Star Trek - From TOS to Discovery and Beyond
Posted: March 31st, 2017, 2:40 pm
Rainn Wilson has joined the cast of Star Trek: Discovery as none other than Harcourt Fenton Mudd: StarTrek.com
A Star Wars Discussion Forum
http://galacticsenate.com/
I wonder why this just finally became officialMaster Magnus wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2017, 3:05 pm Sonequa Martin-Green joins the cast of Star Trek: Discovery as First Officer Michael Burnham:
StarTrek.com: Sonequa Martin-Green Beams Aboard Discovery
Sure, why not? Secondary doesn't mean non-existent. Just because the show isn't centered around his exploits doesn't preclude him not being a big part of the happenings.borgmatrix wrote: ↑April 4th, 2017, 12:20 pm Would they really give Jason Isaacs, as captain, more of a secondary role?
Yes. The people behind the show have stated that the captain isn't the lead character of the show. Sonequa Martin- Green's character will be.borgmatrix wrote: ↑April 4th, 2017, 12:20 pmWould they really give Jason Isaacs, as captain, more of a secondary role?
I never said anything about him being non-existent. In general, I'm puzzled about establishing a "lead character" in what has typically been an ensemble show. Being XO, of course I'd expect her role to be significant. But I'd expect the same for the captain. Not sure I understand singling out a character to be the lead.
Yes, but the last episode isn't fully canon (well, at least not in the Kelvinverse). Otherwise, I agree. I don't think Enterprise was that bad. And I do like the first version of the theme song (the second is awful).Kapit wrote: ↑April 24th, 2017, 10:01 am Finally finished Enterprise. I really enjoyed it and don't understand why it's so maligned.
Outside of both awful versions of the theme song, the only thing I disliked is that they didn't give Archer his big speech at the end.
Friggin Riker ruining two shows.
I'm considering picking up the Enterprise box set at some point when its at a decent price, and giving it another chance. I dumped on Berman and Braga for years, but more recently I've tended to put more of that blame on Berman. I was genuinely glad to meet Braga at the convention last week. If it hadn't been an autograph line with tons waiting behind me, I'd have loved to have had a conversation with him (and offered an apology for my past opinions of him and his efforts). But I do find myself wanting to go back and watch the series start to finish. I saw the entire final season, but only a handful of episodes of the first 3 seasons.Master Magnus wrote: ↑July 31st, 2017, 2:12 pm Yes, but the last episode isn't fully canon (well, at least not in the Kelvinverse). Otherwise, I agree. I don't think Enterprise was that bad. And I do like the first version of the theme song (the second is awful).
Swedish public service television aired Enterprise but not the last season so I watched it on Netflix when it became available there. The cancellation was premature and the show got really good during its last season (even though I think they may have tried to cram a bit too many explanations into it and I wasn't a fan of the alien nazis). Would really have liked to see the Earth-Romulan war...borgmatrix wrote: ↑August 9th, 2017, 10:33 amI'm considering picking up the Enterprise box set at some point when its at a decent price, and giving it another chance. I dumped on Berman and Braga for years, but more recently I've tended to put more of that blame on Berman. I was genuinely glad to meet Braga at the convention last week. If it hadn't been an autograph line with tons waiting behind me, I'd have loved to have had a conversation with him (and offered an apology for my past opinions of him and his efforts). But I do find myself wanting to go back and watch the series start to finish. I saw the entire final season, but only a handful of episodes of the first 3 seasons.Master Magnus wrote: ↑July 31st, 2017, 2:12 pm Yes, but the last episode isn't fully canon (well, at least not in the Kelvinverse). Otherwise, I agree. I don't think Enterprise was that bad. And I do like the first version of the theme song (the second is awful).
I arrived late Wednesday for the convention, so I missed the Discovery panels, which is too bad. I haven't followed the production too closely, and I've been somewhat skeptical, or at least with a wait-and-see attitude. But I'm maybe a bit more interested after seeing some of the costumes last week.
As far as it being premature, I can't say I'm surprised. If that final season had been its first, I think it would have been primed to have a great run. But, unfortunately, the writing staff squandered its first two seasons on stuff that was far too similar to past Trek and didn't try to elevate things much until season 3. Season 4 was too little, too late. And, yeah, seeing that war with the romulans would have been more welcomed, I think, that the conflict with the Xindi.Master Magnus wrote: ↑August 10th, 2017, 11:08 am Swedish public service television aired Enterprise but not the last season so I watched it on Netflix when it became available there. The cancellation was premature and the show got really good during its last season (even though I think they may have tried to cram a bit too many explanations into it and I wasn't a fan of the alien nazis). Would really have liked to see the Earth-Romulan war...
I signed up for the 1 week free trial. Saw the first episode last night and will check out the second tonight probably. But I don't have any intent to continue with All Access.
"Lifeless", that's a good way to describe this dystopian series. It doesn't feel much at all like Star Trek.borgmatrix wrote: ↑September 25th, 2017, 2:51 pmI signed up for the 1 week free trial. Saw the first episode last night and will check out the second tonight probably. But I don't have any intent to continue with All Access.
I didn't care much of the first episode. Felt lifeless. Felt like there were a lot of stupid decisions in how the characters approached that unknown object. Didn't find the characters particularly interesting. I don't mind the look of the Klingons, but didn't find anything particularly interesting about their scenes after the opening few minutes with them. Didn't like the show visually either. It felt somewhat claustrophobic.
I suppose I'll eventually see the rest of the show, though I'm not sure when or how. But very underwhelmed so far.
I'm open to something darker. I don't mind that. But it feels like they're barreling forward haphazardly and without much effort to allow the characters or story to breathe.Master Magnus wrote: ↑October 7th, 2017, 1:37 pm "Lifeless", that's a good way to describe this dystopian series. It doesn't feel much at all like Star Trek.
Star Trek has always been about optimism for the future, of teamwork and exploration. What we've gotten so far is more of the darkness that has plagued the various franchises for the past decade. There's barely any humor in any of them anymore and they take themselves far too seriously.borgmatrix wrote:I'm open to something darker. I don't mind that. But it feels like they're barreling forward haphazardly and without much effort to allow the characters or story to breathe.
And there's no reason this show can't get into those things as it proceeds. Again, I don't want to judge the entire show in the content of just a few episodes. I think its fair game to pursue darker, war-themed storytelling. I wouldn't want the entire show to be that, and I don't get the impression it will be.Master Magnus wrote: ↑October 23rd, 2017, 2:49 pm Star Trek has always been about optimism for the future, of teamwork and exploration.
I'm not sure I know what you mean. Are you saying this isn't really the Prime Universe?...and the producers are being more or less dishonest with the audience: This show has nothing to do with the "old" Star Trek (about which the producers doesn't really know much and have done pretty bad research), and the sooner the pretending stops the better.
Yeah, I'd prefer something set in the future, too. Maybe they were worried about having to keep all the continuity straight from TNG, DS9, and Voyager if they went that route, and chose pre-TOS to avoid that. Of course, they're still mucking up continuity.I also can't understand why they made this into yet another prequel when we've already had one: Star Trek: Enterprise. This would have worked better as a sequel set in the 25th Century.
Sorry, but to me it isn't Star Trek. We are also shown a crew that can't work together. While I'm glad Roddenberry's stupid rule that there can't be conflicts among the main characters is gone, I want to see a group of people working together to solve problems and that humanity has progressed, not having Starfleet officers referring to prisoners as "animals" (and prisoners doing hard labor? What happened to the what was established earlier with criminals being treated). And the entire first season will be devoted to the war.borgmatrix wrote: ↑October 30th, 2017, 11:10 amAnd there's no reason this show can't get into those things as it proceeds. Again, I don't want to judge the entire show in the content of just a few episodes. I think its fair game to pursue darker, war-themed storytelling. I wouldn't want the entire show to be that, and I don't get the impression it will be.Master Magnus wrote: ↑October 23rd, 2017, 2:49 pm Star Trek has always been about optimism for the future, of teamwork and exploration.
Which leads me to...borgmatrix wrote:At this stage, I think the larger story is weak writing and lack of respect for continuity with what we know.
What I am saying is that the producers of this show aren't familiar with basic Star Trek continuity. From minor issues that were laid out in the TOS and TNG Writer's Guide that the viewscreens aren't windows (I blame Jar Jar Abrams for that ) to yet another redesign of the Klingons to the use of more advanced technology, such as holographic communication, that we've ever seen on Trek. Sure, we can't be replicating the sixties show, but trying to keep things a little more in line.borgmatrix wrote:I'm not sure I know what you mean. Are you saying this isn't really the Prime Universe?...and the producers are being more or less dishonest with the audience: This show has nothing to do with the "old" Star Trek (about which the producers doesn't really know much and have done pretty bad research), and the sooner the pretending stops the better.
The writing is, at times, atrocious. This week's episode, Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad, was particularly bad in this regard with huge plot holes and an ending that made one wonder why the heck they even need the spore drive for... And having a TOS-character acting that much out of character...borgmatrix wrote:Yeah, I'd prefer something set in the future, too. Maybe they were worried about having to keep all the continuity straight from TNG, DS9, and Voyager if they went that route, and chose pre-TOS to avoid that. Of course, they're still mucking up continuity.I also can't understand why they made this into yet another prequel when we've already had one: Star Trek: Enterprise. This would have worked better as a sequel set in the 25th Century.
I don't know that they really care about continuity. I think they just want to do what they want. And, unfortunately, they're not doing that very well. I'd be forgiving of things not connecting if they were delivering entertaining, well-crafted episodes/stories. But through the first 3 episodes, they weren't.
Continuity is definitely a problem. I haven't watched beyond episode 3, so I can't comment on some of the newer details that have come up. In general, I think RDM during the DS9 days did a great job of voicing that ST can't be put in a box and that its about a lot of things. I'll continue to favor writers pursuing what they want to within the ST universe, but with an expectation of quality storytelling. And, yes, a reasonable respect from canon/history/continuity.Master Magnus wrote: ↑October 31st, 2017, 3:27 pm Sorry, but to me it isn't Star Trek. We are also shown a crew that can't work together. While I'm glad Roddenberry's stupid rule that there can't be conflicts among the main characters is gone, I want to see a group of people working together to solve problems and that humanity has progressed, not having Starfleet officers referring to prisoners as "animals" (and prisoners doing hard labor? What happened to the what was established earlier with criminals being treated). And the entire first season will be devoted to the war.
It would be nice if they made more of an effort there. I can understand new looks and a different presentation. This kind of stuff is more window dressing for me, so I'm more forgiving and care more about the content and quality of writing.What I am saying is that the producers of this show aren't familiar with basic Star Trek continuity. From minor issues that were laid out in the TOS and TNG Writer's Guide that the viewscreens aren't windows (I blame Jar Jar Abrams for that ) to yet another redesign of the Klingons to the use of more advanced technology, such as holographic communication, that we've ever seen on Trek. Sure, we can't be replicating the sixties show, but trying to keep things a little more in line.
Sad. I'm finding myself less and less interested in even checking this out on disc down the road. I never thought we'd get something that I'd find worse than Voyager, but thus far, as you've said, Discovery has been "atrocious". Incoherent, rushed, badly written, and seemingly in another universe/galaxy compared to the rest of ST.The writing is, at times, atrocious. This week's episode, Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad, was particularly bad in this regard with huge plot holes and an ending that made one wonder why the heck they even need the spore drive for... And having a TOS-character acting that much out of character...
That's good to hear. At some point, I'll check out the rest of the season.Master Magnus wrote: ↑November 16th, 2017, 1:26 pm The last two episodes (including the cliffhanger before the mid-season break) were actually pretty good!
Ugh, no thanks.Master Magnus wrote: ↑December 8th, 2017, 12:49 pm I first thought this was a joke...: Deadline
Quentin Tarantino doing Star Trek?!
I have no issues with this. Never opposed to seeing different takes on things. Based on that article, it looks like Tarantino made a pitch to Paramount (as opposed to the latter seeking him out), so I see that as being good in speaking to Tarantino being motivated and genuinely interested. From a creativity standpoint, I'm interested in seeing where he'd go with this and what kind of story or corner of the Trek universe we'd see.Master Magnus wrote: ↑December 8th, 2017, 12:49 pm I first thought this was a joke...: Deadline
Quentin Tarantino doing Star Trek?!