Star Trek Discovery?

[Underseer]

Seems that they went with darker and more complex version of everything.
My only real complain is about pronunciation, it's hard to get what they are saying sometimes, specifically captain Lorca. And last name "Lorca" suggests to me that he will end up being a bad guy.

Good to hear. The darkness and complexity is exactly what I loved about DS9. In the Pale Moonlight is one of the best Star Trek episodes ever.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Seems that they went with darker and more complex version of everything.
My only real complain is about pronunciation, it's hard to get what they are saying sometimes, specifically captain Lorca. And last name "Lorca" suggests to me that he will end up being a bad guy.

Good to hear. The darkness and complexity is exactly what I loved about DS9. In the Pale Moonlight is one of the best Star Trek episodes ever.

DS9 was great because the side characters were so intriguing. Garek, Dukat, Quark... all five letters and all really interesting characters as the show progressed.

 

[Underseer]

Good to hear. The darkness and complexity is exactly what I loved about DS9. In the Pale Moonlight is one of the best Star Trek episodes ever.

DS9 was great because the side characters were so intriguing. Garek, Dukat, Quark... all five letters and all really interesting characters as the show progressed.

And 4 episodes in, did you have any idea how good those three characters would ultimately become?

Star Trek series typically take a while to find their legs.

Voyager lost me the instant they introduced the highly sexualized Barbie Borg in a series that was supposed to be about female empowerment and female leadership, but all the other shows (other than the original series) eventually grew on me. Even Enterprise. I abandoned Enterprise while it was on the air, but watched it when it was on Netflix, and it eventually got good although it took longer than the other series. Not DS9 good, but good.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I was sold on the show (DS9) from the premiere. I haven't seen Discovery and won't until on disc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Underseer]

DS9 took a while for me to like it, but it became my favorite.

 

[Ford]

DS9 took a while for me to like it, but it became my favorite.

I'm gonna cheat and paste in something I wrote on another forum:

The thing about Deep Space Nine is that it was challenging, and that's quintessential Trek.

They stuck a cast and crew on a space station. Instead of traveling to meet interesting and exciting new cultures, everything had to come to the station.

It was an incredible challenge for the creators of the show. How do we do Star Trek without the exploration element? How do we go boldly when we're not going anywhere?

Deep Space Nine was great precisely because the show was stuck - literally and figuratively - in one place. They had to work harder to make it interesting week after week, and it showed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

DS9 took a while for me to like it, but it became my favorite.

I'm gonna cheat and paste in something I wrote on another forum:

The thing about Deep Space Nine is that it was challenging, and that's quintessential Trek.

They stuck a cast and crew on a space station. Instead of traveling to meet interesting and exciting new cultures, everything had to come to the station.

It was an incredible challenge for the creators of the show. How do we do Star Trek without the exploration element? How do we go boldly when we're not going anywhere?

I would say, there was exploring, because you know... the gamma quadrant. But first they had to get used to Bajor (sp?!) locally and then Cardassia from afar... but on the station. They ramped it up well. And of course, the Defiant was the best ship ever!

Deep Space Nine was great precisely because the show was stuck - literally and figuratively - in one place. They had to work harder to make it interesting week after week, and it showed.

Which could have been what made Voyager great, by giving up on trying to go a bazillion light years to go home. Instead, the try to create a Federation presence in the Delta Quadrant. The episode with Amelia Earhart was so disappointing, because in the end, no one stayed from Voyager... and that was supposed to be a good thing. Instead they should have all stayed.

 

[Underseer]

DS9 took a while for me to like it, but it became my favorite.

I'm gonna cheat and paste in something I wrote on another forum:

The thing about Deep Space Nine is that it was challenging, and that's quintessential Trek.

They stuck a cast and crew on a space station. Instead of traveling to meet interesting and exciting new cultures, everything had to come to the station.

It was an incredible challenge for the creators of the show. How do we do Star Trek without the exploration element? How do we go boldly when we're not going anywhere?

Deep Space Nine was great precisely because the show was stuck - literally and figuratively - in one place. They had to work harder to make it interesting week after week, and it showed.

It's a bit more than that.

The creative people were a little jealous of other sci-fi shows with story arcs that spanned seasons or even multiple seasons (such as Babylon 5), and got into constant arguments with the higher ups, who wanted every episode to be fully self-contained for better syndication.

 

[Jayjay]

Maybe I would appreciate DS9 more if I had watched it when it aired, instead of binging it on Netflix 20 years later after already being spoiled by higher quality tv. The story arc they tried to tell was clumsy and childish compared to a lot of the tv that had come out since then: Babylon 5 (which I did watch when it aired), Firefly, Buffy/Angel, Alias/Lost/Fringe, whatever is on HBO, and even Voyager and Enterprise.

 

[Underseer]

Maybe I would appreciate DS9 more if I had watched it when it aired, instead of binging it on Netflix 20 years later after already being spoiled by higher quality tv. The story arc they tried to tell was clumsy and childish compared to a lot of the tv that had come out since then: Babylon 5 (which I did watch when it aired), Firefly, Buffy/Angel, Alias/Lost/Fringe, whatever is on HBO, and even Voyager and Enterprise.

It was very clumsy. As I said, it was marred by constant battles between the writers and the producers, but at the time, Star Trek was always episodic for syndication (where Star Trek traditionally made its money), which meant they didn't want any story that spanned more than one episode because then it confused audiences when shown out of order (as often happens with syndication).

Next Generation wet my whistle, and compared to that, the season-long stories were epic and grand. The captain had a regular girlfriend and a child. Characters had to live with the consequences of their decisions even seasons later. There was all kinds of stuff in there that we weren't used to seeing in Star Trek.

 

[Ford]

I'm gonna cheat and paste in something I wrote on another forum:

The thing about Deep Space Nine is that it was challenging, and that's quintessential Trek.

They stuck a cast and crew on a space station. Instead of traveling to meet interesting and exciting new cultures, everything had to come to the station.

It was an incredible challenge for the creators of the show. How do we do Star Trek without the exploration element? How do we go boldly when we're not going anywhere?

Deep Space Nine was great precisely because the show was stuck - literally and figuratively - in one place. They had to work harder to make it interesting week after week, and it showed.

It's a bit more than that.

The creative people were a little jealous of other sci-fi shows with story arcs that spanned seasons or even multiple seasons (such as Babylon 5), and got into constant arguments with the higher ups, who wanted every episode to be fully self-contained for better syndication.

I've been re-watching Babylon 5 lately...just about halfway through season 4. The special effects are obviously dated, but the show has otherwise held up really well.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Maybe I would appreciate DS9 more if I had watched it when it aired, instead of binging it on Netflix 20 years later after already being spoiled by higher quality tv. The story arc they tried to tell was clumsy and childish compared to a lot of the tv that had come out since then: Babylon 5 (which I did watch when it aired), Firefly, Buffy/Angel, Alias/Lost/Fringe, whatever is on HBO, and even Voyager and Enterprise.

DS9 has lulls. When the show is on a role, it is great! But it can fall into lulls where the show doesn't advance. However, such as the ending of Season One was really intense. The side characters meant something and you get to see the characters grow and develop, where as in TNG, not so much.

Babylon 5 didn't have the lull, other than the character building first season where you need to settle in. Every subsequent episode progressed the overall plot arc. It really is a minor miracle the show even happened.

 

[jab]

We watched the 4th episode tonight. Maybe it's an Ok sifi show but it's not Star Trek. The spinning saucer section killed it tonight. The characters continue to be unlikeable. With the exception of the ensign and that strange alian who are both boring, the rest are dinks. I see no continuity with any trek timeline except perhaps parallels to the worst trek movie ever made. Into Darkness. That wan't trek either.

The kids liked it and I'm surprised.

Where is Rick Berman when he's needed most?

I kind of liked the 4th episode--very Star Trecky in that the humane way turns out to be the correct way to handle the "monster".
I never thrilled to the Klingons, and this subtitled iteration annoys me no end--also the face masks, if not lit and shot very carefully, look like halloween masks, not like organic structures.

 

[couch_sloth]

We watched the 4th episode tonight. Maybe it's an Ok sifi show but it's not Star Trek. The spinning saucer section killed it tonight. The characters continue to be unlikeable. With the exception of the ensign and that strange alian who are both boring, the rest are dinks. I see no continuity with any trek timeline except perhaps parallels to the worst trek movie ever made. Into Darkness. That wan't trek either.

The kids liked it and I'm surprised.

Where is Rick Berman when he's needed most?

I kind of liked the 4th episode--very Star Trecky in that the humane way turns out to be the correct way to handle the "monster".
I never thrilled to the Klingons, and this subtitled iteration annoys me no end--also the face masks, if not lit and shot very carefully, look like halloween masks, not like organic structures.

I liked the 4th episode also. I think the important stuff will come later, and that's when we will know how well the series was thought-out, e.g. Will they have a good explanation as to why the spore drive doesn't appear later in the Star Trek time-line?
The idea of a lone starship being a game-changer, because they are able to travel practically anywhere in seconds is already being currently used in a sci-fi series (Dark Matter).

 

[crazyfingers]

I kind of liked the 4th episode--very Star Trecky in that the humane way turns out to be the correct way to handle the "monster".
I never thrilled to the Klingons, and this subtitled iteration annoys me no end--also the face masks, if not lit and shot very carefully, look like halloween masks, not like organic structures.

I liked the 4th episode also. I think the important stuff will come later, and that's when we will know how well the series was thought-out, e.g. Will they have a good explanation as to why the spore drive doesn't appear later in the Star Trek time-line?
The idea of a lone starship being a game-changer, because they are able to travel practically anywhere in seconds is already being currently used in a sci-fi series (Dark Matter).

Would be interesting to know what happens to this new drive.

BTW, does anyone know if this series is in prime universe or Nero Shrimp universe? The huge ship and spireling saucer with gaps is too sugestive of Nero Shrimp universe.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't care how they explain the spore drive, or if they explain it at all. It's a plot device like the original warp drive, or transporters, or phasers. I think they are spending way too much time already explaining it. The new drive could have been handwaved with some technobabble in five minutes, but they use two whole episodes on it. What a waste of time.

 

[RavenSky]

As someone who has zero interest in sports, those sports delays always infuriated me.

me too

 

[couch_sloth]

I don't care how they explain the spore drive, or if they explain it at all. It's a plot device like the original warp drive, or transporters, or phasers. I think they are spending way too much time already explaining it. The new drive could have been handwaved with some technobabble in five minutes, but they use two whole episodes on it. What a waste of time.

I meant that they need to eventually give a strong reason why this drive isn't used by starships later in the timeline (It's not in TOS, TNG, etc). A lame explanation for this could very likely taint the whole series.

 

[Jayjay]

I don't care how they explain the spore drive, or if they explain it at all. It's a plot device like the original warp drive, or transporters, or phasers. I think they are spending way too much time already explaining it. The new drive could have been handwaved with some technobabble in five minutes, but they use two whole episodes on it. What a waste of time.

I meant that they need to eventually give a strong reason why this drive isn't used by starships later in the timeline (It's not in TOS, TNG, etc). A lame explanation for this could very likely taint the whole series.

Just imagine it's a different timeline. Problem solved. I don't see why anyone should worry what happens in TOS or TNG, it's not like they didn't have their own share of ludicruous technology that's used once and then never mentioned again.

 

[couch_sloth]

I meant that they need to eventually give a strong reason why this drive isn't used by starships later in the timeline (It's not in TOS, TNG, etc). A lame explanation for this could very likely taint the whole series.

Just imagine it's a different timeline. Problem solved. I don't see why anyone should worry what happens in TOS or TNG, it's not like they didn't have their own share of ludicruous technology that's used once and then never mentioned again.

So you don't think they should worry at all whether this series fits in with the later timeline (as portrayed in the other series)?
Just change the timeline... not very original. I don't think I would be happy with that.