Star Trek Discover premiere--does anyone care?

[jeffgeorge]

Star Trek Discovery airs tonight at 8:30. That's half an hour from now. I find I'm not really all that interested, after all the negative news about it over the past year. I'd rather watch The Orville.

Anyone else?

[Vermin King]

I figured I would pick it up On Demand. BSG marathon seems more interesting tonight

[shep]

I would be interested, however, I'm in Germany and without Netflix, so no Discovery for me...

[okumarts]

I'll have to catch it some other way at some other time. I don't know. The only Star Trek that seems "real" to me is the fan stuff.

[jeffgeorge]

Sept 24, 2017 15:59:51 GMT -9 okumarts said:

I'll have to catch it some other way at some other time. I don't know. The only Star Trek that seems "real" to me is the fan stuff.

Especially if you count The Orville as "fan stuff," which I kinda do...

[oldschooldm]

I must say - I saw the first episode of Discovery last night, and enjoyed it significantly more than The Orville (watched 3 of those so far.)

Bona fides: This is from someone who made Audio tapes of every epsiode of Star Trek in the early 1970s when the local station ran the full episodes (without editing for extra commercials.) I did my HS senior class "faire" project wearing a uniform, black shiny boots, and talking about my multiplayer star trek networked computer game (1978-79).

To me, The Orville is very confused about what it wants to be (tribute/comedy), and I don't find the narratives at all novel or entertaining. We'll see how Discovery does several episodes in, but comparing firsts only - Discovery trounced Orville.

It's all opinion. I'm not trying to change anybody. Enjoy what you enjoy, but be aware not everyone agrees.

[alloydog]

I've just started watching it: about half way through. Personally, I think so far, so good. One of thingsI find funny, is the outcry from the die-hards about how the Klingons look. Long before Discovery was touted, I remember reading several articals about the Star Trek series that never was. It was supposed to happen in the seventies, following on from TOS, but using a lot of the original concepts that had to be dropped first time around due to cost constraints. One of the big things would have been the Klingons. They were, apparantly, meant to be more spikey, but lack of funding reduced the costumes to a bland version of Ming The Merciless. Discovery's Klingons seem to have picked up on the original designs.

But, in the end, it is only a TV series and in my view, if it stands up on its own without having to resort to TOS to make it work, then that's good enough for me.

[Vermin King]

Sept 25, 2017 6:57:19 GMT -9 oldschooldm said:

I must say - I saw the first episode of Discovery last night, and enjoyed it significantly more than The Orville (watched 3 of those so far.)

Bona fides: This is from someone who made Audio tapes of every epsiode of Star Trek in the early 1970s when the local station ran the full episodes (without editing for extra commercials.) I did my HS senior class "faire" project wearing a uniform, black shiny boots, and talking about my multiplayer star trek networked computer game (1978-79).

To me, The Orville is very confused about what it wants to be (tribute/comedy), and I don't find the narratives at all novel or entertaining. We'll see how Discovery does several episodes in, but comparing firsts only - Discovery trounced Orville.

It's all opinion. I'm not trying to change anybody. Enjoy what you enjoy, but be aware not everyone agrees.

Thanks for not giving any spoilers.

I totally agree that Orville doesn't know what it wants to be. I don't think tribute or comedy apply at all. It throws humor in, but not a comedy (if they start adding laugh tracks, I'm done). Not really a tribute, either. Episode 1 was better after seeing the other two episodes. If you look at it as Sci Fi, with a higher percent of average Joe's than in real life, it seems to go a lot better. Okay, sub-average Joe. But they are trying to be thought provoking, but that gets lost. If I weren't trying to avoid spoilers, I could explain that point better.

'Coping in Space' would be a good alternate title at this point

I hope to get to watch Discovery tonight, and I expect it to be better than The Orville, but my expectations may be set too high. We'll see

[alloydog]

Watched the first two on Netflix. I don't care about the 'Kelvin' style uniforms, never been seen before aliens and what-not. So far, it stands on its own two feet and I enjoyed it. I'm so glad they're releasing in weekly, as I'd be binge watching by now...

[Vermin King]

Did I hear correctly that this will not be OnDemand? Only CBS streaming and Netflix? Oh, well

[grendelsmother64]

Watched the first 2 episodes.
The dialog is a little clunky, and I'm not sure how I feel about the high-gothic Klingons...but generally not a bad show.
Most of the production design is top -knotch, and the opening credits are stunning.
Definitely some potential here.

Makes Orville look like crap by comparison.
In my opinion anyway.



GM64

[alloydog]

Sept 26, 2017 4:23:02 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

Did I hear correctly that this will not be OnDemand? Only CBS streaming and Netflix? Oh, well

'fraid so: www.cbr.com/how-where-to-watch-star-trek-discovery/

[Vermin King]

Well, that's their decision. Makes my decision to not watch real easy. I'll catch it on BBCAmerica in 20 years or so

[jeffgeorge]

Sept 26, 2017 7:55:06 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

Well, that's their decision. Makes my decision to not watch real easy. I'll catch it on BBCAmerica in 20 years or so

I couldn't agree more. I'd be a lot more open to ST:Discovery if they were airing it on a platform that I have access to, but instead, they seem to be using it to force people to subscribe to CBS All Access. This strikes me as a plan to get people to subscribe to a pay service that I believe is ultimately doomed. It's one thing to air a fan-base-oriented show on a fledgling broadcast network (didn't TNG and DS9 premiere on UPN?), but I'm not going to subscribe to an entire extra for-pay content provider just to get one show. And for that reason, I'm avoiding watching it on CBS or OnDemand, because I'm protesting their distribution/blackmail strategy.

That being said, based on what you guys have said about it, perhaps some of my concerns about quality, which grew out of the stream of delays and management upheavals on the project, are at least somewhat allayed. When they run it on something I already get--SyFy, BBC America, Amazon Prime--I'll give it a chance. But I'm not going to get myself hooked on a show that is being used to make me shell out $6 a month for shows with commercials!

[squirmydad]

$6/month = $1.50/episode + whatever else they have on CBS streaming, not great but not bad.
The show looks really good, the warp noises and the phasers have a weak "pew-pew!" quality to them, imo.
Consoles are the most dangerous place to be on a ship during a battle, probably shouldn't store explosives inside of them.

[jeffgeorge]

Sept 26, 2017 10:25:10 GMT -9 squirmydad said:

$6/month = $1.50/episode  

Sort of. It's $1.50 per episode while each season is coming out once per week, but how many episodes are they going to release in a year? 13? 22? They are counting on us not to turn our subscriptions on an off when each season of Discovery begins and ends. For most of us, it's $6/month = $72/year. I'd rather buy each season on BlueRay for $30, and actually own it, so I can watch it forever, and not just so long as I'm paying a subscription fee. Or buy it digitally through Amazon at $2 or $3 per episode, where I'll always have access to it. And if I buy it directly, whether BlueRay or digital, I don't have to sit through the commercials.

My problem is that I already pay several content providers for more content than I have time to watch. I have neither the time nor the budget to add yet another pay channel to my life, and I don't think I'm alone in that. There are just too many players in the paid streaming content business right now. There will be a shakeout in the next few years, and I bet that CBS All Access is one of the services that doesn't make it. CBS All Access is late to the game, with a relatively narrow selection of content (basically CBS properties, as I understand it), most of which you can get elsewhere. (For example, I'm pretty sure every episode of every Trek series before Discovery is included with Amazon Prime, which I already pay for. Though they may end that relationship when the current contracts are up, to further force Trek fans toward All Access.) I don't see All Access competing effectively against HBO, Amazon, Netflix or Hulu any time soon. Or regular cable channels like SyFy and FX, for that matter, which I get in a reasonably priced bundle with my cable service, along with online access to full episodes.

I suppose I'm sort of boycotting ST:Discovery in protest of CBS's All-Access-exclusive marketing strategy, which I really object to. If the show is popular and the service is not, the show will survive and move somewhere else. If the service is actually popular, perhaps they will add more content--other shows--that will eventually make it worth my while to buy it.

I'm also just not in a forgiving mood toward CBS and Paramount about Star Trek these days, partly because of the outcome of the Axanar case, and partly because of the way that the good-and-getting-better Kelvin timeline movies have been handled, most likely killing the franchise.

For those who weren't paying attention--and you had no reason to be doing so--the Axanar case involved a supposed Trek fan film that raised a bunch of money (something like a million dollars) to produce a feature-length fan film. The producers invested a huge portion of the funds they raised for the film to build a production studio, which they then used or rented out for other productions for profit. CBS/Paramount felt--quite correctly, I believe--that this massively abused their tolerance of not-for-profit Trek fan productions, as well as taking advantage of donors who thought they were contributing to the making of a not-for-profit fan film, not the construction of a privately-held, for-profit production studio. The producers of Axanar wound up getting creamed in court--largely because they had pretty much taken advantage of everyone they dealt with--but along the way, CBS/Paramount issues an official set of rules for fan productions which was draconian to say the least. Unfortunately, the new rules make ongoing, legit fan projects like Star Trek Continues, basically impossible, and make it illegal for anyone who has ever worked for pay on an official Star Trek production to volunteer on a fan production. So no more Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, Tim Russ, or Gary Graham appearing in fan films at all, ever. The entire Axanar case is fascinating and sad, and worth googling up if you're curious.

Regarding the Kelvin timeline, the basic problem is that the timing of the sequels has been just abysmal, almost deliberately intended to make sure the films made less money than they should have. Basically, the first sequel was started several years too late, then rushed through production resulting in a film that many felt was disappointing. The third film was generally accepted by critics and fans as better than either of the first two--despite a couple of boneheaded detail errors that don't affect the story but should have been caught--but the first sequel apparently soured the market, and audiences for the third film were way below what they needed to be to justify the cost of production. With escalating salaries for the cast built into the franchise's contracts, a fourth film can't possibly make money unless it does about twice the box office that the third one did, and that seems unlikely. As a result, the Kelvin timeline is pretty much dead for financial reasons, despite the fact that it was starting to get really good. Which is sad to me, because I love Star Trek, but I freaking loathe Bill Shatner.

Oh well. At least Star Wars is going well. (I am confident Ron Howard will rescue the Han Solo movie, and I am seriously excited about the Obi-Wan movie, because Obi-Wan is the most interesting Star Wars character EVER.)

[grendelsmother64]

I am confident Ron Howard will rescue the Han Solo movie

I dunno.
Pinning one's hopes on Ron Howard isn't the safest bet in my opinion.

Don't get me wrong....he's made a handful of incredibly good flicks. Apollo 13 is quite possibly a perfect film.

But he's made a bigger handful of stinkers.
And his recent output hasn't been all that great.

He turned the amazing source material of In the Heart of the Sea into a really forgettable B-movie.
For me...a huge age of sail nut...that was unforgivable.

So I'm not holding my breath over his Star Wars debut...

[Vermin King]

jeffgeorge, you can always wait until the end of the season, get it for a month and binge...

[shep]

First season is said to have 15 episodes...

[jeffgeorge]

Sept 26, 2017 12:54:20 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

jeffgeorge , you can always wait until the end of the season, get it for a month and binge...

That's not a bad idea. Especially if there's a free trial period...

I just have to remember to cancel it afterwards, because I don't want to pay $6 a month for infinite episodes of Big Bang Theory.

[godofrandomness]

I agree with jeffgeorge on this one in regaurds to the pseudo boycott. Netflix, Amazon and Hulu have become such a great success that now everyone wants to make their own streaming service to cut out Netflix/Hulu/Amazon's part of the profits pie and keep it for themselves. The problem is some people would rather not pay a dozen different subscription fees to watch everything, like me. It totally defeats the cost savings of the cable cutting feature of streaming. Unless it ends up on Netflix or Amazon Video, I may end up skipping it entirely.

Besides, I personally prefer the TNG era of the timeline myself. :-)

[shep]

Oh, since Netflix basically paid the entire show... It already is on Netflix for the rest of the world, only the US and Canada have it on their respective own (streaming) stations.

Netflix paid CBS enough to cover the entire first season and in return got the license to stream all (official) Star Trek ever produced. That's also why you can't watch the old movies on Amazon-Video anymore, I guess.

[jeffgeorge]

Sept 26, 2017 18:47:40 GMT -9 godofrandomness said:

Unless it ends up on Netflix or Amazon Video, I may end up skipping it entirely.

It will, eventually.

[jeffgeorge]

Sept 26, 2017 23:24:25 GMT -9 shep said:

That's also why you can't watch the old movies on Amazon-Video anymore, I guess.

They were all still there on Amazon Prime a few weeks ago. If they've come down, it's a very recent event. Who knows when the current contract will expire...

[squirmydad]

You could always just watch Star Trek: The Animated Series on CWTV;
cwseed.com/shows/star-trek-the-animated-series/beyond-the-farthest-star/?play=1dcd27f7-54ba-42a0-a05c-24157d6b1c66

[Punkrabbitt]

Sept 27, 2017 6:34:06 GMT -9 squirmydad said:

You could always just watch Star Trek: The Animated Series on CWTV;
cwseed.com/shows/star-trek-the-animated-series/beyond-the-farthest-star/?play=1dcd27f7-54ba-42a0-a05c-24157d6b1c66

I have it on DVD

[shep]

So, I saw DSC tonight, and I must say that (many many canon inconsitencies and outright errors put aside) I quite liked it. However, I'm still positive this is not Prime timeline, and I still have to say that this could just as well be Mass Effects: The Series...

But, the story was acceptable and actually got me hooked in order to want to look on. The visuals were outstanding, performance of the actors was now and then a bit wooden, but hey it's only the pilot, right?

But the errors, OH THE ERRORS! Holo-projections that move around and interact with the environment they are projected into? And why are all the halls, rooms, and decks so huge? Who would waste so much material building a starship? Okay, all this was already in the trailers, and I should be acustomed by now, but....

Ntl, I'll watch the rest of the season as well.

[alloydog]

Well, three episodes in and I like it. The only thing that bugs me are the ships - they've been shown in the trailers, so no spoilers...
The series is set 10 years before TOS, but the ships are more like Enterprise era ones, on outside, at least. They look too "industrial", for want of a better word. By the time we get to the TOS era, the ships are sleek and rounded, white hulls and so on. Here, they are metallic and edgy. So it's like a century of little development, then, schwiiing, less than ten years and the ships get a major make-over. And of course, the design for Discovery is /post/ TOS. But, like I said, I still think the series if pretty good so far.

One big PLUS for Netflix - when I went to watch episode 3 on the bus home from work, it had Finnish subtitles. When I went to the subtitle menu to remove them, I saw they offer subtitles in Klingon!

[squirmydad]

Liked that shuttle they were using in the last episode. Pardon my Trek ignorance but I was not aware that shuttles could warp, is that a new thing?

[Vermin King]

Not until later on, and then only on the Captain's Gig. But they seem to be going for story and effects rather than following Trek canon.

Unattended, sterilized Tribbles is kind of new, since the Federation didn't know about them until TOS.

Perhaps the best way to look at this is that it is an alternate timeline