Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Star Trek
Byrne Robotics > Star Trek << Prev Page of 36
Topic: STAR TREK: DISCOVERY - New TV Series Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1018
Posted: 02 November 2018 at 6:56pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

Wait, my bad... Discovery IS totally enjoyable. I just meant that in my old age I am trying not to get too hung up on where and how it fits into the Trek universe, whether the phasers and Constitution class starships have been redesigned for no good reason, and the changeovers in the creative team. 

This would be amazing STAR TREK if I:

a) Turned off the critical thinking portions of my brain 
b) Squinted at the TV screen.

However, I don't deny that it's a slickly-produced show that looks good and is entertaining to a reasonable degree.   It's just leaving me a bit wanting in the STAR TREK department.


Edited by Rob Ocelot on 02 November 2018 at 6:56pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15307
Posted: 03 November 2018 at 3:39pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuMyfI_WM7E
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1018
Posted: 05 November 2018 at 6:49pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Ahhh, can always trust Midnight's Edge to postulate the absolute worst-case scenarios and conspiracy theories.   They are particularly down on DISCO and have been for the past year or so -- so take their viewpoint with some salt.   

While I don't think the problems with the show are as dire as ME is making them out to be I do think they may have to retool some aspects of the show if they plan to keep it going for the long run.  I have a feeling CBS/Paramount may take the easier road and cancel this once the other shows they have planned are about to air or airing.   It's not that DISCO is entirely terrible (though I do think it's a somewhat poor example of STAR TREK) but once PICARD gets rolling I can see them wanting to put their money behind Patrick Stewart's name as the flagship show.   DISCO at that point will have served it's purpose -- to get the STAR TREK brand back on the small screen and in the minds of TV viewers.  PICARD seems to be the show everyone (both the producers, execs, and --most importantly-- the viewers) want.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15307
Posted: 07 November 2018 at 9:12pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

Ahhh, can always trust Midnight's Edge to postulate the absolute worst-case scenarios and conspiracy theories.   They are particularly down on DISCO and have been for the past year or so -- so take their viewpoint with some salt.   
++++++++

I seem to have missed the part where the past decade of the once-great STAR TREK franchise hasn’t been a worst-case scenario. I find listening to Midnight’s Edge (...and Doomcock!) reporting on (...and ranting about!) STD to be incredibly therapeutic. And their inside sources and information have proven reliable, more often than not.

Not that I have any particular interest in discussing STD, of course. But I do feel obliged to report on these ongoing devopments to the three or so people who watch and/or care about the show.

The best and most telling comment for that video would be, “When fans actively want to see a STAR TREK show get cancelled, then you’re doing something wrong”. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15307
Posted: 07 November 2018 at 9:35pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5mmZO_M7jos
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1018
Posted: 08 November 2018 at 7:16pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

That Doomcock video was... erm... interesting.   I was laughing so hard at their 'soiled hotel bed and Tide pods' analogy that I may have to send them a cleaning bill.   Certainly entertaining, perhaps moreso than watching DISCOVERY itself.

Here's a video I found really interesting and really demonstrates why I feel DISCO isn't really STAR TREK in an overall tonal sense:


It's also noteworthy the majority of the scenes they break down from 'classic' STAR TREK come from ENTERPRISE, which despite it's continuity sins does follow the same tried and true methods of filmcraft, lighting, direction, and line delivery that have served all previous STAR TREK iterations (and at least five decades of television too) very well -- something that I never thought before about ENT -- and to be honest I don't think I've watched a lick of ENT in the 15 years since it folded.  

The counter argument to this analysis is that DISCO represents in some way a forward progression for STAR TREK -- that by somehow breaking all of the rules for how good watchable television is made they are setting a new standard that others are going to pick up on and follow.

There's a striking similarily in this to things I see on the electronic music production discussion boards I frequent.   On almost a monthly basis someone starts a thread asking something along the lines of "Do I really need to learn how to read music?".   Of course someone brings up the old chestnut of how some jazz muscians or successful modern artists don't know how to read music and get along just fine.  They miss the point that these 'unlearned' musicians are/were exceptional in other areas that made formal learning redundant -- they still fundamentally understood the underlying mechanics and mathematics of music even if they didn't gain that knowledge in a traditional way.  What the "I don't wanna learn music, cuz it's hard" types fail to understand is you need to learn the rules and work within the system before you can consciously break the rules and strike out on your own.  Instead, they just want to make up their own rules and learn the shortcuts before anything else.

That's the feeling I get from DISCO.  They are trying so hard to do something so different from any STAR TREK before it that they miss the mark for what actually made STAR TREK worth watching and a viable franchise in the first place.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 7822
Posted: 08 November 2018 at 11:39pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

The narrator's constant use of the word "disjointment" was jarring. I can find little on-line to the support its use. "Disjointedness" or even the apparently archaic "disjoint" are far more common. 

I have not seen the show, but the idea that it would ape BSG and the Expanse makes sense given that is how science-fiction looks onscreen looks these days. Even Enterprise gave this a shot with it's mostly gray and overly mechanical backgrounds and settings. Cameras in constant motion and keeping the viewer off balance are commonplace in modern storytelling, especially if one is shooting for a more action-oriented effect. 

That Discovery would consciously try to go backwards and make itself look like a product of the 90's is unlikely. Trek, especially Trek of the Berman era, has been routinely criticized for its static, locked-down, unimaginative look and pacing. Fans may feel comfortable in its environs, but to more general audiences, the look is repetitive and boring. 

Kristen Bell in connection with the film Fanboys was asked which franchise she would prefer appearing in, Star Trek or Star Wars. While she allowed that she had affection for Trek, she said, "My body just wants to do Star Wars."

Discovery seems to be attempting to give Kristen and those who feel similarly an action-based version of the franchise they like but can't quite love. 

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1018
Posted: 09 November 2018 at 7:58am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

That Discovery would consciously try to go backwards and make itself look like a product of the 90's is unlikely.

The same goes for aping the look and feel of TOS in the 60s but there are ways to use old tools and techniques (ie the fundamentals) and apply them to make something new without throwing away the rulebook.   ENTERPRISE with it's dull greys and confining submarine-like environs actually feels like something from the pre-TOS PIke era.  You at least have an idea there's a progression of form and function in the ship environments and controls.   It DISCO had been set in the post-TNG era then I wouldn't have a problem with them going wild with the visuals and the presentation.   It's not impossible to be progressive in your writing/presentation and to be what's essentially gap-filling glue for the STAR TREK franchise but it requires a lot of forethought and care.

   

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 7822
Posted: 09 November 2018 at 9:43pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Again, a major obstacle in the series' production and airing is the creators' insistence that it be set in this awkward period in Star Trek's history, and in the "Prime" timeline. 

All of this could have been avoided had they gone with the Kelvin universe or set the series after the TNG era. All of the new technology and visuals would make sense. Michael Burnham could be the adopted daughter of any prominent, politically dicey Vulcan. The tenuous connection to Spock wouldn't exist, but instead another sibling, with far more story potential, could have been introduced. We already know Burnham plays no part at all in Spock's future. She isn't there for his death, isn't mentioned in "Babel," plays no part in "Star Trek V," isn't present when he is brought back, and isn't referenced when he becomes the Romulan ambassador who destroyed Romulus. 

There is no point at all in attempting to shoehorn her into his story, and the connection makes her an unnecessary adjunct to his career rather than the star of her own.

It's just a bad idea from the get-go. I see that CBS (weird for a long-time Star Trek fan such as myself not to associate the property with NBC) is hyping a major role for Spock in Season Two. That's fine, whatever; but I'd actually be intrigued if her other brother showed up to wreak havoc on Discovery. Sybok and Michael Burnham together! If we talk to the rights holders, maybe we can work in Scrappy-Doo and Cousin Oliver as well...


Edited by Brian Hague on 09 November 2018 at 9:43pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3073
Posted: 10 November 2018 at 10:28am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

I really enjoyed "Calypso", the new short Trek.  Anybody else watch it yet?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Victor Perez
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 November 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 36
Posted: 10 November 2018 at 11:55am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

Yes both Short Treks were decent...the lastest one, Calypso was especially good and might as well be called... Star Trek: Black Mirror.  By Michael Chabon. :)
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3073
Posted: 10 November 2018 at 2:27pm | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Now that you mention it, it did have a bit of a Black Mirror feel to it.
Back to Top profile | search
 

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login
If you are not already registered you must first register

<< Prev Page of 36
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login