|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Oct 16, 2017 2:32:09 GMT -5
Welp! I began life with memories of my parents watching TOS, and as I got older I grew up with TNG, matured with DS9 and VOY, and harbored my acceptance of ENT and everything that it brought to us despite executive meddling. And now we've got a new show, and I just caught the first two episodes of it.
That's right: I caught STD's... first two episodes, anyway. ...this show probably needs some better initials. ...yeah.
Anyway: I like what I've seen so far! It's a little weird, though... a number of its technological designs are fun considering the fact that they simultaneously need this to be one of the most visually cutting edge TV shows out there, but they also need to make it look both less advanced than TNG and TOS, but more advanced than Enterprise. I won't say whether or not they succeeded (I think it's fair to say they got a lot right, at least), but I *WILL* say that it doesn't look like an Apple Store anymore.
The Klingon redesign is... curious. I have mixed feelings about it. They definitely succeeded at making them alien while also making them recognizable as Klingons down to the necessary forehead ridges. On the other hand, I worry that certain elements of the design were a little *too* alien. Even when they spoke English, I had to keep active focus to follow along with what they were saying. And, again, not necessarily a bad thing, but MSTies know to wait and see how long the accents'll last. I'll be impressed if they keep it up with this degree of alien-ness, and I almost hope they soften it just a touch. Either way, these definitely aren't Michael Dorns' klingons. (They arguably have more than a little Buffy-verse Vampire in their makeup DNA.)
Though that does bring about an interesting issue: the fact that TOS Klingons looked different from every other Klingon appearance from the first movie and onward was canonical in Deep Space Nine, and a relevant plot point in Enterprise. I don't get the sense that these Klingons are meant to look "different" in-universe, though. Like, I get the sense that Worf and company would, in this world, still look like this redesign... so does that do anything to the canonical different appearances in TOS? My guess is no, but having said that... well... it's worth pondering.
Anyway, I like it so far.
|
|
|
Post by said43 on Oct 17, 2017 22:40:52 GMT -5
As a lifelong Star Trek fan(nerd), I have mixed feelings about it so far. I will grant you that it is better than the first five episodes of TNG, which were mostly abysmal, and VOY but I'm afraid that the series will abandon the optimism that makes me love Star Trek so much. It's still early; there's still plenty of time to change things, but I'm afraid they're going with "everything is dark and edgy because this is 2010s" that I'm frankly pretty tired of. Real life is depressing and dark enough. I don't need it in my fiction. Even DS9, which some Trek fans attack for its darkness, had plenty of episodes with either a lighter tone to them or an optimistic message. Again it's still early, and I do like the cast (I hope they don't kill off the engineer character as I'm starting really like him), so I hope the series finds its footing, improves, and recaptures the spirit of Star Trek that has kept me watching for all of these years.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Nov 14, 2017 4:31:01 GMT -5
I wanted to wait until midseason to make my initial judgments on the show, and I'm personally happy with it. So far this might be the best first season any Star Trek series has had, barring the mostly exceptional first season of the original series. There are a few dead weight episodes, but for the most part I enjoy how the series has offered stories that stand alone while adding to the overall narrative, which is tricky to do.
Is the series "Star Trek" enough? I think it absolutely is. The issue Star Trek had when Enterprise was cancelled was that it wasn't evolving and each show started to feel exactly the same. I've gone on record saying I quite like Enterprise personally, and was disappointed it ended just when it was really chugging along, but it would have been foolish to do standard Trek nowadays. Is it straying from Roddenberry's vision? Perhaps, but even those who worked on TNG were frustrated with his vision. Storytelling need intriguing characters and conflict, and keeping things a clean vanilla makes that difficult (he'll, McCoy from the original series didn't shy away from racial slurs against Spock). Acknowledging imperfection helps us work to conquer it, not pretending they don't exist. And Discovery's working in the shade is helping set it apart and work in today's television environment. Discovery does have some growing to do, but when it does it could be something spectacular.
I'm hearing a lot of people claim that The Orville is the "true" successor to Trek. Granted that I didn't watch past it's painfully bad pilot episode, but if someone seriously thinks this of that show then they and I have very different ideas of what makes good television.
|
|
|
Post by said43 on Nov 24, 2017 1:53:17 GMT -5
For the record, I have no issues with straying from Roddenberry's vision, especially the no conflicts between the main characters part. I think the show has gotten better in the last few episodes. I really liked the second Mudd episode. I also really liked the finale. I haven't seen The Orville, so I'm not inclined to comment on it.
|
|
|
Post by mitchell33 on Dec 21, 2017 22:43:12 GMT -5
i haven't seen this one yet to be fair. nor have i seen Enterprise either but i hear that one was poopie. having said that i liked Voyager though not many i don't think do. but on Tuesday though i did buy the Original show on blu-ray for only $50 bucks. i had to get it for that price and i've only seen i think i dunno honestly. i haven't watched that since Sci-fi back when it was still called that they played the uncut episodes that were longer with lesser Commericals. i can't remember if i watched them all when they aired i think i may have. but it's been years. so i don't remember if i've seen them all to be honest. and as for Roddenberry's Vision
i've always said that if it's done right than it's okay if it's away from a creators vision. you have to get the right set of people, cast and crew including writers who do it with love and don't treat like just a job to get good product. so it depends on how it's written i think, only star trek i could not get into was Deep Space Nine i tried watching it years ago and just coudn't get into it. i don't think it was an awful show but it just wasn't one i could get into that's all. i love Star Trek but you aren't going to see me dress up at conventions nor know every single detail like some people seem to.
i just enjoy watching the shows/films that's all
|
|
|
Post by said43 on Dec 21, 2017 23:00:28 GMT -5
The first two seasons of Enterprise were really, really bad, but it does get better if you ever decide to give it a shot. I can see not getting into DS9; I personally love the series, especially season 4 and on. It's not for everyone, though.
|
|
|
Post by said43 on Jan 22, 2018 19:43:26 GMT -5
On the positive side, I think the current arc is a good improvement overall. The mirror universe fits the show's tone well, and I look forward to seeing where they take the show after this arc ends.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Jan 23, 2018 18:03:02 GMT -5
I can see not getting into DS9; I personally love the series, especially season 4 and on. It's not for everyone, though. From TNG on they all got better as they went on. And DS9 might be my favorite.
|
|
|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Jan 30, 2018 0:17:25 GMT -5
I think it's still more or less working. I mean, it's weird whenever a crew member swears and they all turn to the camera to nod slowly and say "Eh? See? Edgy, right? Like the memes on the net?" But then it gets back into the swing of things and things are okay again.
An issue I'm worried about, though: this show has a *strong* arc built into it from the start, and while that's not a problem, it's also something that might deprive us of the stand alone, pure sci-fi episodes that always made Trek memorable. I mean, TOS gives us beautiful things like The City On The Edge Of Forever and fun escapades like The Trouble With Tribbles. TNG has long-form character studies like The Inner Light that wouldn't be feasible without a sci-fi or fantasy edge to them, and it has bizarre sci-fi holodeck romps (plus it basically codified the book on technobabble'd solutions to monsters of the week, even if TOS got the ball rolling on that.) The stand-alone episode is part of what makes Star Trek great.
And that's not to say that story arcs are bad. Voyager's episodes all happened in one gigantic story arc, the build up to The Borg's assault on Earth sent the entire Trek universe careening in new and frightening directions, and, to put it bluntly, once Picard accepted Worf's request that he be his Cha'Dich, Klingon society kept dragging Picard back to help with all of their political shifts. I swear, it's surprising that there isn't an episode where Worf wakes Picard to inform him that, as Cha'Dich, he now must journey to his son's little league game. I had a point here somewhere...
Right. I love Star Trek arcs. But I also love the standout standalones. I'm getting a feeling that they'll be lost in the shuffle. There's a few things in the first part of the show that suggest that the writers feel this way too, like the second episode with Mudd, but even that wasset up as a recurring character's continuing relationship with what had happened before. (Admittedly, you *needed* an ongoing relationship for that story's driving motivation, but still.)
I'm confident we'll get those back, but... I dunno. Just a weird worry.
|
|