USS Discovery

[tthurman]

 

When did Popular Mechanics start so much sci-fi coveage?

[hansolo77]

Honestly.. not impressed...

• Ship design looks worse than the NX-01
• Not going to pay to watch
• CGI looks worse than than Space Rangers
• Not going to pay to watch
• Still no idea when it takes place... although it is officially in the EXISTING canon and not the reboot
• NOT GOING TO PAY TO WATCH

This show is going to bomb so bad.  I wish it wouldn't.  We need more Star Trek.  We need it to be good.  We need it to last.  By limiting the show to just their private online streaming subscription service, they're going to see it's not very popular and cancel it.  The die hard fans will pay ANYTHING.  The true Trekkie's won't buy into their cash-cow scheme.  Surely they must know that it's probably going to be the most heavily pirated TV show ever after Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, and The Simpsons.  I even read an official quote from the producers saying something like "If it doesn't sell, we won't continue it".  So it's probably going to fail within 2-3 weeks.  Star Trek has always been available free, on local broadcast channels.  You didn't need cable.  I just shake my head at it and yell "no!"  We'll just have to wait and see I guess.  But honestly, that ship looks horrible.  And the CGI looks like early 90's TV.. DS9 and Voyager CGI looked better, not to mention Enterprise's.  However, I do like the idea (and queues from the music) that maybe this is a hybrid Federation and Klingon ship, and if it takes place some time after the Khitomer Conference when they all got buddy-buddy.. it would be interesting to see.  Especially if it's got a cloak and they go off to find adventures in Romulan territory.  But they'll probably ruin the whole thing and not go anywhere near that.

[RIP-Felix]

I assume this is just a sample of the design of the ship, not an actual render from the show. But if it is, I agree. it is maybe 1 visual step above season 1 of Babylon 5. Just watched it again..No way that's a finished render.

From what I've read making the jump to streaming allows them to follow a novel like narrative, focusing more on a season long storyline format rather than a single episode cathartic experience as demanded by TV. I don't like the idea of having to buy a million different streaming services each with 1 proprietary show forcing me to buy it. That being said, I'm ok with waiting a while before I can watch it on the streaming service I prefer if it can live up to the quality of "House of Cards" or "Game of Thrones" and the like. That's the future we're in my friends. No one can get along and play nice, spoiled brats without responsible parents to give them moral instruction. Thus, Syndication is dying. The one good thing about this model is that a production team commits to a full season, no more Firfly Follies (in theory).

Spoiler

What I dislike about the newer generation of science fiction (SGU and Battlestar Galactica) is the simple interpersonal dynamics of ambition ignorance and power struggles. Lets raise the maturity level above the arguments in MTV's "the real life." This is a science fiction show about the crew of a spaceship! I can watch countless, crime shows for who-done-its, lonely housewife shows for infidelity and jealousy, and politics shows for power struggles and so on. The character development should complement the stress the crew is under in reaction to the plot of the show. I'm less interested in the character development than I am the science fiction, I'm watching for the plot and characters not the political commentary. While they can be complementary, this priority must be maintained. I'm so tired of the same trite arguments and social commentary over and over again. It's deflating, especially when told from an arrogant western ethnocentric atheistic perspective. Let's not perpetuate stereotypes which plague TV. Surprise me, PLEASE, with atypical characters that don't follow a predictable pattern of stereotypes. Maybe a kind, morally opaque (as opposed to transparent), patient and polite character who is also guarded and enigmatic? This is a character you may or may not like or agree with, but respect professionally and are curious about. This kind of character adds to the intrigue of the show without stealing it or detracting from it with too simple a character. We all know people like this, who take time to get to know. Maybe you've had a friend that you didn't understand or like when you first met them. This unchanging character thing is the worst stereotype of all. People are not static. 1 mistake and your evil, no second chances? Give me a break! People learn from their mistakes and change all the time, you can't just dismiss a characters development as a good guy/bad guy and condemn them to that destiny. Piccolo from Dragonball Z was originally a bad guy, then became a friend. This is how loved characters are developed (Because we all identify with them). What if no one ever gave us a second chance after we made a mistake? Maybe you had a breakup that changed your behavior or a traumatic event that altered your character. These are the type of chances writers have in a show like star trek to develop characters Please let us get to know the characters that you kill off, no red shirts, so that it can affect the main characters development and define the show. There are no expendable people, there are always consequences for the plot of the show or the development of characters when someone dies, just like real life.

 

[hansolo77]

Hidden - Well Said...

I guess the new show IS going to be available on Netflix too..

Quote

Star Trek: Discovery is coming to CBS All Access in January 2017, following the premiere on the CBS Television Network, and will be distributed concurrently on Netflix in 188 countries and through Bell Media in Canada.  - See more at: http://www.startrek.com/article/introducing-the-u-s-s-discovery#sthash.ZM5Fb9SD.dpuf

This is good news.  I'm a little more relaxed about my hate towards them now for this.  But still, they need to do something about that ship!

[Draco1962]

Available on Netflix except for the US and Canada. 

[hansolo77]

Seriously??

[Draco1962]

Yup. Thanks CBS.

[RIP-Felix]

We're cattle to them. They keep us in a legal pen and milk us at their leisure. They don't care how we feel about it. We only get to see it if we pay for it, because we fall under the reach of their blackout. Sports fans have to put up with this BS all the time.

Sports and TV are the new crack. They string us out and leave us wanting more (Cliffhangers and mid season breaks). Then when things go dry from one dealer your forced to find who has some and pay a premium for it (Canceled by one station or provider and picked up by another, perhaps premium channel or streaming service).

It's now impossible to watch everything you want from only one provider, Netflix original content, Hulu original content, HBO, Showtime, other channels and streaming content providers. Not everything is available under one roof anymore. I did read that Comcast boxes will now able to Stream Netflix, but I understand it's just a hardware capability not a service included at discount through partnership.

[hansolo77]

They are making pirating more and more demanding when they do this kind of crap.  I mean, if it's gonna be available to subscribers in one part of the world, why not others?  I just don't get it.  It's like they WANT the series to fail.  They'll think it sucked in the USA because not enough subscribers are watching it, but people in Europe will love it.  But, that's not the market they're targeting, so it'll get cancelled.  If the show is more or less designed to be an on-going drama script rather than an episodic alien of the week.. they're gonna put it on a summer hiatus with a cliff hanger and then cancel it.  I hate the media anymore.  What I would LOVE to hear is that the Paramount execs decide to order up 7 seasons (or more) and then they're at least contracted to produce.  I mean, the show's gotta last at least a full season right?  If it's destined to fail, the least they could do is tie up any loose ends before the final episode ends.

[Circo]

What would be nice is if Netflix took over after season 1

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RIP-Felix]

AT least in the past the first 10-13 episodes were the trial period. Then if viewership were what they hoped for, they would "order up" 7-10 episodes to finish first season (after a mid-season hiatus). The biggest hurtle was getting picked up for a second season. If that happened you would see a five season plot be developed. Starting with the second season and continuing through the third and fourth season. The fifth season is where you would see if the show would be picked up for more seasons (rarely) or culminate along the planed five year plot. This is why the first seasons always seem to be more self contained. The writers didn't know if the show would be picked up for a second season, so they try to close the story enough it doesn't feel like things end on a cliffhanger, but not so much it gives the executives an excuse to cancel.

I kinda like the streaming model from what little I've seen so far. They tend to focus more on full season stories that culminate in a cliffhanger rather than self contained episodes. The story develops more naturally and culminates in bigger payoffs, since they can be set up more masterfully than two or 3 part episodes allows for. However, as you say, they risk canceling during the off season, potentially leaving the show on a cliffhanger. However, I have a feeling they will follow up with a final season rather than doing this. Essentially they commit to at least two seasons at a time. If the rating aren't what they hope for after the first season, then they finish the plot with the "final season." One benefit is that if there is time for the show to be renewed before the final season is finished airing.

[tthurman]

http://arstechnica.com/the-multiverse/2016/08/new-trek-series-committed-to-casting-diversity-main-character-wont-be-captain/

 

[hansolo77]

WTF TIMES INFINITY

This show is going to bomb so bad....  A female lead, who is not the captain and is openly gay (not much of an issue with gay, but if they're going to be showcasing her gayness by having her making out with other girls in each episode I might hurl).  The cast will include a Klingon captain (I knew there would be Klingons!) yet the show will take place a decade before the Original Series and yet still be designated USS...  Um?  Klingons and Terrans don't get a long, and there was never a Klingon serving aboard any USS ship before Worf in TNG.. so if this takes place in the "PRIME" timeline, how is this even possible?  There are just too many plot holes.  Any intelligent Trekkie will see the problems from the start.  Any other redneck Trekkie probably won't care in the slightest and not even catch it. 

[RIP-Felix]

3 hours ago, hansolo77 said:

.. The cast will include a Klingon captain (I knew there would be Klingons!) yet the show will take place a decade before the Original Series and yet still be designated USS...  Um?  Klingons and Terrans don't get a long, and there was never a Klingon serving aboard any USS ship before Worf in TNG.. so if this takes place in the "PRIME" timeline, how is this even possible?  ...

They said there are 2 admirals on the lead cast too. Maybe the mission has to do with going behind enemy lines, and the Klingon is sympathetic to the cause of peace (AKA, a traitor). Aren't admirals usually sent on diplomatic missions? Also, they said that there would be a Klingon as one of the main characters, not that he would be crew on the ship. He could be an enemy captain that the show follows for a different side of the story, one we rarely get a good look at. I kinda like the possibilities this idea affords. I guess the answer would be to look for some reference to this. It's been a while since I've watched TNG and I skipped the original, so I don't know what they might be refereeing to.

.

Quote

...A female lead, who is not the captain and is openly gay (not much of an issue with gay, but if they're going to be showcasing her gayness by having her making out with other girls in each episode I might hurl)...

I like the idea of following a character or group of characters that isn't the captain or senior bridge staff. The plight of less senior officers is one of more dramatic appeal to the common person, most of us won't personally identify with a captain or commander, but might with a civilian, ensign or maybe even a lieutenant. Moreover their stories would be more dramatic because they aren't in control of their destiny, having to take orders and being led into dangerous situations. The plot will develop frantically, more like a turbulent stream, the characters are swept away by the actions of others and be forced to deal with the consequences. They'll have to reconcile personal dilemmas about compromising the chain of command, following orders rather than debating the moral and ethical options as do senior bridge staff (That's been done to death).

They said the lead character would be female and that there would be a gay character, but I didn't get the impression they meant the same character. Besides, wouldn't lesbians get higher ratings? Just saying...

[hansolo77]

Quote

In addition to the female lead, Fuller hopes to cast an openly gay character

Yeah I guess I misread that.  Still, I'm not impressed with the idea of doing this just to help increase ratings and diversity.

[RIP-Felix]

While I too would prefer not seeing openly gay conduct on television, we live in a disputatious but democratic society. The US has integral to its population people of every race, ethnicity, religion, and even sexual preference. We may bump heads over every sort of issue, but ultimately we realize the necessity for patience and understanding. We all sacrifice a little comfort and preference so that we can live together according to our beliefs, different but together. While I may disagree with a persons choice, I respect their right to make it. The alternative is unacceptable, except in cases where a persons choice is dangerous to others (crime).

If having an openly gay character helps this sector of society, one that has been ostracized by society for a very long time, feel more included, I'll deal with it. It's not too much of an inconvenience to view on TV what I've seen in real life anyway. I had friends who were gay/Bi and frankly putting it on TV adds a bit of realism. Besides, it's a trending issue which will get people talking and add attention to the show. Free publicity is not a bad Idea. It might help draw viewers.

"Times They Are A-Changin" - Bob Dylan

[tthurman]

Star Trek: Discovery goes back to the Original Series era—again.

?, based on what little I've read, and many of the discussion here, it sure sounds like a lot has changed from the Original 

[RIP-Felix]

Yeah, I'm not sure how diligent their writing and research staff with be with show mythology. I'm sure they will conjure up some lame excuse like a violation of the temporal prime to justify breaking from an inconvenient bit of show history. I'm a little dubious we're in for a good brand of startrek, I'm just hoping it's not going to be another enterprise! To tell you the truth, startrek is loosing its appeal to me. It used to be my favorite, since it got me into Science fiction. But as I've gotten older, I'm more put off by the social commentary and sociopolitical bias.

[hansolo77]

They really needed to do something POST Voyager in terms of the timeline.  What was wrong with Enterprise?  It's pretty good, just cancelled before it should have.  The best stuff was dealing with the Temporal Cold War, that they never finished.  The whole bit where they have people in the 27th(?) century going back through time to watch events and prevent bad guys from changing history sounds like an awesome plot for a TV series.  Putting this new show 10 years before Kirk yet after Enterprise puts a huge limit on the possible stories available to them.  If they base the show on any thing related to past Star Trek franchises, that means they can't have technology BETTER than Kirk's time, and WORSE than Archer's time.  It was hard enough for them to develop a look for Enterprise that didn't look better than what the original series had.  Finding a niche in between is going to be hard.  The only thing I can think of is perhaps the show will take a "Voyager" type approach, where the ship exists out of touch with everyone else.  Or perhaps they fall into a Temporal Rift (classic Star Trek gimmick) and get sent into a future time.  I just don't understand how they feel like THIS time frame is the best for telling the story they want to tell.

Another thing I'm eager to learn is the cast.  I have TV Guide's from before the Deep Space Nine premier showing cast photos and story plots from 6+ months before.  We're only a little over 4 months out now and the most recent thing we've heard is that they're still casting.  WTF.. the show starts in 4 months.  How can they still be casting?  When are they going to have time to ACT?  This show is going to be an epic crunch-time failure.  There is so much negative around this show, I really doubt it's going to go anywhere.  Such a shame too because the only positive thing coming out of this is that there is going to be a new Trek.

[RIP-Felix]

13 hours ago, hansolo77 said:

...  What was wrong with Enterprise?  It's pretty good, just cancelled before it should have.  The best stuff was dealing with the Temporal Cold War, that they never finished.  The whole bit where they have people in the 27th(?) century going back through time to watch events and prevent bad guys from changing history sounds like an awesome plot for a TV series.  ..

I just don't get excited by the prospect of watching it a second time. It's been a couple of years since I binged it. I vaguely remember the temporal cold war stuff, but I must not have been too into it. I generally don't like time travel or alternate realities. Essentially it feels to me like a juvenile game of made you look. They cry wolf so often I can't trust them when something really does happen. It makes the real thing anticlimactic. Time travel and alternate realities are too esoteric. They remove the suspense building throughout a show, undoing the setup by casting doubt on the pay off. You get jaded, half expecting events to be reversed by time travel or explained away in an alternate reality. This is my major complaint with Fringe, the alternate reality stuff killed fringe for me. The last season was almost unbearable.

My 2c

[RIP-Felix]

On 8/21/2016 at 9:31 PM, RIP-Felix said:

...Time travel and alternate realities are too esoteric. They remove the suspense building throughout a show, undoing the setup by casting doubt on the pay off. You get jaded, half expecting events to be reversed by time travel or explained away in an alternate reality....

I mean really, who would like to see the opening read of Star Wars be: "A long String of Temporal Divergences ago, in an Alternate Reality Pointlessly Far Far Away"?

To typify my point, I just got caught up on season 2 of Dark Matter. Anyone watching this? The show has been going along well (IMO), with a decent plot and atypical developments. Human colonies and no aliens as of yet. Nefarious Multi-system Militant Corporations and a complicit Galactic Authority. Main characters all with amnesia, which affords multiple routes of plot exploration and twists as they navigate through an unpredictable gauntlet of past demons. It reminded me of Firefly in many ways, but not with quite as much intrigue (River's backstory was more compelling than anything I've seen on Dark Matter so far). I'm into it and like it as much as The Expanse, which I think has more potential (in production value and momentum), but both can skyrocket since it's still early. I had high hopes that this show would avoid the multiverse traps I've detailed above, but...Spoilers to follow, not just of Dark Matter but Game of Thrones as well. If your not caught up, maybe skip until then...

Spoiler

They killed #1 this season. I am watching intently at what they have in mind. It being science fiction and in that genera the typical cop-out is time travel or alternate realities. As I predicted, the "Blink Drive" carries them into an alternate reality where they meet alternate Jace Corso (the character #1 was impersonating), except here he's alive. And guess what happens when they manage to return to their own reality? They brought someone back with them! Although they haven't revealed who yet, It seems obvious it's Jace Corso. However, it might be alternate Derrick Moss. Perhaps he was on the alternate Raza in secret to kill and impersonate Alternate Jace Corso. Then after learning of the (real?) Raza snuck aboard in the hope that his wife was alive in the alternate (from his perspective) reality. This might explain why he rushed off in the shuttle - to see if she was alive and to escape the Raza crew's wrath. It's more likly to just be alternate Jace Corso. They could turn #1 into alternate Jace Corso and he'll be a villain from now on, or they'll delve back into the multiverse to retrieve Derrick Moss, or time travel to prevent #1's death, or any combination of the unlimited cop-outs this rediculus idea affords (to cry wolf and violate the trust they built up until now).

I figured they would not use his death as an opportunity to establish other main characters and build the credibility that anyone can die, but rather as a stepping stone into the predictably esoteric. Yay! More extra-dimensional, extra-temporal, well traversed, beaten to death science fiction overly done before. Tragic turn of events for a show I've been really getting into. I hope this is the last of it and they get back to show plots anchored to the present or forgoten past in this reality!

The model of a show that kills main character well is Game of Thrones, which until John Snow's resurrection, killed main character heavily in the first few seasons to establish the main characters and to leave the audience with an acute sense that they might kill the main characters too, for good. They spent so much time establishing John Snow's character, setting him up for more to come, before cutting his life short. Because you had no reason to believe he would be back, and every reason to believe he was gone for good like all the others, John Snows' death came as a shock to many people.

Dark Matter was following this pattern well, having spaced #2 during an episode. Wow! I didn't see that coming! I thought the cinimatic double entendre (Ejecting a #2 into space) was a humorous bit of production value; if this was intended I'm impressed, that level of artistry is not often seen on TV. I'll keep an eye out for more of this, Even better was the explanation for her survival, not alternate realities or time travel, but illegal nanite research that establishes her backstory and cements her role, much like John Snow's resurrection has cemented his role in Game of Thrones. We'll see what they come up with for #1, but so far I'm annoyed they went the alternate reality route, mainly because I'm not at all surprised (it was typical) and I hoped they were better than that

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the show. I'll keep watching and so far it's been compelling. They just crossed one of my pet peeves.

[hansolo77]

Dark Matter is one of those "watchlist" shows I have on Trakt.  It's something I'm intrigued to watch, but not so much that I've started yet.  I actually have a bunch of those on my list.

11.22.63 - " An unassuming divorced English teacher stumbles upon a time portal that leads to Sept. 9, 1958, and goes on a quest to try and prevent the assassination of John F. Kennedy. "  JJ Abrams and Stephen King as Exec Producers

Childhood's End - " Childhood's End is a 1953 science fiction novel by the British author Arthur C. Clarke. The story follows the peaceful alien invasion^[1] of Earth by the mysterious Overlords, whose arrival begins decades of apparent utopia under indirect alien rule, at the cost of human identity and culture. "

Killjoys - Bounty Hunters in Space... like Boba Fett and the gang. 

Defiance - Dad highly recommends this.

The Librarians - Sounds like a fun show to watch.

 

[RIP-Felix]

I just polished off "Defying Gravity." Fox killed another good show, and just when things were getting good. Damn, I liked the Solaris like psychological aspect of the show. Very interpersonal with the character development, more focus went into this than I prefer (I'd like to see more plot and atmosphere), but it blends well with the theme (a long space journey) and did invest me in the characters. It's jut they did a lot of jumping back and forth in time rather than focus on linear narrative, Overall, I really liked it. At least the season long sub-stories were concluded. As is it stands partially complete, but makes me want to see more.  They still have the rest of the solar system to explore! This could have gone 7 or eight more seasons, 6 for the remaining planets and another 1 or 2 for the overall plot to develop and conclude. Too bad.

[Draco1962]

Defying Gravity was great, but it was on ABC which stands for Already Been Cancelled  (unless it is another "reality show" because we don't have enough of those).

[RIP-Felix]

On 8/26/2016 at 2:46 AM, Draco1962 said:

Defying Gravity was great, but it was on ABC which stands for Already Been Cancelled  (unless it is another "reality show" because we don't have enough of those).

It had the kiss of death from the beginning..It aired on ABC and was produced by Fox (Actually, to be fair, it was co-produced by multiple companies which included Fox).