Star Trek: Discovery

[Bruce Banner]

Episode 3 was interesting... it was cool to get a closer look at the Discovery and her interior. And to learn more about her mission.

[hedrap]

Rich is awesome. Reminds me of one my best friends from college.

[Hector]

[palitoy]

I almost stopped watching that video after I heard that annoying laugh from the dude on the right. .

Rich Evan's laugh is how i imagine angel's sing.

[Hector]

I almost stopped watching that video after I heard that annoying laugh from the dude on the right. But I kept watching, and surprisingly they both made good points. They were not in 100% hate mode, they pointed out both the good and bad. They echo exactly what I had previously posted...beautifully looking show marred by a very unlikable lead character. They pointed out how the original show's set design and technology would look silly now (another thing myself and others had pointed out too)...but in turn, how other things had zero continuity...like past Klingons not caring about dead bodies, as they considered them discarded empty shells, yet in Discovery, it's the total opposite.

Get rid of Michael, kill that character off, Discovery would vastly improve as a show.

[EMCE Hammer]

I'll probably keep watching but I was underwhelmed. If the explanation for the superior tech is truly Romulans I'll take BSG for $500 Alex. The updated Klingons didn't bother me, but the TNG on steroids feel made the whole thing hard to swallow.

RIP Captain Robau err Captain Philappa

[hedrap]

[knight errant00]

I didn't really get a Star Warsy vibe other than the "shoe horning" in of a classic series character to make the prequel go down easier.

It's got some action but TOS had oodles of that.

It's the hologram people and the quick blasts instead of beams on the weapons shown so far, the way the ships move, the designer aliens . . . and what isn't Star Wars then feels very Babylon 5 as well.

At least that's how it seemed to me.

[palitoy]

I didn't really get a Star Warsy vibe other than the "shoe horning" in of a classic series character to make the prequel go down easier.

It's got some action but TOS had oodles of that.

[LonnieFisher]

I really hate the "starwarsification" of Star Trek.

[Mikey]

Seen the beginning title sequence on youtube.

If a person had never seen a History Channel documentary title sequence they might think it was impressive

[Nostalgiabuff]

I tried to find it on demand but cannot locate it anywhere. not even the second episode in first run viewing

[Bruce Banner]

Just watched the first two episodes. Star Trek, but not as we know it.
I kinda liked it. Some aspects more than others. The Klingon-Federation war premise is compelling.
I concur that aesthetically it does suggest Abrams Trek, but with a strong dash of Enterprise in the mix too.
I'll keep watching.

[pmwasson]

My problem is that I liked it okay after only seeing half of the 2 hour pilot, but don't feel the need to pay to see more.

I wonder if CBS will backtrack and show it on network TV mid-season or next summer if they don't get enough subscribers?

I liked the visual of the opening sequence but agree that the music was a muddled mess.

[hedrap]

Supposedly, TOS "downgrades" tech wise to analog from Discovery's hi-tech, because the Romulans...could hack the systems. Don't shoot me, that's apparently from one of the producers.

If you want to know why this show is such a mess, and are looking for an excuse to drink early, read this.

http://deadline.com/2017/09/star-trek-discovery-spoilers-michelle-yeoh-alex-kurtzman-akiva-goldsman-michael-burnham-cbs-1202175852/

...and the bat**** crazy kicker takeaway quote.

As has been widely reported, Star Trek: Discovery will take place entirely within the TV series canon, specifically ten years before Star Trek: The Original Series, which began around 2260, and 90 years after Star Trek: Enterprise. How much closer will we get to the characters from the original 1960s show? Essentially, this season is as close as it gets: We have Spock’s father Sarek (James Frain) as Burnham’s stepfather (“She’s a mirror image of Spock,” says Kurtzman about Burnham, “She’s all human, but she was raised to repress her emotions.”), and we’ll soon see Spock’s wife who Fuller promised during TCA sessions. Also, as previously reported, Rainn Wilson will star in nine episodes as Harry Mudd, the affable con man and android appointed ruler of the planet Galor IV who had repeated run-ins with original Star Trek TOS crew.

But what about villains like the Romulans? “You will not see Romulans. That would be canon violation, but there are other Star Trek aliens you will see — potentially allies,” says Kurtzman on how Star Trek: Discovery is sidestepping the canon established by Abrams’ pics, “For reasons we can’t explain, we don’t violate canon.”

Now....is that last quote not an admission this is Abrams Trek?

IMO, CBS sold it as TOS Prime because Abrams take didn't sell, (and they don't want to give him a executive credit), but they're actually producing a show off of his movies so they really don't have to hold to cannon which I think the Klingons have made pretty clear.

Then, we have that Trek IV Hemsworth signed for as George Kirk so wouldn't he fit into this timeline?

And wasn't this show supposed to be even earlier than a decade before TOS?