It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Star Trek: Discovery

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
These Klingons look like the TOS movie ones. #6 in particular.




posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Your scaring me dude.
I am a true fan of star trek and I really wanted a good new series.
Enterprise sucked. The new movies aren't even in the same reality so I don't even count them.
Last good star trek was voyager.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I'm still looking forward to it.

I'm kind of hoping for a bit of a mix between TNG and Voyager. Exploration AND the pew, pew, bang, bang.

Guess all I can do is wait and see.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   
My biggest issue with it, beyond the lore issues, is that I always felt ST highlighted social issues while simultaneously showing how we have transcended them in the future. Rather than just the typical "raising awareness" by showing direct correlations. The shows were seeping hope from every nook and cranny.

Obviously, that's just my personal take, and we will see how discovery handles it, but I always found that rather unique and inspiring. Instead of simply preaching like so many other forms of media and people, they demonstrated solutions AND how it would actually look in action.

I've felt the series has moved away from this since enterprise. While ST has some of my favorite stories of all time, I've had to lower standards significantly and shift expectations to continue enjoying it at all. At a certain point, it just isn't worth it anymore.

I also feel that creating yet another timeline is a bit of a cop out.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
As far as the Klingons looking different, I'm just gonna go with what Worf said on DS9. "We don't like to talk about it". Honestly I hope they stick with Roddenberry's philosophy of "no internal conflict". Trek is supposed to be a vision of a future where humans put aside petty differences and come together as a species, hopeful not political.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Serdgiam


I also feel that creating yet another timeline is a bit of a cop out.


The problem is, they opened the idea in TOS and every new Star Trek has had some form of time travel. The ones just off the top of my head are Star Trek with the whales, First Contact and the Borg, Voyager and the wormhole they spoke to a Romulan, the new films where Spock went back in time and effected his own and Kirks timeline and a whole load of other ones.

But I get what everyone's saying. Stop messing with the timelines and let the lore be a sacred thing.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock

Yeah I watch all of TNG at least once a year. Amazing how it still holds up.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 11:06 PM
link   

These ptacks insult the klingons.

May they find no peace as they rot in Grethor for their dishonor.



posted on Sep, 20 2017 @ 11:37 PM
link   
excited, expecting disappointment, but ....Star Trek.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr




Originally Klingons were a mix of dark skinned, barbaric, warlike, guttural, commies.


No.

Klingons are Republicans.

Vulcans are democrats.

Romulans are Antifa.

Fergengi are greedy capitalist pigs.

The federation were socialists ( the so called good guys).'

The Borg were the commies.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep




Last good star trek was voyager.


Deep Space Nine.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: scraedtosleep

This is the place I am in with Star Trek at the moment.

I have been a fan since I was knee high to a grasshopper, and love the original series (although for totally different reasons, than I enjoy the other parts of the franchise), TNG, DS9, and quite enjoyed a lot of what Voyager had to offer. I like the lore, have HUNDREDS of Trek related books, some of them having to do with technical breakdowns of the spacecraft featured in both film and television shows in the Star Trek family, others just fictions which flesh out the aspects of the lore of the setting, not dealt with in the shows and movies.

However, Voyager, as you say, was the last Star Trek series which did anything for me. Enterprise was a total waste of production time and money, if you ask me. First of all, it was a prequel, which is dodgy ground to start with, since there are only a few periods previous to the installation of Captain James Tiberius Kirk as captain of the Enterprise, with regard to the in universe lore, which ought to have enough resemblance to either the original series setting, or indeed the TNG setting, to make them watchable entertainment. In the period covered by Enterprise, the most challenging thing about operating a starship would not have been the scheming of alien species, or the machinations of undesirables in the command structure, or time traveling borg, or whatever nonsense was a foot in Enterprise. It would simply have been dealing with the problems which come up when your technology is not actually up to snuff, when your engines fail because their design is so inefficient that you spend more time adrift than under power, the problems of keeping people supplied with medicines, food, water, and so on. In the show however, the ship itself has a sleek, modern looking design, which makes the Enterprise of TOS, look like a bloody Nissan Micra, which is one of the many reasons that prequelising Star Trek to a pre-Kirk era, is and always was a bloody stupid idea, from a series perspective.

I did enjoy the first of the new batch of films, on the basis that the time lines were buggered about with. If they had not have been, I would have been unable to accept them at all, since again, stylistically, the ships were all wrong for the period, and so on, and so forth. I did not mind Into Darkness, although it had some holes in it, one might say, and I have not seen the other film that came out, simply because I saw the trailers, my reaction to which was "Since when the bloody hell is Star Trek supposed to look like a pajama party which got into a rugby scrum with a Star WARS fan club?". If you had told me, that since these films have been made, with this new timeline, any future series will now operate on THEIR timeline, I would have said "Stop this ride, let the people with taste and discernment off".

Look at comic book related movies, right? The BEST ones, are as rigidly devoted to the comic books they portray, as is physically possible. Case in point, Logan is a brilliant movie, but X-Men Origins: Wolverine is TERRIBLE, just a TERRIBLE movie. Same lead actor, same character, but the directors and direction are totally different, and simply put, the Origins movie was awful because?

TOTAL LACK OF RESPECT FOR THE SOURCE MATERIAL ON THE PART OF PRODUCERS AND DIRECTORS ALIKE!

By that I mean, that fans of the comics which came before, should find themselves unable to utter a single "Thats not canon" or "They buggered the plot about here" or "Wow... this movie has nothing to do with *insert name of intellectual property here*. This is tripe" when watching a comic book inspired film, and the same thing can be said of Star Trek series. The people making these things need to accept that if they want to work with a totally or even nearly free reign, then they may simply not work on things which have an existing following, pre-existing timelines, pre-established paradigms.

To do anything other than work WELL within the pre-drawn lines which define the Star Trek universe, the characters, species, the progression of the advance of technology throughout time, and so on, is just not acceptable, because unless the writer has more respect for what has gone before, than they do for their own vision, then personally speaking, I do not think they should be permitted to work on these things.

Star Trek is more than a fictional universe, more than a television show or collection thereof, more than a film franchise. Its a lifestyle, a way of thinking, a way of life. You cannot attach things to it willy nilly, so those working on projects related to it should not be trying to put their own stamp on it, but fit comfortably and without overmuch fanfare, into it. Whats happening now, is a case of directors and producers with egos too large to fit, trying to shoehorn themselves into a franchise in which they do not belong, with no regard for what it does to the lore. This is my fear, that the lore (which, before the new cluster of movies, was a huge, but largely cohesive and beautiful thing), will now become a convoluted, utterly unfollowable mess, as a result of nothing more than those making a show, not understanding their own total irrelevance in the face of the lore, failing to realise just how little importance their artistic freedom has, when compared with the weight of what has been before, and staying true to it.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Got to agree with all the comments about rewriting Klingon character and history etc.

And to be fair I'd like to see Star Trek moving forward rather than (re)writing back stories and alternate timelines etc - give us something genuinely new, challenging and thought provoking whilst also being entertaining.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Indeed, there is a great deal of difference between the Klingon of the Original Series, and The Next Generation era. However, that difference has a great deal more to do with the fact that the make up effects department for TNG was actually capable of doing more than painting people funny colours, and giving them elf ears.

This however, does not nearly explain a thing about the reason it was deemed either necessary or desirable to make changes to the base state of the Klingon race for THIS new series. It seems like something one would only seek to do, if one was utterly unwilling to engage with the canon of the existing storylines, which ought to be a one way ticket to the trash heap, for anyone looking to work on a Star Trek franchise in any serious manner.


They came up with a lore reason for the lack of forehead ridges in TOS.

memory-alpha.wikia.com...

The augment virus was shown in ENT. I'm okay with it. At least they didn't resort to time travel to fix the lore in this case.

Klingons aren't why I'm not going to watch the new series. It's dripping with PC. PC actors, PC plot, PC everything. I watch sci-fi for the entertainment, not for the brainwashing.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 07:22 PM
link   
While I like do the Roddenberry's classic "no internal conflict" slant as something of an inspirational outcome for society to aim for, it's honestly not that realistic even for a utopian-themed franchise.
Not everything's going to go perfectly -- if it does, it's practically unnatural. ST lore is littered with conflicts, not touched on much further than in passing, save for a scant few episodes that lifted the Veil of Paradise. DS9's "The Siege of AR-558", and "In the Pale Moonlight", TNG's "Chain of Command" and Voyager's "Remember" are all especially dark & gritty episodes I wish there had been more of, because they clearly show even a utopian society has to grapple with the horrible whether they expect it or not, whether they like it or not.

I'll give Discovery a fair shake. I waited way too long to give Enterprise a fair shake -- years after it was canceled. I ended up loving ENT, the early, rough-hewn baby steps of what would eventually be the Federation WAS worth exploring in a prequal after all. Perhaps, in hindsight, the issues & conflicts Discovery is centered around will also be regarded as equally worthwhile. Or perhaps not, it could also be a huge flop. We'll just have to see.



posted on Sep, 23 2017 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: peskyhumans

PC?

I guess you never liked TOS, TNG, DS9, or Voyager then, if you have a problem with being taught lessons in morality by a science fiction show.



posted on Sep, 23 2017 @ 05:38 AM
link   
I can count on one hand what I don't like about ST.

1- The first movie. Terrible. TOS went POS with this one. I sat through it at the theatre.
2- The fifth movie. Although the dude that played Sybok was pretty cool. It seemed thrown together.
3- Early DS9. The Dominion wars are some of the best episodes in all the lore though.
4- Into Darkness. Poor script and sorry Brits. I can't stand Cumberbatch. He annoys me. Khan? More like Khan't.
5- Enterprise. Nuff said.



posted on Sep, 25 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Just got done watching the first two episodes of Discovery.

Going to try and not do any spoilers here.

The show certainly does not start off like all the others. All the other shows starts us off with the crew and the ship (or station in the case of DS9). This show doesn't do it that way.

The other shows seem to center around the Captain (or commander in the case of DS9), and how he/she gets them through that episode, with some episodes later on being centered around a certain crew member or members.
This show seems centered around a certain character instead, and it's not the captain....in fact, 2 episodes in and we've not seen the ship Discovery nor her captain yet.

Klingons - yes, they changed how they look. They added a lot more make up to make them look even more alien that have been previously shown. Not sure why they felt the need to do this as the way Klingons looked from TNG on was just fine for me.

As for the "political crap" that people here on ATS were going on about: not seen it. So far it's Star Trek, and about what I'd expect out of Star Trek. Any politics that people are complaining about, they are trying to put it in the show in their own heads as far as I can see.

Special Effects: Solid! They were quite good, and can not complain at all.

Right now after 2 episodes if I were to rate the show from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, I would give this show a 8 to 8.5 for now. If you're a Star Trek fan, I don't see much to complain about.

If you're new to Star Trek (where have you been????), you may find this show's beginning a bit confusing as it's assuming you know about Klingons, Vulcans, the Federation, etc, etc. I would recommend doing some research and learning about Star Trek's universe at least a little bit first. You don't have to watch entire shows to do this, plenty of wiki and fan pages to search for on the web.



posted on Sep, 25 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

I haven't got around to watching it yet. Going to watch both episodes tomorrow.

Thanks for the brief summary so far and thanks lots for the lack of spoilers



posted on Sep, 25 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: eriktheawful

I haven't got around to watching it yet. Going to watch both episodes tomorrow.

Thanks for the brief summary so far and thanks lots for the lack of spoilers


I am half way through the first episode and have yet to have a tantrum or throw anything in disgust.

Not quite ST as I am used to but I am open to new ideas and I also liked Enterprise so.......

the cast does seem a bit young for a crew but maybe that is because I am getting old.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join