Star Trek Discover premiere--does anyone care?

[jeffgeorge]

Oct 3, 2017 9:24:20 GMT -9 alloydog said:

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!

I agree that if you regard TOS as a literally accurate and definitive visual record of the Federation of that time period, both Discovery and Kelvin represent "alternate visual timelines," if that's a thing. However, I make allowances for the visual effects technology available in the mid-1960s (and to some degree, the fashion and design aesthetic of that era as well--e.g. miniskirts as military uniforms), and believe that the production and effects designers on 21st-century Trek productions ought to be able to take full advantage of the technology and design sense of the current era when producing shows for the current audience.

Putting it another way, TOS was that era of Federation history as told by 1960s storytellers and visualized by 1960s effects designers for a 1960s audience; Discovery and Kelvin present that same (general) period of history, as interpreted by storytellers and designers in the late 2010s. It is impossible to prevent the messenger for shaping the message, and that's ok. I'm pretty sure that if the producers of Discovery or Kelvin used the exact TOS ship designs, we'd see them not as faithful reproductions of or nostalgic homages to the original designs, but as tired, dated models that look blocky and simplistic next to the design of more modern SF like Galactica, Dark Matter and Killjoys. And don't get me wrong, I really enjoy Dark Matter and Killjoys, but a new Trek series on a paid streaming service needs to look a LOT better than related-to-nothing shows on a basic cable channel. (The Galactica reboot is in a separate category; in my opinion, the original Galactica was a Star Wars knock-off that accidentally acquired a campy/kitchy cult following. The Galactica reboot raised the franchise into the Star Trek neighborhood in the history of genuinely high-quality, timeless SF--in my opinion at least.)

Let me make a comparison to justify the seen-through-the-eyes-of-the-60s take on the designs from TOS. Most of us in Western cultures have a set of visual images in our minds that depict the life of Christ (I'm talking about art history here, not religion, so let's don't get sidetracked into a discussion of faith.). We know what Christ looked like at the last supper, what he looked like giving the Sermon on the Mount, what he looked like as a babe in the manger, surrounded by Mary, Joseph, the wise men and the shepherds. The problem is, those images are not historically accurate. Those scenes were painted by Renaissance artists, and depicted their characters wearing clothes worn during the Renaissance in western Europe (or maybe a generation or two earlier, to make them look "old fashioned."), not in the clothing worn in the Holy Land in biblical times. Thus, the messengers--the painters--were shaping the message to match their own expectations and sensibilities, as well as those of their intended audience. If you look at early Hollywood-era biblical epics, you see production designs that reflect the Renaissance paintings of the life of Christ, not historically accurate costumes and sets, because that's what the designers and audiences thought bible stories should look like. More recent films in the genre have presented somewhat more anthropologically-accurate depictions of the period, partly because there is more general familiarity with what the period actually looked like, partly because aesthetics have evolved over the past 50 years, and partly because the technology has improved. If you set out to remake The Ten Commandments today, you wouldn't dress your Moses (Patrick Stewart or Ian McKellan, you decide) just like Charlton Heston in the original--you'd hire a modern production designer, and have her or him design a production according to modern standards and expectations.

And that's what Discovery and Kelvin have done--presented the same source material as TOS through a contemporary lens. I think they were right to do that, both from a marketing standpoint, as well as a fan-service standpoint. Perhaps a few basement-dwelling TOS diehards would have been smugly pleased if Discovery or Kelvin had given us starships with paper-towel-tube nacelles and frisbee saucer disks, but the rest of us would have mocked them for getting stuck in 1965, and kept our money in our pockets.

---

An afterward regarding The Orville:
The rules for The Orville are different than they are for Discovery, and that difference involves the visual design of the show as well as the writing. Discovery is supposed to be new Trek material, perhaps even new prime timeline canon (that's their stated intent, at least; whether they are succeeding is debatable). Orville, on the other hand, is deliberate, intentional, and open homage to ST:TNG. You can argue about how well they are succeeding in that homage, but you can't debate that homage is their intent. (Watch the on-demand extras about The Orville, and see McFarlane and Jon Favreau talk about what they are doing and why, and you'll have a better understanding of The Orville, and probably will enjoy it more.)

The purpose of homage is best served if the visual design of the show faithfully recreates that of the source material; the only permissible "improvements" are technological, not aesthetic. For example, the opening credits of The Orville are a series of images of the ship passing interesting astronomical phenomena, just like the opening credits of TNG. The only difference is that visual effects technology has improved in the past 20 years, so the shots look better. But they don't look different--they look the way they would have looked on the original TNG series, had the designers of that show in that era had access to visual effects technology of 2017. In fact, that The Orville even has an opening credits montage is a great example of how that show is a nostalgic love letter to TNG; modern TV series don't even have opening credits. Instead, they dive right into the action with a cold opening, and put the credits in the corner of the screen a few minutes later. The era of rich, orchestral theme songs is, sadly, dead...

So, I think its safe to say that both Discovery and The Orville (and Kelvin, for that matter) are doing a pretty good job, at least on the visual design front. As for the writing, that's more open to discussion...

[Vermin King]

I also don't think Discovery is designed for being a continuation of the Star Trek canon. It's for a generation who saw the newer movies. It's probably well written for that market

[Punkrabbitt]

The problem with Discovery's tech and place in the timeline is the pre-production hype... expectations were set one way, and the end product turned out very different.

[jeffgeorge]

Oct 3, 2017 11:46:16 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

I also don't think Discovery is designed for being a continuation of the Star Trek canon. It's for a generation who saw the newer movies. It's probably well written for that market

For legal reasons having to do with the division of the television and movie rights between CBS and Paramount after they split in 2005, I'm pretty sure that no TV show can use the Kelvin timeline, and the Kelvin timeline has to remain distinct, not only historically but also visually, from the Prime timeline as established on both TV and film. The whole thing was very confusing when I read about it, but the bottom line is that Paramount Pictures produced the Kelvin movies under license from CBS Television Studios, with restrictions to keep those films separate from the Prime timeline, over which CBS Television is maintaining absolute control.

CBS Television has asserted that Discovery is Prime timeline, but if it is, they are apparently really messing with canon. They may eventually be forced to admit that Discovery is a new timeline (Discovery timeline?), since from what I hear they've done or plan to do things that will directly contradict facts and circumstances that were established in TOS and TNG at the very least. But the one thing that Discovery will never be is Kelvin, because legally, I don't think it can be, and for marketing purposes, it would be stupid for them to do it. Paramount and Bad Robot can't make more Kelvin movies without a license from CBS Television (which they may already have, but will probably never exercise), but the last thing CBS Television wants to do is have to pay money to Paramount and Bad Robot to use stuff from the Kelvin timeline.

BTW, one of the biggest reasons that there will probably not be any more Kelvin movies is that no one buys Kelvin toys and tchotchkes. The TOS stuff still outsells all the rest of the Trek merch by a million miles; TNG is the only other Trek property that ever sold much at all, and I don't think it sells much anymore. But absolutely no one wanted Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto PEZ dispensers, it seems, and that makes it hard to make new Kelvin movies make money. I will be surprised if ST: Discovery does any better on marketing their merchandise.

Anyone know where I can order some Orville throw pillows? I want the one with Bortus and Klyden that says "Eggs-pecting the best!"

[squirmydad]

I watched the premiere of the Orville....I'm not sure that "homage" is the right word for it.

[okumarts]

Oct 4, 2017 18:55:43 GMT -9 squirmydad said:

I watched the premiere of the Orville....I'm not sure that "homage" is the right word for it.

I think people were getting impatient for new Trek. Also, The Orville seems a bit of a middle finger to the fan movie guidelines CBS put out. I hear Shatner will appear on an Orville episode.

That said, I've been enjoying both, not really wanting to have enjoyed either of them in the first place, but pleasantly surprised that there is some good old-fashioned space opera out there again.

[jeffgeorge]

Oct 4, 2017 18:55:43 GMT -9 squirmydad said:

I watched the premiere of the Orville....I'm not sure that "homage" is the right word for it.

Do NOT judge Orville by the pilot. The show evolved a lot between the filming of the pilot and the filming of the second episode. Episodes 2-4 are all much better than the pilot, and I think much closer to what MacFarlane said he was trying to do with the show in the on-demand extra interviews I've watched. They are much less "The Office in Space," and much more "ST:TNG but with a crew of mere mortals."

[jeffgeorge]

Just watched Episode 5 of The Orville, "Pria", directed by Jonathan Frakes and guest-starring Charlize Theron. Apart from the handful of jokes--which are becoming less and less central to the show as it develops--it could have been a pretty solid episode of TNG. There are a lot of good, smart people working on this (MacFarlane obviously has a lot of talented friends, both in front of and behind the camera, who are pitching in to make The Orville work), and I think it's really shaping up into something worth watching. 

I will say one thing that Orville is doing that I wish "real" Trek had done: it's giving me some idea of what would have happened if Riker had taken a command. It ALWAYS bugged me that Star Fleet let someone camp in the XO chair on the Federation's flagship for seven years, turning down promotions to stay there at least a couple of times. A real military (or military/exploratory/diplomatic) organization would have treated that job--working directly for the most respected captain in the fleet--as a post-graduate program for its next round of commanders. There should have been a new XO at least every two years (and probably much more often than that), with each one moving on to his own high-profile command from the first-officer spot on the Enterprise. Anyone who had that job and turned down a command would have been judged a wash-out and a waste of time, and sent to fly a desk at a ROTC program in a second-rate college on a backwater planet. If Riker was such a promising officer (and I think he proved he was, during the Borg/Locutus arc), not taking a command wouldn't have been an option for him--Star Fleet would have ordered him off the Enterprise.

In any case, MacFarlane's Ed Mercer is no Picard, but he's a lot like Riker--young, handsome, promising, with a sense of humor and a willingness to bend rules for a good cause. I'm starting to feel like this is the Captain Riker show that I wanted and never got. (I really, really wanted Star Trek to have the nerve to write Picard out of the show after Locutus, when he was offered the directorship of that civilian undersea station, and give Riker the Enterprise permanently. Because that's what happens in life--major events change peoples lives profoundly. But nothing ever seemed to change life for anyone on an Enterprise crew. Only George Takei seemed to get that...)

[squirmydad]

ST:Discovery has been renewed for a second season.

[shep]

Well, I guess that means CBS has sold enough All Access subscriptions to keep the show running...

[alloydog]

Interesting to read how Orville is panning out. Unfortunately, there isn't much chance of seeing it here in Finland without paying for another subscription service, I guess - I already have Netflix.

As for Discovery, I like it. Thought it seems more Babylon 5 than Star Trek. And whatever you think, at least it doesn't have a godawful theme tune like Enterprise did...

[shep]

Oct 25, 2017 12:01:26 GMT -9 alloydog said:

Interesting to read how Orville is panning out. Unfortunately, there isn't much chance of seeing it here in Finland without paying for another subscription service, I guess - I already have Netflix.

As for Discovery, I like it. Thought it seems more Babylon 5 than Star Trek. And whatever you think, at least it doesn't have a godawful theme tune like Enterprise did...

You can watch The Orville on fox.com, you just need a VPN...

[Vermin King]

I always wonder about the Virtual Private Networks. How private are they?

When I log onto my computer in the morning, all the ads are for Independence, Missouri and Kansas City. When I log into the VPN for the work database, all the ads are for Sacramento and Northern California.

[Papercraft Warrior]

Oct 26, 2017 4:25:51 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

I always wonder about the Virtual Private Networks. How private are they?

When I log onto my computer in the morning, all the ads are for Independence, Missouri and Kansas City. When I log into the VPN for the work database, all the ads are for Sacramento and Northern California.

The private part about them is the imaginary LAN that all the computers on them belong to. If it is your only exit to the interwebs, you pass through the VPN gateway that can serve as a proxy and/or a filter. Your browser still accepts cookies as usual, and you can still be targeted by ads as usual.

Its purpose is not to offer you privacy, but to ease file/printer sharing between geographically separated computers.

It is possible to set it up to help protect your privacy, but is is never 100% safe. The VPN you have at work is probably not made for browsing privacy. It does enable you to use internal domains (often the case in IT companies) and mail servers that are not reachable from the outside world.

All the above is somewhat simplified, but the gust of it is correct.

[Vermin King]

You are absolutely correct. I was actually making a small joke. An infinitesimal joke, obviously

[Punkrabbitt]

Oct 26, 2017 5:21:38 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

You are absolutely correct. I was actually making a small joke. An infinitesimal joke, obviously

A quantum joke, even.

I liked it. But then, I always appreciate the little things...

[Papercraft Warrior]

Oct 26, 2017 5:36:33 GMT -9 Punkrabbitt said:

Oct 26, 2017 5:21:38 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

You are absolutely correct. I was actually making a small joke. An infinitesimal joke, obviously

A quantum joke, even.

I liked it. But then, I always appreciate the little things...

As a joke it is nice.

I did not realize it for what it is, the non-personal interactions on the forum make it hard to be sure when someone is joking. There was no intent to imply anybody's lack of knowledge.

***

On a matter of lack of knowledge, the writters of scifi sitkom episodes could sure gain from a fifteen minute IT course before they try to include AI or any kind of hacking in their script.

[oldschooldm]

Oct 5, 2017 20:55:27 GMT -9 jeffgeorge said:

Just watched Episode 5 of The Orville, "Pria", directed by Jonathan Frakes and guest-starring Charlize Theron. Apart from the handful of jokes--which are becoming less and less central to the show as it develops--it could have been a pretty solid episode of TNG. There are a lot of good, smart people working on this (MacFarlane obviously has a lot of talented friends, both in front of and behind the camera, who are pitching in to make The Orville work), and I think it's really shaping up into something worth watching. 

I really was giving it a chance, then The "Krill" episode killed my watching of The Orville for good. The discord between the three facets was just too much for me: 1) the inane anachronistic 20th century sidekick-based humor, 2) The focus on religious fundamentalism as the source of the Krill's genocidal tendancies, all contrasted with 3) a suddenly very different "super competent" Captain from the one we've come to know, who becomes all TNG make-the-hard-call-to-murder-the-crew in a painful and agonizing way. That's before how we talk about how STUPID it would be do design a ship with a lighting system that could kill you. Goodness, how stupid are Krill that they couldn't see through their blundering cultural ignorance (even if we ignore all the language issues, which we did for Trek as well)?

This episode made crystal clear to me that this show is conflicted along these three axes (homage, humor, and moral grandstanding). For me, Pick no more than Two and be better at distracting me from one of them. :-)

My intelligence was insulted an several ways, and that's quite a feat!

This is my last post on the topic of this show. If it's your thing, then cool. Me, I'm enjoying Discovery and can't wait for the next season of The Expanse.

[squirmydad]

I fell asleep during the second episode of The Orville, which is the kiss of death for a show for me. Also looking forward to the next season of The Expanse and hoping that the pacing issues on that show improve.

[jeffgeorge]

Oct 26, 2017 7:03:50 GMT -9 oldschooldm said:

I really was giving it a chance, then The "Krill" episode killed my watching of The Orville for good. The discord between the three facets was just too much for me: 1) the inane anachronistic 20th century sidekick-based humor, 2) The focus on religious fundamentalism as the source of the Krill's genocidal tendancies, all contrasted with 3) a suddenly very different "super competent" Captain from the one we've come to know, who becomes all TNG make-the-hard-call-to-murder-the-crew in a painful and agonizing way. That's before how we talk about how STUPID it would be do design a ship with a lighting system that could kill you. Goodness, how stupid are Krill that they couldn't see through their blundering cultural ignorance (even if we ignore all the language issues, which we did for Trek as well)?

This episode made crystal clear to me that this show is conflicted along these three axes (homage, humor, and moral grandstanding). For me, Pick no more than Two and be better at distracting me from one of them. :-)

My intelligence was insulted an several ways, and that's quite a feat!

This is my last post on the topic of this show. If it's your thing, then cool. Me, I'm enjoying Discovery and can't wait for the next season of The Expanse.

Fair enough. Let's just agree to disagree about The Orville, and remain friends.

I'll have to reserve judgement on Discovery until they run it someplace I can see it, because as a matter of principle, I'm not buying an entire streaming service for one show, when I already pay for cable TV and Amazon Prime Video. (You could argue that Amazon Prime is the AOL of streaming services, and you'd probably be right, but we order enough stuff to make the free shipping matter.) As for The Expanse, I was absolutely addicted to it for the first season and a half (again, up the the resolution of the Miller plotline), but I missed a few episodes because of reasons, and by the time I got back to it, the back episodes weren't on demand anymore, so I lost the thread. Sadly, I lost Killjoys, The Magicians, and Dark Matter mid-season, too, so I'm way behind on my SF tv. Maybe that's why I'm so hopeful for The Orville--it's all I've got at the moment. Usually--hopefully--they will put the full previous season up on demand in the weeks before the new season premieres, and I can catch up then.

BTW, if you like The Expanse, I highly recommend Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars). It is also a highly complex and political story set in a forseeable future in which mankind is beginning to explore our own solar system. It would make a kick-a$$ SyFy show, once The Expanse runs its course. The docudrama Mars, which ran on the National Geographic channel about a year ago, covered the same sort of Mars settlement mission that takes up the first half of Robinson's first book, so if you liked that as well as The Expanse, you'd really enjoy the Robinson Mars trilogy. And the Nat Geo Mars show is well worth watching on its own merit, too.

[jeffgeorge]

On a totally unrelated topic (unrelated to my immediately previous post, at any rate), I notice that CBS All-Access is running a show called Discovery.

Does that mean that we can expect a show called CBS All-Access on the Discovery Channel?

[oldschooldm]

Oct 27, 2017 3:04:40 GMT -9 jeffgeorge said:

BTW, if you like The Expanse, I highly recommend Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars). It is also a highly complex and political story set in a forseeable future in which mankind is beginning to explore our own solar system.

I don't read a lot, but I read that trilogy back-to-back-to-back. Very much feels like The Expanse TV show...

[Vermin King]

Over at PM.com, someone asked about Bones's 'Disco Enterprise', and it took me a minute to equate Disco with Discovery. Evidently, AirDave took a little longer and posted this

[jeffgeorge]

Nov 12, 2019 12:49:52 GMT -9 Vermin King said:

Over at PM.com, someone asked about Bones's 'Disco Enterprise', and it took me a minute to equate Disco with Discovery. Evidently, AirDave took a little longer and posted this

This is hands-down the least-annoying Bill Shatner appearance I've seen in decades. Lovin' the Smilin' Spock, too!