Author Topic: Star Trek Discovery  (Read 84 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Star Trek Discovery
« on: May 17, 2017, 04:17:48 pm »

Definitely looks like a 21st century Star Trek.  Liking the production design, though it is a bit monochromatic for what Trek should be.  What timing, a day after Orville.  Definitely worth some compare and contrasts.

Social Buttons


Chiprocks1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24422
  • Tell me a joke...
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2017, 08:00:37 pm »
Star Trek: Discovery - Official Trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC7IMj7WFyE


How is it that I never saw this thread till now? Anyway, THIS is a Star Trek TV show I can get behind! I had no f*cking idea that Michelle Yeoh was in this! She alone will make me tune into this. Having Sonequa Martin-Green, Jason Isaacs and Rainn Wilson is just icing on the cake. With that said, what I like in the trailer is probably what Neumatic will hate about this incarnation of the series. More Star Wars and less Star Trek that is.
Chip's Rockin' Art
Michael Scott To Meredith: "You've slept with so many men, your starting to look like one. BOOM! Roasted! Go here.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2017, 08:12:04 pm »
Reminds me a LOT of Mass Effect.

And actually, this is scratching my itch more than you might suspect.  Yeah, as much as I love the TNG aesthetic, this is totally working for me.  Reading some of the Trek books, this is TOTALLY what I was picturing in my head.  And I'm all for more action and scale, which this totally is.  But it better not be at the expense of thought, like "Star Trek Into Darkness" was.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2017, 08:34:58 pm »
A little show-off of Discovery props and outfits.



Orville trailer 2.  More action, more funny, less plot.

« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 08:40:21 pm by Neumatic »

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2017, 04:57:36 pm »

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2017, 08:30:35 pm »
So... Discovery...

Well, the first thing to point out was how awful the release was.  Slated to premiere at 7pm, football and 60 Minutes delayed it until 7:47pm, with constant commercial breaks.  Those streaming on CBS's app were constantly buffering, and even with episode 2 allegedly available immediately, no one seemed to be able to access it.  Also, CBS All-Access is 6 bucks a month WITH COMMERCIALS.  No one wants to bite on that.

Now, as to the episode itself.  Well, I've said before that I like the look, it reminds me of Mass Effect as well as what I pictured in my mind reading the recent novels, but it could stand to have a little more colour.  I liked Michelle Yeoh as the captain as well, but... it just seemed like not a lot happened in it.  Very "written for the trade," you know?  One episode isn't as satisfying.  It felt like the events that would have been the first half of an episode of old Star Trek, expanded and made flashy with just a few too many dutch angles and lens flares (Guillermo Navarro shot it beautifully, though).

That's the big issue: there was too much of one thing and not enough of the other.  Ironically... or perhaps obviously... The Orville has the exact opposite problem: lacking in the cinematic flair but nailing the feel of a full episode of Star Trek.  The ideal, mythical Trek series remains somewhere in the space between them.

Chiprocks1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24422
  • Tell me a joke...
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2017, 03:10:19 pm »
I'm waiting for this to be uploaded to my Roku before I can watch this myself. With that said....I'm hearing a lot of negativity directed at this first two episodes. This doesn't give me a sense of confidence going into this.
Chip's Rockin' Art
Michael Scott To Meredith: "You've slept with so many men, your starting to look like one. BOOM! Roasted! Go here.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2017, 04:24:25 pm »
These two shows are so bloody polarizing.  Honestly, it feels like they're taking a page from the Game Of Thrones playbook in terms of how they lay out the series, so it might be worth waiting to see the whole first season in one go.

Chiprocks1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24422
  • Tell me a joke...
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #8 on: September 27, 2017, 09:19:33 pm »
I guess Star Trek is so awful they aren't even going to bother putting them on Roku. Sheesh!!
Chip's Rockin' Art
Michael Scott To Meredith: "You've slept with so many men, your starting to look like one. BOOM! Roasted! Go here.

Chiprocks1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24422
  • Tell me a joke...
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2017, 06:13:16 pm »
So, I did a little digging and found out why it's not on Roku. CBS isn't allowing it to be uploaded anywhere other than CBS All Access, where you have to pay to watch. Screw that. I'm not paying for free shows. So, Star Trek....you've been bounced from my list. You can thank CBS for that.
Chip's Rockin' Art
Michael Scott To Meredith: "You've slept with so many men, your starting to look like one. BOOM! Roasted! Go here.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2017, 07:39:21 pm »
preaching to the choir.  So, quick history lesson that I'm sure you already know.

You know why Star Trek was so iconic?  Because it was EVERYWHERE. It wasn't popular in primetime, but it was great for syndication... and it was in colour when a lot of other options were in black and white.  There were only 80 episodes (instead of the usual 100 required for syndication), so everyone saw the same iconic moments over and over again.  The green alien?  That's only in three episodes.  Just three, and Kirk isn't even in one of them.  Klingons are probably only in a dozen episodes, perhaps, Romulans in two or three.  But you just saw them over and over again, so it got burned into your mind.

So in the 70s, Paramount decided it wanted to make a fourth television channel and a new Star Trek was going to be the centerpiece program (sound familiar?).  They started writing scripts, they built sets, they were all ready to go.  And then STAR WARS came out, and Paramount realized "oh crap, let's do that instead!"  So Phase II became The Motion Picture (which is why there's that dude who appears and all of a sudden dies, he was Spock's replacement because Nimoy didn't want to do a new series).

The first movie was in theaters for a YEAR and it made bank.  The others did pretty good, too.

So after four movies and a 20th anniversary approaching, Paramount decided to make a new Trek series.  But none of the networks were really biting. so instead they made the show direct for syndication.  They'd make the show, and any TV station could buy it.  Fox was relatively new, so a lot of the affiliates bought the show (and advertisers seemed to like the show because it was new content, a popular property AND family friendly without being "a kid's show").  So you could go anywhere and odds are you'd find Trek on TV.

Notice a pattern emerging here?  Trek stayed popular because it was so ubiquitous and easy to find.  Like McDonald's, except good for you.

Then in 1995 UPN decided to make its TV station and Star Trek was going to be it's flagship program again.  They created Voyager.  Now, Voyager was FINE, but it was a new channel you weren't instinctively flipping to, AND there wasn't anything else quite like it on the channel, in fact, the other programming seemed almost counter to Trek.  Plus, now they had to fight cable and satellite TV.  So numbers began to drop off.  And when Voyager ended, they decided to make another sequel, when fan fatigue was really starting.  Enterprise was the first one to be cancelled, after only four years, and it was stuck in this mid-space between wanting to be Trek and not wanting to be Trek.  And at this time, sci-fi fans had Farscape, Stargate, and the new Battlestar Galactica to slick their thirst.  While that was happening, the TNG movies weren't setting the box office on fire because they became dumb action movies, very un-Trk-like at the core, alienating the fanbase.

So now we're seeing that happen again, making a Star Trek that's sort of Star Trek but not really, locked behind a paywall when there's other fulfilling content that's easier to access (Dark Matter, The Expanse, Killjoys, Legends Of Tomorrow, Doctor Who, The Orville).  So why would anyone fork over money for an app for that one show?  On top of that, Discovery is on NETFLIX in every other country in the world.  So it feels as if the entire American fanbase is being asked to take on an unfair burden with CBS All Access.

You know what Star Trek was like in the 90s?  It was the Marvel Cinematic Universe, on TV.  It really was.  You had this universe that expanded three TV shows, with characters popping up in each other's series.  There were comics and novels, they even made a new "series" in book form called "Excalibur" that was pretty much presumed to be canon.  But the key factor was that it was easily accessible.  It feels like Star Wars really stepped up to fill that niche in the last couple of years, with the movies and the games and the new burst of novels and comics.

TL;DR:  Star Trek and CBS seem to be doing everything counter to what made Trek popular in the first place.

Chiprocks1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24422
  • Tell me a joke...
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2017, 05:38:44 am »
The stupidity of CBS knows no bounds. Two tier payment plan. $5 and you get to watch it WITH commercials. $10 without. Who 'OK's' something so stupid? This has failure written all over it.
Chip's Rockin' Art
Michael Scott To Meredith: "You've slept with so many men, your starting to look like one. BOOM! Roasted! Go here.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #12 on: October 02, 2017, 06:15:47 am »
...for something everyone else gets with no commercials on an almost ubiquitous, cheaper service.

TV executives and older people who don't understand what audiences want or how they consume content.

Chiprocks1

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24422
  • Tell me a joke...
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #13 on: October 02, 2017, 06:18:17 am »
GREEDY MOTHERF*CKERS. They are already getting paid with the ads. So now they want to double up on revenue? Seriously dumb.
Chip's Rockin' Art
Michael Scott To Meredith: "You've slept with so many men, your starting to look like one. BOOM! Roasted! Go here.

Neumatic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3902
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #14 on: October 04, 2017, 06:46:26 pm »
HOLY COW, Michael Burnham was originally planned to be played by... ROSARIO DAWSON.  Oh my god, that would have been AMAZING.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
32 Views
Last post November 25, 2013, 10:52:00 pm
by Neumatic
14 Replies
40 Views
Last post May 14, 2014, 06:18:54 pm
by Neumatic
2 Replies
67 Views
Last post November 01, 2016, 05:06:24 pm
by Neumatic
0 Replies
13 Views
Last post July 23, 2016, 03:44:25 pm
by Neumatic
0 Replies
8 Views
Last post December 14, 2016, 07:29:57 am
by Chiprocks1

Automatic Image Resize Code