There have been a few interviews with the cast and crew of Star Trek: Discovery in the last couple of days, so we gathered together clips and highlights to keep you up to speed, along with some more Disco Bits from around the web.
Tig doesn’t understand her technobabble, reveals some character details
Comedian and actress Tig Notaro was a guest on Tuesday night’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, where she shared some classic Trek technobabble about “subspace particles wrapped in a tachyon field of good vibes.” Notaro, who will be playing the chief engineer of the USS Hiawatha in the second season of Discovery, admitted to Colbert, “I have no idea what I am saying on that show.”
The actress did reveal a couple of details about her character, notably that she has the rank of Commander and that her name is Jet Reno, and not the previously reported Denise Reno. Notaro said she had the opportunity to chose the name herself.
For his part, Colbert talked talked jealously about how he very much wanted a chance to appear in Discovery.
Martin-Green says season two goes bolder and deeper
Entertainment Tonight has deemed Sonequa Martin-Green’s performance in Star Trek: Discovery as a standout for this year’s Emmy voters to consider. In an interview with ET, the actress didn’t give any specifics about the second season, but noted how there is a new confidence:
With season one now behind them, a calm has taken over her and the Discovery team. “We’re just as excited [as we were for season one], but there is a blanket of peace in this sense of preparedness because we’re familiar with it and because we have our experiential knowledge from last year. Now, we have a little bit more hold on what it is that we’re doing, the universe we’re in, the story that we’re telling, the roles that each of us have within the story. We’re hopefully very boldly, if I may say, going higher and deeper.”
The actress is also featured in the latest issue of Emmy Magazine, where she talks about how she binged as much Star Trek as she could before starting work on Discovery:
Her Star Trek binge gave her a greater appreciation of the franchise. “There are these moments where you zoom out and say, ‘What am I becoming a part of?'” she says. In this prequel to the original series, her character was born human but raised as a Vulcan by the parents of her foster brother, Spock. “The first time I did the Vulcan salute and approached my station on the bridge, I was filled to the brim with honor.”
Sonequa Martin-Green at CBS Upfront event on May 16 at Carnegie Hall
Composer says more swashbuckling in season 2
Discovery composer Jeff Russo was a guest on the Ultimate Score Podcast this week and he talked a bit about his approach to scoring Trek. Regarding the second season, Russo said he expects “more of the swashbuckling stuff I did in season one,” and added, “We use that word a lot.”
Cruz says they were worried people would stop watching after Culber’s death
When Dr. Culber, played by Wilson Cruz, was killed off last season, producers for the show made it clear that same night via various interviews that the character was going to come back. In a new interview with Access Hollywood, Cruz talks about how the need to counter any narrative the show had fallen into the “bury your gays” trope motivated the push for breaking the usual wall of secrecy about future story lines.
Cruz noted, “We all knew pretty early on that this was just the beginning of the story and we didn’t want people to be worried or stop watching.” As for how Culber will return in the second season, the actor remained mum.
On the subject of Culmets, Discovery actors Wilson Cruz and Anthony Rapp attended a Pride Month event in Los Angeles held by LA Confidential Magazine, which featured portraits of a number of LGBT Angelinos. Cruz tweeted out a fun photo of the pair in front of a collage featuring both actors, with the hashtag #spaceboos.
This guy and I are so proud to be counted among these outstanding LGBTQ Angelenos! Thank you @lacmagazine and @stefanpinto for the beautiful portraits and for a fabulous time last night. @albinokid #startrekdiscovery #spaceboos pic.twitter.com/aijX2BTPHx
— Wilson Cruz (@wcruz73) June 5, 2018
By the way, you may have noticed that Cruz is growing out his beard. As it has been confirmed that his Dr. Culber is returning for the second season of Discovery, it could signify that his trip into the mycelial network created some fungal-fueled facial hair.
BTS Tweet of the week: Editor nerds out with Number One
Discovery editor Scott Gamzon takes us inside the editing room with Jonathan Frakes, who directed episode 2 of the second season.
That moment when @jonathansfrakes is sitting in your edit bay, gives you a note and you answer “I will MAKE IT SO.” #StarTrekDiscovery pic.twitter.com/Oz5R77bIqQ
— Scott Gamzon, ACE (@ScottGamzon) June 7, 2018
Fan art of the week: Voq Fandango
Actor Shazad Latif shared fan art from Robin Careless which is quite funny if you are also a fan of Latif’s other show, Toast of London.
Star Trek: Discovery is available exclusively in the USA on CBS All Access. It airs in Canada on Space and streams on CraveTV. It is available on Netflix everywhere else.
Keep up with all the Star Trek: Discovery news at TrekMovie.
If people stopped watching it was certainly NOT because they “killed” Dr. Culber. In fact, that was the one “holy crap!” moment in the entire first season! If producers truly believe THAT is why anyone would stop watching then they are truly out of touch with the viewing public.
It was also pretty darn dumb to go around ant tell everyone right away “he’s coming back.” I thought these guys wanted suprises? They should have tried to hid that one for as long as they possibly could. Even if word got out in the off season at least they should make the attempt.
I definitely know people personally and online who stopped watching because of that. And even when being told that he’s supposed to come back, they think they’re being lied to.
A lot of people do take that what they feel as a trope very seriously. Look at the backlash other shows have gotten in the past.
Some people really tend to blow things our of proportion, don’t they?
But the person you are responding to proclaimed that your friends did “certainly not” stop watching the show for that reason. Read their post — they leave no room for debate: “If people stopped watching it was certainly NOT because they “killed” Dr. Culber.”
There is a thing called hyperbole. Google it.
Hey I just remembered…my whole set comments on Star Trek Continues were also intended by me to be perceived as hyperbole.
;-)
Really? I’m honestly floored there are some people who feel that way. I guess there are always some but I have got to believe it’s a very small total overall. And to be honest, the only backlash I can recall from killing a regular was over Jon Snow. And even then people immediately knew he was coming back. So it seemed to not have the impact it might have.
A few of my friends gradually lost interest because honestly, the show isn’t all that captivating. The writing has to step up.
THAT I can believe.
The one holy crap moment? Ummmm enterprise? Lol
Actually for me that was a roll of eyes moment, because I feel that it wasn’t earned. Perhaps it would be have been a “holy crap” moment for me at the end of the second or third seasons after we’ve really gotten the gist of these Discovery characters, but at the end of the first season I just did a Spock raised eyebrow and asked myself nonchalantly “what were the producers thinking?”
Exactly, alphantrion.
Maybe for some. But for me, like aphpatrion, it was an “eyeroll” moment. No, it was more a facepalm moment.
“If people stopped watching it was certainly NOT because they “killed” Dr. Culber.”
But MattR posted here:
“I definitely know people personally and online who stopped watching because of that.”
Seems like you just violated your own rule and tried to put words in others’ mouths here — i.e. you made a blanket statement (using a variant of the work, “CERTAIN”) that you applied to all people, which has now been categorically shown to be false statement.
OK. I was using hyperbole but I am forced to concede that I can see how you would think that. In my defense I can say that I was not really speaking for other people, like when someone says “We don’t like such things”. I was drawing a conclusion about whether or not such a scene was enough to cause someone to stop watching a show. But yes, I have no data to back it up. Just deductions that I stand by.
OK, I appreciate your response. Thanks.
It certainly had no bearing on whether I kept on watching the show or not. It was more like “what a stupid thing to do.” They go to all the trouble in pre-production to tell the world “We have a gay couple!” then kill one off. Plus, it killed off what seemed like a good doctor.
The fact that he seemed like such a good guy to me was what made it even more of a “holy crap!” moment.
I agree ML31. Ridiculous of the production team to let us know he would return – a shame, as it would have been a satisfying surprise and even pulled on the audience’s heart strings to see him return. I think, as Discovery’s ethos seems to really be wrapped up in the SJW vibe… that they wanted the media to know they were STILL doing the ‘gay thing’. Mannnn I dislike this show.
I love the series but still can’t wrap my mind around whether or not all the visual design differences are suppose to be a “visual reboot/re-imagining” of the Trek universe, or if these visual changes/updates are part of a planned plot twist…..
It is most likely an intentional visual reboot. But, to my knowledge, the producers have danced around the topic without explicitly saying those words, so maybe it will be a plot twist at some point. The multiverse and “permutations” that Staments has seen in the mycelial network would sure seem to make it possible that they are not quite in the prime universe we know and love just yet. But, at this point, I’m accepting it’s just a visual reboot and dealing with it. Other than a few loose ends that I think can be pretty easily explained, I haven’t seen any huge deviations from the story canon. For example, just because Spock never mentioned Burnham on screen doesn’t mean he never talked about it off sceeen. There were less than a 100 hours of canon Spock material, but the guy lived for over 200 years. We weren’t privy to every conversation he ever had…
That’s my thought approach as well.
By that rationale, you could do a series on which we learn about Spock’s tap-dancing career on Bajor.
You COULD do anything. Because you can does not make it a good idea. And everything with Burnham being related to Sarek has been a bad idea. Every single thing.
But I love Martin-Green herself; every time I see an interview with her, I just wish the show was doing a better job of using her talents.
Bryant Burnette,
Re: …Spock’s tap-dancing career on Bajor.
Well, that would certainly explain how he managed to flamenco on Platonius, because it certainly couldn’t have come from Parmen watching old Earth broadcasts where he’d most assuredly have learned about bread mold and penicillin.
*Sigh* You folks are no fun at all. . .
Agreed Bryant,
I don’t like this logic either. It feels lazy. I mean its never been made clear that Spock only dated women so therefor he can be gay or bisexual and even married to a guy. We know hardly anything about him between TUC and when showed up on Romulus in the 24th century. I’m not trying to start up anything, I’m just making a point with the argument you can add any canon you want as long as the character has never said something explicitly point blank. I can buy some of that to a degree but something like this just feels ridiculous.
And its not JUST about Spock. Clearly Burnham had the bigger relationship with Sarek and Amanda. There has never been a hint anywhere they raised another kid. I can’t recall one line of dialogue that suggested there was not only another sibling but that they were in Starfleet.
It just feel too shoehorned for me.
Yeah, I see what you mean with that, Tiger. And it does make sense. We have the Sybok thing so I guess I can also buy the Burnham thing. But to me, that’s just dipping into the well one too many times. And in my view, the logic along the lines of, “no one ever explicitly said Spock DIDN’T have a sister”, while factual, does not feel reasonable. It’s the same argument that Discovery crew can have a 100% different uniform style than the entire rest of Starfleet because “we never saw ALL the starfleet uniforms, therefore it is possible they could exist in Discovery.” True, we did not see ALL the ships but we saw a number of other ships and they ALL were wearing shirts similar to what they had on the Enterprise. Now if they wanted to go with something other than the Delta shield at least THAT would have some connection with what we saw in TOS, even though later it was decided everyone had the delta shield on their uniform regardless of ship or station.
I hope you recognize that this is merely your opinion.
The show runners of DISC have proven to me, that they are using care with canon and the story they want to tell. Other than art direction, which was desperately in need of an update from the 1960s efforts for this era, I have seen no canon violations, or abuses of the subject matter as you flippantly suggest.
I like the Burnam story, so far I’ve not seen a single thing wrong with it, and moreover I LOVE how her relationship with Sarek has fit neatly into a rather complicated puzzle which is still clouded by mystery and missing pieces in what make Spock the person he was. In fact, of all the Vulcans it could have been, Sarek really is the perfect choice — he’s the Vulcan who embraced humans, and married one, and faced the scorn of his piers by having a child with one. His effort to understand Humans through marriage and child rearing, makes him the perfect Vulcan to be Burnam’s foster parent. Of course Sarek took her in and raised her.
I’m glad it works for you. It works for me in no way.
The concept of a human raised by Vulcans is interesting. The sad thing is they did little to nothing with it. Pity. It has so much potential.
Well said. This fully works for me.
I think there must be a plot twist in the works, because the Federation was nearly conquered and destroyed by the Klingons, who laid waste to most of Federation territory, and seemed to have much greater military power than the Federation. Yet TOS takes place 10 years later, and there is no evidence of the Federation having been nearly wiped out and having had to near totally rebuild. Everything seemed all “hunky dory.” And militarily they and the Klingons were on par. Dialogue though did hint that the Feds had “issues” with the Klingons in the years prior.
It’s possible. And in a way I hope so because I personally appreciate visual continuity as well as story continuity. There was that mysterious spore that landed on Tilly last season so maybe that will have some significance in resolving the discrepancies.
Admiral Cornwell, the whole Federation council and Sarek (!?) attempting genozide on a global scale and getting away with it was more of a headscratcher.
Yeah… The result of that Klingon war just doesn’t fit into what we saw 10 years later. I mean, how easily could Germany have waged war in Europe in 1954? Not very I should think. Yet 10 years later both sides looked pretty eager to do it again. Did Star Fleet do nothing but build war ships for 10 years?
Yeah the entire Klingon war and how it was played out just didn’t make a lot of sense. Maybe they will smooth it out next season but I never remotely got the feeling on TOS that the Klingons nearly wiped out the Federation ever, much less a decade before. I liked the idea more that Klingons and the Federation had a bad first contact which created tensions and conflict between the two for decades but never on a big level. Of course Enterprise already destroyed that idea as well.
Yep. Nowhere in TOS was it ever even hinted at or implied or anything that the Federation was a milimeter from getting completely decimated. Again, this is where many will bring up the “that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen” argument. Which also again, is true. But it just doesn’t seem to fit in with what we saw. Therefore, it is a tough sell. Also, such issues seem to permeate the show. “We have the fascinating concept of a human raised by Vulcans but we are never ever going to delve into that. We are going to explore the goings on in the Klingon houses but we aren’t going to do THAT either. The first season will be dealing with a Klingon war but in reality it really will only bookend the season.” In my mind, this show has a lot bigger problems than canon and continuity issues. Which, and this has to get said again, would not be nearly as big if the show were just better overall.
@Thomas Johnson — I think people are inferring a lot from that. Was it ever stated the Klingons “nearly conquered and destroyed”, or “laid waste to most of the Federation territory”? Or did they win a lot of battles, reducing Starfleet’s capacity to defend itself? 10 years is a long time, especially in a technologically sophisticated Federation. I didn’t take it to mean they had to rebuild from scratch. If anything the Federation was occupied by invading Klingon forces that likely didn’t have the resources, or desire to raid, or destroy entire populations. There were plenty of clues in early TOS that there was a lot animosity and resentment for the Klingons, as mortal enemies … the kind of resentment that only comes from previous conflict. If you liken it to WWII, the US basically brought Japan to its knees without every setting foot on the mainland. Japan did very little damage to the US. But both sides suffered massive casualties and losses during the war. And for years afterward, there was a simmering resentment between the nations. Just imagine it the war had ended in a draw, and the Japanese had continued to rattle their sabers in the region.
Even if this were set 10 years in the future of TNG, what you demand is that new events can never be created in Trek’s fictional past, to tell a new story because they were never discussed in the intervening canon. And that’s simply not how fiction works, or should work frankly, as it would seriously limit the ability to tell stories.
Spock having a secret adoptive sister, from my point of view, does not violate series canon in any way. But I will say that it was a terrible creative choice that felt contrived only to have some sort of physical link to TOS. And no other creative reason.
Does anyone know which actor would become/play Spock in ST DISCOVERY (having hope that no cgi is utilized, as that’s the wrong way to do this) I’m for Zachary Quinto as the younger Spock, but he should not mind taking a pay cut. I am also of the sincere hope that Captain Pike’s Command crew is DUPLICATED according to TOS Canon (NEVER, made up as we go along).
One would imagine you probably walked out of the movie theater when WOK premiered, when they shoehorned Kirk ALL OF A SUDDEN having a son to add a physically dramatic Kirk family connected to the Genesis Device subplot. It was just so contrived, and just such lazy writing by Meyer…a terrible creative choice!
To respond seriously to what is has all the markings of a trolling post… I was not a huge fan of Kirk having an unknown kid. But it did not harm the story in any way and in fact actually added to it. And the final result was a kick-ass movie. The problem with STD is they did not utilized Burnham in any way even remotely similar. And their final result was… Well… Not.
I’m pretty sure the execs on the show have said on multiple occasions that their intent is to respect canon with regard to events but not necessarily the look of the show.
But it feels like they are picking and choosing what events they choose to respect.
I definitely have issues with the show but I think the jury is still out on whether everything will dovetail with established canon or not. Yes, there are some definite head-scratchers in terms of events and characters but just because something was not mentioned before, that does not necessarily mean it will end up violating canon. They still have time to make everything dovetail together; it just remains to be seen if they actually accomplish that or not.
The fact they went to the Mirror Universe first is already kind of a canon buster. It was pretty clear in Mirror, Mirror Kirk and company knew nothing about the mirror universe until they went.
Now is it a HUGE deal, no, but clearly they don’t mind ignoring canon a bit if they will get a good story out of it, which I agree with. But if you do it too much then it becomes a problem.
Well they did stay very bluntly in the episode that all knowledge of the mirror universe was going to be classified and purged, and everyone sworn to secrecy to never talk about it. So Kirk and company not knowing anything about it 10 years later does state true to Canon.
But thats what feels ridiculous about it and I have argued this on this board after that episode aired as if you can classify about knowing another universe exists. Their emperor is literally living in the prime universe now. And it doesn’t explain how the other side would not know either.
I get they are trying to cover themselves but it still violates canon basically.
I don’t think it does. And the former Emperor and now a section 31 operative would have enough sense to keep her mouth shut about it to anyone that doesn’t need to know. Same goes for the crew of the Discovery.
Section 31 clear knows a lot of secrets that no one else knows about. The events of Voyager and Enterprise make it pretty clear that they probably know about the Borg, kept that secret, as well as the whole temporal Cold War. They might even have learned the truth about the Romulans and Vulcans also.
Its one thing to cover up an incident that happened, its another thing to cover up an entire universe. And I don’t understand why it needed to be classified? Were they afraid others would try and go or something?
I just don’t like the fact anything that breaks canon gets away with it being ‘classified’. It feels a bit of a stretch after awhile. Tech that is waaaaaay too advanced for the period, that wasn’t known later because it was classified. Aliens we know that aren’t introduced later like the Borg. Well that wasn’t known for centuries later because that was classified as well. A parallel universe that is exactly like ours, but evil. Yep, that too, classified.
Yes its a way to work around canon issues, but its still basically breaking canon. They just found an excuse on how to retcon it basically.
I agree 100%. There are so many people who simply ignore that TNG and other shows during the Berman era, and even TOS, did this all the time. The Cage comes to mind as a TOS episode that mentions Talos IV for the first time — the only planet that caries the death penalty! Why hadn’t such a major thing been mentioned before? Surely it would have, according to some of the hard core fans visiting this forum. Consider than a ship of over 400 people visited this planet, almost lost their captain, and yet somehow, no one knows why it’s forbidden to travel there, why it’s the only crime that still carries the death penalty, and no one ever talks about it. Yet when it comes to keeping the Mirror Universe a secret for a mere 10 years, they completely ignore that TOS already did something just as significant, that no one knows about after 13 years! And still, well into the 24th Century, there’s still nobody talking about the only death penalty on the books.
So how do you discuss such discrepancies with people who won’t acknowledge simple truths? The answer is — you don’t.
Curious Cadet you seem to think your opinion on this outweigh’s other for some reason. Hate to break it to you chief, it doesn’t.
Some things I agree with you on, others I don’t. This is one of them.
No one is ‘ignoring’ anything. In this discussion, the Mirror Universe was never considered a ‘classified’ until now. On DS9 they talked about it openly and people came and went from that universe on both sides.
And no one is saying the other shows were perfect in this regard either. But we’re talking about this show and more importantly how it breaks canon simply by the time period it in as things like the MU.
I literally seen The Cage twice and the last time was probably over a decade ago, but that sound just as bad as this. But that was also episode one of an unaired pilot at the time. Its a bit different fifty years later of a show whose canon is well known, especially when it comes to the mirror universe.
Again I get WHY they made it classified obviously but it was done to ‘avoid’ breaking canon but its a pretty weak attempt and only bring up more questions.
Just trying to ignore other people’s views who differ from yours doesn’t mean those views don’t exist dude. ;)
“On DS9 they talked about it openly and people came and went from that universe on both sides. ”
And the reason for that is because the way things went (at least what the audience is meant to infer) is that Kirk and crew made this universe aware of the MU. After that details about it were at the disposal of anyone with proper clearance. Which probably wasn’t all that high, I would guess. Now we changed things to 100 years earlier we were made aware of the MU yet it was decided to “classify” it. I get that attitudes and views change over time but geez… It still feels inconsistent to the point that it is fair to conclude it was only done to make it canonical. To me, it’s lazy. They could almost literally do ANYTHING in STD and then “classify” it to fit canon.
To use your own logic, Curious, it is entirely believable that only a small number of the crew knew what was going on on Talos IV. So they would be the only ones who had to keep their mouth shut. Easier for 10-20 people to keep a secret than a few hundred. And then, we have no idea if anyone talked or if it got declassified more than 15 years later. Which would make perfect sense. So while the situations I grant you have similarities, the circumstances are different enough to make one conclusion more reasonable than the other.
Thomas, I would disagree. The more people that know a secret the more likely someone is going to spill the beans. Plus it makes ZERO logical sense to send ships out exploring the unknown and NOT make at least the captains aware of such a thing. You may as well send them out without telling them “we know cybernetic lifeforms called Borg are out there somewhere, so here is all we know just in case you run into them or evidence of them.”
That MU Lorca could carry off such an elaborate hoax for the better part of a year was absurd enough on its face. But it also totally undercut Spock’s statement at the end of “Mirror, Mirror” that it is far easier for civilized men to behave like barbarians than barbarians to act like civilized men. As bad creative decisions go, this one was epic.
One of many many many reasons why using the MU was such an awful awful creative choice that completely undermined the entire series. Would have been better just to have a morally ambiguous captain. I LOVE that idea.
Tiger, I agree that if a little canon violation is required to tell a good story then go for it. But it IS a gamble because if it doesn’t work, as it didn’t in STD, you make yourself look really really bad. Fans will rip you left and right for ignoring canon and whatnot. If you make something great, your canon violations turn into “fun nit picks” in a GREAT story. And little more than that.
I feel the same Thomas. I hope that the visual updates can be explained – then I could reconcile it with the rest of the rich 50 year tapestry and enjoy it more. II am so emotionally invested in the previous series, because they all tried to retcon and build on the past. But the Discovery production team seem so far up their own backsides – it’s all change for changes sake. And worst of all, ‘selective’ change. Let’s make the iconic Klingons unrecognisable, let’s mess with the design of a constitution class ship or the original TOS Enterprise looks like, but the Andoreans are safe and Vulcans can still have pointy ears. Star Wars would never reimagine the Millenium Falcon – Disney understands fans are emotionally invested in a universe they have escaped to and fallen in love with. Star Trek Discovery does not have that same reverence for the franchise they’re trying to make money from.
As far as the look of the Klingons goes, I think they did this to make the Klingons more “alien” looking and visually frightening. But they had the artistic realism to do so by looking at what the later series implied/defined what the evolution of the Klingon species was, and retro applied it to the “new” look of the Klingons, so they are consistent with what the species is suppose to have come/evolved from. And to me these Klingons look like they are the TMP-TNG era look, only on “steroids” to really give them a sinister alien look.
In my own personal (and maybe just a little bit crazy) head canon, I’ve rationalized the change in the Klingon appearance as follows: it was stated that the Klingons had been mostly in isolation for 100 years before the Battle of the Binary Stars. This would line up to around the same time as the augment virus created the flat headed Klingons. What if the Discovery Klingons are a result of trying to reverse the augment virus? Maybe through genetic tinkering they unlocked a more primitive version of Klingons, which might also explain the behavior changes, like eating humans, as well. Perhaps between now and TOS they were able to reverse these changes, but changed back to the flat heads again, only to finally get it right and restore their “normal” appearance sometime around the time of TMP and beyond?
Cruz was literally the weakest actor of the group.
Who knows if it was bad direction or he’s just not that good of an actor or???
Having any fear people would stop watching because they liquidated the weakest link of the cast while opening up and underutilizing the pain that comes with losing a spouse goes to show how out of touch and amateur the writers are.
Maybe someone needs to slap 1000 pics of Kirk proclaiming “Risk is our business” all over the writers room.
Guess I’m the fool playing Charlie Brown to CBS’s Lucy with the football, but I do harbor some hope for DSC Season 2. There’s so much potential: a lot of great visual elements, a truly talented cast, and an unusual protagonist with a potentially fascinating backstory. But as someone below noted, the writers really need to step it up.
Martin-Green’s acting style is cheesier than a lake of liquified Velveeta. Oh well, they said the same thing about Shatner. Ronald D. Moore claimed Shatner didn’t go full Shatner until the third season, but that’s not really true. See: the “risk is our business” speech from season 2, that’s pretty close to a full Shat-Attack. But anyway, Martin-Green needs to embrace the nacho factor, crank it up… no other choice- her take on Vulcanian comportment isn’t working at all, and Ruby Dee she is not. Martin-Green might not even be on the level of Sandra Dee… and she’s surely not in the same league as Dee Wallace. Admit it.
All true, but I have little hope of the show figuring that out. They’re way too busy checking boxes trying to satisfy demographic classes. Can you think of a more bass ackward way to construct a show? How about write good stories and make us love the characters? Thus far I’m ambivalent about every character, perhaps apart from Saru. Doug Jones gives the guy so much heart.
Because Roddenberry would never consider such a dastardly, peecee thing as choosing performers based on who could depict his vision of an inclusive future; Takei and Nichols were simply the most qualified actors to take on those roles regardless of ethnicity or gender. Yeah, whatever.
Funny that you like Doug Jones well enough…I imagine that there are two traits Jones has that provide you comfort.
Well, okay. He gives out the best hugs at cons, but other than that, I’m at a loss as to what you mean. Care to elaborate?
Maybe Greg is a tall skinny dude too?
Galt,
If cheese is a factor with Shatner, you can go back to the Where No Man pilot, because his speech to Dehner about what Mitchell will dare do is nearly as bold as ‘risk is our business’ (though probably better motivated dramatically.) Martin-Green just comes off like a mess on the show, engendering no sympathy or empathy despite the strong dramatic situation at the outset. That’s in large part due to ‘quite honestly inferior’ writing, to quote Khan, but everybody labored under that and yet she is the one carrying or not carrying the show. They had Isaacs to offset that in s1, but I doubt that crutch is going to be available on a regular basis in the future.
For now, she strikes me as almost being like Kyle McLachlan in DUNE — a black hole at the center of things that sucks away at the talent around it. KM is great to brilliant in most of his later work, but I have always found him to be wholly uncharismatic in DUNE and also unconvincing in all parts except the born-to-the-royal aspect. In retrospect, I wish Rob Lowe, who turned the part down, had done it, or some other then-young star with a certain amount of charisma who might otherwise be lacking in acting chops, just so there was SOMETHING at the center of the film besides Lynch’s talent being hacked away at by Dino. It’s kind of funny, because we are rewatching PARKS AND REC right now and Lowe’s spin on his character is very VERY McLachlan-like in his mannerisms, as if Dale Cooper had bypassed the FBI in favor of a different government service. If you can get through the misfire of s1 PARKS & REC — which is only 6 eps — it comes highly recommended as an amazingly upbeat show, one I really needed to see again this year.
Well, I happen to think that SMG is a real coup for this franchise, an actress with all of Shatner’s natural charisma and none of the excesses that came to dominate his work to the point of self-parody after Trek’s first season. (His performance in “Balance of Terror” is a minor masterpiece of understated dramatic restraint, and it’s difficult for me to understand why he increasingly chose to turn his back on a style of acting that proved to be so compelling.) No mystery to me at all why Bryan Fuller was willing to put the entire series on hold until she was free to participate, and if the writers were largely unable to provide her with dialogue and character growth worthy of her talent, well, that’s entirely on them.
McLachlan’s work on DUNE certainly could have been less generic, but in truth nothing could have salvaged that absolute mess of a movie. It’s a fascinating failure, because Lynch is a genuine auteur–and who knows if Jodorowsky’s version would have turned out any better–but a failure nonetheless.
Wow. She’s barely one step removed from a table-reading rehearsal. There is a natural style and there is a forced style. There are Patrick Stewart’s and there are Gates McFaddens. Martin-Green is 100% in the McFadden camp….and no, that is not a good thing…especially for a series’ lead.
‘Wow,’ indeed. So sorry your judgement that this apparently much sought-after performer isn’t capable of handling even the rudiments of her job isn’t as self-evidently obvious to myself and others as it is to you.
(Sheesh. I remember a few years back when the fine writer over at Salon, Andrew O’Hehir, while an obvious fan of the franchise, called Bill Shatner “The greatest bad actor in history,” a line I found pretty funny if a little unfair. Pity that some just can’t recognize that others have different tastes that are no less valid than their own, and leave it at that.)
“….much sought-after performer….”
*chuckle*
Why, because that’s wrong? Or do you just enjoy being a dick?
Hall, you are 100% correct here. She’s one of the top rising actors around today, and much sought after…like, duh!
Seriously??? SMG is a great actor. Get real.
You also really need to go back and watch Patrick Stewart in Season 1 of TNG. He wasn’t very good at the start. He has even acknowledged that.
“McLachlan’s work on DUNE certainly could have been less generic, but in truth nothing could have salvaged that absolute mess of a movie. It’s a fascinating failure, because Lynch is a genuine auteur–and who knows if Jodorowsky’s version would have turned out any better–but a failure nonetheless.”
Well said. I think Jordorwosky’s movie would have been cool to see, but I doubt it would have had much basis on Herbert’s Dune. Jordorwosky didn’t even read Dune.
The guy doing the DUNE remake has a history of taking big ideas in SF (ARRIVAL, BLADE RUNNER 2049) and ultimately scaling them way down to very personal stories, what with how ARRIVAL ultimately became a story about a woman and her daughter and BR about a man(?) and his daughter. I’m not sure that is the way to go with DUNE or not.
I’ve been doing a very very slow re-read of DUNE over the last several months, reading random stretches of the novel for just a few minutes at a time, which is something I almost never do with fiction, and I’m struck by just how much is not in the film (or the miniseries, which for all its alleged fidelity, I found much further afield, to the point I actually gave up after watching more than three-quarters of it.)
A friend once told me back in the 90s that he thought the DUNE film should have begun with the Harkonnen attack, then flashed back as needed to drop in the context. I didn’t agree then, but now I’m thinking that might be a very good take on it.
I’d really like to be a fly on the wall as progress gets made on the new film (or films, as I’ve heard he is doing two, though I don’t know if that is just to cover DUNE alone or includes MESSIAH) — have a feeling that win or lose, it’ll be an interesting proposition.
Your flashback approach could work – I like that idea.
First of all, Dune was a complete disaster that no core actor could have saved…the Ishtar of science fiction movies.
Second of all, Rob Lowe back then couldn’t act his way out of high school play.
See, and I rewatch DUNE at least yearly, as I concur with Harlan Ellison’s early assessment that it is the BIRTH OF A NATION (original silent film!) of sf films, very epic in scope, even if flawed in so many other ways. I’ve even watched the long disavowed version at least a half-dozen times.
Do you folks know about Ridley Scott’s version? He was on it for a year or more prior to BLADE RUNNER, and it infuriated Frank Herbert with its changes, which included Alia’s sister being a product of incest between Paul and his mother. As crazed as the Jodorowsky would have been and as fantastic as it would have looked, this thing might have been equally bizarre (and possibly far less watchable than the Lynch, which has some still gorgeous foreground miniatures sprinkled amid the sloppy VFX.)
Did you get the European Blu-Ray longer version of Dune? I was thinking about getting that.
If that is the same as the Judas Booth version that aired on broadcast here, then I have that, along w the theatrical on blu-ray.
Velveeta is notoriously not all that cheese-like, so your metaphor ironically proves to be the cheesiest.
Ah, Velveeta has not been made from real cheese in decades my friend.
Whoops!
There was swashbuckling music in season 1? Did I miss something?
The music of the first season was definitely not very memorable. We’ll see how they do it in the second season.
I usually notice music in just about every movie and tv show I watch, but for all I know, Berman could have been secretly riding herd on s1 of DSC, because I can’t hum or recall anything from the show musically.
This might as well be DOG DAY AFTERNOON or THE CHINA SYNDROME or NETWORK (except that there is immense talent involved with those three films, while almost nothing of that brilliance is evinced on DSC), none of which have any dramatic underscore in them whatsoever, and the miracle is that they work wonderfully without that typical dramatic crutch.
Try taking the underscore/hype out of Search for Spock during the escape from spacedock or the approach to Genesis while BoP is cloaked – you’ll doze off without the music egging things on (Nimoy’s camera and editing choices are not at all exciting compared to Meyer’s — you CAN watch TWOK with the sound off and still get a sense of building tension, it’s just that it’s that much better with the music added.)
Music adds so very very much. I was at a symphony with John Williams as a guest conductor. They showed a clip from Jaws sans the music. Then they replayed the clip with Williams conducting the score. Literally night and day. Sometimes you don’t notice the score but it can still effect the scene, too. Just adding my little insight here. Apologies if this a, “we know that already” thing.
Apology accepted. Thanks.
No need to be a dick about it.
It was a joke! :-)
I see. So I misread it. In my defense it really did come across as arrogance.
Nothing stands out from season 1.
All I remember of the music of season one was thinking to myself at times, “this sounds a lot like the music in the Kelvin movies.”
And some of that sounded like it was from Lost.
Well, it was written by the same guy. And composers do have musical signatures.
I agree, musically none of it really stood out. Although the main theme is FINALLY growing on me like it took me a long time to like the Kelvin main theme.
Sorry, but it sounded nothing like the Kelvin movies music. It’s much more understated; in fact, probably too much so. The Kelvin music by contrast is much more bombastic.
This was yummy! Can’t wait for more. I’m so glad Wilson Cruz is back and I can’t wait to see how. I’ve been a fan of his for years and so now to see him in Star Trek is a treat beyond treats. Not to mention his character had so much heart and wisdom last session. I also can’t wait for the whole gang to return and also meet the new comer’s. Biggest question is when will it be back?
I can’t wait for the new season. Finally Star Trek the way it should have always been.
Star Trek the way it should have always been?
Do you mean dystopian? Do you mean with characters that don’t get along with each other, even worse than the average workplace in our time?
Star Trek as its always been? With the bar set for being (from the last episode of Discovery)”We are Starfleet” meaning we are against genocide? Was that Gene’s grand vision for Star Trek? Is that your vision for what Star Trek always should have been?
OP is an established troll. Posting simplistic, unnecessarily polarizing generalizations designed to get an easy reaction. Just ignore.
Yeah HN4 is trolling sadly again. He’s clearly baiting to get a rise out of people. Its better to just ignore his posts and move on.
HN has reached that point with me for the time being. I’m now ignoring any post with his name on it. There is one other who is slowly approaching that level, unfortunately. I wonder how long it will be before I have three trolls on ignore…
Discovery is an amalgamated mess! Gotten way-too politically correct, trying to make every faction represented, visually and technically not even believable that it takes place before TOS. When they introduced the Enterprise at seasons end, they couldn’t even help tampering with the established ship design for God’s sake. Now they try to introduce Sonequa Martin-Green as half-sibling to Spock, talk about pulling strings. (remember ST5 Sybok?)(Not her fault however, its just a job). Expanding the pre-TOS time period is vast without trying to find relations of established canon characters by weaving some thin strand into something grander. Cancelled my subscription. Don’t want care any longer about it.
I find Star Trek Discovery to be the worst Trek series. And I thought I hated Enterprise. We needed gay characters a long time ago, I am all for diverse casting too – but when it comes to escapism, it provides none for me. It’s dark, violent, angry and pretentious. Not a hopeful look at humanity’s future. Discovery mocks fans.
By the way, has anybody seen the new Lost in Space? It has plots based on solving scientific problems, with likeable characters committed to acting ethically (except one of course).
Who knew that fifty years later, Star Trek and Lost in Space, the smart show and the dumb show, would switch roles? Life is funny.
I like Discovery, but I love the new Lost In Space. Especially when they use real science to resolve an issue.
Ditto. Loved Lost in Space. It didn’t try to do too much — the writers/story worked with what they had created and built on it on it with each successive episode. The sixth episode was very emotional. The character conflicts made sense and so the arcs worked.
Well if you also include The Orville into that group then we have 2 shows not named Star Trek doing better Star Trek than a show that actually has the name of Star Trek.
@alphantrion — I wouldn’t put ORVILLE in that group. It has nothing in common with either. I wouldn’t even put it in the same group as TNG which it shamelessly rips off.
I sure wouldn’t either. I don’t hate the show personally–it had its moments, here and there–but at the same time I’m pretty mystified by the love some have for it. At best, it was a very uneven, clunky first season.
The Orville is TNG with a few jokes sprinkled in. And I think it is far more successful at what it is trying to do than what STD is trying to do.
Maybe, I’d definitely take exception to your “far.” But when making such comparisons my question always has to be: is it better to aim high and fall short of your target, or aim low and hit the target dead-on. And while I’m fairly certainly you’d disagree, for my money Discovery aimed far higher than The Orville did.
The Orville is a completely derivative show with no originality — like Enterprise, but with sitcom jokes thrown in.
Like or dislike DSC, but you can’t argue that its much more ambitious science fiction.
Michael, I would agree that Discovery did indeed aim higher than Orville did. Even with that being the case, if I were only allowed to watch one of those two, Orville would win every time simply because I find that Orville works much better than Discovery does.
“The Orville is TNG with a few jokes sprinkled in.”
You just described perfectly why I have no interest in The Oville. If “Berman 2.0 with jokes” is what some fans want, go for it and claim “success”…for my part, that concept bores me to tears, and I have zero interest in watching season 2 of that silly show.
I had the same thought. Star Trek now resides in Lost in Space and the Orville, but not in STD. It’s like Turnabout Intruder when Kirk goes into Janice Lester’s body.
Huh? Although it was traumatic for Kirk to be in Janet Lester’s body, I do not recall that either of then contracted an STD from the experience?
Wait, did you perhaps mean to say DSC, which is the official short-hand term for Star Trek Discovery?
I can’t put Orville into that group…it’s simply TNG with sitcom humor thrown in.
I was only able to maintain interest for about 4 episodes before just giving up. To be honest, I found most of the characters annoying or incredibly cliched. I’m also really tired of all these shows relying on flashbacks as a storytelling tool to flesh out the characters. Turning John Robinson into a borderline clueless career grunt was also something of a turn-off to me. The old show is impossibly silly by today’s standards but this one just came across as insufferable to me.
You lasted longer than me; we gave up while Penny was still stuck in the ice, about 20minutes, tops. I watched a VFX reel on youtube, figuring that would get me inspired to try again, but that didn’t do it either.
Haven’t seen it yet. Am curious to. Sadly Netflix has been very scrooge-like when it comes to releasing their original content to disc. I can’t even put it in my cue yet!
Thanks Gary!!!! Genuinely, so so glad I read your comment. I’ve just finished with a bunch of shows and am at a loss as to what to watch next. This sounds right up my street (sad this wasn’t the angle the new Trek series took) I am going to watch it. Sci-fi with heart and integrity. Bring it on!
Lost in Space was a pleasant surprise. Go figure.
Watched two episodes and was not at all impressed. Maybe I’ll sample more, as some do seem to like it.
@GarySeven — I did like the show, and enjoyed watching all of it. That said, I didn’t care for the following:
WARNING SPOILERS:
1) I hate that the robot is an alien. That’s not at all in keeping with the spirit of the original. Nor does it make any sense how cavalierly they all accept it, despite seemingly not having a choice.
2) While I don’t mind that Parker Posey is playing “Dr. Smith”, I’m not at all happy about how blatantly she’s depicted as a psychopath. It’s cartoonish, and she’s all but a mustache twirling villain. It was discovered way too early that she isn’t really Dr. Smith, and the blatant acts of aggression are entirely too unforgivable to keep her around the family the way the original Dr. Smith was.
3) I’m not really happy about the conspiracy theory alluding to the government stealing alien technology which they now want back. It’s all too convoluted for what LIS was originally supposed to be.
We’ll see what season 2 brings, but considering the changes they’ve made, this isn’t really LIS at all, except in name. This could be any space faring adventure about a group of colonists venturing out into space, encountering an alien race, and struggling to survive.
@Curious Cadet-
First of all, thank you for respectfully and thoughtfully explaining your point of view. I rarely post on this site because people are often so brutal with each other, it’s just depressing. So I appreciate both what you said and the way you said it.
As far as my thoughts on what you said:
1) I agree about Parker Posey’s Dr. Smith. I even fast forward through her parts sometimes. To me it’s like a different show when she’s on.
2) Personally, I don’t mind that it differs in fundamental ways from the original. The original was fun but ridiculous and silly. This is a reboot. I think of it as similar to the way BSG rebooted the more campy, less substantial original BSG.
But I am really happy to have a respectful dialogue about these fun shows with other fans and exchange thoughts. Why do we have to agree on everything? That would be boring and unstimulating.
@G7 — happy to engage civilly. As to your second point, I’m happy that it’s less campy and silly than the original. But I think if you were to re-watch the first 5-6 episodes, you’d see the potential before Jonathan Harris sent the show off the deep end in search of ratings. Again, I’m happy for the serious tone it sets, and there are some truly brilliant comedic moments:
WARNING SPOILERS
Like when the Robinsons escape from the tar pit using helium. I literally could not stop laughing after they narrowly escaped death and were talking with chipmunk voices after inhaling so much helium.
That said, the original premise still needs to retain a lot of the elements of the original in order to qialify it as LIS, otherwise call it something else. But the tone is not one of them — and it’s much less dramatic than the poorly received movie. One of my biggest complaints is Judy the doctor. While I applaud them for giving the female roles strong personalities and skills, she’s entirely too emotional given the abilities she’s supposed to posses to have been chosen for this mission, and at times incredibly unprofessional. I have a few other problems too — but my biggest is by far Smith. I just don’t know how any parents could trust someone like this Smith to be around themselves, much less their family — and that was a large part of SMith’s contribution to the original.
I’ve gotten halfway through LIS. I have to say it is a pretty good show so far. Still not better than Star Trek BUT I could actually see this as a Trek show if they had the same premise of Starfleet officers being stranded on a planet. I guess if the Voyager crew crashed the ship and had to stay there being so far from home.
Tried it for a couple of eps, but does not come across a realistic future, unfortunately. My wife commented that is assumes the viewers are dumb, and tries too hard to be Disney-like.
If Tig Notaro really said smtg with tachyons on the show, the chances are good for some timey-wimey story stuff and therefore the possibility to see Capt. Picard. NICE! :) :)
For all you cutting down on Culber, who is easily the most normal and relatable character on the show, the fact that he has also been to many worlds may be the continuity bridge we are all hoping for. And he does work well with Tilly.
I was particularly invested that Discovery should have a gay couple, being gay myself. But Discovery dropped the ball because like all of their concepts, a lot of flash and bang, but no real message or value. Growing up and feeling particularly isolated I looked to Star Trek for escapism, imagining a more hopeful, fair and accepting future for mankind, I was always a bit confused as to why we never saw an incidental same-sex couple, or sexuality of crew mates wasn’t casually addressed in a scene. I expected no big fanfare, nor did I want it, I just wanted a subtle reference to how ‘no big deal’ a person’s sexuality had become. When Discovery does show us a gay couple, it kills one off. It feels like a copout. Gay couples exist but not long enough for the fanbase to feel uncomfortable. These are my feelings and probably not the pretentious and contrived production team’s intensions. I dislike Discovery for so many reasons, they have done so little ‘right’ by me.
I dont believe that Culber is going to stay dead.
No one does. Writers told everyone he was coming back 2 seconds after his on screen “death”.
Thanks Gary and ML31. I thought he’d only be brought in flashbacks or dream sequences… or more mirror nonsense. But bringing back their dead character, as meaningless as it would be, sounds exactly like the kind of thing to expect from the level of writing on this show. Bomb on Qo’noS anyone?
For the record, they did NOT say what capacity is return would be. He might be corporal ghost that only Stammets can see or something.
…that would actually be pretty cool.
It’s been a staple of contemporary conventional drama on TV going back to RESCUE ME, though it went into genre stuff going back 50 years to MY PARTNER THE GHOST. Odd how elements that by themselves would once brand a show as SF now go into DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES and the like without anybody giving it a second thought.
For me, it depends on how they bring him back.
So, I am reserving judgement, for now.
“But bringing back their dead character, as meaningless as it would be, sounds exactly like the kind of thing to expect from the level of writing on this show”
You must have walked out the theater in protest then over that meaningless drama-milking Trek III movie back in the day where they brought back a dead character. One would imagine that you were never able to take the Spock character seriously again after that nonsense, which I have to say, is exactly the kind of thing to expect from the overrated Bennett and Nimoy. Protomatter and Katras anyone?
Martin, I agree. As a boy Star Trek taught me some wonderful values that I cherish to this day. If I grew up as a boy with Discovery, I would be a different, and lesser person. I think that says it all in a nutshell.
My 12 year old son and I watch STD. He said “It’s really fun and exciting show with all the action, but it’s not a good Star Trek show.”
If you have any issues with GaryEight getting his homework done this fall, have him start watching TNG Season 1, and he will start begging you to help him with his math homework instead. (save Voyager for High School homework reinforcement)
;-)
So much negativity in the comments here now. Unfortunate that it begins to tarnish the rep of a really amazing site that brings fresh Trek news to us consistently and constantly. Keep up the good work TrekMovie team. As far as the comments…eh…
Why does criticism of a series “tarnish” the wonderful work that TrekMovie do? Fans are passionate. Star Trek is awesome. Stop trying to silence people you don’t agree with. Shaming, bullying, personal attacks – it’s your kind of posts that infuriate me the most. If someone sings Discovery’s praises, I read it, shrug and move on. Why can’t you vocal few do the same when you read criiticism of what many feel is a badly written, pretentious show? There are millions of fans of this rich and vibrant 50 year franchise, Discovery is a small slice of that pie. May Star Trek continue for another 50 years! And it’s the passionate fans that guarantee that happening, not the mindless happy-with-anything masses.
PEB didn’t complain about “criticism”, he complained about “negativity”. Whether you like Discovery overall or not, it is certainly deserving of criticism in many parts. That, however, is a totally different from negativity.
The thing that ‘infuriates’ me most on this site and all other Trek sites are those posters with unrelenting negativity – on any given thing, all the time, with hyperbole everywhere. X is the “worst thing ever”, actor Y is the “literally the weakest”, “everything has been a bad idea”, etc. It is this kind of unrelenting negativity that bothers me, and maybe PEB too.
I definitely don’t agree, and in fact I read nearly all the comments here and there weren’t any personal insults or bad language too, people have a right to criticize and they are doing it relatively civil here. There has been some unfortunate comments in other threads but I myself usually call out those overeager fans and definitely do not condone it. But I have the right to criticize the show. I think criticism can only make a show better, without criticism you have people with tunnel visions who only go in one direction without looking at everything else around them. As a teacher, I always ask my students to criticize me if they see me do something not quite right and I think this helps in my development as a person, same thing can be true for entertainment as well. The way you worded your post makes me think that you only want to hear positive things about the show? Is that how life really works for you? You want everyone to constantly praise you and never criticize you?
As a newbie I see it too. Seems par for the course here. Sad! But there is another…
Though I tend to be pretty critical of Discovery myself I agree that to me much of the criticism here seems to be over-the-top. (Flawed as it is I’ll still take its first season over those of TNG, VOY, or ENT.) But if you want to see real negativity bordering on hysteria, check out some You Tube videos devoted to STAR WARS sometime.
Criticizing a show in no way criticizes the website which features it, much less the people who run it. As I’ve said here many times, the folks here at Trekmovie are top-notch and put out an excellent product. It’s not their fault quite a few people have problems with Discovery, and the people at Trekmovie actually deserve our thanks for giving us a forum by which to discuss this franchise which we’re all so passionate about.
NO one is really criticizing TM though, they are just talking about the show. I like TM because it does it best to give the latest news with all things Trek. I even defend it when some people call some of the articles click bait. I think they generally do an amazing job. But no one can stop people talking about how they feel about the subject matter that is posted.
I would agree. I think they do a pretty bang up job delivering all the Trek related news bits they possibly can get. Sure, there are articles I personally do not give a flip for. But that’s fine. And I enjoy the threads and hearing all the opinions posted. It’s really when people cross the line to obvious trolling is when things fail. That’s on the trolls, not the site runners. While I wish they had an official “ignore” button I am capable of skipping posts with known trolls writing them.
I’ve been visiting this site since about 2008. The number of positive versus negative comments is about the same, honestly, as those when the first Abrams movie was released. Nothing new here.
-I think the fans of the rest of the series should boycott Discovery ,just like Star Wars fans of the EU did with the last movies,and demand a REAL Star Trek show with normal Klingons and made it in the well known TNG style.
They already are! lol
See, I don’t agree with this, I may criticize Discovery on occasion but I also think the show has incredible potential and I want to watch to see how they continue with this story. I will still voice my criticism but I will also keep an open mind too. Same thing with Star Wars too, in fact I liked The Last Jedi more than The Force Awakens, but at the same time I can understand some of the problems the film has.
I was SO looking forward to Star Trek for modern television in 2018, nobody in their right mind wants a rehash of what came before… as much of a fan I am of TNG, DS9 and Voyager – we already have them. As you’ve pointed out Marian, Discovery has gone out of it’s way to distance itself from what’s come before and in doing so, distances the loyal fans of that rich 50 year franchise. If they can explain the visual inconsistencies, then I can approach the series differently. I didn’t want a prequel and a re-imagining is just plain insulting.
See I DON’T want that even though I love the past shows, especially TNG. I have NO issues with it being different but if its going to be this different but still suggests it fits in with other canon, then I can’t blame people for feeling upset. It does feel like its own thing, which IMO is good. BUT as I always say then call it a reboot and just feel free to do whatever you want with it.
The producers want to have their cake and eat it too in this instance telling us its all in the prime universe and fits into canon with the other shows but then looks and feels nothing likes it. Thats where most of the anger is coming from.
The Klingons could look however they want to if that was the case as well (although I know they have changed them countless times but it would be easier to swallow how different they feel for some from TOS and TNG).
This. Well said, Tiger. I LOVE TOS as the best of the bunch but I don’t want to see a TOS redoux. I think any new Trek needs to be it’s own thing but it also needs to respect the universe it is a part of IF you want it to be canonical. If you are going to cherry pick what elements you want then just call it a full on reboot and be done with it. People will be good with it. No one thought nu-BSG was the same show as the crappy one on the ’70’s. What are they so afraid of?
That explains the
I think those of us fans who like DSC should buy at least 2 CBS All Access accounts each to JUST SAY “ NO” to the subset of fans living in the past who want either a “Berman 2.0” or a “big budget version of Star Trek Continues” type of series.
Or you could spent that money on a worthy real-world cause.
“Notaro said she had the opportunity to chose the name herself.” I’m pretty sure she was joking.
She probably contributed ‘Jet’ as a retro-nickname — even though her humor is very dry, I didn’t get the slightest impression she was joking about that.
there is no gay people in the 23 century. just kidding.
Are sentence formulation and punctuation mastered by the 23rd century? ;-)