Author Topic: Star Trek Discovery casts lead  (Read 1051 times)

Offline Marvelous

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3311
    • View Profile
    • PhotograFX
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2017, 02:44:52 pm »
Personally, I think The Orville is going to be more entertaining.


"2. IF YOU DON'T READ THE BOOK BUT ARE WILLING TO ARGUE ABOUT IT EITHER YOU ARE:
a) An idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about.
b) A liar who is a fan who can't admit it to himself or others."

Offline KIP LEWIS

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5535
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2017, 06:25:26 pm »
Personally, I think The Orville is going to be more entertaining.

It does look good and I don't care for Seth McFarlane's humor.

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #17 on: July 26, 2017, 05:37:41 am »
I think the Orville is going to overstay its welcome. A little McFarlane goes a long way. I think having each Orville episode last an hour is too long. It's testing the patience of the audience for a comedy/parody about Trek. Plus, the Trek audience is a niche audience and I don't know how much the Orville will be able to attract other viewers.

I'm assuming that the show won't only be a Trek parody but still I think it's going to be hard for the show to catch on, even if the quality is there. The production values for Orville does have some nice production values.

I'm looking more forward to Discovery after the new trailer and the stuff coming out of Comic Con. I just wish that they had set it after Nemesis. They would have to rework the Sarek angle but I don't see what else they would lose beyond that, from the material they've showed us so far.


Offline Vic Vega

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4096
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2017, 11:49:52 am »
They keep putting these shows on streaming networks I don't have.

I like Star Trek but not enough to pay 10 bucks a month extra to watch it.

Offline Mastrmynd

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 7929
  • Check my new site www.top20takeover.VVCRadio.com
    • View Profile
    • http://arvellpoe.atspace.com/
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #20 on: July 26, 2017, 12:15:17 pm »
They keep putting these shows on streaming networks I don't have.

I like Star Trek but not enough to pay 10 bucks a month extra to watch it.

But you can also get exclusive behind the scenes access to Big Brother!


Listen to my entertaining radio show, "The Takeover: Top 20 Countdown" at www.top20takeover.VVCRadio.com.

Right on to the real and death to the fakers!  Peace out!

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #21 on: July 26, 2017, 02:33:34 pm »
I'm a big Trek fan but I'm not buying CBS All Access. I'm just going to wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray.

Offline Hypestyle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5342
  • Intellectual Conqueror
    • View Profile
    • Hypestyle's Homebase
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2017, 06:15:39 am »
I'm a big Trek fan but I'm not buying CBS All Access. I'm just going to wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray.

:-) I'll have to get all the series on Blu-ray, I keep putting it off.  Are any on Hulu?  I don't have that, either, lol.

I'm still kind of disappointed that this is set in the TOS universe.  I'd be okay with this being in the "Pine-Kirk" universe, and this being a totally separate crew having their adventures.  I'm not sure what to get from this show being set 10 years before Original Kirk's adventures-- especially considering that this series promotes itself as being more up-front with its racial diversity, more prominent women characters and sexuality, I'm not sure how this squares with the (par for the period but dated now) social sensibilities depicted of the original show?  Enduring props to Nichelle Nichols :-* no doubt, but in TOS she was "space secretary".  Having Ms. Martin-Green be a commander and Michelle Yeoh be a captain "before" all this would seem to imply that Starfleet went culturally backward for a good while...   :P  So was there some analog to 45 elected president of the Federation by then?   ::)
Be Kind to Someone Today.

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2017, 12:18:44 pm »
I'm a big Trek fan but I'm not buying CBS All Access. I'm just going to wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray.

:-) I'll have to get all the series on Blu-ray, I keep putting it off.  Are any on Hulu?  I don't have that, either, lol.

I'm still kind of disappointed that this is set in the TOS universe.  I'd be okay with this being in the "Pine-Kirk" universe, and this being a totally separate crew having their adventures.  I'm not sure what to get from this show being set 10 years before Original Kirk's adventures-- especially considering that this series promotes itself as being more up-front with its racial diversity, more prominent women characters and sexuality, I'm not sure how this squares with the (par for the period but dated now) social sensibilities depicted of the original show?  Enduring props to Nichelle Nichols :-* no doubt, but in TOS she was "space secretary".  Having Ms. Martin-Green be a commander and Michelle Yeoh be a captain "before" all this would seem to imply that Starfleet went culturally backward for a good while...   :P  So was there some analog to 45 elected president of the Federation by then?   ::)

I wouldn't mind if Discovery was set in the Kelvin timeline either. For one, they wouldn't have to worry so much about continuity problems or why the Discovery ships look more advanced than the 'later' TOS ships and two it could open up the possibilities for Pine or others from the new Trek movies to show up on Discovery or flesh out story lines that the films might bring up but don't fully answer or delve into.

I was reading that the former showrunner Bryan Fuller had long wanted to see Angela Bassett as a Trek captain and he had been advocating that the show have a black female lead. He has commented about how Nichelle Nichols's role in TOS (and I agree with you about her being a glorified secretary, but still that was major) had a major influence on black children (Whoopi Goldberg and astronaut Mae Jemison too, if I recall correctly, being two of them). Fuller was pleased two that Discovery will feature a black female lead and an Asian female captain.

As for TOS going backward, I think we can come up with the fan reasoning that we didn't see 'all' of Starfleet during that of Kirk's show, we only saw slivers of it. The final TOS episode, "Turnabout Intruder" seemed to suggest that women couldn't be starship captains, but I think that is fan conjecture. Madge Sinclair played a starship captain-though unnamed-in Star Trek IV. And the show Enterprise (ENT), featured Captain Erika Hernandez of the Columbia, which predates TOS by about 100 years.

Recently, the very good TOS fan series Star Trek Continues took on this issue of the lack of women as captains on TOS in the episode "Embrace the Winds". They posited that sexist attitudes from one of the key Federation member worlds put a break on women being captains in the Kirk era. I recommend the episode and Continues in general if you like TOS.

I look at TOS was very much a product of its time even as it stretched and broke some boundaries. There was at least one black flag officer (Commodore Stone) on TOS and some minor other diversity, mostly with male characters.  By the movie time frame both Admirals Morrow and Cartwright were prominently featured as supporting characters in some of the films. ENT wasn't that racially diverse in comparison to DS9 and VOY and it only made it to four seasons. I think the Discovery folks are smart to embrace diversity if for no other reason to avert any complaints about the lack of it. Of course the diversity push of the show has still gotten a backlash, but from the opposite direction.

Offline Marvelous

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3311
    • View Profile
    • PhotograFX
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2017, 01:50:22 pm »
Really, the lead's name is Michael??? And she is Spock's step-daughter???  I think I'm done.


"2. IF YOU DON'T READ THE BOOK BUT ARE WILLING TO ARGUE ABOUT IT EITHER YOU ARE:
a) An idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about.
b) A liar who is a fan who can't admit it to himself or others."

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #25 on: July 30, 2017, 04:36:51 pm »
I'll be honest, I don't like the first name. It sounds me to like they are trying to make a black female character more masculine. Black male characters are made effeminate and black female characters are made masculine. But this likely also goes with the gender/sexual orientation politics of this new iteration of Trek. I would've been fine if they had named her Michelle (and they could've done it in honor of Michelle Obama).

She's not Spock's step-daughter. It appears that she's Sarek's adopted daughter which would make her Spock's sister. And there is precedent for Spock having siblings come out of the blue, like in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, where they dropped his heretofore never mentioned older half-brother Sybok on the audience. Personally I didn't have a problem with Sybok or with Burnham being an adopted sister, depending on how it's handled. For all we know Burnham could be dead or missing in action by the time we get to Spock on Kirk's Enterprise.

Offline Marvelous

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3311
    • View Profile
    • PhotograFX
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #26 on: July 30, 2017, 07:30:15 pm »
Step daughter, sister, it still sounds like BS with BS writers that don't have anything original to bring to this show.


"2. IF YOU DON'T READ THE BOOK BUT ARE WILLING TO ARGUE ABOUT IT EITHER YOU ARE:
a) An idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about.
b) A liar who is a fan who can't admit it to himself or others."

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2017, 02:16:02 am »
I don't think you are alone in that sentiment among fans. I am cautiously optimistic that Discovery can be a good show. Just from the trailer it has good production values-the best of any of the television shows-and I like Sonequa Martin-Green.

I have to wonder if the Sarek connection was a poor sop to fans, or a way to connect Discovery to the TOS time in a very visceral way that old fans got, while also bringing in a legendary Trek character to mollify any fan concerns. The issue with that is the actor James Frain doesn't exude Sarek to me, either Mark Lenard or Ben Cross's take on the character. I would've rather had Gary Graham (Soval) or Jolene Blalock (T'Pol) from ENT. I like how the previous shows have found some way to pass the torch with characters from previous shows or movies. Graham could've done that while still being that Vulcan surrogate father or Blalock the mother and avoiding the whole Spock step-sister/adopted sister continuity headaches.

I'm not sure if the Discovery writers have anything fresh to say besides adding racial, gender, and sexual orientation cosmetics to a standard white production, but I am intrigued by the writers saying that the Klingons in their show would represent Americans. In the past, the Klingons were stand-ins for the USSR and later on were a mix of Vikings, Samurai, and biker gangs. So I am curious about how the show will use the Klingons to speak to this particular moment in American society and history. Discovery also seems to be a show somewhat about war and Trek has never started off a show dealing with war. War is often held off at a distance, it's a threat that is usually averted, or it's in the background. ENT was canceled before it got to the Romulan War and it's final episode jumped ahead in time to the formation of the Federation after that war. TOS had a war with the Klingons that lasted all of one episode. Around the TNG time frame they were fighting, or just had fought the Talarians and Tzenkethi and the Tzenkethi War is never mentioned on TNG. They were also fighting a war against the Cardassians around about the TNG time frame, but we never see that war, we see the aftermath of it. DS9 was the only series to feature major wars, but those war episodes were often interspersed with episodes about other things.

So for Discovery to perhaps focus on war will be different. I hope that the series canonizes the Four Years War or at least some war with the Klingons before the short one in TOS. It makes no sense to me that there wouldn't have been a Federation-Klingon War before Kirk's time. The Klingons were too aggressive and territorial for there not to be.

I do find it interesting that the two black Trek leads don't start out as captain. Sisko was a commander for like two or three seasons before being promoted. And while the Discovery lead was long touted to not be a captain, Fuller also conceived of the character early on, if from jump, as a black woman. Burnham might not even make it to captain, we'll see with the show.

Offline Marvelous

  • Moderator
  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3311
    • View Profile
    • PhotograFX
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2017, 10:43:51 am »
Those are some badass responses EJ, thanks bro!  I will give it a try and hope for the success of the show.  I'm having flashbacks of Enterprise introducing the Borg and other messed up cannon ideas just to bring in more viewers late in the shows existence.


"2. IF YOU DON'T READ THE BOOK BUT ARE WILLING TO ARGUE ABOUT IT EITHER YOU ARE:
a) An idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about.
b) A liar who is a fan who can't admit it to himself or others."

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery casts lead
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2017, 04:46:53 pm »
Thanks for the compliment. To be honest, I liked that ENT Borg episode. I think they were artful in how they handled it, not so great with how they got around not mentioning the Borg name, but the rest of the episode I thought was a pretty intense hour. And the ENT Borg were like a mix of early TNG Borg and First Contact Borg and I liked seeing the more chalky Borg again.

The Ferengi episode on ENT I liked less, though I didn't hate it to be honest. I had more issues with how ENT brought in the Klingons (which I thought was too early; to me ENT didn't need the Klingons, it would've felt more like its own thing to not have the Klingons) and how the show handled the Vulcans (I think the show went out of its way to paint them in a negative light to justify the bias Archer and Trip had against them). I think a more interesting and bolder choice would have been for Archer to be biased but to have those biases challenged and over time he changed, as opposed to literally showing the Vulcans change in the last season (the Vulcan Reformation) to get more in-line with how they were portrayed on TOS. The idea during that arc of Archer carrying Sarek's soul was a great opportunity for him to change as a character that the show didn't really address or explore.

I am hopeful that Discovery will be better than ENT. ENT started off with a strong pilot and then just plunged until the second season finale. I got back into it during the third and fourth seasons and was sad to see it go. I wouldn't have said that if it had gotten canceled in the first two seasons.