Rating for US Premiere

[Noname Given]

And? That isn't the viewers fault. Kurtzman and company had nearly two years to put this together, and have served up an underwhelming product so far.

Bryan Fullers neglet of Star Trek Discovery's production isn't the viewers fault either (And CBS actted as they did once they saw Fuller was neglecting and not fulfilling his contract terms fopr the show - as CBS saw it)

You also seem to forget how TNG's pilot came across to fans in 1987. The fans lauding TNG these days weren't fans during the TOS years.

My point? I think in a few years time, overall opinions of ST: D's pilot will improve in a similar fashion as it gains new fans that aren't steeped in EITHER TOS <--- (still my favorite series and Star trek era) or TNG/DS9/VOY...(Berman Era) Star Trek or the ST2009 era.

I also get that ST: D looks the way it does production design wise because of two factors:

- CBS wants a 'modern' looking 2017 production.
- CBS does want to appeal and rope in the JJ Abrams Star Trek (2009) fans (and yes, those do exist.)

 

[BillJ]

You also seem to forget how TNG's pilot came across to fans in 1987. The fans lauding TNG these days weren't fans during the TOS years.

I was a TOS fan in 1987, and loved "Encounter at Farpoint". I know lots of folks didn't, but no everyone hated it.

 

[Noname Given]

Do they have an original idea anywhere in this freaking show?

http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/09/amanda-grayson-coming-to-star-trek-discovery-harberts-reveals/

Considering original Star Trek itself in concept and tone was taken from 1956's feature film "Forbidden Planet" - I fail to see your point.

Since they have Sarek and the main character (the Human Burnham) as his ward; you're surprised they'll have Sarek's human wife (who appeared in TOS, STIV:TVH and ST(2009) make an appearance in ST: D?

The unoriginal horror of it all.

I was a TOS fan in 1987, and loved "Encounter at Farpoint". I know lots of folks didn't, but no everyone hated it.

Fair enough. IDK - because again, (and yeah I'm old and have a number of longtime friends) I saw the ST: D pilot at a viewing party (that we'll repeat tomorrow) with a majority of the same people who all watched the premiere of TNG back in 1987.

In 1987: We were all disappointed with TNG: "Encounter At Farpoint" (and all not pleased with the promo for "The Naked Now" because we didn't want a rehash of an ortiginal TOS episode right out of the gate:; and a number of these people didn't watch TNG again unbtil "Yesterday's Enterprise")

In 2017: We all liked ST: D "The Vulcan Hello" + "Battle At The Binary Stars" and decided we'd keep watching to see where it goes.

 

[BillJ]

The unoriginal horror of it all.

I just wasn't planning on paying monthly for Star Trek: Kitchen Sink. I would like for the show to stand on its own.

 

[Campe]

Do they have an original idea anywhere in this freaking show?

http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/09/amanda-grayson-coming-to-star-trek-discovery-harberts-reveals/

They let us know A LONG time ago that Amanda would be a part of this series. August of last year, in fact:

Fuller strongly hinted that Amanda Grayson (aka Spock’s mother) would figure into the series. “I love that character. I loved Winona Ryder’s portrayal of her [in the 2009 movie] and it’s a great character. It would be fun in some iteration of this show to incorporate her and her storyline. She’s not a central part of the show but we love that character.”

If they’ve gone so far to include Amanda as had been planned, it sounds like they’ve stuck fairly closely to Fuller’s overall plan.

 

[Campe]

I just wasn't planning on paying monthly for Star Trek: Kitchen Sink. I would like for the show to stand on its own.

If you don’t like the direction, an attitude I can respect if not wholeheartedly share, you don’t have to pay for it. You don’t have to watch it. No one is sticking a gun to your head to do so.

At least I hope they aren’t.

 

[Noname Given]

I just wasn't planning on paying monthly for Star Trek: Kitchen Sink. I would like for the show to stand on its own.

Considering TNG started off as ST:TMP (aka Star Trek: Phase II) with characters like:

- Commander William Decker..er, I mean Commander William Riker

- Lt. Commander Ilya (an Empath)...er, I mean Lt. Commander Deanna Troi (an Empath)

- A Kholinar now totally devoid of emotion/highly intelligent half Vulcan....er I mean a totally devoid of emotion highly intelligent Android, Lt. Commander Data (who BTW was erily similar to an android from a failed Gene Coon and Gene Roddenberry pilot called "The Questor Tapes".)

I have to wonder why, with all the above as a part of TNG; and you really enjoying TNG back in the day; that a charcater from TOS who is wife to a character with a connection to ST: D's main character suddenly makes you feel the show won't stand on it's own.

As shown, a similar setup didn't seem to hurt TNG acquiring fans, or that series longevity.

 

[BillJ]

If you don’t like the direction, an attitude I can respect if not wholeheartedly share, you don’t have to pay for it. You don’t have to watch it. No one is sticking a gun to your head to do so.

At least I hope they aren’t.

It is Star Trek. So I'm giving it every opportunity possible to win me over.

 

[Campe]

It is Star Trek. So I'm giving it every opportunity possible to win me over.

Fair enough.

 

[Mudd]

Um, it was first pitched to FOX before that October announcement - and had been in pre-development (and also took used a lot of what they had done for the aborted 'Star trek Phase II' project that was ultimately turned into ST:TMP.

No.

Paramount had pitched a considerably different Trek series to Fox (the one that Roddenberry characterized as "a lot of cadets running the ship") and could not come to an agreement with the network.

Paramount offered the producer's chair to Nimoy and Bennett; they both passed. Greg Strangis was involved at one point, and got a contractually-entitled credit on a couple of first-season TNG episodes.

In fact, Roddenberry and company developed TNG from a standing start - putting pen to paper, so to speack - beginning in October of 1986. That he recycled a couple of characters from earlier failed projects does not in any way mitigate that. TNG was created in less than one year.

Or, you could argue that it had been in development since 1964 - but that would be somewhat disingenuous.

 

[gblews]

If you don’t like the direction, an attitude I can respect if not wholeheartedly share, you don’t have to pay for it. You don’t have to watch it. No one is sticking a gun to your head to do so.

At least I hope they aren’t.

One of the good things that comes with having to pay extra for CBSAA is that it should be a deterrent for those who planned on hate-watching DSC. It's one thing to casually tune in to network TV and find stuff you hate and post about it, but another thing entirely to pay extra just to hate-watch.

Or, did I speak too soon?

It is Star Trek. So I'm giving it every opportunity possible to win me over.

 

[BillJ]

One of the good things that comes with having to pay extra for CBSAA is that it should be a deterrent for those who planned on hate-watching DSC. It's one thing to casually tune in to network TV and find stuff you hate and post about it, but another thing entirely to pay extra just to hate-watch.

Or, did I speak too soon?

It isn't hate watching, trust me. I have better things to do with my time. Just been underwhelmed by it thus far. Hoping "Context is for Kings" will hook me.

 

[Mudd]

Well, since they're now giving away free one-month subscriberships right and left you may have to contend with more so-called "hate-watching" than you'd hoped.

 

[BillJ]

Well, since they're now giving away free one-month subscriberships right and left you may have to contend with more so-called "hate-watching" than you'd hoped.

I think the fact they are giving away free one month subscriptions, shows that commercials and number of people viewing them are still an important piece of their business plan.

 

[Longinus]

There was definitely heart and warmth between the crew of The Shenzhou - pretty much mirroring that between Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest.

Sure, I really liked that. I would have loved a show about Georgiou, Saru and non-psycho Burnham exploring strange new worlds. But that's not the show we are getting. My biggest worry is that this will be a bleak war show with edgy morally grey characters. I was done with that shit with DS9 already, not to mention the mess that was ENT.

 

[Fateor]

300k isn’t that many viewers.
This does not take Live+3 into consideration.
Analysts suggest viewership is holding steady.

Pretty much, all signs point to a good chunk of the Sunday viewership switching to DVR.

 

[Dr. Bashirs protege]

I think the fact they are giving away free one month subscriptions, shows that commercials and number of people viewing them are still an important piece of their business plan.

Literally every streaming service offers a free introductory month so I wouldn't say it's because of that at all. Although it doesn't hurt.

 

[tomalak301]

Literally every streaming service offers a free introductory month so I wouldn't say it's because of that at all. Although it doesn't hurt.

I was offered two days, not a whole month.

 

[Dr. Bashirs protege]

And for the 10 months Bryan Fuller was involved - he was paying more attention top his EP duties on "American Gods" then "Star Trek: Discovery" (Fuller seems to like to leave that fact out in interviews over why he an CBS parted ways.)

My biggest issue is that quite frankly he bit off more than he could chew. Something like American gods NEEDS your undivided attention, it's not a sitcom of the week. The creative forces behind madmen, breaking bad and the Sopranos were 100% behind those shows, they werent split. Heck, game of thrones has two with Benioff and Weis!! A "prestige" tv show deserves and requires undivided attention. I appreciate that fuller is a huge fan and honestly was probably kicking himself about the timing, but he bit off more than he could chew. For the record I adore American gods, the book and show. I highly recommend it.

 

[Dr. Bashirs protege]

I was a TOS fan in 1987, and loved "Encounter at Farpoint". I know lots of folks didn't, but no everyone hated it.

I saw it as a ten year old in the year 2000 and hated it, I do to this day. That being said I could see the pure novelty of something as unique in 1987 as "encounter at farpoint"TNG being enough to be like "okay let's see where this goes". To be honest whenever people point to encounter at farpoint as getting off to the wrong foot I always says it's that second episode of TNG and code of honour *shudders*. Now THOSE are irredeemable. That second episode is so bad that the ten years between watching TNG reruns on tv and when I saw it on Netflix for the second time ever I remember thinking "well data had sex, but I think it was like season 3 or maybe 4?" Just because logically in my head that's a huge step developmentally in his wanting to be more human. It's a big deal! And then in that second episode it was like "ohhhh.....okay....." Yeah , let's just throw that out there like it's a nothing in episode 2