Oh please. Stop treating TheWrap.com as some bastion of journalistic integrity. It's a Hollywood gossip website, period.
Who conducts themselves with more professionalism than many mainstream outlets. If they print gossip, they reach out for comment prior to posting their article. You may disagree with their content, but they are professional.
As I said, I'm sure there's a nugget of truth in this, but it's not as sinister as some fans like to paint. It's a typical Hollywood gossip column, wrapped in vague quotes from "sources close to the situation."
In the end, I don't care if it's 100% accurate or a complete lie. Whether it's J.J. Abrams or Big Bad Les Moonves, I have little patience for fan conspiracy theories that ultimately are used just to support their views of NOT getting their way.
What does any of this have to do with anything?
JJ wanted to sell JJ-Trek merchandise. Market research showed "brand confusion" between JJ-Trek and Old Busted Trek. JJ asked CBS Consumer Products to pull their license for Trek products that "confused" consumers. CBS Consumer Products said "No". There is no "conspiracy".
There is nothing else to tell. Today, merchandising an IP can lead to equal or greater profits than the theatrical release. Various people lamented at the loss of profit. They even talked about the lack of "multimedia direction in merchandising". They went on to talk about Star Wars and how it is a merchandising juggernaut and would be a better fit for JJ's expectations.
Not sure how any of this makes JJ-Trek bad. It's the mediocre to terrible execution of the JJ-Trek movies that makes them bad. Not JJ's failed forays into merchandising.
You seem to be confusing the words "professional" and "accurate." TheWrap may be a professional operation, with professional employees... but, in the end, they still run a Hollywood gossip website, and in that game, you're just wrong sometimes.
Or, at the very least, reporting an incomplete story.
And the conspiracy theories come in when you start painting J.J. Abrams as sitting in a high-back leather throne, petting a white cat, and demanding that "old busted Trek" be thrown out. Even characterizing the exchange like that (and, "old busted Trek" is YOUR words) paints the exchange in a certain light... and we don't know if it went down that way.
And, again, for the third time... I'm sure that there are nuggets of truth in this. I'm positive Abrams wanted to turn Star Trek into a multi-platform empire that would have made Rick Berman and George Lucas weep. I'm sure there were discussions about "brand confusion," and when CBS refused to stop selling TOS merchandise (and why would they? If it still makes them money...), I'n sure that was frustrating news for Bad Robot.
That sounds like typical Hollywood business to me. But no, some fans want to project MORE into the story... Abrams DEMANDING he get his way, dismissing old Trek as "old and busted"... you want to harp about professionalism? How unprofessional would it be for a major Hollywood produce to act like that?
And, if you want to prove me wrong? Then you (or TheWrap, as it were) need to proceed more than one anonymous source on the subject. Don't have that? Then we're done.
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
The show is set prior to TOS, it will use designs from the most recent eras to both itself in the show and in terms of the audience's memory (ENT, Kelvin, and KT respective) as it progresses it will become TOS.
I imagine this was obvious to everybody in production from the start with only ardent fanbois claiming this is them backtracking to save face despite it being clear from past interviews they could't care less about the fanbois and didn't need htem to carry the show.
It was also obvious to some of us here who've either suggested it as a possibility or repeatedly pointed out that any and all stuff seen in DSC predates TOS and shouldn't look like it.
It will be continually be less obvious to those here who are conspiracy nuts and will simply believe this is another lie CBS is telling them personally. Either desperately trying to win those dozen people back because the show can't survive without them or lying to make them watch.
We will see a TOS era ship or character before the show is done as we always were going to. Maybe even a passing the torch character from ENT or the KT films.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
For inspiration the crew drew from Byzantine, Medieval, Gothic and Islamic influences. And one of the Star Trek sources that Bryan Fuller directed the designers to pull from was the 1984 Star Trek novel The Final Reflection by John Ford. This book was helpful as a “launching off point thematically” for the Klingons and for specific details, such as a creating a version of the game “klin zha” which is played to teach military strategy.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
Did the same not hapoen with Suicide Squad mid-shoot? Like I said, reaction to what has been seen: Ship design which was rapidly denounced as only being 'work in progress' after lukewarm reception. Reaction to the aesthetic differences between Discovery, and what has been seen of The Cage and TOS, Axanar and Continues. Significant rejection of the project, for a competing project which is 'out-Trekking' the official Trek offering. And, alleged test-screenings where less than 50% were interested in seeing more.
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Why should CBS worry? Netflix Europe has already financed their streaming service in exchange for the show. They could drop a number two steamer with zero financial impact.
We existing Trek fans are not a single group. There are diehard 'make no changes' fans, there are fans who will give it screen time just because it has an Enterprise Delta on it, and there is a majority who pick their spot on the spectrum between the extremes. With no single target group, it makes no sense to cater to Trek fans. In serving one portion of the fanbase they would of necessity offend another.
So instead they use logic and try to appeal to a wider audience. We'll see very soon if they made the right choice.
Why should CBS worry? Netflix Europe has already financed their streaming service in exchange for the show. They could drop a number two steamer with zero financial impact.
We existing Trek fans are not a single group. There are diehard 'make no changes' fans, there are fans who will give it screen time just because it has an Enterprise Delta on it, and there is a majority who pick their spot on the spectrum between the extremes. With no single target group, it makes no sense to cater to Trek fans. In serving one portion of the fanbase they would of necessity offend another.
So instead they use logic and try to appeal to a wider audience. We'll see very soon if they made the right choice.
That you even ask that question, I don't think I'll be able to sufficiently answer. As you say, we will see very soon...
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
Did the same not hapoen with Suicide Squad mid-shoot? Like I said, reaction to what has been seen: Ship design which was rapidly denounced as only being 'work in progress' after lukewarm reception. Reaction to the aesthetic differences between Discovery, and what has been seen of The Cage and TOS, Axanar and Continues. Significant rejection of the project, for a competing project which is 'out-Trekking' the official Trek offering. And, alleged test-screenings where less than 50% were interested in seeing more.
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
Overanalysis.
Who cares about Suicide Squad when there's a near-perfect, in-franchise analogy: The Next Generation. As has been pointed out MANY times in this thread, the fan reaction to DSC is very similar to fan reaction to TNG in 1986. Had the internet been around back then like it is today? You'd probably see the same reaction.
You assume "damage control" based off of concept art, set photos, and scenes from two trailers... which, in all likelihood, only covers the first 2-3 episodes. The planned evolution of the show's aesthetic could have been planned from the beginning, who knows.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
Did the same not hapoen with Suicide Squad mid-shoot? Like I said, reaction to what has been seen: Ship design which was rapidly denounced as only being 'work in progress' after lukewarm reception. Reaction to the aesthetic differences between Discovery, and what has been seen of The Cage and TOS, Axanar and Continues. Significant rejection of the project, for a competing project which is 'out-Trekking' the official Trek offering. And, alleged test-screenings where less than 50% were interested in seeing more.
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
You are guessing this is not going to go the way you are hoping? you are entited to that viewpoint. However you mentioned it yourself, you can't know for sure what will happen. Why should CBS fear to do something to add to Trek history? If it succeeds or fails it doesn't matter, it's the effort of trying that counts and and as far as i am concerned, all power to CBS forat least trying, better than sitting around wondering and never knowing for sure.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
Did the same not hapoen with Suicide Squad mid-shoot? Like I said, reaction to what has been seen: Ship design which was rapidly denounced as only being 'work in progress' after lukewarm reception. Reaction to the aesthetic differences between Discovery, and what has been seen of The Cage and TOS, Axanar and Continues. Significant rejection of the project, for a competing project which is 'out-Trekking' the official Trek offering. And, alleged test-screenings where less than 50% were interested in seeing more.
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
Overanalysis.
Explain
Who cares about Suicide Squad when there's a near-perfect, in-franchise analogy: The Next Generation. As has been pointed out MANY times in this thread, the fan reaction to DSC is very similar to fan reaction to TNG in 1986. Had the internet been around back then like it is today? You'd probably see the same reaction.
Tainted speculation benefiting from hindsight. You can't use TNG's success, to disregard the concerns which people (apparently) had prior to its release. Just because TNG was good (despite early fears) doesn't in any way mean Discovery will be. You don't get to borrow the credibility for one show, and apply it to another.
As for Suicide Squad, it doesn't matter if the example is in-franchise or not. The producers re-wrote it mid-shoot due to test reception. That is a fact. I'm not even touching upon the fact that it hasn't been a huge success either, because that's irrelevant. It was re-written due to poor reception, and the noted examples to do with Discovery, certainly sound much like the same thing: Poorly received (or at least, not universally praised) promo material, thus leading to announcements of evolutions (which really just sound like disguised revisions)
You assume "damage control" based off of concept art, set photos, and scenes from two trailers... which, in all likelihood, only covers the first 2-3 episodes. The planned evolution of the show's aesthetic could have been planned from the beginning, who knows.
Assumption? I'd say 'reasonable speculation', based upon observation of negative reception across the fanbase' Tomayto tomarto
Hey, I might well be wrong, seeing 2 and 2 as 22 not 4. It may be that the evolution and other things were always planned, but it can certainly be seen to appear the other way, and given the contemporary era's love of prevarication and "No I didn"ism when caught out, I see no reason to give the benefit of the doubt, until seeing the final product (or in my case, waiting to hear what others say about it, because I won't be watching it due to no CBS All Access and no Netflix)
Also, f*** Axanar.
Yeah, TRIBBLE Axanar, or more appropriately, TRIBBLE Alec Peters, but I don't think it can be dismissed that the project was looking too good, raised too much money, and focussed too closely on the time period which Discovery is now set in, for cbs/Paramount to ignore, so they went down the legal route.
Regardless of the legal wrangles, shenanigans and personality issues, the look of what was released was unquestionably what people know and expect of 23rd Century Trek. (The reason why people still make AoY characters) Discovery's 'difference for the sake of difference' approach? TRIBBLE Discovery.
I'd still rather fly an Ares with a 23rd Century themed crew than a Shenzhou, but hey, to each his own
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
Did the same not hapoen with Suicide Squad mid-shoot? Like I said, reaction to what has been seen: Ship design which was rapidly denounced as only being 'work in progress' after lukewarm reception. Reaction to the aesthetic differences between Discovery, and what has been seen of The Cage and TOS, Axanar and Continues. Significant rejection of the project, for a competing project which is 'out-Trekking' the official Trek offering. And, alleged test-screenings where less than 50% were interested in seeing more.
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
You are guessing this is not going to go the way you are hoping? you are entited to that viewpoint. However you mentioned it yourself, you can't know for sure what will happen. Why should CBS fear to do something to add to Trek history? If it succeeds or fails it doesn't matter, it's the effort of trying that counts and and as far as i am concerned, all power to CBS forat least trying, better than sitting around wondering and never knowing for sure.
Are you making a statement, or asking a question?
At the moment, all anyone is doing is speculating. Based on the above examples, it comes across to me as face-saving attempts at disguised revision based on poor test reception. I know that this happens, and cited Suicide Squad as a very recent example of it being done.
As for 'why should they fear to do something to add to Trek history?' That's a loaded and misleadingly-worded question: But off the top of my head;
-They should fear to release a series which could potentially damage IP popularity and marketability.
-They should fear to release a series, which they are clearly using as a flagship draw to CBS All Access, because if it fails to win popularity, oh dear, they'll be losing subscriptions, and while they may not have to issue refunds, they certainly won't be getting any more dollar out of displeased viewers.
-They should fear to release a show which shows a marked lack of awareness for the IP or the sensitivities/sensibilities of the fanbase (upon which they are hoping to make dollar) because that could potentially impact upon their own personal employabilit or bankability as a producer.
They have a lot to gain, but they equally have a lot to lose if this project bombs. And, up against a competing project which would appear to be being well-received, they may be entering s popularity contest which they can't win.
Look at how Nemesis failed at the box office, simply because of the competing titles at the time. Discovery is running the same kind of risk, in fact, more so than Nemesis, because where Bond and Potter weren't directly competing comparable franchises, The Orville is.
Onky a few weeks now, and we'll know what happens.
"Exciting!" - Montgomery Scott
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
(...)
Look at how Nemesis failed at the box office, simply because of the competing titles at the time. (...)
Yes. Or because it was a unspeakably horrible piece of TRIBBLE
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
...As for 'why should they fear to do something to add to Trek history?' That's a loaded and misleadingly-worded question: But off the top of my head;
-They should fear to release a series which could potentially damage IP popularity and marketability.
-They should fear to release a series, which they are clearly using as a flagship draw to CBS All Access, because if it fails to win popularity, oh dear, they'll be losing subscriptions, and while they may not have to issue refunds, they certainly won't be getting any more dollar out of displeased viewers.
-They should fear to release a show which shows a marked lack of awareness for the IP or the sensitivities/sensibilities of the fanbase (upon which they are hoping to make dollar) because that could potentially impact upon their own personal employabilit or bankability as a producer.
ST V: TFF, ST: Nemesis, VOY: Threshold and the entire Enterprise series were absolutely dreadful and didn't do a thing to damage the popularity of the IP. It's still going.
And how long was it between the release of Nemesis, and 09? Between the cancellation of Enterprise, and Discovery? Of course the franchise is still going, but that doesn't make it bulletproof..
Discovery is already paid for via the deal with Netflix, nor is it the only draw for All Access. For fans of CBS properties, it's actually a very good deal to have access to their complete library of programming.
And for non-fans of CBS stuff, they're only paying out for Discovery. Why do you have a problem with the notion that Discovery is being used as a flagship show, due to the popularity of the Trek IP?
Lack of awareness of the IP does not necessarily mean anything. Harve Bennett and Nicholas Meyer never knew anything about Star Trek before being tasked to get involved with it and in turn produced some of the best Trek to-date.
And the same point as before: Credibility is not transferable. Change for the sake of change, will only be tolerated so far, especially when there is an alternative available.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
What's to explain? I think you're overanalyzing the situation.
Tainted speculation benefiting from hindsight. You can't use TNG's success, to disregard the concerns which people (apparently) had prior to its release. Just because TNG was good (despite early fears) doesn't in any way mean Discovery will be. You don't get to borrow the credibility for one show, and apply it to another.
As for Suicide Squad, it doesn't matter if the example is in-franchise or not. The producers re-wrote it mid-shoot due to test reception. That is a fact. I'm not even touching upon the fact that it hasn't been a huge success either, because that's irrelevant. It was re-written due to poor reception, and the noted examples to do with Discovery, certainly sound much like the same thing: Poorly received (or at least, not universally praised) promo material, thus leading to announcements of evolutions (which really just sound like disguised revisions)
Sorry, you don't get to cherry-pick examples to support your decision, after diminishing my stance for doing the same.
And, you assume a conclusion where none exists. I never claimed Discovery will be successful, let alone reach the level of success that The Next Generation achieved. My only point is: we don't know, so jumping to conclusions at this point is silly.
And if the DSC hand phaser or communicator are any indication, the producers are well-aware of the design aesthetic they need to achieve without resorting to "damage control" over a few upset fanbois on the internets.
The Hollywood Reporter is on the ground in San Diego to gauge the immediate and often knee-jerk fan reaction to each pilot episode, extended sneak peek and first-look trailer. Below, THR's assessment of the audience reaction to each first look, ranked from tepid acceptance to fan favorite.
....
1. Star Trek: Discovery (CBS All Access)
Premieres: Sunday, Sept. 24
Starring: Sonequa Martin-Green, Doug Jones, Jason Isaacs, Anthony Rapp, Michelle Yeoh, James Frain, Rainn Wilson
Logline: Star Trek: Discovery will follow the voyages of Starfleet on their missions to discover new worlds and new life-forms, and one Starfleet officer who must learn that to truly understand all things alien, you must first understand yourself. The series will feature a new ship, new characters and new missions, while embracing the franchise's well-known ideology and hope for the future that inspired a generation of dreamers and doers. Reaction: Despite any fears that Trekkies wouldn't embrace the new crew, the new trailer that debuted in Ballroom 20 went over well (to a huge, positive reaction).
Seems to me everyone at comic con enjoyed the Discovery stuff and is looking forward to the series.
Cherry picking. Look at the reactions to the use of the McQuarrie design, on this forum alone: Far from universal praise, and the design was changed, from what was initially teased. You're going to have to do harder than The Hollywood Reporter, to convince me that these evolutions were in anyway intended all along, and not Suicde Squad-esque panic revisions
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
What's to explain? I think you're overanalyzing the situation.
And just because you think that doesn't actually mean that I am
Tainted speculation benefiting from hindsight. You can't use TNG's success, to disregard the concerns which people (apparently) had prior to its release. Just because TNG was good (despite early fears) doesn't in any way mean Discovery will be. You don't get to borrow the credibility for one show, and apply it to another.
As for Suicide Squad, it doesn't matter if the example is in-franchise or not. The producers re-wrote it mid-shoot due to test reception. That is a fact. I'm not even touching upon the fact that it hasn't been a huge success either, because that's irrelevant. It was re-written due to poor reception, and the noted examples to do with Discovery, certainly sound much like the same thing: Poorly received (or at least, not universally praised) promo material, thus leading to announcements of evolutions (which really just sound like disguised revisions)
Sorry, you don't get to cherry-pick examples to support your decision, after diminishing my stance for doing the same.
The difference is I wasn't cherry-picking, I was giving examples. You, were relying on the notion of TNG's eventual popularity proving naysayers wrong, to be enough to disregard the concerns which people are citing before Discovery's release. Not the same thing, and not an applicable supposition.
And, you assume a conclusion where none exists. I never claimed Discovery will be successful, let alone reach the level of success that The Next Generation achieved. My only point is: we don't know, so jumping to conclusions at this point is silly.
Again, not an assumption of a conclusion, because I'm not, and was not, talking about Discovery's eventual/potential popularity, but the creative process which has gone into it as a project and how it appears to have been revised in response to negative test feedback and reception
And if the DSC hand phaser or communicator are any indication, the producers are well-aware of the design aesthetic they need to achieve without resorting to "damage control" over a few upset fanbois on the internets.
No, not producers, the artists. The producers aren't going to turn down good design work. Had the rest of the aesthetic been in keeping with the phaser and communicator, my view would be 180 degress different.
"I fight for the Users!" - Tron
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
(...)
Look at how Nemesis failed at the box office, simply because of the competing titles at the time. (...)
Yes. Or because it was a unspeakably horrible piece of ****
don't make me turn you into bacon....
also, people like to exaggerate how drastically Suicide Squad was rewritten after the initial trailers were shown. when you watch the film closely you can see how certain of the comedy scenes feel a bit out of place. Well, the majority of the movie(as shown in theaters) was done when they made the first few trailers, and then a few more scenes got shot to make it a bit less grim dark and more funny(albeit a dark sort of humor). It certainly livened it up nicely.
So, it looks like the show will slowly pivot towards a more TOS look. Now, you could ask why did the PTBs make such a departure in design in the first place, if they're only going to walk it all back later... a valid question... but, as we have discussed in here earlier, designs (ships, graphics, uniforms, etc.) can change. It's silly to write off a show because of that, IMO.
Interesting article indeed, thanks for the share. Its timing, I consider interesting. When the initial look of the Discovery was released at the comicon, it was resoundingly derided. Their response? "Oh this is just concept art..." And they changed it.
There's been months of feedback on social media since the trailers, where people have pointed out the glaring aesthetic inconsistencies to TOS, and how they feel this is a show which is Trek in name only, coasting on the name and nostalgia to get subscribers, while providing a totally different concept (which under any other circumstances, would be written off as alternate universe/reboot/etc)
And now they say that things will be shifting towards the TOS aesthetic.
To me, that comes across as nothing more than damage-control placations to try and retain interest from people who have already decided it's not something they're intersted in subscribing to watch
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
Did the same not hapoen with Suicide Squad mid-shoot? Like I said, reaction to what has been seen: Ship design which was rapidly denounced as only being 'work in progress' after lukewarm reception. Reaction to the aesthetic differences between Discovery, and what has been seen of The Cage and TOS, Axanar and Continues. Significant rejection of the project, for a competing project which is 'out-Trekking' the official Trek offering. And, alleged test-screenings where less than 50% were interested in seeing more.
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
You are guessing this is not going to go the way you are hoping? you are entited to that viewpoint. However you mentioned it yourself, you can't know for sure what will happen. Why should CBS fear to do something to add to Trek history? If it succeeds or fails it doesn't matter, it's the effort of trying that counts and and as far as i am concerned, all power to CBS forat least trying, better than sitting around wondering and never knowing for sure.
Are you making a statement, or asking a question?
At the moment, all anyone is doing is speculating. Based on the above examples, it comes across to me as face-saving attempts at disguised revision based on poor test reception. I know that this happens, and cited Suicide Squad as a very recent example of it being done.
As for 'why should they fear to do something to add to Trek history?' That's a loaded and misleadingly-worded question: But off the top of my head;
-They should fear to release a series which could potentially damage IP popularity and marketability.
-They should fear to release a series, which they are clearly using as a flagship draw to CBS All Access, because if it fails to win popularity, oh dear, they'll be losing subscriptions, and while they may not have to issue refunds, they certainly won't be getting any more dollar out of displeased viewers.
-They should fear to release a show which shows a marked lack of awareness for the IP or the sensitivities/sensibilities of the fanbase (upon which they are hoping to make dollar) because that could potentially impact upon their own personal employabilit or bankability as a producer.
They have a lot to gain, but they equally have a lot to lose if this project bombs. And, up against a competing project which would appear to be being well-received, they may be entering s popularity contest which they can't win.
Look at how Nemesis failed at the box office, simply because of the competing titles at the time. Discovery is running the same kind of risk, in fact, more so than Nemesis, because where Bond and Potter weren't directly competing comparable franchises, The Orville is.
Onky a few weeks now, and we'll know what happens.
"Exciting!" - Montgomery Scott
A question and i'm trying to find some form of understanding in what you see and like you mention this is a speculation thread.
The others here; @angrytarg, @valoreah and @mhall85 have made some valid points, which is something i agree with, that Star Trek has been going for 50 years now, it's had it's ups and downs but it hasn't been shafted, it's been almost 20 years between TOS and TNG and only a few years between films and series. Time gaps don't mean anything to Trek.
They don't have a lot to fear for their series and there have been a lot more damaging episodes and choices in trek history and even with those the franchise has not been shafted by the fanbase, a lot of people love trek and the significance it created. Trek is built on controversy and what could be considered damaging to the brand and not once has Trek been hammered for it, it fact some of those choices are used as proud examples of how cultures have shifted in the face of a tv series which at their time would be considered outragous.
CBS shouldn't fear to put new things into trek.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
They don't have a lot to fear for their series and there have been a lot more damaging episodes and choices in trek history and even with those the franchise has not been shafted by the fanbase, a lot of people love trek and the significance it created. Trek is built on controversy and what could be considered damaging to the brand and not once has Trek been hammered for it, it fact some of those choices are used as proud examples of how cultures have shifted in the face of a tv series which at their time would be considered outragous.
CBS shouldn't fear to put new things into trek.
Essentially, yes. Star Trek will always be TOS to the vast majority of people (including outside the fanbase. If you ask someone about Star Trek they've seen TOS at some point in their lives). And nothing anyone can do can damage this, it's not going away. But for the same reason we won't see CB abandoning it, there will be no "reboot" beyond recognition. And DSC will, I am almost 100% certain about it, feature classic visuals at some point, even if just in the background.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
They don't have a lot to fear for their series and there have been a lot more damaging episodes and choices in trek history and even with those the franchise has not been shafted by the fanbase, a lot of people love trek and the significance it created. Trek is built on controversy and what could be considered damaging to the brand and not once has Trek been hammered for it, it fact some of those choices are used as proud examples of how cultures have shifted in the face of a tv series which at their time would be considered outragous.
CBS shouldn't fear to put new things into trek.
Essentially, yes. Star Trek will always be TOS to the vast majority of people (including outside the fanbase. If you ask someone about Star Trek they've seen TOS at some point in their lives). And nothing anyone can do can damage this, it's not going away. But for the same reason we won't see CB abandoning it, there will be no "reboot" beyond recognition. And DSC will, I am almost 100% certain about it, feature classic visuals at some point, even if just in the background.
Visuals yes, along with same gender relationships, a complicated familial history between Burnham and Sarek. Thats just for starters.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Comments
You seem to be confusing the words "professional" and "accurate." TheWrap may be a professional operation, with professional employees... but, in the end, they still run a Hollywood gossip website, and in that game, you're just wrong sometimes.
Or, at the very least, reporting an incomplete story.
And the conspiracy theories come in when you start painting J.J. Abrams as sitting in a high-back leather throne, petting a white cat, and demanding that "old busted Trek" be thrown out. Even characterizing the exchange like that (and, "old busted Trek" is YOUR words) paints the exchange in a certain light... and we don't know if it went down that way.
And, again, for the third time... I'm sure that there are nuggets of truth in this. I'm positive Abrams wanted to turn Star Trek into a multi-platform empire that would have made Rick Berman and George Lucas weep. I'm sure there were discussions about "brand confusion," and when CBS refused to stop selling TOS merchandise (and why would they? If it still makes them money...), I'n sure that was frustrating news for Bad Robot.
That sounds like typical Hollywood business to me. But no, some fans want to project MORE into the story... Abrams DEMANDING he get his way, dismissing old Trek as "old and busted"... you want to harp about professionalism? How unprofessional would it be for a major Hollywood produce to act like that?
And, if you want to prove me wrong? Then you (or TheWrap, as it were) need to proceed more than one anonymous source on the subject. Don't have that? Then we're done.
Damage control over fans that give snap judgements on the internet over a show they haven't seen yet?
The show is set prior to TOS, it will use designs from the most recent eras to both itself in the show and in terms of the audience's memory (ENT, Kelvin, and KT respective) as it progresses it will become TOS.
I imagine this was obvious to everybody in production from the start with only ardent fanbois claiming this is them backtracking to save face despite it being clear from past interviews they could't care less about the fanbois and didn't need htem to carry the show.
It was also obvious to some of us here who've either suggested it as a possibility or repeatedly pointed out that any and all stuff seen in DSC predates TOS and shouldn't look like it.
It will be continually be less obvious to those here who are conspiracy nuts and will simply believe this is another lie CBS is telling them personally. Either desperately trying to win those dozen people back because the show can't survive without them or lying to make them watch.
We will see a TOS era ship or character before the show is done as we always were going to. Maybe even a passing the torch character from ENT or the KT films.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
(Source was already linked above: https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/03/star-trek-discovery-designers-reveal-look-and-colors-will-evolve-to-be-more-like-tos/)
Are we there yet?
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
In an interconnected information age, these are all perfectly valid reasons to be performing damage control, and potentially changing the direction of later episodes of the series, compared to what has been planned. If I was a CBS executive attached to the project, frankly, I'd be extremely nervous about the potential reaction upon launch.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
We existing Trek fans are not a single group. There are diehard 'make no changes' fans, there are fans who will give it screen time just because it has an Enterprise Delta on it, and there is a majority who pick their spot on the spectrum between the extremes. With no single target group, it makes no sense to cater to Trek fans. In serving one portion of the fanbase they would of necessity offend another.
So instead they use logic and try to appeal to a wider audience. We'll see very soon if they made the right choice.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Overanalysis.
Who cares about Suicide Squad when there's a near-perfect, in-franchise analogy: The Next Generation. As has been pointed out MANY times in this thread, the fan reaction to DSC is very similar to fan reaction to TNG in 1986. Had the internet been around back then like it is today? You'd probably see the same reaction.
You assume "damage control" based off of concept art, set photos, and scenes from two trailers... which, in all likelihood, only covers the first 2-3 episodes. The planned evolution of the show's aesthetic could have been planned from the beginning, who knows.
Also, f*** Axanar.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
I am hoping to see new designs for TOS ships as well and not just the Constitution class half constructed in drydock.
You are guessing this is not going to go the way you are hoping? you are entited to that viewpoint. However you mentioned it yourself, you can't know for sure what will happen. Why should CBS fear to do something to add to Trek history? If it succeeds or fails it doesn't matter, it's the effort of trying that counts and and as far as i am concerned, all power to CBS forat least trying, better than sitting around wondering and never knowing for sure.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Tainted speculation benefiting from hindsight. You can't use TNG's success, to disregard the concerns which people (apparently) had prior to its release. Just because TNG was good (despite early fears) doesn't in any way mean Discovery will be. You don't get to borrow the credibility for one show, and apply it to another.
As for Suicide Squad, it doesn't matter if the example is in-franchise or not. The producers re-wrote it mid-shoot due to test reception. That is a fact. I'm not even touching upon the fact that it hasn't been a huge success either, because that's irrelevant. It was re-written due to poor reception, and the noted examples to do with Discovery, certainly sound much like the same thing: Poorly received (or at least, not universally praised) promo material, thus leading to announcements of evolutions (which really just sound like disguised revisions)
Assumption? I'd say 'reasonable speculation', based upon observation of negative reception across the fanbase'
Hey, I might well be wrong, seeing 2 and 2 as 22 not 4. It may be that the evolution and other things were always planned, but it can certainly be seen to appear the other way, and given the contemporary era's love of prevarication and "No I didn"ism when caught out, I see no reason to give the benefit of the doubt, until seeing the final product (or in my case, waiting to hear what others say about it, because I won't be watching it due to no CBS All Access and no Netflix)
Yeah, TRIBBLE Axanar, or more appropriately, TRIBBLE Alec Peters, but I don't think it can be dismissed that the project was looking too good, raised too much money, and focussed too closely on the time period which Discovery is now set in, for cbs/Paramount to ignore, so they went down the legal route.
Regardless of the legal wrangles, shenanigans and personality issues, the look of what was released was unquestionably what people know and expect of 23rd Century Trek. (The reason why people still make AoY characters) Discovery's 'difference for the sake of difference' approach? TRIBBLE Discovery.
I'd still rather fly an Ares with a 23rd Century themed crew than a Shenzhou, but hey, to each his own
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
At the moment, all anyone is doing is speculating. Based on the above examples, it comes across to me as face-saving attempts at disguised revision based on poor test reception. I know that this happens, and cited Suicide Squad as a very recent example of it being done.
As for 'why should they fear to do something to add to Trek history?' That's a loaded and misleadingly-worded question: But off the top of my head;
-They should fear to release a series which could potentially damage IP popularity and marketability.
-They should fear to release a series, which they are clearly using as a flagship draw to CBS All Access, because if it fails to win popularity, oh dear, they'll be losing subscriptions, and while they may not have to issue refunds, they certainly won't be getting any more dollar out of displeased viewers.
-They should fear to release a show which shows a marked lack of awareness for the IP or the sensitivities/sensibilities of the fanbase (upon which they are hoping to make dollar) because that could potentially impact upon their own personal employabilit or bankability as a producer.
They have a lot to gain, but they equally have a lot to lose if this project bombs. And, up against a competing project which would appear to be being well-received, they may be entering s popularity contest which they can't win.
Look at how Nemesis failed at the box office, simply because of the competing titles at the time. Discovery is running the same kind of risk, in fact, more so than Nemesis, because where Bond and Potter weren't directly competing comparable franchises, The Orville is.
Onky a few weeks now, and we'll know what happens.
"Exciting!" - Montgomery Scott
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Yes. Or because it was a unspeakably horrible piece of TRIBBLE
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
And for non-fans of CBS stuff, they're only paying out for Discovery. Why do you have a problem with the notion that Discovery is being used as a flagship show, due to the popularity of the Trek IP?
And the same point as before: Credibility is not transferable. Change for the sake of change, will only be tolerated so far, especially when there is an alternative available.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
What's to explain? I think you're overanalyzing the situation.
Sorry, you don't get to cherry-pick examples to support your decision, after diminishing my stance for doing the same.
And, you assume a conclusion where none exists. I never claimed Discovery will be successful, let alone reach the level of success that The Next Generation achieved. My only point is: we don't know, so jumping to conclusions at this point is silly.
And if the DSC hand phaser or communicator are any indication, the producers are well-aware of the design aesthetic they need to achieve without resorting to "damage control" over a few upset fanbois on the internets.
Nemesis gave us Donatra and BFAW ON SCREEN
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
Again, not an assumption of a conclusion, because I'm not, and was not, talking about Discovery's eventual/potential popularity, but the creative process which has gone into it as a project and how it appears to have been revised in response to negative test feedback and reception
No, not producers, the artists. The producers aren't going to turn down good design work. Had the rest of the aesthetic been in keeping with the phaser and communicator, my view would be 180 degress different.
"I was here before you, I will be here after you are gone. I am here, regardless of your acknowledgement or acceptance..." - The Truth
also, people like to exaggerate how drastically Suicide Squad was rewritten after the initial trailers were shown. when you watch the film closely you can see how certain of the comedy scenes feel a bit out of place. Well, the majority of the movie(as shown in theaters) was done when they made the first few trailers, and then a few more scenes got shot to make it a bit less grim dark and more funny(albeit a dark sort of humor). It certainly livened it up nicely.
My character Tsin'xing
A question and i'm trying to find some form of understanding in what you see and like you mention this is a speculation thread.
The others here; @angrytarg, @valoreah and @mhall85 have made some valid points, which is something i agree with, that Star Trek has been going for 50 years now, it's had it's ups and downs but it hasn't been shafted, it's been almost 20 years between TOS and TNG and only a few years between films and series. Time gaps don't mean anything to Trek.
They don't have a lot to fear for their series and there have been a lot more damaging episodes and choices in trek history and even with those the franchise has not been shafted by the fanbase, a lot of people love trek and the significance it created. Trek is built on controversy and what could be considered damaging to the brand and not once has Trek been hammered for it, it fact some of those choices are used as proud examples of how cultures have shifted in the face of a tv series which at their time would be considered outragous.
CBS shouldn't fear to put new things into trek.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Essentially, yes. Star Trek will always be TOS to the vast majority of people (including outside the fanbase. If you ask someone about Star Trek they've seen TOS at some point in their lives). And nothing anyone can do can damage this, it's not going away. But for the same reason we won't see CB abandoning it, there will be no "reboot" beyond recognition. And DSC will, I am almost 100% certain about it, feature classic visuals at some point, even if just in the background.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Visuals yes, along with same gender relationships, a complicated familial history between Burnham and Sarek. Thats just for starters.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.