Star Trek Page 138

  • Page

    of 142 First / Last

  • bad09 11 Oct 2017 22:39:31 7,970 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Eurgh....OK I'm out. Generation thing, different direction, whatever. By 4th episode it is fucking AWFUL. Movies dead. TV dead. I'm out. Good night and good luck to the trek.....
  • NotBdaggers 11 Oct 2017 22:53:34 149 posts
    Seen 13 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I accidentally turned on subtitles earlier. When I went to turn them off, I discovered that Klingon is an option.

    Yes, they’ve done Kilngon subtitles for the English bits.

    Nuts.
  • Kronos 11 Oct 2017 23:52:00 680 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    If they hadn't already explained some of the changes in Klingon physiognomy in Enterprise I was beginning to wonder whether white Klingon is going to somehow become a human/klingon hybrid(ie more like the klingons we are used to seeing) or create an army of human/klingons to overthrow the pure (elephant men/vogon) klingons as he has been cast out by them. His female was hinting he would have to sacrifice everything to win ie his own Klingon-ness. It's fun to speculate.
  • sirtacos 12 Oct 2017 03:11:24 8,002 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I quite liked the first three episodes, but the latest one was retarded.
    Just awful all around

    EDIt: except when what's-her-name was mauled to death - Iiked that part.

    Edited by sirtacos at 03:14:25 12-10-2017
  • Darren 12 Oct 2017 13:29:48 9,482 posts
    Seen 15 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I grew up watching the original Star Trek but for me it was the Next Generation that remains my favourite followed by Voyager, Deep Space 9 and even Enterprise.

    I have mostly enjoyed watching the first three episodes of Discovery; those Klingon scenes were really annoying though, not because they were subtitled (I'm hearing-impaired so I use subs all the time) but because spoken Klingon dialogue is just painful to listen to for anything more than a few seconds! Anyway, the whole spore/transport thing does seem a bit far-fetched (even for Star Trek) and contradicts events shown in all the other shows, a problem with setting a series that pre-dates everything we've seen.

    In fact, I think I would enjoy this series more if it was set in a time period AFTER Star Trek: Voyager rather than before the original series. While visually the series looks stunning the technology being used is far superior to anything seen in any of the other shows (a problem that Enterprise sometimes had as well). I'm not sure why they keep dragging this series further and further into the past (first Enterprise then the movies being based around the original Enterprise) but, for me, Star Trek is interesting because it focuses on the future. IMO, they should have set this series in the late 24th/early 25th century; that way they could have even had guest appearances from the Next Generation/Deep Space 9/Voyager which would also explain why they look older. A wasted opportunity, I think, or maybe they want to distant themselves from the old shows?

    Edited by Darren at 13:30:33 12-10-2017
  • Darren 12 Oct 2017 13:33:32 9,482 posts
    Seen 15 minutes ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    P.S. Not so keen on the Michael (did someone mistype Michelle?) character as she comes across as a bit headstrong and emotionless (yeah, she was raised on Vulcan but still...). In fact, I'm having a hard time finding anyone likeable in this new series and there is a distinct lack of any humour as well. It's all very dark, very grown up and very serious now
  • BigOrkWaaagh 12 Oct 2017 13:48:17 6,543 posts
    Seen 48 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I'm actually kind of happy it's a bit dark/gritty/grown up. I'm really enjoying the other show as well, and if Discovery was more like old Trek, they'd both be exactly the same. As it is they both have a very different feel and I likes it.

    Edited by BigOrkWaaagh at 13:48:44 12-10-2017
  • DrStrangelove 12 Oct 2017 22:20:22 11,013 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Darren wrote:
    P.S. Not so keen on the Michael (did someone mistype Michelle?)
    No, it's a habit of series creator Bryan Fuller to give his female lead characters male names.

    It's all very dark, very grown up and very serious now
    Dunno, to me all this forced edginess feels anything but "grown up".
  • richyroo 12 Oct 2017 22:22:36 75 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Im loving the new series. If this series is "all grown up", then the older series were "childrens TV".

    Personally, I would much rather have this darker, more serious vibe.
  • Jyzzy-Z 12 Oct 2017 22:30:17 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @bad09 pretty much how I feel. I've given it time but I've no interest in the films or Discovery. I could give it more time but 4-5 hours is enough to know it's not my thing.

    Just have to admit it's not for me and good luck to it. Hope it's successful.
  • simpleexplodingmaybe 13 Oct 2017 00:04:16 4,227 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Every time I see someone mention the films I get a split second flash of anger when I think someone is dissing the TOS films. No film is better for a lazy dark autumn Sunday afternoon in than a TOS film. All of them queued up one after another. Bliss.
  • drhickman1983 13 Oct 2017 00:18:51 4,932 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Caught up on Discovery.

    I'm... I don't know. I'm finding it enjoyable enough, but it doesn't feel very Trek. I'd enjoy it more if it wasn't tied in with that brand.

    I don't even mind things being a bit dark and gritty (DS9 already did that in a way that felt cohesive with that universe), but this just feels like something entirely different.

    If I think about it as a totally separate sci-fi thing I actually enjoy it more. There are some interesting enough characters and I'm curious to see how things play out, and I like the time they're giving to the Klingons, they seem truly alien.

    I'll keep watching, but I'm waiting for something to happen that amazes me, and I don't think that will come.

    richyroo wrote:
    Im loving the new series. If this series is "all grown up", then the older series were "childrens TV".

    Personally, I would much rather have this darker, more serious vibe.
    Nah, disagree with that entirely.

    Edited by drhickman1983 at 00:22:34 13-10-2017
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 09:20:15 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Being dark or not doesn't make a show good. Star Trek was originally a fluffy western in space for primetime TV audiences. It's now a murder and misery simulator for a subscription network, heavily influenced by 20 years of serialised HBO adult dramas.

    They could definitely do an adult Star Trek, but they'd need good characters, setting and plot. I personally don't think this has anyof those.

    Edited by Jyzzy-Z at 09:20:24 13-10-2017
  • Zerobob 13 Oct 2017 10:27:52 1,938 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    People label things as being "dark" or "for adults" but it simply comes down to whether the show is written with a dystopian or utopian outlook.

    I would say all series of Star Trek so far have been written with generally a utopian outlook, especially TOS and TNG, with a primary focus on exploration rather than provocative acts of war. Discovery, however, has a distinctly dystopian perspective, with a heavy focus on war and conflict.

    I personally think dystopian stories are easier to write and that's why this direction was chosen: It's far easier to critique something, to say what's wrong with the world, than to suggest how you might fix those problems, and what a utopian society might look like.

    It's a shame, because there are so many shows with a dystopian outlook at the moment that something utopian would contrast well with them and provide some relief. It's almost ironic that Star Trek, of all things, is being written with a dystopian outlook. I think that's why The Orville is currently gaining more popularity than it probably deserves.

    It's more than that though. In Discovery thus far, all utopian elements seem to be completely absent. We haven't been shown what human society looks like back on Earth. What is a stake in this war. What Starfleet is fighting so hard to protect. We haven't even witnessed a fun social occasion, a moment of passion, or a crew member indulging in the arts. Where are the music concerts, theatre productions, and poetry recitals? As far as we know, as the viewer, these things are no longer valued in society. I have no idea what Starfleet's values are and why I should care.
  • General_Martok 13 Oct 2017 10:39:00 297 posts
    Seen 22 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Discovery is not dystopian. DS9 was not dystopian. DS9 (s4+) and Discovery are both set a time of war.

    DS9 was extremely dark, (In the pale moonlight and various war related episodes) Discovery hasn't even reached that level yet. It's more violent yes but that's about it.

    The galaxy is very big, is it beyond the realms of (sci fi) reality that amongst the utopian federation there are one or 2 ships that have clandestine motives?

    Every other major power in the Star Trek Universe has these. We just had never seen the Federation version until DS9 and even then it was very limited and based on agents.

    The way I see it this is a section 31 controlled ship, some people on the ship know it, some people suspect it, some have their heads in the sand.

    It is Star Trek, just not your grand dads Star Trek.

    I wonder if the people that find it hard to accept this as Star Trek never watched DS9?
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 10:51:48 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    DS9 had the benefit of decent characters which makes or breaks any show.

    The premise or tone has absolutely very little to do with the success of any story really. It's just window dressing.

    It's the same reason I found Enterprise as dull as dishwater. Bakula is a good actor but Archer was badly written.

    Don Draper, Tony Soprano, Sisko, Picard, Kirk, Janeway, Frank Underwood, Walter White etc etc. I was engaged by these people in the first 10 minutes of watching their shows.

    Michael is just a JJ Kirk clone. Angry, subordinate office with internal conflict/parent issues. It's lazy and boring.

    Edited by Jyzzy-Z at 10:59:17 13-10-2017
  • drhickman1983 13 Oct 2017 10:52:45 4,932 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I loved DS9, something I've been very vocal about in this very thread.

    DS9 was incredibly dark at times, and I agree that at times it was darker than anything we've yet seen in Discovery, but DS9 also showed the more traditional, optimistic Trek.

    In DS9 the darkness that lurked beneath the surface acted as a mirror and contrast to that shiny surface, but Discovery only really explores the darkness. Without having the "traditional" Trek to balance it, it feels a bit more one dimensional and simplistic.

    Basically, in Discovery I'm not getting a strong sense that what Lorca is doing clandestine, because there is nothing to contrast and compare it with.

    If I'm being honest though, I quite like Michael as a character

    Edited by drhickman1983 at 11:02:22 13-10-2017
  • General_Martok 13 Oct 2017 11:09:26 297 posts
    Seen 22 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Nothing to contrast or compare apart from 50 years of Star Trek?:)

    As for characters I agree but we're what 4 episodes in? Voyager survived 7 seasons with horrible characters. :)
  • drhickman1983 13 Oct 2017 11:20:36 4,932 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    If Discovery had been released shortly after one of the older Trek shows it would have more context, but I still feel it lacks that context. It's not helped by the inconsistencies between this and the older shows, so it doesn't really slot into the chronology that smoothly, which just makes it feel even more unrelated to the older shows.

    Edited by drhickman1983 at 11:20:53 13-10-2017
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 11:44:27 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @General_Martok They had some decent characters, they just never really did anything with them. Janeway was interesting as the first female lead character, pretty brave in the 90s.

    She was also pretty good in the pilot, standing up to Chakotay immediately, getting Tom Paris, making the big call with the caretaker which stranded them.

    I don't care for the show but it had some decent characters, as I said they just ran them into the ground.

    Obviously some awful ones too like Neelix. Though even he is better in the pilot as a scavenger/tour guide of the delta quadrant. He just turned into a shit Guinan cooking in the kitchen dispensing wisdom from his stupid shaped head.

    7 of 9 was a good character. And not for the reasons you're thinking you monster.
  • sirtacos 13 Oct 2017 11:47:25 8,002 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I'm just happy that, for all intents and purposes, we have two Treks at the moment - whatever the hell this is, and The Orville. The latter scratches the Trek itch I didn't know I had... like slipping into an old, warm, fuzzy bathrobe (except for McFarlane... I find him unsettling), while the former is a grimdark take on JJ's blockbuster bastardisations.

    Both shows have lots of potential, IMO, and even in their present (flawed) state they complement each other perfectly.

    Edited by sirtacos at 11:51:03 13-10-2017
  • reviewer 13 Oct 2017 11:48:13 4,633 posts
    Seen 38 minutes ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    The episode where they were turned into worms, or whatever it was, and they got it on was amazing.
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 11:55:02 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @reviewer could have been. The concept of trying to break warp 10 to get home and testing in a shuttle with a top pilot is great. Why they decided to turn them into slugs and have slug babies I will never know.

    Imagine that concept in BSG with Starbuck. Would have been a great episode. Ron Moore was right to fuck off and do his own thing.
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 11:56:30 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    In fact they did a similarish thing with the stealth ship and it was brilliant.
  • drhickman1983 13 Oct 2017 12:00:20 4,932 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Jyzzy-Z wrote:
    @General_Martok They had some decent characters, they just never really did anything with them. Janeway was interesting as the first female lead character, pretty brave in the 90s.

    She was also pretty good in the pilot, standing up to Chakotay immediately, getting Tom Paris, making the big call with the caretaker which stranded them.

    I don't care for the show but it had some decent characters, as I said they just ran them into the ground.

    Obviously some awful ones too like Neelix. Though even he is better in the pilot as a scavenger/tour guide of the delta quadrant. He just turned into a shit Guinan cooking in the kitchen dispensing wisdom from his stupid shaped head.

    7 of 9 was a good character. And not for the reasons you're thinking you monster.
    Voyager had uniformaly rubbish character in my opinion. The Doctor was the only one I actually like, though 7 of 9 was pretty good.

    I hated Janeway. Yeah, it was good to see a female lead, but I found her utterly insufferable.
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 12:09:55 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    That's fair. I think I agree really, probably just used it as an example as I watched the pilot not long ago and I thought the show and characters had enormous potential they didn't fulfil. It's a better premise than Discovery at any rate.

    I can't see the potential in Michael. It's going to be a lot of daddy issues and rule breaking set around explosions, like the films. Feel like I've seen it all before, even if it is a bit 'darker', which I don't necessarily agree with. Loads of action and turning the contrast down doesn't mean it's dark. BSG was a lot darker that this. One of the cylons snaps a baby's neck in the first half hour of the pilot. The darkest thing about this was a character getting snuffed in a fight, which even Voyager did (half the senior officers are killed in the first episode of VOY to make way for the maquis)
  • Scimarad 13 Oct 2017 12:29:04 9,223 posts
    Seen 24 seconds ago
    Registered 15 years ago
    I think any darkness is exaggerated because of the comparison with 'normal' Star Trek which tends to have a utopian vibe.

    I don't really mind that, I've not watched enough Star Trek to really have much of an opinion as to whether it works or not but I do know I start each episode kind of interested and impressed with the visuals and by the end I have this weird confused feeling over whether I even vaguely enjoyed any of it. Still, I suppose I DO watch the next episode.
  • bad09 13 Oct 2017 15:40:56 7,970 posts
    Seen 4 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    drhickman1983 wrote:

    Voyager had uniformaly rubbish character in my opinion. The Doctor was the only one I actually like, though 7 of 9 was pretty good.

    I hated Janeway. Yeah, it was good to see a female lead, but I found her utterly insufferable.
    I dunno, I think the only truly terrible one was Chakotay. Even annoying Harry Kim and Nelix were supposed to be that way. Really liked Tuvok and his stuggles with the crew.

    Janeway is a hard one, At times i think Kate Mulgrew is terrible but I think the Janeway character works ultimately, she had some good episodes. Certainly not up there with Kirk, Sisko and Picard but I'd put her above water polo loving Sam Beckett. Bakula was great but definitely the weakest of the all captains.
  • Jyzzy-Z 13 Oct 2017 16:34:22 2,149 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Enterprise was creatively bankrupt. They basically made TNG for the 4th time in 10 years and unsurprisingly nobody gave a toss.

    It's no coincidence everyone bums the xindi season, as it was the one time they tried something new.

    Audiences and critics respond to novelty, not a change of wallpaper. Shame it was too late by S3.

    Edited by Jyzzy-Z at 16:36:00 13-10-2017
  • drhickman1983 13 Oct 2017 17:34:38 4,932 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    My problem with Janeway is, aside from finding her a bit annoying, is that I felt she was a bit too capable, she could handle situations a little too well without needing the input of anybody else. Like she had all the answers, all the time. And that the rest of the crew had too much reverence of her.

    Maybe I'm deeply wrong, but that's how it felt to me at times.
  • Page

    of 142 First / Last

Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.