|
I just want Discovery to be interesting. I don't care if the effects are bad or the design is wrong or whatever. Just make a show that draws me in.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
skasion posted:I'd like if we had any idea what the show was about thematically. So far we haven't really heard anything about the writing apart from it's a starship exploration show. We've already had four of those and half of them sucked rear end. I'm not sure they've come up with any hot new ideas for how to make the concept less tired in the intervening decade. I assume it will be more serialized than previous Trek shows have been, but Enterprise tried that too late on and it still mostly sucked rear end. I'm unconvinced that the franchise has much of anywhere left to go and all the talk about using the original series as a touchstone makes me worry that there isn't really going to be anything to this show, apart from its desire to remind you of when you used to watch a different, better show. Yes a spaceship full of people able to travel throughout most of space, definitely a setting/concept incapable of producing more stories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
kaworu posted:Oh, c'mon - it isn't rocket science. It's not like there is some magical formula or a special challenge that a STAR TREK™ show needs to have or accomplish to be successful. It's actually far easier to be successful with a franchise like Star Trek, because you aren't obligated to do some huge amount of world-building and massive exposition dumps and clunky writing and scenes spent trying to establish the setting of genre shows like these. Star Trek is Star Trek, and on a very basic level these showrunners know what that means, and they know how to use that, take advantage of that, and ideally turn it on its head at times. I'm not sure why you think I'm talking about some kind of secret to Star Trek that they need to crack. The mere fact of something being called Star Trek doesn't mean it's good tv. It doesn't even mean it's likely to be good tv. The last two series of the Star Trek franchise were lazy, cliche-ridden, stupid, patronizing, abject crap from beginning to end. There are not 24 good hours of tv out of the entirety of them. And that despite the fact that the people who made them were franchise veterans who had been working on Star Trek for like a decade and thought they understood it as well as anyone could. My reason for lacking optimism about this show is that there doesn't seem to be a clear direction for it apart from "it's kind of like TOS". I haven't seen anything about it yet that convinces me this is anything other than more of the same old Star Trek, which you will watch because you liked those Star Trek shows back in the day, right? But this is the exact same attitude which led to the development of the two terrible, pitifully poo poo shows that I referred to above. Under new management, the result might be different, or it might not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
It's impossible to get hype for anything anymore because of all the reboots and sequels to things that have been made as obvious attempts to cash in on people's nostalgia for better things/times that completely fail to capture what made the originals worthwhile. While Bryan Fuller is far, far more likely to know what to avoid in making a new Star Trek show and the fact that the others involved are also veterans of solid entries in the franchise is also a big plus, until I see a trailer that doesn't completely suck it's hard to feel positive
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
How pissed is everyone going to be if he pulls an Abrams and the show is just a demo reel for a Star Wars show he'd rather be making?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Cat Hatter posted:How pissed is everyone going to be if he pulls an Abrams and the show is just a demo reel for a Star Wars show he'd rather be making? If they can pull theater quality ship battles on a tv budget I'm pretty sure most people would be really loving impressed. I mean imagine having that kind of scale on a television show and actually being able to explore giant space stations or planetary locations we saw in the Abrams films. As a matter of fact, it would probably get most normal people really interested if they could come close to pulling that poo poo off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:If they can pull theater quality ship battles on a tv budget I'm pretty sure most people would be really loving impressed. I mean imagine having that kind of scale on a television show and actually being able to explore giant space stations or planetary locations we saw in the Abrams films. As a matter of fact, it would probably get most normal people really interested if they could come close to pulling that poo poo off. Im hopeful but I just don't think they'll be able to hit what BSG was doing as far as space battles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Zurui posted:Once Voyager makes it back and they reverse-engineer the mobile holoemitter there is literally no reason to have more than a dozen actual human beings on board a starship. The purpose of the starship is not to get a collection of hardware to a given location; it is to move people from one place to another.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Zurui posted:Must importantly, the 'verse is supposedly half Chinese but there are no Chinese people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
Nessus posted:My interpretation of this stuff is that the entire cast are animated heavily by their anti-space-Chinese racism to the point of specifically seeking out the one neurotic white Englishman on the Triad Shipping Container Planet. See, I would have thought that Whedon would jump at the idea of casting generic "Asian" actors of without needing to have any sort of sensitivity for their culture or beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Nessus posted:My interpretation of this stuff is that the entire cast are animated heavily by their anti-space-Chinese racism to the point of specifically seeking out the one neurotic white Englishman on the Triad Shipping Container Planet. I'm glad I'm not the only one bothered by taking a trip to Chinatown to chat with the artful loving dodger
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Wikkheiser posted:I unironically want a super-crazy kitschy Star Trek with retro-60s futurism on a social justice warpath. trekcomic.com is for you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:The purpose of the starship is not to get a collection of hardware to a given location; it is to move people from one place to another. Holograms are people though
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Zurui posted:Once Voyager makes it back and they reverse-engineer the mobile holoemitter there is literally no reason to have more than a dozen actual human beings on board a starship. As that Geordie comic points out, though, there's no reason for Data to use holograms once he becomes the ship's computer other than his wanting to be humanlike and stuff. They could already only crew ships with a few people if they really wanted to-there's no reason for the computer to be pressing buttons or to have to tell a guy three decks down to press a button there when you can just tell the computer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Are there any han chinese with speaking roles in firefly?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
Nessus posted:My interpretation of this stuff is that the entire cast are animated heavily by their anti-space-Chinese racism Since they're essentially Confederate analogues, this makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
What I most want out of Star Trek is for it to make space travel interesting and exciting again. I want it to show the wonder of discovery (the name encourages me slightly) and the beauty of the stars. I want the joy of exploring the unfathomable, infinite mysteries of the universe. I want "let's see what's out there." I don't particularly care about inclusion or social justice or whatever - I'm not saying don't do it; the premise of an improved and unified humanity is worthy and a core feature of the franchise, but if it's too much in the foreground past a certain very low level of preachiness, it becomes distracting and counterproductive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:The purpose of the starship is not to get a collection of hardware to a given location; it is to move people from one place to another.  "Men no longer need die in space or on some alien world! Men can live and go on to achieve greater things than fact-finding and dying for galactic space, which is neither ours to give or to take!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Watched Attached and Sub Rosa with the wife recently. She called Crusher out for being a cocktease at the end of Attached. She called Sub Rosa 'the kind of kiddie vampire movie pulp that she doesn't want in scifi'. Still a good performance by McFadden, despite the awful plot. Only 3 more discs of S7 and then all good things must come to an end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
EX-GAIJIN AT LAST posted:What I most want out of Star Trek is for it to make space travel interesting and exciting again. I want it to show the wonder of discovery (the name encourages me slightly) and the beauty of the stars. I want the joy of exploring the unfathomable, infinite mysteries of the universe. I want "let's see what's out there." It's why I want a new Trek show where they leave Federation space in the first episode and don't come back until the finale.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
We already had that!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:It's why I want a new Trek show where they leave Federation space in the first episode and don't come back until the finale. This would be great if they can avoid the pitfalls of Voyager, kind of a chance at a do-over for a show that wasted most of the potential of a great premise. I wouldn't even mind if they go out for shorter than a full five-year mission and come back before going out again, like a pilot program of 6-month or 1-year missions as a preliminary for the longer missions of the TOS era proper.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:We already had that! Voyager ended up at earth like four times and then status quoed back to the delta quadrant
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
I hope it's something I haven't seen 5 versions of, only half of which were consistently any good
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Voyager ended up at earth like four times and then status quoed back to the delta quadrant Psh! Time travel doesn't count and only the Doctor made it there during the main run AND they ended the drat show ends with them rolling up on Earth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Voyager was trying to get home all the time, though. My suggestion would be nothing of the sort. 'gently caress yeah we've loaded up on supplies let's go get lost'. Also, key point, it wouldn't be Voyager.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
I want no goddamn holodeck. If the writers want to do a period piece they have to do a cowboy planet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
speakhard posted:trekcomic.com is for you. This is incredible and I am really glad you linked this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
8one6 posted:I want no goddamn holodeck. If the writers want to do a period piece they have to do a cowboy planet. Or at the very least if they use the holodeck use it realistically and have them use holosims where they fling themselves out of an aeroplane and have a mid-air shooting fight before surfing a crocodile to the ground, rescuing the princess, and then fly a jet-powered motorbike to safety because if you have a holodeck why wouldn't you. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Or at the very least if they use the holodeck use it realistically and have them use holosims where they fling themselves out of an aeroplane and have a mid-air shooting fight before surfing a crocodile to safety They had to curtail the James bond holosuite stuff after MGM complained, but I hope that Dan Ryckert is a little more understanding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
The Dark One posted:They had to curtail the James bond holosuite stuff after MGM complained, but I hope that Dan Ryckert is a little more understanding. Oh man. I was going for https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXYfnWRp1Q0
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
EDIT wrong thread
MikeJF fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
EX-GAIJIN AT LAST posted:I want "let's see what's out there." This. Just this. The whole of this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:the drat show ends with them rolling up on Earth. You just said time travel bullshit doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:those pylons are terrible No, but they do have mass and that matters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Sash! posted:No, but they do have mass and that matters. It really only matters to a federation starship when poo poo has already seriously hit the fan. In any normal situation it wouldn't matter a bit. I guess it matters if you want the ship to land (or go underwater!) and I suppose you don't want your nacelle struts snapping off the instant the inertial dampeners fail or the warp bubble is hit by an inverse quagmire field.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
Trent posted:I suppose you don't want your nacelle struts snapping off the instant the inertial dampeners fail or the warp bubble is hit by an inverse quagmire field. Just firing your thrusters without your magic doodad fields would be a serious threat to the ship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
Trent posted:It really only matters to a federation starship when poo poo has already seriously hit the fan. Then it matters!
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
Zurui posted:Once Voyager makes it back and they reverse-engineer the mobile holoemitter there is literally no reason to have more than a dozen actual human beings on board a starship. I wonder how Star Fleet Command is going to react when they ask where the emitter came from and Janeway says, "Oh that, we took it from a 20th century industrialist who stole it from the future. We've just been letting our sapient hologram use it because we didn't want to hurt his feelings. It's been broken and stolen a few times and at one point it was infected by the Borg, but don't worry, our chief engineer, a terrorist, has always been able to fix it and has even improved its functionality through various untested modifications. Why do you ask?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
The Admiralty probably got like six pages into Janeway's logs and just said "gently caress it, just promote her and forget all of this happened."
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 06:45
|
|