• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Star Trek: Discovery |OT| To Boldly Stream Where No One Has Streamed Before

M

Marty Chinn

Member
I overall enjoyed it but man there was one thing that really bugged me and it falls into the typical Star Trek away party cliche that really usually never bothers me. Spoiler about the climatic scene at the end.

It really bothered me that they think that capturing the Klingon leader will prevent this war but then they only send the Captain and the First Officer? Nobody else? Not even a security detail? For something so important to stop a war, it seemed pretty stupid to just send two people unless I missed some reasoning as to why they did it. Again, usually this trope doesn't bug me but for something that was really solid overall, this stood out to me as such a weak point. Thoughts?

Red Arremer said:
I know that, but it's military nonetheless.
Click to expand...

But it's not really. In fact, there's even a line in the episode where the helmsman is talking to Michael in the brig and point out how it's very uncommon for them to be fighting. It's way more exploration, science expedition and general Starfleet duties rather than what you view as the military. So it's not weird for it to be a bit more lax about these things. They're not at war, and they probably haven't had a war in a century since the events on Enterprise.
 
C

Caleb187

Member
Nete said:
I really liked these two episodes. There's a lot of things to nitpick for, but overall I liked what they have done. Fuck the sitting hologram tho.

And I still can't believe we are getting a gorgeous looking, high budget Star Trek show.


For the non-US people, can the season promo be seen anywhere?
Click to expand...

The Sarek sitting hologram thing weirded me out too, but if you look at the scene again his hologram kind of suddenly snaps to the sitting position instead of naturally goes there. My theory is that his hologram was going to walk through the table, so the program adjusted his hologram to a sitting position even though in real life he wasn't sitting. I hope. Otherwise yes it's just silly.
 
Superkewl

Superkewl

Gold Member
SG-17 said:
I don't get why we just can't get another series set after a time jump? TNG was set in the 24th century to give it breathing room from TOS and establish it's own identity. Discovery is just TOS 0.9. There was a perfect opportunity to explore a brand new reality in the 25th century after a devastating war and the destruction of one of the major powers in the galaxy. But no, we got another prequel series that adds nothing to Star Trek .
Click to expand...

This is what I want as well, but have faced the hard fact that is not likely to happen. I would love to see a show post Nemsis and post Dominion War. A galaxy struggling to rebuild itself, and keep it as far away from JJ Trek as possible, but the young people love the JJ Trek.
 
J

JonnyDBrit

Member
whyamihere said:
Well it sounds like it was just the Vulcans who interacted with the Klingons in terms of striking first, not Starfleet.

The fact that they have their own exploration force (which Michael references) and their reluctance to join Starfleet always stuck me as sort of the UK's relationship with the EU pre-Brexit. Sure, we're in, but we have some concessions and we're suspicious.
Click to expand...

The UK wasn't a founding member of the EU though. To break down a potentially more analogous example, we never got to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty over the Falklands War in part because the Falklands are outside of the proper regions to be covered by its protection.

Otherwise, I buy that this used to be the Vulcan method of operation with Klingons, but given the context, I presume that's from before the foundation of the Federation. You know, when Vulcan defense was purely a matter for the Vulcans.
 
T

TheGoddamn

Member
Just finished watching episode two, then I'm going to read the thread.

Initial thoughts: people remembered that Star Trek is science fiction! The show took the spirit of TOS and transported it to 2017 (dare I say prestige or prestige-like) styles and production values.

Watched it blind, and thought that Burnham was trans. And a human racially, but a Vulcan culturally. But I'm not sure the first item is the case upon further reading? The show was impressively matter-of-fact about it though. I like that not a single white person appeared until after the (beautiful) title sequence. And the show passed the Bechdel test immediately.

Knowing nothing of it beforehand, the reveal of Burnham's ears was also brilliant.
 
R

radios shipping overview

Member
Also, the idea of the Vulcans having adopted a first-strike doctrine of any kind goes against what we've seen of them generally having a pacifist philosophy, at least according to the teachings of Surak.
 
A

antispin

Member
I liked the two episodes on Netflix. Michael is an interesting character. Hope they keep her morally ambiguous. Kinda like *fingers crossed* DS9.
 
J

JonnyDBrit

Member
jiji said:
Also, the idea of the Vulcans having adopted a first-strike doctrine of any kind goes against what we've seen of them generally having a pacifist philosophy, at least according to the teachings of Surak.
Click to expand...

Which, again, works if it's their pre-Federation method. Ie, the sort of approach they had been used to by the time some human had the fun idea of trying to return a Klingon to Qo'noS.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
jiji said:
Also, the idea of the Vulcans having adopted a first-strike doctrine of any kind goes against what we've seen of them generally having a pacifist philosophy, at least according to the teachings of Surak.
Click to expand...

Well it sounds like they tried that, it didn't work, so they did what logic dictated they do until they were actually able to have dialogue. It seems specifically tailored for their relationship with Klingons.

JonnyDBrit said:
Which, again, works if it's their pre-Federation method. Ie, the sort of approach they had been used to by the time some human had the fun idea of trying to return a Klingon to Qo'noS.
Click to expand...

We don't talk about that.
 
F

Fledz

Member
Enjoyable two episodes but nothing mind blowing. Michael will need more time for me to develop a liking for her, but there's a lot of character development there around the corner so I'm sure she'll grow on me. Not entirely convinced she can carry the show though for most people. Her acting is a bit stiff and emotionless. Is that supposed to be the Vulcan upbringing?

As for the Captain,
thank everything she's dead. What a boring character.
They could have culled her in ep1 and I wouldn't have cared at all.

Other characters are a bit...meh? No one really grabs me. The funky tall guy could be okay in the long run but the rest are completely bland.

We get new people from Ep3 right on the actual ship? Let's hope there's a tonne of new people.

As for the look of the Klingons, I don't like it either but I can get used to it.
 
R

Red Arremer

Member
Marty Chinn said:
But it's not really. In fact, there's even a line in the episode where the helmsman is talking to Michael in the brig and point out how it's very uncommon for them to be fighting. It's way more exploration, science expedition and general Starfleet duties rather than what you view as the military. So it's not weird for it to be a bit more lax about these things. They're not at war, and they probably haven't had a war in a century since the events on Enterprise.
Click to expand...

In reality, there are several countries that have a purely defensive military, that hasn't seen any warfare or, at most, conducted supportive/relief/humanitarian missions in war zones and other crisis regions.
That doesn't make them - or Starfleet - less military. The officers of Starfleet go through education at a military academy. It is structured like a military organization, and is clearly meant to be the Federation's defense and interstellar peacekeeping force.
Of course, there is a science/exploration arm to Starfleet, and they do have ships that are specifically dedicated to these aspects. But: Just like a field hospital or a military science division aren't going to be fighting in the frontlines, they are still part of the greater military apparatus.

Military doesn't mean inherently built for only warfare or aggressive acts. I'm not sure why this is even a point of contention.
 
W

Won

Member
Just finished it. That sure were two very pretty episodes. One hell of a sales pitch.

Also very interesting approach with sticking to that one area of space and crew for most of the run time and not even teasing the Discovery. I'm very curious how this show proceeds from here.
 
S

Sgt. Kabukiman

Banned
Just watched the pilot. Not a fan of the characters so far aside from the Science Officer but dammit, it warms my heart to finally see a Star Trek show that looks so absolutely gorgeous. Story was okay, the characterization is just a bit bland. Still, a much better intro than Encounter at Farpoint for example. Now on to episode 2.
 
M

Marty Chinn

Member
Red Arremer said:
In reality, there are several countries that have a purely defensive military, that hasn't seen any warfare or, at most, conducted supportive/relief/humanitarian missions in war zones and other crisis regions.
That doesn't make them - or Starfleet - less military. The officers of Starfleet go through education at a military academy. It is structured like a military organization, and is clearly meant to be the Federation's defense and interstellar peacekeeping force.
Of course, there is a science/exploration arm to Starfleet, and they do have ships that are specifically dedicated to these aspects. But: Just like a field hospital or a military science division aren't going to be fighting in the frontlines, they are still part of the greater military apparatus.

Military doesn't mean inherently built for only warfare or aggressive acts. I'm not sure why this is even a point of contention.
Click to expand...

Sure, but because of the lack of conflict, they are a bit more relaxed about things so to say that they don't joke around a little bit because they're military is overlooking the circumstances. Have you never seen TOS?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GAUQ3CLkLo

The banter and humor happened all the time.
 
W

wetflame

Pizza Dog
Divvy said:
I can also see why they chose to redesign the Klingons, since this look is pretty much non-threatening at this point:

kCgCVWn.jpg


They have been too humanized after TNG and DS9 to the point where they are practically cuddly. I see why the story they want to tell wouldn't work with that design. That being said, I'm not sure I'm 100% on board with the new ones either as I think they are a bit overdesigned, but I guess I'll reserve judgement until a few more episodes have passed.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with this. They clearly wanted to reintroduce the Klingons as a legitimate threat, and TNG onwards (especially Worf's storylines) essentially reduced them to a Ferrengi level joke race. Doing this draws a line under that, immediately makes them seem more alien and sinister, and avoids having to do a lot of unnecessary work to build them back up as a threatening race.
 
I

Iriscomeback

Member
Just watched it and I must say I really liked it. Looked incredible, acting was decent and although I'm not a big fan of the Klingon redesign I can get over it.

It was clearly a pilot with the focus on action, but there was sufficient Trek stuff in between imo. Captain calling her first officer 'number one' was a nice homage to TNG.

I have a few nitpicks though:
- Fleets warping in looked awful, ships moved unnaturally in that shot and lame sound effect. Minor annoyance.
- Mutiny in the first episode with minimal justification? Not good, that was a leap.
- Motivations of big bad guy were not convincing. Yes Klingons are warriors but the reason for them to go to war is because the Federation comes in peace? Their territory too close to theirs? That suddenly is a problem? I needed more motivation and background on the Klingons for that time period to accept them rallying behind a new Kahless figure.
- Stop with the lens flares, seriously....

Looking forward to the next episode! Really curious how the hell she's going to get her own ship now.
 
H

Huw_Dawson

Member
An interesting thought on Burnham and what she does in the two eps btw:

If she'd been captain, this would have been a perfectly ordinary Star Trek episode: the captain shoots at the Klingon ship, the Klingons are like "WTF we need to respect this person" and the entire situation probably resolving itself.

It's because she's only First Officer that the war happens.

Nevertheless she acted like a crazy person and this is a deeply uninteresting arc for her character if it turns out this is what the writers are going for.
 
R

radios shipping overview

Member
Iriscomeback said:
- Motivations of big bad guy were not convincing. Yes Klingons are warriors but the reason for them to go to war is because the Federation comes in peace? Their territory too close to theirs? That suddenly is a problem? I needed more motivation and background on the Klingons for that time period to accept them rallying behind a new Kahless figure.
Click to expand...

Nationalism. Gain power by uniting your country against a common enemy.

The reasoning he used - the Federation's insidious cultural influence - is something DS9 touched on once, with the root beer scene.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VhSm6G7cVk
 
H

Huw_Dawson

Member
caliph95 said:
She started a war

She got off lightly
Click to expand...

She didn't - it was her captain and the admiral not being willing to think outside the Starfleet box that starts the war by allowing themselves to be manipulated by the bad guys.

What she did do was accomplish exactly nothing doing something incredibly stupid for no apparent reason beyond she's probably bonkers.
 
J

JonnyDBrit

Member
Re: The motives of the Klingons, it's basically two-fold:
1) Make Klingons Great Again. The Empire has apparently been in disarray for much of the last century since the great houses have squabbled among themselves. So T'Kuvma wanted to play the part of a Genghis Khan, Victor Emmanuel II, or an Otto von Bismarck - as Sarek puts it, a great unifier - to restore glory to their culture and empire. As real life has shown recently, the desire to return to perceived greatness can be a powerful motivator.
2) Resist Federation expansion. In part because of the above, T'Kuvma feels that the Federation is slowly towards a point where it may be able to threaten the continued existence of the empire by surrounding it, and then peacefully absorbing it and removing its cultural identity. It's something that-

Oh, Jiji has it covered.
 
N

nOoblet16

Member
Divvy said:
As a Trek fan that grew up with the franchise going so far as to buy all the technical encyclopedias as a kids and memorizing all the specs of every starship, I enjoyed the first two episodes a lot. I know a lot of other Trek fans are upset with the inconsistencies with technology, but I'm really glad the showrunners are not being slaves to lore especially since much of that really amounts to limitations of the budget and technology at the time. There's a balance to be made between perfect continuity like some Trek fans want and not giving a shit at all like the JJ Abrams films.

I can also see why they chose to redesign the Klingons, since this look is pretty much non-threatening at this point:

kCgCVWn.jpg


They have been too humanized after TNG and DS9 to the point where they are practically cuddly. I see why the story they want to tell wouldn't work with that design. That being said, I'm not sure I'm 100% on board with the new ones either as I think they are a bit overdesigned, but I guess I'll reserve judgement until a few more episodes have passed.
Click to expand...
To be fair that was more due to the actors and the loose fitting costumes. Not the facial features themselves. Most of the Klingons we saw in TNG/DS9 were big or just fat and wore loose dress/big armour while they used a shitty excuse for a weapon i.e. the Bat'leth, with 90s fight choreography. Someone like Martok would still look like a badass even today with modern costumes even if he had the exact same design.


What we have here is a bit too far in the other direction.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Huw_Dawson said:
An interesting thought on Burnham and what she does in the two eps btw:

If she'd been captain, this would have been a perfectly ordinary Star Trek episode: the captain shoots at the Klingon ship, the Klingons are like "WTF we need to respect this person" and the entire situation probably resolving itself.

It's because she's only First Officer that the war happens.

Nevertheless she acted like a crazy person and this is a deeply uninteresting arc for her character if it turns out this is what the writers are going for.
Click to expand...

Well,
that makes her not a crazy person! What she wanted to do was probably correct, so using logic, mutiny might have been the only appropriate action to stop a war. It didn't work out for her because of Saru.

If Saru hadn't stepped in, the war might have been avoided, she might have been court marshaled, stripped of her rank, and thrown in prison for life, but the war wouldn't have happened and there's a good chance Georgiou would be alive. Sounds like a good trade off to me.

KillerStar said:
I wondered if Burnham
was in love with Georgiou
, it would explain his attitude ...
Click to expand...

No, but I'm assuming Tumblr is already on it.
 
M

Marty Chinn

Member
Iriscomeback said:
- Motivations of big bad guy were not convincing. Yes Klingons are warriors but the reason for them to go to war is because the Federation comes in peace? Their territory too close to theirs? That suddenly is a problem? I needed more motivation and background on the Klingons for that time period to accept them rallying behind a new Kahless figure.
Click to expand...

I think you're misreading it. The Klingons don't believe that the Federation comes in peace. They think that statement is a lie that they present to everyone else while in the background they expand for power. From the Klingon's view, the Federation is growing their power through what they think is a lie about peace and prosperity. This is a threat to the Klingon empire existence which is weakened because they are fractured. The goal here is to stop what they believe is a lie and push back on the Federation by uniting all the houses together before it's too late and the Federation takes over.
 
I

Iriscomeback

Member
jiji said:
Nationalism. Gain power by uniting your country against a common enemy.

The reasoning he used - the Federation's insidious cultural influence - is something DS9 touched on once, with the root beer scene.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VhSm6G7cVk
Click to expand...

JonnyDBrit said:
Re: The motives of the Klingons, it's basically two-fold:
1) Make Klingons Great Again. The Empire has apparently been in disarray for much of the last century since the great houses have squabbled among themselves. So T'Kuvma wanted to play the part of a Genghis Khan, Victor Emmanuel II, or an Otto von Bismarck - as Sarek puts it, a great unifier - to restore glory to their culture and empire. As real life has shown recently, the desire to return to perceived greatness can be a powerful motivator.
2) Resist Federation expansion. In part because of the above, T'Kuvma feels that the Federation is slowly towards a point where it may be able to threaten the continued existence of the empire by surrounding it, and then peacefully absorbing it and removing its cultural identity. It's something that-

Oh, Jiji has it covered.
Click to expand...

Marty Chinn said:
I think you're misreading it. The Klingons don't believe that the Federation comes in peace. They think that statement is a lie that they present to everyone else while in the background they expand for power. From the Klingon's view, the Federation is growing their power through what they think is a lie about peace and prosperity. This is a threat to the Klingon empire existence which is weakened because they are fractured. The goal here is to stop what they believe is a lie and push back on the Federation by uniting all the houses together before it's too late and the Federation takes over.
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough. I guess I would have liked it if they explained it a bit more in depth. It went by a bit too fast for my tastes so it didn't really register.
 
F

Finn of Ooo

Member
Spoiler regarding Klingon culture.
I thought the Klingons treated corpses like trash and just blew them out of the airlock? The warrior was in Sto'vo'kor and the shell they left behind was nothing.
 
D

Divvy

Canadians burned my passport
nOoblet16 said:
To be fair that was more due to the actors and the loose fitting costumes. Not the facial features themselves. Most of the Klingons we saw in TNG/DS9 were big or just fat and wore loose dress/big armour while they used a shitty excuse for a weapon i.e. the Bat'leth, with 90s fight choreography. Someone like Martok would still look like a badass even today with modern costumes even if he had the exact same design.


What we have here is a bit too far in the other direction.
Click to expand...

True, but I think I've definitely been conditioned to see that Klingon look as more of a potential ally than a menacing threat. I mean, it's true that they could have just set this further in the future with a different race, but I can see why they would want something more familiar for a soft reboot type of show.
 
H

Huw_Dawson

Member
whyamihere said:
Well,
that makes her not a crazy person! What she wanted to do was probably correct, so using logic, mutiny might have been the only appropriate action to stop a war. It didn't work out for her because of Saru.

If Saru hadn't stepped in, the war might have been avoided, she might have been court marshaled, stripped of her rank, and thrown in prison for life, but the war wouldn't have happened and there's a good chance Georgiou would be alive. Sounds like a good trade off to me.
Click to expand...

Here's the issue with this:
I don't buy that the character we see able to calculate how far a storm is off just by looking at it (she's wrong, of course, but she tries!) somehow fails to realise that her storming out of the captain's office asking to shoot at the Klingons after getting extremely angry at the captain about a minute prior would not draw serious questions from the extremely tense bridge crew. It's just about justifiable if it had been shown to work - the fact is that it predictably failed and we're never given any explanation for why she thought it would work. Her being consigned to the brig is a worse outcome than her not getting her way and helping her beloved captain as much as possible.
 
B

Bits N Pieces

Member
Really enjoyed the first two episodes. I've been longing for a big budget sci-fi show for ages and this looks like it might scratch that itch.

Definitely going to be tuning in each week.
 
N

Noisepurge

Member
Red Arremer said:
They should speak English for the conceit of a television show. Having to read the subtitles takes away the capability to watch what's going on on screen.
Click to expand...

eh, thats like your problem man. the rest of us in the world usually read subtitles all the time anyways and its far superior to dubbing shit. eventually you learn to just quickly scan the subs and keep main focus on the whole picture.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Huw_Dawson said:
Here's the issue with this:
I don't buy that the character we see able to calculate how far a storm is off just by looking at it (she's wrong, of course, but she tries!) somehow fails to realise that her storming out of the captain's office asking to shoot at the Klingons after getting extremely angry at the captain about a minute prior would not draw serious questions from the extremely tense bridge crew. It's just about justifiable if it had been shown to work - the fact is that it predictably failed and we're never given any explanation for why she thought it would work. Her being consigned to the brig is a worse outcome than her not getting her way and helping her beloved captain as much as possible.
Click to expand...

It only failed because of Saru. Everyone else on that bridge was ready to listen to her order.

I mean, her options are:

1) Do nothing, war starts. Everyone dies.

2) Attempt to shoot the Klingons first by any means necessary, go to jail for the rest of her life, but avert war.

So she had to do option 2 (in her mind), or at least try.
 
K

Kevin

Member
Noisepurge said:
eh, thats like your problem man. the rest of us in the world usually read subtitles all the time anyways and its far superior to dubbing shit. eventually you learn to just quickly scan the subs and keep main focus on the whole picture.
Click to expand...

This. I actually respect that they made the decision to have them subtitled. Makes it feel a little more authentic an alien to me. Loved the first two episodes and I can't wait for more!
 
N

nOoblet16

Member
Btw I want to talk something about the technology. They should not try to make things look like TOS because TOS Washington low budget 1960 stuff but there should be a limit to how far it should be different. JJ Trek movies were canonically more technologically advanced because of Nero's incursion and I bought that but this looks very similar to that despite being prime timeline.

First of all, what you see in TNG/Voyager era Star Trek isn't really that outdated. Minor adjustments here and there like replace padds with tablets, monitors with thin displays and it's still futuristic without breaking continuity. Because in that universe that's what's suppose to be modern (and no one's going to bat an eye if they use sleek looking tablets since it's a contemporary everyday thing so it's not going to stand out).

I understand that the tech in shows need to evolve with our times but they also should not stray too far from continuity. And it is possible to do both:

Take Star Wars for example, everything you saw in the original series was timeless. It looked advanced despite it using knobs and buttons and what the 70s considered futuristic. The Force Awakens came out in 2015 and Rogue One in 2016, effectively using the same sort of knobs and buttons and yet it does not look dated at all! It's because it showed us a version of future that's considered advanced in that universe and we still consider it advanced eventhough we don't really use buttons and knobs to control stuff and have touchscreens.

Now let's look at the Alien franchise, Alien 1 had the nostromos with the same buttons and knobs for futuristic computers and stuff. Prometheus tried to do away with it with completely modern interpretations of future technologies with holographics and what not. Yea Nostromose was a mining vessel and Prometheus was state of the art but despite that there's like a century's worth of gap between the two. Then Covenant came out and eventhough I didn't like the movie I can't fault its visuals. It went back to the retro futuristic look of Alien and it worked !

Bladerunner 2049 is going to be another one of the cases where the 2017 movie will have the same look as the movie released in the 80s, and still end up looking futuristic.


Point being, you don't need to have 2017's interpretation of future to make something look futuristic.
 
C

carlsojo

Member
Noisepurge said:
eh, thats like your problem man. the rest of us in the world usually read subtitles all the time anyways and its far superior to dubbing shit. eventually you learn to just quickly scan the subs and keep main focus on the whole picture.
Click to expand...

Ehhh with the cadence


Of how they talk


Can be kind of


Distracting


Know what I mean?
 
G

GrandHarrier

Member
Finn of Ooo said:
Spoiler regarding Klingon culture.
I thought the Klingons treated corpses like trash and just blew them out of the airlock? The warrior was in Sto'vo'kor and the shell they left behind was nothing.
Click to expand...

This is correct. They are clearly reinterpreting Klingon culture in this regards; However, we only know that for sure as of TNG, if I recall correctly, so that is something that could in theory have changed between now and then. The lore nerd inside of me isn't happy but eh...
 
D

Dandy Lyin

Member
Finn of Ooo said:
Spoiler regarding Klingon culture.
I thought the Klingons treated corpses like trash and just blew them out of the airlock? The warrior was in Sto'vo'kor and the shell they left behind was nothing.
Click to expand...

It could be that T'Kuvma's faction places more importance on them.
 
G

geomon

Member
Just finished watching the first 2 episodes. I'm not a fan. The characters, with the exception of Michelle Yeoh, are very unlikeable and the story was not well written. The special effects were good, especially for a made for streaming TV show.

I am confused about one thing though. I was under the impression that the show takes place in the original timeline, from the 60's show. But it was shot like it was Abrams' Trek and even design choices were taken from it, like the Vulcan school.
 
J

JonnyDBrit

Member
nOoblet16 said:
Btw I want to talk something about the technology. They should not try to make things look like TOS because TOS Washington low budget 1960 stuff but there should be a limit to how far it should be different. JJ Trek movies were canonically more technologically advanced because of Nero's incursion and I bought that but this looks very similar to that despite being prime timeline.

First of all, what you see in TNG/Voyager era Star Trek isn't really that outdated. Minor adjustments here and there like replace padds with tablets, monitors with thin displays and it's still futuristic without breaking continuity. Because in that universe that's what's suppose to be modern (and no one's going to bat an eye if they use sleek looking tablets since it's a contemporary everyday thing so it's not going to stand out).

I understand that the tech in shows need to evolve with our times but they also should not stray too far from continuity. And it is possible to do both:

Take Star Wars for example, everything you saw in the original series was timeless. It looked advanced despite it using knobs and buttons and what the 70s considered futuristic. The Force Awakens came out in 2015 and Rogue One in 2016, effectively using the same sort of knobs and buttons and yet it does not look dated at all!

Now let's look at the Alien franchise, Alien 1 had the nostromos with the same buttons and knobs for futuristic computers and stuff. Prometheus tried to do away with it with completely modern interpretations of future technologies with holographically and what not. Yea Nostromose was a mining vessel and Prometheus was state of the art but despite that there's like a certain tutu's worth of gap between the two. Then Covenant came out and eventhough I didn't like the movie I can't fault it's visuals. It went back to the retro futuristic look of Alien and it worked !

Bladerunner 2049 is going to be another one of the cases where the 2017 movie will have the same look as the movie released in the 80s, and still end up looking futuristic.


Point being, you don't need to have 2017's interpretation of future to make something look futuristic.
Click to expand...

What I found slightly curious is that while the ship architecture and such does obviously look more advanced, in other respects they have tried to make the tech look than what we see even in TOS. Mentioned this earlier in the thread but the point made about the transporters sticks out in this regard, while even the phaser seems done in a way so as to look more complicated - not as simple as the single barrel design of Kirk's day. Plus many of the ships we see in the fleet are boxy in a way so as to almost seem... clunky. I do think/hope there's going to be a slow transition to TOS era equipment, at least in stylish simplicity.

Edit: I know it's heresy in some parts, but I recall Enterprise doing similar with the Mirror episodes it had. Ie, the Terrans gushing out over just how advanced the Defiant (Constitution class, not Sisko's) is, in part because of how much simpler everything is to use vs their own tech.
 
M

Marty Chinn

Member
Iriscomeback said:
Ok, fair enough. I guess I would have liked it if they explained it a bit more in depth. It went by a bit too fast for my tastes so it didn't really register.
Click to expand...

They do though. In the opening scene they say this:

They are coming. Atom by atom... they will coil around us and take all that we are. There is one way to confront this threat. By reuniting the 24 warring houses of our own empire.

Together, under one creed..remain Klingon! That is why we light our beacon this day. To assemble our people. To lock arms against those who fatal greeting is... "We come in peace".
Click to expand...

Later on in the funeral they say this:

Witness our brother, our Torchbearer, killed by the Federation interloper on our sacred beacon. I see you as you see the end. Our Torchbearer honors us first to die in our crusade for self-preservation.
Click to expand...

In the meeting with the various Klingon houses:

We have become complacent in the time since we last battled the Federation at Donatu V. Our purity is a threat to them. They wish to drag u s into the muck, where humans, Vulcans, Tellarites, and filthy Andorians mix.
Click to expand...

Here it comes, their lie.

"We come in peace"

They do not! They come to destroy our individuality. Shall we rise up together and give them the fight they deserve?

Remain Klingon!
Click to expand...

In three different scenes they focus and specifically talk about this. I thought it was pretty straight forward and had plenty of screen time to establish.
 
F

funkystudent

Member
Liking what I have watched so far.

But kinda bummed they didnt have enough Majel Barrett recorded somewhere just to keep her as the computer voice forever.
 
M

Morts

Member
What was the year Michael gave in her log in the beginning? Is Spock on the Enterprise yet? Is Pike already in a wheelchair?
 
F

funkystudent

Member
Morts said:
What was the year Michael gave in her log in the beginning? Is Spock on the Enterprise yet? Is Pike already in a wheelchair?
Click to expand...

I forget but I belive the show is set 10 years before TOS.

So I think the Enterprise would still be under construction but if they ever wanted to have the OG 1701 in the series at a later date its totally doable.

The timeline of the original Enterprise and exactly how long it was around before Kirk is still kinda foggy anyway. Depends on how canon you see things like the Animated Series.
 
R

radios shipping overview

Member
Star Trek TMP already showed how the Original Series aesthetics could be upgraded with a bigger budget, and those models and sets still look good. There's a reason they were reused for such a long time. Discovery's look isn't about TOS's aesthetics being unusable, it feels like it's about creating a big, new, maximalist aesthetic that feels consistent with the JJverse movies.
 
F

funkystudent

Member
jiji said:
Star Trek TMP already showed how the Original Series aesthetics could be upgraded with a bigger budget, and those models and sets still look good. There's a reason they were reused for such a long time. Discovery's look isn't about TOS's aesthetics being unusable, it feels like it's about creating a big, new, maximalist aesthetic that feels consistent with the JJverse movies.
Click to expand...

trek-motion-picture-cast.jpg


enterprise-bridge-sti.jpg


Totally not dated at all!!!!



TBH I feel like the uniform / ship design is closer to Enterprise then anything. But the visuals / direction is totally going for a JJ feel. Its a weird blend.

I can understand why purists are put off but if its the sacrifice needed for new Trek is to crib some things from the new movies. I am ok with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Star Trek "Origin Story" movie in the works
44
1K
Panajev2001a replied
ESPN, FOX and Warner Bros. Discovery Forming Joint Venture to Launch Streaming Sports Service in the U.S
30
978
Papa_Wisdom replied
What Does Star Trek Mean to You?
Social Opinion Community 2
82
2K
sono replied
Twitch targets butt streams with new rule banning 'content that focuses on intimate body parts for a prolonged period of time'
Business 2
61
4K
darrylgorn replied
What Is The Best Star Trek Videogame?
2
53
2K
UltimaKilo replied
Top Bottom