Star Trek: Discovery

Are you a Trekker, a Lurker, a Scaper, a Browncoat, or would you rather be flying on the Rocinante? Let everyone know what SF-TV shows you enjoy, and also what you would like to see on the small screen.

Star Trek: Discovery

ecgordon
Registered User
Joined: 28 Jul 2000, 12:08

24 Sep 2017, 16:40 #1

I may or may not watch live tonight. It's possible I'll be reading or watching something else and forget about it. The time is listed as 7:30PM CENTRAL time, but that is subject to adjustment due to football earlier in the day. For anyone with a DVR, it would be best to program extra time, not only because it may start late, but also it shows to run for 1 hour, 5 minutes. I wouldn't doubt if the extra time is simply for more commercials, or an extended opening credits sequence that might not be with subsequent episodes.

I do like the Trek universe, more so for some of its iterations than others. I'm still a fan of the original series, in all its cheesy glory, mainly for the core characters and the way they incorporated real world issues into a lot of the episodes. I got into TNG late, thought it had a very slow start, but developed into a strong series by the third year, and it continued improving, and had a very good finish. DS9 started strong, but I felt it diminished over time with the Dominion war and other issues. Never got into Voyager, and bailed on Enterprise early. As for the films, I think I'm one of the few who liked the first one, although I'd love to see a heavily edited version. I'm probably also one of the few that does not think The Wrath of Khan is the best of the original cast films. I prefer The Voyage Home and Undiscovered Country. I'm indifferent to Generations, but liked First Contact a lot. Still have never seen Insurrection or Nemesis. Didn't care for Abrams' first effort, haven't seen Into Darkness, and only saw Beyond in theaters because my brother-in-law wanted to see it, and he paid.

Discovery has had a long, arduous development process, with several creatives dropping out along the way. According to IMDb, Bryan Fuller will still get a credit as co-creator, and he wrote the first two episodes, although it is possible other people revised his scripts. His first two credits were for DS9's fifth season, story only, not the teleplays, and he worked on 22 episodes of Voyager. I've been a big fan of his since Wonderfalls, then Dead Like Me, and Pushing Daisies. He wrote probably the best episode in the strong first season of Heroes, as well as three others. Hannibal was a departure in story content, but not necessarily in style, something he continued in American Gods. I even liked his failed pilot, Mockingbird Lane, a reboot of The Munsters. Somebody that came aboard the production later just might balance Fuller's departure. Nicholas Meyer is a very good writer and director, with Trek experience. He directed The Wrath of Khan, and IMDb says he worked on the screenplay too, even though Jack Sowards got the on-screen credit. He did write the screenplay for The Voyage Home but didn't direct (Nimoy did), then wrote and directed The Undiscovered Country, so he had his hand in what I consider three of the best Trek films. He's also done great work in other film and TV projects, including writing/directing 1979's Time After Time, also writing one ep of the recently cancelled series. He wrote the teleplay for The Night That Panicked America, about Orson Welles' "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast, and directed the nuclear apocalyptic TV movie The Day After in 1983. He wrote the novel and the screenplay adaptation of The Seven Percent Solution, which I think is much better than its 6.8 IMDb rating would indicate. His presence does give me some hope.

What I'm less thrilled about is the time frame. Yet another prequel, supposedly ten years before the original series, although it's not clear if this is in that timeline, or the alternate Kelvin timeline, or possibly another one altogether. There will be alien species we've never seen before, and yet another Klingon look. If that species was a real one, they'd probably have a massive persecution complex based on how other people visualize them. I am encouraged by the diverse cast, and I am willing to give it a chance, but as I said in my "Genre TV" post yesterday, I'm not paying for another streaming service just to watch this after tonight. Later on in the season, if reviews are good, I might reconsider. If anyone else signs up for All-Access, please let us know what you think.

EDIT: I might not be able to watch tonight. I haven't upgraded my antenna or raised it, and the trees are tall around my place and still full of leaves. During the winter and early spring I got good reception on all channels. Right now I'm getting a very pixelated picture on CBS. NBC is coming in fine, it's transmitter is almost due south of me, but east of I-35. The CBS, ABC, and FOX towers are all in the same general area on hills near Moody southwest of town, west of 35. I can see the towers on Google satellite view, and CBS looks to be the tallest, so it should have the strongest signal. ABC looks good, but it's the furthest north toward Waco. The FOX tower is the furthest south, and it isn't coming in at all, and CBS is intermittent at the moment. I have the ability to turn the antenna, so I'll continue fooling with it for a while to see if it improves. I've already checked online at CBS, and sure enough, their records show I'm done with the free trial, I'd have to pay $6 now in order to watch on All-Access. That's reasonable, if it wasn't for Trek being the only thing I'd be watching, nothing else on the network interests me until Elementary returns.

2nd EDIT: Reception was acceptable throughout the show, just a couple of minor glitches where I missed some dialog. My overall reaction...meh. The main problem with setting a show prior to the original series is that we should not see tech superior to what we saw in the original series. I can accept superior graphics/effects, but the technology itself should be less refined. It also makes absolutely no sense to present the Klingons that way, completely different than we've ever seen them before. Why couldn't they look more like Worf?
Reply

NotAgain
Registered User
Joined: 02 Jun 2005, 04:55

25 Sep 2017, 13:07 #2

I will always visualize Klingons as Worf.
Reply

Elizadolots
Registered User
Joined: 07 Oct 2017, 03:35

07 Oct 2017, 04:05 #3

So, I waddled over here to see if this discussion was happening.  I was hoping to find some people who, like me, ponied up the money to get to see the show.  I deeply resent having to pay and if had only been Star Trek, I wouldn't have.  But another CBS show I love has been moved to a time I cannot watch.  We don't have a DVR so this seemed like a good reason to pay the money.  

One note:  I went to the 35th anniversary Fathom event showing of Wrath of Khan and in the pre-movie interview William Shatner confirmed that Nicholas Meyer had written some of the script. 

A second note:  It's been made clear that this show takes place in the PRIME universe, not the Kelvin universe.  So, any and all crossovers to characters/stories from the original series are in keeping with the premise of the show.

The Klingons are one of the weirdest parts of the show. I don't think they are as horrible as they looked in the pre-release pictures, but they are super weird.  I find them plasticy and unrealistic.  One of the things that was great about Next Gen was that the Klingons were very believable.  There faces were animated.  They felt real.  These Klingons seem fake. To be honest, I really wanted someone who speaks Klingon (because you KNOW that people do) to translate for me because I didn't think that the short little phrases being barked could possibly equal the lengthy concepts in the subtitles.  I do think they get better.  The second episode has a lot more of them and they are better in a bunch.  Also, the "coming on Star Trek Discovery" bits show at least one Klingon who would have fit in quite well with the Next Gen group.

I also have huge issues with the "Sarek is Michael's Guardian" concept.  I know they did this to create a connection, but it really rings false.  We know exactly what Sarek thought of Star Fleet at this time because this show takes place when Spock is already serving under Pike on the Enterprise.  So the whole idea that Sarek would deliver his ward to a Star Fleet captain for service is ludicrous (that might be a spoiler, it might be revealed in a 2nd episode flashback, please don't hate me, it's hard to keep track when there are a lot of flashbacks).  I just finished watching the 3rd episode (the one where we finally get Jason Isaacs) and there is a pretty nice little moment that is well explained by the idea that Amanda raised Michael, but I'm not sure that excuses the utter illogic of the premise.

All that said, I'm on board.  I'll stick with it for as long as I find it interesting enough to warrant my time.

(edited to correct a redundancy)
Reply

NotAgain
Registered User
Joined: 02 Jun 2005, 04:55

07 Oct 2017, 13:54 #4

I watched the first episode, since it was free.  I cannot bring myself to pay the money to watch the rest.  It hurts my soul because I have seen every Star Trek episode in existence.  I will watch it when it comes out on DVD.
Reply

Elizadolots
Registered User
Joined: 07 Oct 2017, 03:35

08 Oct 2017, 03:19 #5

I wouldn't have paid just for Trek.  It was Criminal Minds that got me.  One suggestion I made to a friend at work:  wait until the season ends, then pay for one month and binge it.  I'd say go for the commercial free membership if you do that.
Reply