TV Shows Star Trek Discovery

I do prefer the BSG Farscape solution, make a new word that's similar, frack, frel etc. Binibadgi, makes sense now!

 

I’ve only watched the first 3 episode so far, but so far I’m liking the feel to it - a bit more grown up and darker.


This, The Orville, and new Red Dwarf all on at the same time - brilliant

 

And early in the new year, a new season of The Expanse too!

 

This show had an awful lot of work to do in order to overcome my extremely negative expectations of anything now produced as "Star Trek". So far it has utterly failed to deliver.

It's an OK sci-fi show but it sure as sh- isn't Star Trek. It just feels... out of place as a Star Trek series. I don't mind the whole "darker, grittier, edgier" thing (but aren't we bored of that yet?), and I couldn't really care less if characters drop an F-bomb here and there. But it just doesn't feel right. They're trying too hard to paint Lorca as an "anti-hero", Michael seems to have very little depth as a character, the engineer guy is an irritating tw@, and the less said about the Klingons the better. If this had not been a Star Trek series then I would probably be enjoying it a lot more.

I'm willing to swallow my pride and keep watching it. After all, if you go back and watch Encounter at Farpoint and then an episode from, say, Season 4 or 5, it feels like a completely different show. World-building and character development takes time, so... for now, let's see where it goes. Any new "Star Trek" property, which is supposedly "canon" (or "prime timeline", whatever you want to call it), is going to have a hard time living up to what has already been established in 703 TV episodes and 10 films (not counting the JJ Abrams reboot films); that alone is enough for me to give it the benefit of doubt... for now.

THIS IRRITATES THE F- OUT OF ME. The Defiant was the first ship in which we saw this technology and even though it'll probably be ret-conned somehow (if it hasn't already) it just doesn't make sense in-universe. Clearly it's a relatively stable technology - at least as stable as warp cores, which seem to want to catastrophically explode if a mouse so much as farts too closely to one, or teleporters, which disassemble living creatures molecule by molecule and reconstruct them (and of course that never ever went horribly wrong) - so why wouldn't it have been fitted to any other starships that came after it?

 

You have to give up thinking they are any way related. When you accept to think that it's a total reimagining it's easier to enjoy.

 

I think this show is supposed to be pre-JJ, not pre-TOS.

 

But the producers themselves are saying that it is canon with TOS and Enterprise... https://www.inverse.com/article/37357-star-trek-discovery-canon-changes-tos-tng

 

But pre-JJ is pre-TOS?

I can accept technology looking different to the style in TOS but I want and explanation for the more advanced tech, and I'm optimistic I'll get it.

 

I'm fairly sure someone posted the timeline somewhere in the thread, but Discovery is set 10 years prior to TOS. It is explicitly canon with Enterprise, TOS, TNG, DS9, & Voyager.

 

Spoiler: Spoilersaurus

Least the fungus drives been binned off in a semi sensible way

I cannot see how its in canon with TOS an TNG theres things that just don't add up. The pop up HUD on the panel, holo comm, Klingons lost their hair an got weird armour list goes on.

 

Lorca has a tribble on his desk, when they were introduced to the Federation by Harry Mudd in "The Trouble with Tribbles" during TOS.

 

dude you should check out The Orville, trek fans are flocking to it, myself included.

 

Will do .

 

If you want to go down that logic route - It seem to be more post-Enterprise more than pre rest-of-tv-trek

 

I'm reading a lot of *wah* " it's not canon","the Klingons are wrong", "I don't like that character"*wah* - seriously, is it really that ****ing important if the show takes a tangent? They're all Probably going to die to make their arc fit in with canon anyway.

The Klingons have changed numerous times, and everyone eventually got over them.

Characters who elicit an emotive response from you are surely having an impact, or their imminent demise will have.

I have this seemingly superhuman ability to watch franchised shows without freaking out if they don't dovetail perfectly with my understanding of their particular universe, and I'm enjoying it on its own merit so far.

 

Is it wrong to enjoy something and not want to see it ruined? TBH after the JJ Abrams Star Trek movies, Star Trek really is circling the drain. I say this not to be indignant or get worked up over nothing, I say this because I enjoy Star Trek - I want to enjoy Star Trek, and I want to continue enjoying Star Trek in the future.

If that means I need a waahmbulance then so be it.

 

It’s certainly not being ruined, it’s being dragged into the times. I loved Voyager and Deep Space 9, and so far this is my fav.

 

Like I said earlier, I think it needs time - for now I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, despite my misgivings. For me it's been disappointing so far, but I'm going to continue to watch it. One of these days I'm going to swallow my pride and watch Enterprise, too!

 

Finished watching episodes 1 thru 5 to give it a chance and IMO compared with TNG and Voyager it's rubbish.

 

TBF so were season 1 of both Voyager and TNG, most of TNG S1 is painfully bad upon re-watching imo...