?

 

[Noname Given]

They are playing a long game to destroy Trek, apparently.

Yep - and Desilu/Paramount have been doing it since 1964 (yes, 1964 when the original idea was first pitched. There's those who wanted to make sure the first rejection took/was ultimately proved correct. #killtrekconspiracy )

 

[BillJ]

Yep - and Desilu/Paramount have been doing it since 1964 (yes, 1964 when the original idea was first pitched. There's those who wanted to make sure the first rejection took/was ultimately proved correct. #killtrekconspiracy )

When time travel is developed, I wonder how many fractured timelines will be created by disgruntled fans trying to change various elements of Trek's production history?

 

[Hythlodeus]

If you can make major changes to them and drop them in the middle of the timeline with no explanation, then I'm not sure how it would be an issue to do at the end of the timeline where the future is still a mystery?

I'd think nerd rage would be the same or even bigger. It's a gut feeling I have, but an informed one

 

[Greg Cox]

Getting back to original topic, I remember things getting very heated and divisive during the Reboot Wars, with both sides eventually claiming to be persecuted and bullied by the opposition. Thankfully, things don't seem quite so bad with DISCO. Fewer people are claiming to speak for all "the fans" or maintaining that anyone who enjoyed the reboot just likes snazzy SFX and explosions and has no idea what STAR TREK is all about.. Or, conversely, insisting that the naysayers are just nitpicking purists who hate anything new or different.

DISCO doesn't strike me as nearly so "polarizing" . . . so far. We'll see if we're still arguing about new Klingon makeups three seasons from now.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm not a particular Star Wars fan, so I'm sure there were a billion complaints that fanbase had about this, but "Rogue One" was my favorite of those films. It was a prequel that was rigorous about folding itself into established continuity (visual and otherwise) but also had the most fresh & unique take I'd seen on the Star Wars universe since it's inception. I definitely think it is possible to do something that is super fanwank-y and also good and creative. It's just REALLY, REALLY HARD.

The interesting thing about RO, not to bunny trail too much, is that it actually fits more in to Lucas' original idea of a government in exile and the very warlike atmosphere with comparisons being made to Vietnam. I think RO took that concept and really expanded upon it. As you said, it is really difficult. But, it can expand because the tech and such is still fanciful. All that RO did was use more money to expand upon the "used universe" and "Freedom fighter" ideas Lucas had. Also, there are plenty of fans who complained that the U-Wing and TIE Striker and Death Troopers made no sense since they were never seen again

With DISCO, the problem runs the other way. It's supposed to be based on the future of humanity. Well, it's tough to see that when the contemporary cell phone can do more and more functions, and yet Star Trek relies upon very limited technology.

Visual reboot or not, DISCO did put itself in a difficult position. I just think they are doing much better than they will be given credit for, largely because they are not worried about the tech side and explaining everything, but trying to focus on the characters. Yes, I know that's a mixed bag, but i like the characters. Compared to RO were I barely felt invested in the characters.

the problem is that 24th century Klingons are neutered versions of the concept and overused

More stereotypes, please.

Yep - and Desilu/Paramount have been doing it since 1964 (yes, 1964 when the original idea was first pitched. There's those who wanted to make sure the first rejection took/was ultimately proved correct. #killtrekconspiracy )

That's why they rejected the first pilot.

 

[bigglesworth]

the problem is that 24th century Klingons are neutered versions of the concept and overused

But the show's producers didn't need Klingons. They could have used virtually any established race (Romulans, Breen, Shelliak, etc...) or created a completely new one for their war. And in context of the Dominion war it would make sense. The UFP and the other races were barely able to fight back the Dominion. Even after a few years, Starfleet may still not have enough ships to adequately control Federation space. Perfect time for another space empire to try a gain a foothold in the AQ.

Also, the tech seen in DIS would more easily fit in the 24th century as opposed to the 23rd.

 

[Hythlodeus]

More stereotypes, please.

more stereotypical as 24th century Sons of Anarchy Klingons? Impossible (and I say that as a fan of 24th century sons of Anarchy Klingons)

 

[Hythlodeus]

Also, the tech seen in DIS would more easily fit in the 24th century as opposed to the 23rd.

It hardly fits in the 22nd, since it is already way to close to contemporary tech

 

[fireproof78]

But the show's producers didn't need Klingons. They could have used virtually any established race (Romulans, Breen, Shelliak, etc...) or created a completely new one for their war. And in context of the Dominion war it would make sense. The UFP and the other races were barely able to fight back the Dominion. Even after a few years, Starfleet may still not have enough ships to adequately control Federation space. Perfect time for another space empire to try a gain a foothold in the AQ.

Also, the tech seen in DIS would more easily fit in the 24th century as opposed to the 23rd.

I really don't think it does, or only on the surface level. The functionality of some of Discovery's tech seems unique to that ship as a test bed. The holograms lack any semblance of being actually present and a huge reliance on physical buttons.

Also, if they used another established race there would be outcry.

"But, the Federation has seen the Romulans since the WAR!"

"The Federation hasn't encountered the Breen yet or know anything about them (See also the Ferengi on Enterprise).

Etc, etc.

If you're going to annoy the base, might as well present your production team with new artistic options.

 

[seigezunt]

Having flashbacks to the Suliban.

 

[bigglesworth]

I really don't think it does, or only on the surface level. The functionality of some of Discovery's tech seems unique to that ship as a test bed. The holograms lack any semblance of being actually present and a huge reliance on physical buttons.

Also, if they used another established race there would be outcry.

"But, the Federation has seen the Romulans since the WAR!"

"The Federation hasn't encountered the Breen yet or know anything about them (See also the Ferengi on Enterprise).

Etc, etc.

If you're going to annoy the base, might as well present your production team with new artistic options.

I meant that DIS would be the same show but set post ST: Nemesis in as far as using the various bad guys.

 

[Greg Cox]

When time travel is developed, I wonder how many fractured timelines will be created by disgruntled fans trying to change various elements of Trek's production history?

"Timeship Log. Our mission: convince Kirstie Alley to stay on as Saavik. Failure is not an option."