Finally got around to watching the new trailer. Just realized a continuity error: they're using the Enterprise's insignia as their own. The Enterprise's symbol didn't become the defacto Starfleet symbol until TOS movies (see: what all the people on other ships not named Enterprise had as their uniform insignia in TOS). So, that's kinda disappointing. And I rolled my eyes at the symbol being burned/walked into the desert sand as the ship was flying away.
I'm still not feeling anything regarding the Klingons. I hate everything about their design, especially since this is a prime timeline interquel. Archer never ran into anything that looked like these Klingons. Klingon ships have a very clear design lineage, much like Starfleet has, and this show apparently decided to chuck it out the window simply to make their own mark.
I'm happy the ship effects look better. It's a night and day difference between the original teaser trailer and the new one.
The biggest thing is that nothing in the trailers feels like Trek. There's very little joy to be found. It seems like the usual "man is the real monster" crap that has infected sci-fi. BSG with Klingons.
Finally got around to watching the new trailer. Just realized a continuity error: they're using the Enterprise's insignia as their own. The Enterprise's symbol didn't become the defacto Starfleet symbol until TOS movies (see: what all the people on other ships not named Enterprise had as their uniform insignia in TOS). So, that's kinda disappointing.
I'm baffled by someone actually caring about this, but there's still time for them to change their mind in universe. Maybe the insignias were a short lived experiment, the setting of TOS is so vague there's no way to know.
I appreciate that continuity is important, especially when you're setting a new story so close to an existing one, but it's odd to see how people cherry-pick things.
Like, if you're going so deep as to care about badge insignias, you should probably also be noting that as per TOS 23rd Century Starfleet did not allow women to be captains.
Finally got around to watching the new trailer. Just realized a continuity error: they're using the Enterprise's insignia as their own. The Enterprise's symbol didn't become the defacto Starfleet symbol until TOS movies (see: what all the people on other ships not named Enterprise had as their uniform insignia in TOS). So, that's kinda disappointing.
I'm baffled by someone actually caring about this, but there's still time for them to change their mind in universe. Maybe the insignias were a short lived experiment, the setting of TOS is so vague there's no way to know.
I'm just sick of the "need" to have an in-universe explanation for everything. I don't give a damn about the "ship insignias" I don't care about ridged Klingons vs smooth-forehead Klingons, I don't care about technology "in the future" looking like ancient tech from the 60s
you should probably also be noting that as per TOS 23rd Century Starfleet did not allow women to be captains.
This isn't actually true, an unnamed woman captained the USS Saratoga in Star Trek IV, and Uhura assumed command in an episode of TAS.
Which were both retcons of "Turnabout Intruder," Season 3 of TOS, where it's stated that women are not allowed to captain starships.
In fact, the whole insignia thing is also the result of a retcon. The movies switched to using Enterprise-style badges because they were more recognizable. And also most of the others seen in TOS are god-awful. Putting in the whole "we shifted our entire uniform code because this one ship is way cool" was a way to smooth things over continuity-wise. They really should've just ignored it like they did the whole "no women thing."
Edit: Fun bit of trivia- the captain of the Saratoga in Voyage Home was played by Madge Sinclair, who also played the queen of Zemunda in Coming to America and Sarabi in The Lion King. She was way cool. Although the captain of the Saratoga went unnamed in the film (and was in fact uncredited), she was later named for Sinclair.
The no woman captains thing was obviously 1960s gender role bullshit, and that has no place in Trek as far as I'm concerned. So, changing that is a net positive, and it's easy enough to ignore in TOS.
The insignia is obviously a nitpick, but as a fan, it's a noticeable one. I'm a stickler for detail. If it doesn't bug other people, cool, but now that I've realized it, it jumps out to me (as do a lot of things I can at least attribute to a better realization of future tech than what was depicted in the 1960s, and thus be mostly okay with). The rest/bulk of my post was about more substantial issues I have with the overall direction of the series as sussed out by watching the trailers. I can't help but appreciate the irony of people nitpicking my nitpick.
The no woman captains thing was obviously 1960s gender role bullshit, and that has no place in Trek as far as I'm concerned. So, changing that is a net positive, and it's easy enough to ignore in TOS.
The insignia is obviously a nitpick, but as a fan, it's a noticeable one. I'm a stickler for detail. If it doesn't bug other people, cool, but now that I've realized it, it jumps out to me (as do a lot of things I can at least attribute to a better realization of future tech than what was depicted in the 1960s, and thus be mostly okay with). The rest/bulk of my post was about more substantial issues I have with the overall direction of the series as sussed out by watching the trailers. I can't help but appreciate the irony of people nitpicking my nitpick.
It's nitpicks all the way down, lol.
I agree with you about the Klingon design. I'd be fine with changing things if the new style was any good. This version just looks way too busy, and I question how well the actors will be able to emote. Dorn and Hertzler gave amazing performances during their run, and it'd be a shame to hamstring the next round of Klingon actors because the production wanted to fix something that wasn't broken.
you should probably also be noting that as per TOS 23rd Century Starfleet did not allow women to be captains.
This isn't actually true, an unnamed woman captained the USS Saratoga in Star Trek IV, and Uhura assumed command in an episode of TAS.
Which were both retcons of "Turnabout Intruder," Season 3 of TOS, where it's stated that women are not allowed to captain starships.
I looked this up, and the actual line is "Your world of starship captains doesn't admit women", which is spoken by a woman as she's pining for Kirk. Interpreting that to mean "women can't be starship captains per Starfleet regulations" seems a little ridiculous, especially when we know from the series pilot that women can serve as first officer aboard a starship (and would be expected to assume the captain's duties regularly from that position).
Heh, wonder if this is the same Mudd from those two episodes of ToS.
Most definitely, a re-imagination though.
I do wonder if we'll have time travel/parallel universe shenanigans, depending in whatever that pixelated glowy thing is.
I also can't get a read on that metal spider thingy at all, it reminded me of the mind worms from Star Trek 2, for some reason, but that's probably not it
you should probably also be noting that as per TOS 23rd Century Starfleet did not allow women to be captains.
This isn't actually true, an unnamed woman captained the USS Saratoga in Star Trek IV, and Uhura assumed command in an episode of TAS.
Which were both retcons of "Turnabout Intruder," Season 3 of TOS, where it's stated that women are not allowed to captain starships.
I looked this up, and the actual line is "Your world of starship captains doesn't admit women", which is spoken by a woman as she's pining for Kirk. Interpreting that to mean "women can't be starship captains per Starfleet regulations" seems a little ridiculous, especially when we know from the series pilot that women can serve as first officer aboard a starship (and would be expected to assume the captain's duties regularly from that position).
Except that the rest of the episode shows imposter!Kirk failing at being captain for all the classic misogynist stereotypes. At one point, Scotty even says he'd never seen Kirk so "red-faced with hysteria."
The fact that this was written, produced, and aired under Roddenberry's supervision after he'd created Number One just goes to show that looking to TOS for strict continuity is kind of a non-starter. They wrote that series by the seat of their pants, and it shows. Even basic concepts like the Federation or phasers weren't nearly as solidified as people imagine.
Yeah, a lot of core Star Trek lore was basically made up as they went along in TOS. The federation basically didn't exist in season one, the Enterprise originally ran on lithium crystals, Vulcans had no telepathic ability at all until the mind meld was invented to help an otherwise boring exposition scene, etc.
That's why Vulcans ended up with a crazy list of abilities - super strength, telepathy, nerve pinch, etc. Spock being the only non-human on the crew, any time a new superpower was called for, he got it. If Kirk didn't have a ray gun, it was only a matter of time before Spock started shooting lasers from his eyes.
It's pretty interesting that this pattern repeats through a lot of long-running fandoms. The creators start it with a relatively simple idea- Hornblower in space- and it takes off. Then other people start taking the reigns, and setting up rules and boundaries so that everybody else can keep up. And then those rules become more solidified as the story goes on, until the stories are about those rules more than anything else.
I agree with you about the Klingon design. I'd be fine with changing things if the new style was any good. This version just looks way too busy, and I question how well the actors will be able to emote. Dorn and Hertzler gave amazing performances during their run, and it'd be a shame to hamstring the next round of Klingon actors because the production wanted to fix something that wasn't broken.
Yeah, everything revolving around these Klingons seems weird to me. I was extremely disappointed to see that their ships looked extra busy, too.
I'm not too concerned about the nitpicky stuff. I don't even care that much about the Klingon redesign. I'm more worried, the more we learn about Discovery, that the show isn't going to do anything DS9 didn't already do better. Hopefully I'm proven wrong and it brings something interesting to the Trek universe.
OremLK on
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
I'm not too concerned about the nitpicky stuff. I don't even care that much about the Klingon redesign. I'm more worried, the more we learn about Discovery, that the show isn't going to do anything DS9 didn't already do better. Hopefully I'm proven wrong and it brings something interesting to the Trek universe.
I'm intrigued by Trek continuing the conversation DS9 began. Maybe they'll fail, maybe they won't - we lose nothing either way.
The main reason I care about the continuity stuff at this point, beyond a need for everything to make sense, is it's an indicator about how invested in the property the showrunners are, and how deeply they care about it.
So far, signs aren't looking good.
I'll still give them the benefit of the doubt and give this a watch (at least the first few episodes). But I'm not getting "this is a Star Trek show called Discovery because it's about discovery. We care and want this to be something you'll love, don't worry Star Trek fan" vibes from it. I'm getting "the fans loved the new films right? LOADS OF EXPLOSIONS, sod the canon, we've got a brilliant new take you'll LOVE" vibes. Which doesn't exactly thrill me.
I'm not too concerned about the nitpicky stuff. I don't even care that much about the Klingon redesign. I'm more worried, the more we learn about Discovery, that the show isn't going to do anything DS9 didn't already do better. Hopefully I'm proven wrong and it brings something interesting to the Trek universe.
I'm intrigued by Trek continuing the conversation DS9 began. Maybe they'll fail, maybe they won't - we lose nothing either way.
They trailer gave off more of a Abrams reboot Trek vibe, and new-Trek doesn't do conversations. It's all exposition dumps, monologues, and pew pew space fights.
The trailer lost me early on with the main character's voice over, which I guess she's actually saying out loud at some point in the show. "Sometimes up is down and when you're lost you're found blah blah blah." Nobody speaks like that. The general concept that sometimes, when things are in a crisis state and all messed up, you can really discover who you are and what you stand for is solid; but the actual way she's saying it sounds like someone took a normal speech on that topic and the attempted to shrink it down to tweet length. It ends up sounding like she's describing the rules for Opposite Day.
I like setting the show during the period of Klingon unification. A Klingon GoT type thing has a lot of potential; but at that point I'm not sure why they need the Federation people there. Normally it'd be to insert a human that you can relate to as the viewpoint character, but I don't think Trek actually needs to do this at this point. We all know Klingons, everyone loves Worf; alien-centric with just bit roles for the humans is perfectly doable. They could do something interesting by not showing anything that happens behind the scenes in the whole Klingon story, and having the Federation people attempt to figure out what's going on and what to do based on who they're seeing today and what's being said (or not said). Pretty sure that Wolf Hall in space isn't what they're going for though.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
They trailer gave off more of a Abrams reboot Trek vibe, and new-Trek doesn't do conversations. It's all exposition dumps, monologues, and pew pew space fights.
Abrams didn't do conversations, this isn't an Abrams helmed production.
The trailer lost me early on with the main character's voice over, which I guess she's actually saying out loud at some point in the show. "Sometimes up is down and when you're lost you're found blah blah blah." Nobody speaks like that. The general concept that sometimes, when things are in a crisis state and all messed up, you can really discover who you are and what you stand for is solid; but the actual way she's saying it sounds like someone took a normal speech on that topic and the attempted to shrink it down to tweet length. It ends up sounding like she's describing the rules for Opposite Day.
Trek isn't known for people speaking naturally, so it didn't bother me that much.
I like setting the show during the period of Klingon unification. A Klingon GoT type thing has a lot of potential; but at that point I'm not sure why they need the Federation people there. Normally it'd be to insert a human that you can relate to as the viewpoint character, but I don't think Trek actually needs to do this at this point. We all know Klingons, everyone loves Worf; alien-centric with just bit roles for the humans is perfectly doable. They could do something interesting by not showing anything that happens behind the scenes in the whole Klingon story, and having the Federation people attempt to figure out what's going on and what to do based on who they're seeing today and what's being said (or not said). Pretty sure that Wolf Hall in space isn't what they're going for though.
Worf's last appearance was in 2002, so his cultural relevance has diminished for the public significantly. They may do something interesting - we don't have enough information to know whether that's true or not yet. They may be doing this exact story, we won't know until we see the final product.
+2
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
They trailer gave off more of a Abrams reboot Trek vibe, and new-Trek doesn't do conversations. It's all exposition dumps, monologues, and pew pew space fights.
Abrams didn't do conversations, this isn't an Abrams helmed production.
Nope, but it looks like one. So between the lens flare, the FX, and the fact that it's focused on a Klingon war, any conversations will probably be very loud with explosions in the background.
The trailer lost me early on with the main character's voice over, which I guess she's actually saying out loud at some point in the show. "Sometimes up is down and when you're lost you're found blah blah blah." Nobody speaks like that. The general concept that sometimes, when things are in a crisis state and all messed up, you can really discover who you are and what you stand for is solid; but the actual way she's saying it sounds like someone took a normal speech on that topic and the attempted to shrink it down to tweet length. It ends up sounding like she's describing the rules for Opposite Day.
Trek isn't known for people speaking naturally, so it didn't bother me that much.
They tend to be a bit verbose in Trek, but well constructed sentences aren't something that Trek dialogue avoids like the plague.
I like setting the show during the period of Klingon unification. A Klingon GoT type thing has a lot of potential; but at that point I'm not sure why they need the Federation people there. Normally it'd be to insert a human that you can relate to as the viewpoint character, but I don't think Trek actually needs to do this at this point. We all know Klingons, everyone loves Worf; alien-centric with just bit roles for the humans is perfectly doable. They could do something interesting by not showing anything that happens behind the scenes in the whole Klingon story, and having the Federation people attempt to figure out what's going on and what to do based on who they're seeing today and what's being said (or not said). Pretty sure that Wolf Hall in space isn't what they're going for though.
Worf's last appearance was in 2002, so his cultural relevance has diminished for the public significantly. They may do something interesting - we don't have enough information to know whether that's true or not yet. They may be doing this exact story, we won't know until we see the final product.
This thing is airing on CBS's streaming service in the US, the public is not the target audience because the general public is not going to be able to see it. Internationally on Netflix, maybe, but the domestic market is going to be 100% Trekkies because nobody else is going to sign up for the service.
I'm pretty sure that Worf Hall wasn't the elevator pitch for this show.
daveNYC on
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
that trailer was the first I've seen from Discovery and while the redesigns are weird and ill-advised (klingon minotaur men, a spaceship with a giant glowing eye on the front) it seems to have style and verve, which are welcome qualities in a star trek tv show
some of the dialogue was pretty good too
i am in a very neutral judgment-reserving place w/r/t this
in other news, I've been talking about this in chat a lot, but the new Star Trek Adventures tabletop rpg has just come out as of a couple weeks ago and I finally got to play it last night and can confirm that it is pretty terrific
it supports the enterprise, tos, and tng eras and, somewhat miraculously, it has rules for doing every star trek thing you can think of (remodulating the shield harmonics, racing against time to cure a virus, firing a full spread of quantum torpedoes, launching a class A probe) while at the same time being a pretty rules-light system
It's simply not a spaceship without maroon carpetting
Nope, but it looks like one. So between the lens flare, the FX, and the fact that it's focused on a Klingon war, any conversations will probably be very loud with explosions in the background.
There is a big difference between looking like something, and actually be that thing. They may have adopted that visual style since Abrams Trek movies are the popular go-to for Trek now, which make sense.
Abrams didn't make any of those tools, merely adopted them into his skill set - as far as I can tell he has no control over this behind the scenes (that was originally Bryan Fuller, of Hannibal and American Gods fame).
It's your call to write it off, but this hasn't convinced me it's a concern by itself.
Beyond had all these things too, and while it wasn't a thinking movie it was a blast and the most faithful movie to Trek post-Abrams.
They tend to be a bit verbose in Trek, but well constructed sentences aren't something that Trek dialogue avoids like the plague.
I wouldn't say the entire trailer had terrible dialogue like that, nor can all dialogue be winners.
This thing is airing on CBS's streaming service in the US, the public is not the target audience because the general public is not going to be able to see it. Internationally on Netflix, maybe, but the domestic market is going to be 100% Trekkies because nobody else is going to sign up for the service.
I'm pretty sure that Worf Hall wasn't the elevator pitch for this show.
Depends on how much they're relying on Netflix, if they do then yes, public perception is important to address and the public may have forgotten who Worf is. Trek is one of their crown jewels, though, so I wouldn't rule out that the general public view Trek (especially given the movie franchise).
The show has changed a lot from its elevator pitch behind the scenes, and it may be years before we know the details.
Harry Dresden on
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Netflix is 100% of their strategy for non-North American (North America defined as north of the Rio Grande) distribution. The USA gets the premier on network and then everything else is on their streaming. Canada gets the premier on CTV and the rest on what seems like a Canadian SciFy chanel thing. This thing is probably going to live or die based on how many people pony up the $5.99 ($9.99 to go ad free) for All-Access.
I'm not writing it off, but I don't see any reason to defend it based on what I've seen so far. Trek has been pretty not good for the last decade or so, I'm not seeing anything about this show that's convinced me they've turned the corner.
I suspect the elevator pitch wasn't much more complex than 'Star Trek movies are making money, lets get in on some of that'.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
I like setting the show during the period of Klingon unification. A Klingon GoT type thing has a lot of potential; but at that point I'm not sure why they need the Federation people there. Normally it'd be to insert a human that you can relate to as the viewpoint character, but I don't think Trek actually needs to do this at this point. We all know Klingons, everyone loves Worf; alien-centric with just bit roles for the humans is perfectly doable. They could do something interesting by not showing anything that happens behind the scenes in the whole Klingon story, and having the Federation people attempt to figure out what's going on and what to do based on who they're seeing today and what's being said (or not said). Pretty sure that Wolf Hall in space isn't what they're going for though.
Even as a Star Trek fan, I've gotta disagree. I've seen every episode of non-TOS Trek and most of TOS. I like Worf. I would not watch a Klingons-only show.
Klingon society has always been so ridiculously stilted and cartoonish that it barely works for the length of time it takes to resolve a Klingon society-centric story on an otherwise not-Klingon-centered show. Watching hours and hours of Klingons interacting with other Klingons, where all of them are the TNG-and-after style ones? That sounds terrible.
Hell, maybe they're doing all the Klingon redesign in part to justify making Klingon culture actually seem like a thing which could achieve an industrial revolution - much less warp flight capability - without self-destructing.
PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
+3
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Unfortunately a lot of Trek aliens seem to have been created solely to make humans look good, which does limit how much time you spend with them.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
It's entirely possible the trailer was all of the exciting moments in the season and the rest of it is people sitting and talking in gray rooms about treaties, you know how they edit trailers.
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
It's entirely possible the trailer was all of the exciting moments in the season and the rest of it is people sitting and talking in gray rooms about treaties, you know how they edit trailers.
why would they not show any of the stuff we, as star trek fans, want to see?
It's entirely possible the trailer was all of the exciting moments in the season and the rest of it is people sitting and talking in gray rooms about treaties, you know how they edit trailers.
Grey rooms? And you call yourself a fan?
I'm pretty sure that at least some of those walls were beige.
that trailer was the first I've seen from Discovery and while the redesigns are weird and ill-advised (klingon minotaur men, a spaceship with a giant glowing eye on the front) it seems to have style and verve, which are welcome qualities in a star trek tv show
some of the dialogue was pretty good too
i am in a very neutral judgment-reserving place w/r/t this
in other news, I've been talking about this in chat a lot, but the new Star Trek Adventures tabletop rpg has just come out as of a couple weeks ago and I finally got to play it last night and can confirm that it is pretty terrific
it supports the enterprise, tos, and tng eras and, somewhat miraculously, it has rules for doing every star trek thing you can think of (remodulating the shield harmonics, racing against time to cure a virus, firing a full spread of quantum torpedoes, launching a class A probe) while at the same time being a pretty rules-light system
It's simply not a spaceship without maroon carpetting
It's entirely possible the trailer was all of the exciting moments in the season and the rest of it is people sitting and talking in gray rooms about treaties, you know how they edit trailers.
Grey rooms? And you call yourself a fan?
I'm pretty sure that at least some of those walls were beige.
As a progressive Star Trek fan, I don't see color.
To be honest, part of the reason I'm pretty blase about Discovery is that I see as a win-win.
If the show is good, and succeeds, then great- there's more good Trek in the world.
If the show is bad, and fails, then great- it increases the chances that Netflix will pick up the series, and they have a much better track record of producing good shit.
Even if the show is good, but fails, that still helps keep the franchise alive. TOS got cancelled, after all.
Mancingtom on
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
i think if the show fails, there's the very real chance it's blamed on star trek and not on being paywalled behind a service nobody wants or asked for, and then doesn't get picked up anywhere else
Posts
is this something we already know? i've been mostly keeping out of star trek news while i was watching all of the star trek ever made
Yep.
No, that was news to me. I didn't know he was cast.
I'm still not feeling anything regarding the Klingons. I hate everything about their design, especially since this is a prime timeline interquel. Archer never ran into anything that looked like these Klingons. Klingon ships have a very clear design lineage, much like Starfleet has, and this show apparently decided to chuck it out the window simply to make their own mark.
I'm happy the ship effects look better. It's a night and day difference between the original teaser trailer and the new one.
The biggest thing is that nothing in the trailers feels like Trek. There's very little joy to be found. It seems like the usual "man is the real monster" crap that has infected sci-fi. BSG with Klingons.
Like, if you're going so deep as to care about badge insignias, you should probably also be noting that as per TOS 23rd Century Starfleet did not allow women to be captains.
Retcons exist for a reason.
I'm just sick of the "need" to have an in-universe explanation for everything. I don't give a damn about the "ship insignias" I don't care about ridged Klingons vs smooth-forehead Klingons, I don't care about technology "in the future" looking like ancient tech from the 60s
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Which were both retcons of "Turnabout Intruder," Season 3 of TOS, where it's stated that women are not allowed to captain starships.
In fact, the whole insignia thing is also the result of a retcon. The movies switched to using Enterprise-style badges because they were more recognizable. And also most of the others seen in TOS are god-awful. Putting in the whole "we shifted our entire uniform code because this one ship is way cool" was a way to smooth things over continuity-wise. They really should've just ignored it like they did the whole "no women thing."
Edit: Fun bit of trivia- the captain of the Saratoga in Voyage Home was played by Madge Sinclair, who also played the queen of Zemunda in Coming to America and Sarabi in The Lion King. She was way cool. Although the captain of the Saratoga went unnamed in the film (and was in fact uncredited), she was later named for Sinclair.
The insignia is obviously a nitpick, but as a fan, it's a noticeable one. I'm a stickler for detail. If it doesn't bug other people, cool, but now that I've realized it, it jumps out to me (as do a lot of things I can at least attribute to a better realization of future tech than what was depicted in the 1960s, and thus be mostly okay with). The rest/bulk of my post was about more substantial issues I have with the overall direction of the series as sussed out by watching the trailers. I can't help but appreciate the irony of people nitpicking my nitpick.
It's nitpicks all the way down, lol.
I agree with you about the Klingon design. I'd be fine with changing things if the new style was any good. This version just looks way too busy, and I question how well the actors will be able to emote. Dorn and Hertzler gave amazing performances during their run, and it'd be a shame to hamstring the next round of Klingon actors because the production wanted to fix something that wasn't broken.
I do wonder if we'll have time travel/parallel universe shenanigans, depending in whatever that pixelated glowy thing is.
I also can't get a read on that metal spider thingy at all, it reminded me of the mind worms from Star Trek 2, for some reason, but that's probably not it
Except that the rest of the episode shows imposter!Kirk failing at being captain for all the classic misogynist stereotypes. At one point, Scotty even says he'd never seen Kirk so "red-faced with hysteria."
The fact that this was written, produced, and aired under Roddenberry's supervision after he'd created Number One just goes to show that looking to TOS for strict continuity is kind of a non-starter. They wrote that series by the seat of their pants, and it shows. Even basic concepts like the Federation or phasers weren't nearly as solidified as people imagine.
Yeah, everything revolving around these Klingons seems weird to me. I was extremely disappointed to see that their ships looked extra busy, too.
I'm intrigued by Trek continuing the conversation DS9 began. Maybe they'll fail, maybe they won't - we lose nothing either way.
So far, signs aren't looking good.
I'll still give them the benefit of the doubt and give this a watch (at least the first few episodes). But I'm not getting "this is a Star Trek show called Discovery because it's about discovery. We care and want this to be something you'll love, don't worry Star Trek fan" vibes from it. I'm getting "the fans loved the new films right? LOADS OF EXPLOSIONS, sod the canon, we've got a brilliant new take you'll LOVE" vibes. Which doesn't exactly thrill me.
Thoughts of a Part-Time Hobbyist - A Wargaming and RPG Blog
They trailer gave off more of a Abrams reboot Trek vibe, and new-Trek doesn't do conversations. It's all exposition dumps, monologues, and pew pew space fights.
The trailer lost me early on with the main character's voice over, which I guess she's actually saying out loud at some point in the show. "Sometimes up is down and when you're lost you're found blah blah blah." Nobody speaks like that. The general concept that sometimes, when things are in a crisis state and all messed up, you can really discover who you are and what you stand for is solid; but the actual way she's saying it sounds like someone took a normal speech on that topic and the attempted to shrink it down to tweet length. It ends up sounding like she's describing the rules for Opposite Day.
I like setting the show during the period of Klingon unification. A Klingon GoT type thing has a lot of potential; but at that point I'm not sure why they need the Federation people there. Normally it'd be to insert a human that you can relate to as the viewpoint character, but I don't think Trek actually needs to do this at this point. We all know Klingons, everyone loves Worf; alien-centric with just bit roles for the humans is perfectly doable. They could do something interesting by not showing anything that happens behind the scenes in the whole Klingon story, and having the Federation people attempt to figure out what's going on and what to do based on who they're seeing today and what's being said (or not said). Pretty sure that Wolf Hall in space isn't what they're going for though.
Abrams didn't do conversations, this isn't an Abrams helmed production.
Trek isn't known for people speaking naturally, so it didn't bother me that much.
Worf's last appearance was in 2002, so his cultural relevance has diminished for the public significantly. They may do something interesting - we don't have enough information to know whether that's true or not yet. They may be doing this exact story, we won't know until we see the final product.
Nope, but it looks like one. So between the lens flare, the FX, and the fact that it's focused on a Klingon war, any conversations will probably be very loud with explosions in the background.
They tend to be a bit verbose in Trek, but well constructed sentences aren't something that Trek dialogue avoids like the plague.
This thing is airing on CBS's streaming service in the US, the public is not the target audience because the general public is not going to be able to see it. Internationally on Netflix, maybe, but the domestic market is going to be 100% Trekkies because nobody else is going to sign up for the service.
I'm pretty sure that Worf Hall wasn't the elevator pitch for this show.
It's simply not a spaceship without maroon carpetting
There is a big difference between looking like something, and actually be that thing. They may have adopted that visual style since Abrams Trek movies are the popular go-to for Trek now, which make sense.
Abrams didn't make any of those tools, merely adopted them into his skill set - as far as I can tell he has no control over this behind the scenes (that was originally Bryan Fuller, of Hannibal and American Gods fame).
It's your call to write it off, but this hasn't convinced me it's a concern by itself.
Beyond had all these things too, and while it wasn't a thinking movie it was a blast and the most faithful movie to Trek post-Abrams.
I wouldn't say the entire trailer had terrible dialogue like that, nor can all dialogue be winners.
Depends on how much they're relying on Netflix, if they do then yes, public perception is important to address and the public may have forgotten who Worf is. Trek is one of their crown jewels, though, so I wouldn't rule out that the general public view Trek (especially given the movie franchise).
The show has changed a lot from its elevator pitch behind the scenes, and it may be years before we know the details.
I'm not writing it off, but I don't see any reason to defend it based on what I've seen so far. Trek has been pretty not good for the last decade or so, I'm not seeing anything about this show that's convinced me they've turned the corner.
I suspect the elevator pitch wasn't much more complex than 'Star Trek movies are making money, lets get in on some of that'.
it was noted like ten posts ago nexus geez
Even as a Star Trek fan, I've gotta disagree. I've seen every episode of non-TOS Trek and most of TOS. I like Worf. I would not watch a Klingons-only show.
Klingon society has always been so ridiculously stilted and cartoonish that it barely works for the length of time it takes to resolve a Klingon society-centric story on an otherwise not-Klingon-centered show. Watching hours and hours of Klingons interacting with other Klingons, where all of them are the TNG-and-after style ones? That sounds terrible.
Hell, maybe they're doing all the Klingon redesign in part to justify making Klingon culture actually seem like a thing which could achieve an industrial revolution - much less warp flight capability - without self-destructing.
why would they not show any of the stuff we, as star trek fans, want to see?
Grey rooms? And you call yourself a fan?
I'm pretty sure that at least some of those walls were beige.
And lavender door markings.
If the show is good, and succeeds, then great- there's more good Trek in the world.
If the show is bad, and fails, then great- it increases the chances that Netflix will pick up the series, and they have a much better track record of producing good shit.
Even if the show is good, but fails, that still helps keep the franchise alive. TOS got cancelled, after all.