Star Trek: The Next Generation : Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Are you afraid it might suck?

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

It's another prequel, I think a lot of us want post-Nemesis 24th Century Trek.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Another horrible prequel idea like Enterprise...doubtful it will be good. Star Trek was always been about moving forward, not backwards.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Don't know the fact that the ship looks like a Klingon Battlecruiser doesn't seem to make much sense unless the design was made by a Klingon.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Even if the show doesn't suck the delivery mechanism likely will. They're trying to push a streaming system that prevents recording and fast forward past commercials. I'm sure they'd like to transport us back to the pre-VCR days but I'm not interested.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


Are you afraid it might suck?


No I'm sure it will suck

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


Are you afraid it might suck?


No, because I know it will probably suck. As of this writing, my appraisal is based squarely on the kind of buzz I've been hearing about it. So far, it's nothing interesting at all.

The Buzz floating around concerns rather specious and questionable characteristics about the characters. Apparently the show is going to be centered around a black woman as the XO, rather than centered on the CO, whoever that is, and while I think that could work, emphasizing this characters race and gender in the buzz that's released is a bad sign that they're pinning their hopes on political correctness rather than substantive characters and stories. Same thing goes with the deliberate mentioning of an LGBTQNPRWOZ character, as if that's supposed to be something interesting as opposed to going on adventures, exploring new worlds, and new civilizations. If I were producing this show, I'd have mentioned none of that even if I had made my characters as such, because that's not what Star Trek is all about.

If race and sexual orientation and such are important to you, there's a way to do it in such a way as to make it seem as though you're not preaching to the audience, and that is not to mention it at all. You can show some things, but I'd leave out gay romance if I were them, because that's not conducive or appropriate, not even for today's audiences. The reason why I loved Uhura so much in TOS was not because she was black, or a woman, but because she behaved like a competent, professional officer, with poise and a commitment to excellence, that she earned the right to be there, and wasn't Affirmative Actioned in. Even when she flirted with Spock, she was a classy lady. The operative word here is Classy, which is antithetical to political correctness.

In other words, if the buzz at this point is to tell us to watch their show because it has black women and queers in it, that's a sign they have little to nothing to offer.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


LGBTQNPRWOZ
I actually googled that to see what else they had made up since I last paid attention.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I have zero interest.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

There is a new trailer for the new series (at least they got the ship's design right).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52o1d7XPni0

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


LGBTQNPRWO

lol Most of those letters are just random!

Do you know if the captain will be someone we already know? I think it will at least be someone that has been mentioned in a past Star Trek episode.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

At the moment, the buzz doesn't mention who will play the captain, or anyone else. From what I've read and heard about, they've got a particular handful of actresses to play the XO, but nothing definite yet. I'd imagine they've got a tentative cast list already, by now, because they're slated to begin releasing episodes in five months, unless they push that date back again. Generally, for a normal TV show that's not sci-fi, it takes roughly three weeks to film, edit, and process the episode prior to airing, and with sci-fi it takes longer even with the marvels of CGI. The filming part can take the fastest, but there are always reshoots here and there. But, from what it sounds like right now, given the scant buzz we've already got, it's as though they don't have a tentative process down yet, meaning that they have a few things, but until they begin actual filming they don't have a process to make the episodes as yet.

What I think is happening, and I don't know for sure, is that an internal political game is being played by the airing of that little teaser and the releasing of the buzz they've already done, and this is done to sort of nudge the execs hands at the studio level, to show that there is work already happening, and it's progressing, and that money is already being spent. This is done so that if the execs are starting to have misgivings, canceling the show now would only be something of a waste of money. Granted, though, this show is primarily going to be accessed through CBS Stream, as a bit of an experiment to see if there's still any demand for a Star Trek TV show to go on the air, so there may be other factors in play we're not at all privy to because it's still kind of new. I imagine if this were being ran by something like Netflix, there would be fewer problems, but this is a TV network, first and foremost, we're talking about, and that's a totally different kettle of fish.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Bunch of PC Crap.....Zero interest...

You Have a Hard Lip, Herbert..

Better Living Thru Chemistry

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I wish we could go back to the olden days when things were so rampant.

RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time. RIP Robert Vaughn

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


If race and sexuality motivates you to enjoying a quality program, then you are a sad, pathetic human being and probably should rethink your life.


FTFY

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Hope you're back in your safe space now.


"A voice from behind me reminds me. Spread out your wings you are an angel."

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Trek died with Data.
Don't want any prequels or revamps.
I will not do All Access.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Relatively agreed.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Where/how do you watch it? 😶
I'm so not a nerd.

She deleted 33,000 e-mails AFTER congress' subpoena for them !

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I'd feel better if it was a Netflix original show.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I'm excited to see the premiere. It has been over a decade since the last series so it'll be good to get back to some weekly Trek.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

It's on a pay-per-view network so already the network has little faith, despite the star power involved in its making. And if there are still commercials despite paying up in advance, it won't generate good will.

Being in TOS-era as opposed to "a sequel to TNG" where new ideas can be fleshed out is also a downer. But TNG was a huge leap from TOS' era. All the new technology ideas presented and how humans were shown to have evolved over that 85 year period. Picking up decades after TNG's spinoffs ended, how do you show increasingly bland humans? And the technology, making it plausible (sci-fi) versus any convenient whim (fantasy). Roddenberry tended to aim for staying within plausibility when possible, though TBH the reality that space travel will be achieved-- hmmm, "Star Trek V" no longer sucks as much since it did have scenes true to Gene's vision, as Sybok discussed that same issue about the probability that warp speed could never be achieved...

People also believe it will be excessively political. The problem is that the show always has been political and managed not to offend too many "snowflakes" since that's the current nickname used to describe audiences... How they present the politically-tinged situations is key.

Rumor has it there will be Muslims -- if that is true then the makers are utterly clueless since Trek has often referred to all religions as "Myth" (as early as TWOK (1982)). TOS had Kirk saying (sarcastically?) to Apollo how "the one will do" regarding deity, as he - representing the Federation and Earth - was saying they would not submit to Apollo's millennia-old ways because humans had evolved far beyond being farmers. So back to the rumor at hand, how do you think such double standards will go over? Exactly. Maybe that's why Trek used parallel-driven allegory with different species to get religious tolerance across without causing a furore, hoping viewers would be just as open-minded for real life religions once they got done appreciating the Klingon and Romulan lore being told? (It's also a fictional TV show, no matter what is written and shown, it is not real life - which takes everybody in real life to make the reality they choose...)

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Doesn't sound very promising to me at all, Dp.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

When is it supposed to be available?
But so far it sounds pretty dumb.

She deleted 33,000 e-mails AFTER congress' subpoena for them !

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


if that is true then the makers are utterly clueless since Trek has often referred to all religions as "Myth" (as early as TWOK (1982)). TOS had Kirk saying (sarcastically?) to Apollo how "the one will do" regarding deity, as he - representing the Federation and Earth - was saying they would not submit to Apollo's millennia-old ways because humans had evolved far beyond being farmers.


Archer also took a quick swing about religion/mythology speaking with T'Pol.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Considering the fact that new religions are created all the time I do not think we will ever get over religion per se.
Even if all the current ones are discarded as myths there will be always a new guy with a "vision". So it would be more realistic to show a bunch of new religions being there and frictions beetwen them.
Humanity invents better tools but inside, we are not different then thousands of years ago, gods just became fancier.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Interesting. I saw Superman Returns in theaters.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

All Superman movies after Superman II suck,MOS was atrocious and BvsS DOJ was a confusing mess.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Your only confusion is with your own sexuality...

"two queers fighting it out... or is this just foreplay for the real action later on???"


(only the bi-curious at best watch this nonsense... most must be full-blown homers)

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Whatever

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I'm one of the hanful that liked Superman IV. And Returns was okay.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


Rumor has it there will be Muslims


Please no lol. The idea that Islam would still be a powerful ideology in the future fills me with horror. Of course it might be likely, but it does not fit into a utopian society like star trek. It would mean that humanity has not advanced one bit.

It would fit into a story and universe like Dune by Frank Herbert though, with the orange catholic bible etc. But not star trek. The new movies are bad enough but this would truly ruin the franchise for me.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

They have to include everybody nowadays.

RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time. RIP Robert Vaughn

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Only problem how would Muslims know in which direction to pray to Mecca if they are on a Starship galloping around the galaxy?

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

It's always east isn't it? Or west.

RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time. RIP Robert Vaughn

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

That depends on your position on the globe CJ you must pray in the direction of Mecca and when you are in space the problem gets worse.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I guess so. I'm Catholic, so.

RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time. RIP Robert Vaughn

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Discovery could work the times might be ripe for a show like TOS was.TOS was a product of troubled times (mid 60's early 70's) in US history where you had racial segregation and the human rights issues,the war in Vietnam ,and a rift in society between the people who wanted change and those who didn't. The world of today seems to reflect those times and this could be a new source of Trek fans if the show is able to reflect this in the stories.If there is a time when a new Trek show is needed it is now ,people need to see a program that gives us hope in a more unified,peaceful and more fair future World among the dark and dreary shows that are on TV. But... and this is a very big but, the fact that the show is broadcast on an internet/pay per view channel isn't helping.Fact remains that only people who like Trek or SF will watch the show so the chance an average TV viewer won't watch this is very likely.The advantage of a show being broadcast on regular TV is that being part of a regular schedule an average TV viewer might accidentally stumble in an episode of Trek and like it.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Not exactly. TOS was first and foremost a show about stories, and while the writers did try, successfully, to put in allegories of present issues in there, at the same time the first goal was to do sci-fi stories. And I think that if a new Trek show were to be successful, it has to be first an escape from the problems of today. I think, especially after the last eight years and this current election cycle, that people are more than a little tired of politics.

Which is why I think its a particularly bad idea to send out buzz effectively telling people to watch the show because they have rather politically charged characters in it. It's insulting, really, to expect viewers to want to watch a show just because it has, for instance, minority characters in it. Mr. Plinkett addressed this in his Attack of the Clones review, concerning "Why is Samuel L. Jackson in Star Wars movies?" bit. People, of whatever their ethnicity or whatever, won't watch a show simply because some characters reflect such characteristics. That's not how entertainment works. Entertainment is meant to grab you in other ways, to present interesting situations with interesting characters and see how they deal with those situations. Without either, the show will wither, because who cares if a character is black or gay or whatever, if what is presented is about as interesting as watching paint dry?

Which is why I tend to think this pre-TOS approach is also a mistake. Most Trek fans, I would say, aren't really interested in that, as they are interested in what happens AFTER the Dominion War. Or after Nemesis. I think if they had brought back the Enterprise-E, or make a whole new Enterprise (like the Enterprise-G in Star Trek: Renaissance - set in the 25th Century), they would've spawned a lot more interest because they would like to see something really new, not just a new ship, but the future of the Federation itself. Further, I think a lot of fans are done with prequels and soft-reboots. Because both, especially prequels, have been done rather slip-shoddy with regard to continuity, and personally I think they've made keeping up with continuity of the franchise so much of a waste of time that it makes watching these kinds of shows a bit of a drag. We know what is supposed to happen later, but if they violate continuity somehow (like ENT did), it's just too much to ask us all to ignore it.

It's like reading a favorite series of novels, only to have a new author come in and demand that you ignore everything you've read because it's all gone. That wasted the readers' time to go through all of that, only to have someone else wreck it. That is just wrong.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


Which is why I think its a particularly bad idea to send out buzz effectively telling people to watch the show because they have rather politically charged characters in it. It's insulting, really, to expect viewers to want to watch a show just because it has, for instance, minority characters in it. Mr. Plinkett addressed this in his Attack of the Clones review, concerning "Why is Samuel L. Jackson in Star Wars movies?" bit. People, of whatever their ethnicity or whatever, won't watch a show simply because some characters reflect such characteristics. That's not how entertainment works. Entertainment is meant to grab you in other ways, to present interesting situations with interesting characters and see how they deal with those situations. Without either, the show will wither, because who cares if a character is black or gay or whatever, if what is presented is about as interesting as watching paint dry?


Well I agree with you there that putting in characters or stories in the new series for PC reasons or to be appealing to a certain demographic is not what I want.What I meant with the TOS example was to say that somehow the signs of the times were in the show or stories although it didn't whack you on the head with these themes it was(for most of the times) done in an entertaining sometimes subtle way.Part of my problem with TNG(and on) was that it was so overt about it that it came off as preachy and high-minded(certainly in seasons 1-2).And like you I've watched (many of) the Plinkett reviews and most of the times we are agreeing on things were certain movies went wrong.My beefs (after seeing them in the cinema) with Generations and Insurrection were exactly the same things he felt didn't work.


Which is why I tend to think this pre-TOS approach is also a mistake. Most Trek fans, I would say, aren't really interested in that, as they are interested in what happens AFTER the Dominion War. Or after Nemesis. I think if they had brought back the Enterprise-E, or make a whole new Enterprise (like the Enterprise-G in Star Trek: Renaissance - set in the 25th Century), they would've spawned a lot more interest because they would like to see something really new, not just a new ship, but the future of the Federation itself. Further, I think a lot of fans are done with prequels and soft-reboots. Because both, especially prequels, have been done rather slip-shoddy with regard to continuity, and personally I think they've made keeping up with continuity of the franchise so much of a waste of time that it makes watching these kinds of shows a bit of a drag. We know what is supposed to happen later, but if they violate continuity somehow (like ENT did), it's just too much to ask us all to ignore it.


Here I have to disagree a world post-TNG/DS9/VOY would runs the risk being more about technobabble,which I am not that fond of because to me it is where technology replaced the deus ex machina story-device and that was not the part of Trek that appealed to me.I actually liked what they did with ENT(minus the interference of the suits).Going back to less tech and more about the characters and conflicts between and within characters and their dealings with the unknown of space and it's dangers.Or how our main characters deal with ethical or moral problems,deal with death,defeat, xenophobia,disaster and simple set-backs and not always making the right decisions(which is part of human nature making mistakes and learning from them).
I know part of Trek is to present us with a future where mankind is enlightened and non conflict and all to give us ideas or ideals to strive for but part of the problem I had with TNG and VOY (DS9 tried to be a little different in that respect)was that these characters seemed to stray too far from us,denying our human nature not to have conflicts and all that made the characters bland and feel inferior to the technobabble.And since what I mentioned earlier about the characters, ENT for me was very engaging that I didn't mind the continuity things,and most Trek series had these issues so it's not like ENT has the monopoly on that and the writers tried to make it fit.And to be honest most of what causes a stir in the Trek community(the Temporal Cold War,too much advanced tech,The Borg episode) was something that was insisted upon by the head-office (who had no knowledge of Trek or SF whatsoever)and was exactly the opposite of what the producers of ENT(Berman and Braga) had in mind for the series.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


Here I have to disagree a world post-TNG/DS9/VOY would runs the risk being more about technobabble,which I am not that fond of because to me it is where technology replaced the deus ex machina story-device and that was not the part of Trek that appealed to me.


That is a definite concern, and surely I agree it's one to be concerned about. Lord knows how much I hate technobabble. But that's a problem with writing and production, not so much with setting. If I ever hear Quantum-this or using the magical deflector to do something it really wasn't intended to do from STD, though, this would only make my point. I would, however, be very surprised they go with this, given the names of some of the writers I've heard mentioned; they may be TV writers, but they made their chops coming up with decent television stories on other shows.

But, as I said, I think audiences are getting a little tired of prequels, reboots, and soft-reboots. I know that in my circles, nobody is really jazzed up for STD for this reason, and I suspect that this sentiment is shared by a lot of people.

If I had to write for a new Star Trek show, even one like this, I'd go back to the roots in one substantial way - make it action-oriented. Give us a guy in charge who's not afraid to shoot his way out of a problem, even if it's the first resort. Give us enemies who aren't willing to talk, but are willing to kill our heroes at the first sign of weakness. Bring back red-shirt deaths (or gold-shirt), and make serving in Starfleet Security an act of pure heroism (or reckless folly, whichever). It may be quaint, in a sense, but it's also exciting.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?


If I had to write for a new Star Trek show, even one like this, I'd go back to the roots in one substantial way - make it action-oriented. Give us a guy in charge who's not afraid to shoot his way out of a problem, even if it's the first resort. Give us enemies who aren't willing to talk, but are willing to kill our heroes at the first sign of weakness. Bring back red-shirt deaths (or gold-shirt), and make serving in Starfleet Security an act of pure heroism (or reckless folly, whichever). It may be quaint, in a sense, but it's also exciting.



Now that would be a show that I would watch.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

LOL, TOS was a product of the Cold War space race.

Besides... Vietnam? Ever heard of Korea???

(MASH was big at the time, and no, it wasn't about Vietnam either)

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

Not quite Tolyn the series MASH was a product of the 70's it came after the 1970 movie (Featuring Elliot Gould,Donald Sutherland,Tom Skerritt,Sally Kellerman,Robert Duval and DS9's Rene Auberjonois).after the great succes of that movie the series first aired in the '72.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

there's no information about the show. The show has already been pushed back, which in my opinion is not really a good sign.

The show is also going to be shown on a site where you have to pay to see it.
As a prequel, it was already tried and failed, i.e. Enterprise.

The show won't survive the first half of the season.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

From what I gather, it is slated for 13 episodes, so it will run for at least one full season no matter what. One episode each week (as opposed to all at once). And because it'll be on CBS All Access I don't think a mid-season cancellation is a possibility. Even if no one watches, all 13 episodes will be aired.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

That's true.

Now it's confirmed that Bryan Fuller has stepped down as the showrunner for the show.

That can not be good and the show hasn't even started production yet.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

It seems to me like they may be spinning it like he was only meant to be here just to map out the first season. Like, "My work is done here." That's not an actual quote. I'm just saying.

Re: Why don't you guys seem excited about Star Trek Discovery?

I'm excited! There's a great team behind it and it all looks very promising.
Top