Star trek Discovery CBS

[Solluk]

There is often the debate that it must look like 60's television or it must look utterly unrelated.

But please look at their phasers.  Their phasers are practically an indictment of the series.

The hand phasers elegantly combine aspects of TOS and Cage era technology with a sleek modern appearance.  They prove that you can honor a classical aesthetic while also modernizing it.

If the philosophy of the phasers had been carried over into every aspect of the production, I doubt you'd have half as many disappointed fans.

But then you look at things like their Klingon vessel designs, and you can see that they made no attempt to sleekly meld classical and modern aesthetic.  They just ditched the classic design entirely.  And it's disappointing.

You can't ever please everyone, but it's not an either-or.  It's not 1960 vs 2017, with no wiggle.  You can indeed please most, if you take the care to try.

[T'Prina]

You can either enjoy it for what it is, or nitpick it to death. I've watched a good amount of all the different series, but canon is not a bible I need to swear by to enjoy a story. In my opinion Discovery has delivered entertaining and engaging stories thus far and I want to see where it continues. But to each their own. IDIC.

[Ian Galloway]

You can either enjoy it for what it is, or nitpick it to death. I've watched a good amount of all the different series, but canon is not a bible I need to swear by to enjoy a story. In my opinion Discovery has delivered entertaining and engaging stories thus far and I want to see where it continues. But to each their own. IDIC.

Since you mention swearing, this farce of a show has added f-bombs to provide even less charm.

[Leonard T. Scott]

Since you mention swearing, this farce of a show has added f-bombs to provide even less charm.

Then Star Trek IV, Generations, the Kelvin Films all farces by your logic as each have had salty than normal language

[Solluk]

I sure wouldn't put up any defense of Generations.

But salty language doesn't bother me.  After all, we've been calling people PetaQs on television for decades!  ;-)

[Ian Galloway]

Then Star Trek IV, Generations, the Kelvin Films all farces by your logic as each have had salty than normal language

50 years of Trek has managed to avoid f-bombs before Discivery, and yes, I find JJTrek an unmitigated farce.

[Leonard T. Scott]

50 years of Trek has managed to avoid f-bombs before Discivery, and yes, I find JJTrek an unmitigated farce.

Then your choice is an obvious one: Don't watch either.

Simply let those who do watch it enjoy it. I will say this though, had it not been for the KELVIN FILMS, I know for sure T'Prina would not be here. I see these new iterations as a gateway to the greatness that is this franchise we love

[Lek]

Then your choice is an obvious one: Don't watch either.

Simply let those who do watch it enjoy it. I will say this though, had it not been for the KELVIN FILMS, I know for sure T'Prina would not be here. I see these new iterations as a gateway to the greatness that is this franchise we love

I watched the first JJTREK with skepticism and it failed to deliver even more than I imagined was possible. I haven't watched another. As for Discovery, I've pursued the same strategy that I did with season three and four of the remake of BSG, "this episode can't be worse than the last one." That turned out to be an incorrect assumption, so far Discovery has managed to fail tomeet that same low standard. So far though, I'll give you this, Discovery hasn't sucked as much as the season three and four of BSG. I hope nothing can ever sink lower than that.

[T'Prina]

[Lek]

Just out of curiosity, what was this comic originally for?

[Arrun Dihsar]

Going to state this at the top to frame where I'm coming from on this. I'm currently still watching the show, I'm currently sitting at liking it better than ENT and almost liking it as much as Voyager. (My personal ranking being: ENT/VOY/TOS/TNG/DS9). Though, keep in mind I can watch it on my exsisting cable package...so, I haven't had to spend extra to see it...until it gets upto TOS or higher, if I HAD to subsribe to the CBS All Access for Discovery, I wouldn't.

For my part, my critiques of the show are based on what was being offered. I was offered by CBS (as were all of us fans old and new) a Star Trek story. There are certain expectations with that; phasers, starships, warp drives, corny one-liners, technobabble, and space drama. Discovery was promoted as a non-JJAbrams verse story (it predates the events of Kirk and company) and that it would be a new direction and story that hasn't been told; but would still feel like Trek.

Discovery, after the first few episodes, does feel like Trek. But, as an older fan, the changes are jarring. I went into detail about this in an earlier post, so I'll spare you that. However, I will answer the assertion that somehow the canon is written in stone and can never be changed. My take on it is, that if you are going to set up your story in an established universe then you should make good-faith efforts to adhere to it.

Orville, from all accounts I've heard, went its own way entirely. It nods to Star Trek heavily, but it is its own thing. If it does one strange thing or anouther, that's fine: Orville isn't TRYING to be a Trek story, just take elements from it. Babylon 5 and Deep Space 9 are very different shows (the script controversy aside); both space stations, hubs of many cultures, but Babylon 5 was NOT Star Trek and never wanted to be; DS9 was still Trek by the end. DISCOVERY however, felt (in the first couple episodes) like it wanted to be something else. It wanted to not be Trek, but a different Sci-Fi world all together. As I've watched the series, the Trek spirit has shone through. DS9 had its wartime story too, but it felt Trek from even the early episodes ( to me anyway.) So, people being turned off by Discovery, especially if they are used to how Trek has been for decades...is understandable.

For newer fans, this is as good a jump on point as any. In an earlier post, I went into how different shows had different feels. Discovery, so far as current writing, is finding its own Trek voice....it's just taking a long time to get there.

The above said, if you enjoy the show, feel free to enjoy it (Heck, I still like Generations and Voyager; and a lot of my local Trek friends REALLY don't like either of those.). But, and I think in general most of us at Shadowfleet can agree: it's not like if anyone of US don't like Discovery (or any Trek show) that doesn't automatically mean you yourself MUST NOT like it as well. Some of us like the show, some of us don't, some of us don't care either way.

But for my part, I will call out when the show does something that makes no sense of flys in the face of the rest of the canon? Why? Because I WANT this show to be good. I mean, if I went back and looked at TOS and TNG (the stuff I grew up on) I would totally be able to find something or another to pick on.

I once was told this: To like something is one thing, to dislike something is another, but to not care...to be indifferent about something is worst thing of all. If you like or dislike something: you at least consider it, think about it, give it notice and acknowledge its existence. So, for my part. I both like and dislike Discovery. I like Burnham and the Engineer...the Captain I dislike...the new Chief of Security I like...the Cadet, I'm not sure about....but the show over all I'm still watching so far and I hope this show never gives me cause to simply say: "Whelp, this is garbage, time to never watch or talk about this show ever again."

[Ian Galloway]

I completely agree with Arrun Dihsar's assessment. Discovery is a decent science fiction show, but it's not good Trek, it's not even bad Trek, it's simply not Trek at all, especially something that calls itself "Pre-Kirk Trek". If Discovery was some other setting, I would actually like the series.

[Solluk]

Would I like Discovery if it wasn't Trek?  That is a good question.  Strip away all expectations (which they set up by calling it Trek and setting it in a familiar era) and do I like it, then?

I think it would be 'okay.'  I don't think I'd be paying money to get it, but I'd watch it if it was free.  The only reason I paid money for this is because it is Trek and supposedly canon, prime timeline, and I feel the need to stay appraised of such things.  If it does not improve substantially, I may cancel before Season 2 comes out.

Some of the behavior of the protagonist in the first episode has made her so unlikable that they are still repairing that initial damage.  The Klingons are absolutely unlikable and unrelatable, even if I had nothing to compare them to.   But some of the other characters and incidents are intriguing.

By the way,

[spoiler]Do you think Tkuvma is that new guy they picked up from the 'prison ship' D7, in some kind of elaborate disguise/genetic/mental alteration?  A kind of Manchurian candidate?[/spoiler]

[Solluk]

" I will say this though, had it not been for the KELVIN FILMS, I know for sure T'Prina would not be here. "

This got me thinking...

Will we see major fleets adopt Discovery era sims?  Will they incorporate its events into their timeline?  And how soon, if so?  And what will be different if they do?

Already we can expect things to look very different.  To be described very differently.  TOS sims will have holo-communications, and Kirk's phaser rifle won't be anything like what we remember, most likely.

Will we need to re-evaluate the appearance of familiar races?   Or their history?  Kahless supposedly dipped his hair in lava to make the first battleth, if I recall.  Does that still work under their current incarnation?

Or should we wait and see if they maintain this appearance throughout the series before making such judgments?  Perhaps something will happen to 'undo' much of what we have seen and understand to now be true?

How soon, if ever, will Shadowfleet itself start building Discovery lore into our own fleet?

[T'Prina]

Just out of curiosity, what was this comic originally for?

Under where I added Discovery, it originally just said "Thing."