Will this series be more adult than the other ones?

[The Overlord]

What does it mean to be more adult?
Will the show pay taxes and raise children?
Or is this that weird thing where TV shows act more immature with extra violence, cynicism and nudity but people confuse that for being adult?

Star Trek has always been for adults. It's actually been for everybody. That's a good thing, not bad.

How about real stakes and actions that have real consequences, rather then gimmicky plots and planets of the week that never get visited again?

Frankly more adult should deeper story telling, a plot that builds rather then one that just ends rather an hour and better characterization so we don't get useless wastes of space like Harry Kim.

The cause of Star Trek imploding in the early 2000s; it relied too much on the same old story cliches from the past, Enterprise only became interesting once they ditched the alien/planet/anomaly of the week and replaced it with a ongoing story with real stakes.

Something like Batman v Superman was dark and was garbage, Logan was dark and was amazing, because it told a good story, so again how light or dark something is, is not as important as how well executed a work is.

I think this show should be darker then TNG or Voyager, but should still have the light hearted moments that made Star Trek fun. That's why I have no problem with Harry Mudd appearing, having a goofy villain from the past could be change from some of the darker episodes we may see.

But there should be a main villain, rather then villains of the week and that villain should be one of two things: a complex nuanced villain that the audience likes or a truly scary and menacing villain that provides some high stakes, no more random jerks who have no redeeming qualities, but are not menacing in the least, who exist just so humans can act smug towards them and make some belabored point about how much humanity has progressed.

Evolve or die, this show can't be just another TNG retread, but it does not have to be GOT either.

 

[RAMA]

This show won't resemble Berman era stories at all. Standalone episodic TV is out of fashion.

How about real stakes and actions that have real consequences, rather then gimmicky plots and planets of the week that never get visited again?

Frankly more adult should deeper story telling, a plot that builds rather then one that just ends rather an hour and better characterization so we don't get useless wastes of space like Harry Kim.

The cause of Star Trek imploding in the early 2000s; it relied too much on the same old story cliches from the past, Enterprise only became interesting once they ditched the alien/planet/anomaly of the week and replaced it with a ongoing story with real stakes.

Something like Batman v Superman was dark and was garbage, Logan was dark and was amazing, because it told a good story, so again how light or dark something is, is not as important as how well executed a work is.

I think this show should be darker then TNG or Voyager, but should still have the light hearted moments that made Star Trek fun. That's why I have no problem with Harry Mudd appearing, having a goofy villain from the past could be change from some of the darker episodes we may see.

But there should be a main villain, rather then villains of the week and that villain should be one of two things: a complex nuanced villain that the audience likes or a truly scary and menacing villain that provides some high stakes, no more random jerks who have no redeeming qualities, but are not menacing in the least, who exist just so humans can act smug towards them and make some belabored point about how much humanity has progressed.

Evolve or die, this show can't be just another TNG retread, but it does not have to be GOT either.

 

[Mudd]

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

How about real stakes and actions that have real consequences, rather then gimmicky plots and planets of the week that never get visited again?

Frankly more adult should deeper story telling, a plot that builds rather then one that just ends rather an hour and better characterization so we don't get useless wastes of space like Harry Kim.

The cause of Star Trek imploding in the early 2000s; it relied too much on the same old story cliches from the past, Enterprise only became interesting once they ditched the alien/planet/anomaly of the week and replaced it with a ongoing story with real stakes.

Something like Batman v Superman was dark and was garbage, Logan was dark and was amazing, because it told a good story, so again how light or dark something is, is not as important as how well executed a work is.

I think this show should be darker then TNG or Voyager, but should still have the light hearted moments that made Star Trek fun. That's why I have no problem with Harry Mudd appearing, having a goofy villain from the past could be change from some of the darker episodes we may see.

But there should be a main villain, rather then villains of the week and that villain should be one of two things: a complex nuanced villain that the audience likes or a truly scary and menacing villain that provides some high stakes, no more random jerks who have no redeeming qualities, but are not menacing in the least, who exist just so humans can act smug towards them and make some belabored point about how much humanity has progressed.

Evolve or die, this show can't be just another TNG retread, but it does not have to be GOT either.

Nothing here says "adult".
Just a different way of telling a story.

A novel versus a short story as it were.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Nothing here says "adult".
Just a different way of telling a story.

A novel versus a short story as it were.

Several animated shows for children do that already.

 

[The Overlord]

Nothing here says "adult".
Just a different way of telling a story.

A novel versus a short story as it were.

I would argue that real consequences is more adult then no consequences and just hitting the reset button all the time.

 

[BillJ]

I would argue that real consequences is more adult then no consequences and just hitting the reset button all the time.

The "reset"/anthology feel of the original is something I always liked. Got a complete story in an hour, and there was always things left to the imagination.

 

[OpenMaw]

I would argue that real consequences is more adult then no consequences and just hitting the reset button all the time.

The "reset"/anthology feel of the original is something I always liked. Got a complete story in an hour, and there was always things left to the imagination.

Well, adult is in the story telling itself, not so much the way it's done. IE, to meet both points in the middle, an episode like "City on the Edge of Forever" leaves you with the impression that Kirk is going to deal with the events that transpired for a very long time. Hence "Let's get the Hell out of here."

On the other hand, having things like foreshadowing, and building up characters over many episodes, and having things twist and turn along a longer span is also very effective. (See: Babylon 5's Londo and G'kar for beautiful examples of that.)

I do hope Discovery manages a little of both. Even though it will be serialized, I do agree with BillJ, having some of the mystery that goes along with a self-contained story would be great. One way to do that is to have an individual episode tackle a particular event/scenario, but have the themes of that story tie into the overall arc, or the events of that story effect a character and cause them to make a decision down the line.

One example I can take from Babylon 5 is, there is an episode early on that involves a woman using an alien device to help heal people of their illnesses. Well, it turns out this device is actually a form of capital punishment and is sucking a little of her life each time she uses it. If used at full strength it will kill one person and completely rejuvenate the other. It's a standalone story, but the device is brought back up again later in the series on two different occasions. So, you can do stand alone stories, and then build off of them down the line.

 

[BillJ]

On the other hand, having things like foreshadowing, and building up characters over many episodes, and having things twist and turn along a longer span is also very effective. (See: Babylon 5's Londo and G'kar for beautiful examples of that.)

For me, there's yet to be an arc-based show that I've had any desire to revisit. They just have zero rewatch value for me.

 

[The Overlord]

For me, there's yet to be an arc-based show that I've had any desire to revisit. They just have zero rewatch value for me.

Well I would argue some of the best TV series in history have ongoing stories.

It would have been hard to make the Wire compelling if it was episodic, you couldn't have explored the soical/economic problems of Baltimore within an hour.

And frankly I lost interest in episodic Star Trek around the 7th time Voyager got wrecked and appeared fine in the next episode for no reason. Voyager hit the reset button too often for me find it acceptable at this point.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Well I would argue some of the best TV series in history have ongoing stories.

Agreed, but like the poster above, I too find these shows to have zero re-watchability despite being more engaging the first time through.

 

[Mudd]

It's always easier to enjoy rewatching something when you can pick from many brief, well-structured stories that aren't reliant upon the details of previous stories in order to work well dramatically and emotionally.

For me BTVS is nearly the perfect skiffy TV series in this respect. There are just dozens of brilliant, rewatchable stand-alone episodes that nonetheless fit into a long thematic and character-centric series arc.

 

[RAMA]

Just be responsible parents and see if the pilot episode is acceptable for your children. It can still be a "family" show, but with caveats. Almost all series are this way now.

 

[Apparition B5]

Unfortunately. Which is the primary reason why I watch very few television shows made after 2005 or so.

 

[Jay Everington]

I think 'adult' is the wrong word in this case. Shows I consider adult would be like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Westworld, Sons of Anarchy, The Wire, The Walking Dead, etc. That is, shows that have a lot of explicit language, nudity, sexual scenes, and/or over the top violence. I would say 'grounded' is a better word to describe what I hope Discovery is.

Any successful non-super hero show of the fantasy/scifi genre today will need to take a more grounded approach. That's not to be confused with realism, which is quite different (especially with Trek) but you can have characters that look, act, and feel more like actual people than idealized fictional characters. Also, the sets, cinematography, and lighting all have an impact. It's the difference between Agents of SHIELD and the Marvel Netflix shows in terms of production values. Or to use another scifi franchise, Stargate SG-1/Atlantis compared to Stargate Universe.

Sometimes, IMO, less is more. I'm not a fan at all of the way most major networks (ABC/CBS are the worst) give all their shows this artificial, sanitized look. I much prefer shows that look like they could be happening in the real world. Even on a starship or in space, this applies, IMO.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

I would expect the show will reflect contemporary trends in TV storytelling and production (Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, etc...), because otherwise it'll stand out like a sore thumb. If that qualifies as "adult", then I suppose the answer is "yes".

But back in the late 80s/early 90s, TNG was also "adult" compared to the other shows on TV. That's just business.

 

[Mudd]

TNG really wasn't. Paramount came to quickly understand that the show's appeal was as family viewing, and they pitched their marketing to that.

 

[Armus]

What does it mean to be more adult?
Will the show pay taxes and raise children?
Or is this that weird thing where TV shows act more immature with extra violence, cynicism and nudity but people confuse that for being adult?

Star Trek has always been for adults. It's actually been for everybody. That's a good thing, not bad.

Well said. How many adults love Star Wars? It's for everybody and it works on different levels, which is what Star Trek does at its best too.

 

[Greg Cox]

It's worth noting that there's a wide spectrum of possibilities between strictly family-friendly (by 1980s standards, no less) and GAME OF THRONES.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's worth noting that there's a wide spectrum of possibilities between strictly family-friendly (by 1980s standards, no less) and GAME OF THRONES.

There's at least one family in GOT who's members are family friendly, perhaps too friendly.