TRIBBLE-can we at least watch it before the negative reviews spew

ktonof1aq

Just read an article that Star Trek Discovery (TRIBBLE) is confirmed for the fall line-up. Outstanding! Can't wait to see it!

https://www.inverse.com/article/31214-star-trek-discovery-premiere-date-netflix-fall-2017-cbs

vegeta50024

The negative reviews are spread across multiple reasons on why people are reluctant on giving the series a shot.

First is the fact that the series isn't being aired on CBS as a regular primetime series which is stupid since there are people who like watching network TV shows.

Second is that CBS is giving Netflix the streaming rights for all of the other countries outside US and Canada. For the US, they are looking to make people pay $6 a month in order to watch what would probably be the only show they truly want to watch on CBS. Granted, the idea is that for the $6 you get access to all their other shows too, but not everyone watches those shows.

Third is the time that they have it set at, which is 10 years before Kirk, which means it'll be really hard for them to adhere to the established canon from that point in time and still tell the stories that they want to.

Finally, they talked about redesigning the established aliens, something that does not sit well with people. The extent of the redesigns are yet to be seen, but anytime you talk about changing established looks for a series that is only a decade ahead of where TOS was originally, you're asking for trouble.

shanizle

If the only way to watch is cbs stupid 6$ online program than i guess i wont see it. A pity.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

artan42

The abbreviation is DSC.

And no, no you can't watch it first. It's Star Trek which means it'll automatically be despised by some fans for not being True TrekTM just like the KT films, just like ENT, and so on.​​

lapprenticel

vegeta50024, you're forgetting the emphasis that's being placed on pushing an ideological message - the series will be 'progressive' and feature minority, female, and LGBTQ characters, with the latter being emphasised by the producer. Given Star Trek is supposed to be a scientifically advanced future, anyone who adheres to the notion that homosexuality etc is immoral, unhealthy, unnatural etc, will see TRIBBLE as an aberration and not True TrekTM - interesting concept by the way. Similarly those who hold to the notion that women are physically incapable of comparable physical performance and\or their combat roles should be limited at best, may be skeptical of the roles women play in the series.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

angrytarg

artan42 wrote: »

(...)just like ENT, (...)

I don't see a problem with that ​​

discojer

Can't be worse than Enterprise. I've been watching it occasionally because I started getting the Heroes & Icons network over the air and they show all the Star Trek shows in order.

I've become convinced it was a parody of Trek, slightly more subtle than Quark, more akin to the old Batman.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

ashstorm1

I do not worry too much, personally...

It's a common thing to come across a ton of negative criticism from certain people when a new spin-off is about to be released. Sometimes it's half-justified concerns about canonicity, some other times it's just pointless rambling for the sake of sounding cool and smart.

Then, after a couple seasons have gone by, most people are like "whoooa, i can't wait to see what's next !"

nimbull

discojer wrote: »

Can't be worse than Enterprise. I've been watching it occasionally because I started getting the Heroes & Icons network over the air and they show all the Star Trek shows in order.

I've become convinced it was a parody of Trek, slightly more subtle than Quark, more akin to the old Batman.

Think I'll pass on the new Trek for how it's being offered.

vegeta50024 wrote: »

...
Finally, they talked about redesigning the established aliens, something that does not sit well with people. The extent of the redesigns are yet to be seen, but anytime you talk about changing established looks for a series that is only a decade ahead of where TOS was originally, you're asking for trouble.

And this doesn't help it's case any either. Some days people who have IP rights to things need to have them stripped away if they can't stick to the script so to speak.

angrytarg

mattjohnsonva wrote: »

(...)
For me the number one problem is changing canon, JJ tried it and his entire series of films was relegated to an alternate timeline view of Star Trek, i.e. not the REAL Star Trek or to be more clear, not the Star Trek of OUR timeline. So, if they **** with the timeline and canon events it will be seen as yet another alternate timeline version of Star Trek.

For the life of me I cannot understand why they didn't just continue the journey from after Voyager's return, Enterprise already quite successfully gave us the early days pre-federation, I think as a fanbase most of us were hoping to see what comes next rather than a re-write of history, even if canonically done.

I agree. I also cannot understand at all why it always has to be a "prequel", yet it is written and executed as a "sequel". What is going on or rather what is wrong in the minds of people doing that. If you insist on making a prequel you should respect and use the boundaries of what you have - even if this means going retro visuals. Star Wars did this very well, doctor who does this. I don't understand why it is such a big deal with Trek to alwas feel the need to "modernize" things. The franchise itself is not appealing to modern audiences...​​

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

angrytarg

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

You are displaying a severe lack of knowledge about what "canon" is with your statement. Of course it's "at the whim of the writers" because they are writing the Star Trek canon. Elements got overwritten, but looking back canon exists and provides the guidelines how the setting works.​​

Unknown

This content has been removed.

starkaos

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

artan42

azrael605 wrote: »

I know exactly what it means, and just how little it has always mattered to the franchise writers. Canon meant squat when Nick Meyer decide Khan should recognize Chekov, it meant squat when the Voyager writers sent the ship to a 1996 that bore no traces of any Eugenics War. The only people who ever really cared about canon are fans, I say dump it and reboot completely.

Chekov's first appearance has an early stardate than Space Seed. He was already on the ship when Khan was.

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

starswordc

artan42 wrote: »

The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

Point of order, there was no "MCU" until the first Iron Man film, there was just a string of unconnected films with their own continuities. It wasn't until they redid the legal arrangements to create Marvel Studios that the MCU actually started. Since then they've maintained a pretty tight canon other than the "broad strokes" approach taken to the first two Hulk films.

artan42

starswordc wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

Point of order, there was no "MCU" until the first Iron Man film, there was just a string of unconnected films with their own continuities. It wasn't until they redid the legal arrangements to create Marvel Studios that the MCU actually started. Since then they've maintained a pretty tight canon other than the "broad strokes" approach taken to the first two Hulk films.

I mean the MCU is the reboot. Spider-Man, Captain America, HULK, Shield, Daredevil, and Doctor Strange have all had films that have then been rebooted as the conected MCU.

And there is only one Hulk film in the MCU. The Ang Lee one is not slightly broad stroked. It just happens to and where the be one picks up but so to do Spider-Man 3 and Spider-Man: Homecoming. The TIH film is fully integrated (despite a recast) with Ross reappearing later on and Stark in the mid credit scene.

iconians

"I won't watch Discovery because it might contradict established canon."

You know, like literally every Star Trek show and movie that was ever created, including TOS which contradicted itself on more than a few occasions.​​

starkaos

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel TRIBBLE up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel TRIBBLE up the past?

artan42

starkaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel **** up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel **** up the past?

Well it doesn't have to. Your own example is proof of that. ENT makes most of Balance Of Terror moot. DSC will have the same laxadasical approach as every other show did. Especially in regard to TOS which I think TOS is the show most guilty of ignoring the continuity of.

starswordc

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel **** up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel **** up the past?

Well it doesn't have to. Your own example is proof of that. ENT makes most of Balance Of Terror moot. DSC will have the same laxadasical approach as every other show did. Especially in regard to TOS which I think TOS is the show most guilty of ignoring the continuity of.

Except DS9 (barring the Eugenics Wars dating flub). Ron Moore was actually very cognizant of the fact that Star Trek fans love continuity, and criticized the Berman and Braga-run VOY and ENT for exactly that lackadaisicality.

artan42

starswordc wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel **** up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel **** up the past?

Well it doesn't have to. Your own example is proof of that. ENT makes most of Balance Of Terror moot. DSC will have the same laxadasical approach as every other show did. Especially in regard to TOS which I think TOS is the show most guilty of ignoring the continuity of.

Except DS9 (barring the Eugenics Wars dating flub). Ron Moore was actually very cognizant of the fact that Star Trek fans love continuity, and criticized the Berman and Braga-run VOY and ENT for exactly that lackadaisicality.

DS9 had an advantage there where most of its continuity was internal due to the lack of exploration and the war arc that kept filler scripts (that on TNG were normally call backs) to a minimum. Any references were usually to the concurrently airing TNG. Even then it's not perfect. They completely forget starships have shields for most of the space battles, can't keep a consistent sense of distance between Bajor and Earth, and the Romulans are even further from their TOS versions than the TNG ones were.

And the dating issue might have been a mistake but it ties into continuity from TVH, VOY, and TNG making it better than if it were 'corrected'.​​

starswordc

artan42 wrote: »

starswordc wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel **** up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel **** up the past?

Well it doesn't have to. Your own example is proof of that. ENT makes most of Balance Of Terror moot. DSC will have the same laxadasical approach as every other show did. Especially in regard to TOS which I think TOS is the show most guilty of ignoring the continuity of.

Except DS9 (barring the Eugenics Wars dating flub). Ron Moore was actually very cognizant of the fact that Star Trek fans love continuity, and criticized the Berman and Braga-run VOY and ENT for exactly that lackadaisicality.

DS9 had an advantage there where most of its continuity was internal due to the lack of exploration and the war arc that kept filler scripts (that on TNG were normally call backs) to a minimum. Any references were usually to the concurrently airing TNG. Even then it's not perfect. They completely forget starships have shields for most of the space battles, can't keep a consistent sense of distance between Bajor and Earth, and the Romulans are even further from their TOS versions than the TNG ones were.

And the dating issue might have been a mistake but it ties into continuity from TVH, VOY, and TNG making it better than if it were 'corrected'.​​

They never forget the ships have shields, they're mentioned frequently in the script. Apart from the fact that Dominion weapons fire simply passed right through Alpha Quadrant shields until "Call to Arms", I suspect that they simply didn't model the shields because they had to save time and money somewhere. TNG used rotoscoping onto shots of models for its effects. They didn't have the budget to pull off Star Wars OT-level numbers of models and they weren't doing major fleet actions in that series anyway. But DS9 used CGI from day one, and they did it at far higher texture resolutions than the contemporary Babylon 5, to the point where it still holds up pretty well against current TV-quality CGI. And when you're modeling dozens of ships and lots of weapons fire and explosions, this sh*t gets expensive fast.

As for the rest, I disagree that DS9 Romulans are any different whatsoever from TNG Romulans, and scaling issues and inconsistent travel times are part-and-parcel of Star Trek. For starters, TOS traveled to the center and rim of the galaxy multiple times, and remember the alien command post in TNG whose shields had less power than a flashlight?

artan42

starswordc wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starswordc wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel **** up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel **** up the past?

Well it doesn't have to. Your own example is proof of that. ENT makes most of Balance Of Terror moot. DSC will have the same laxadasical approach as every other show did. Especially in regard to TOS which I think TOS is the show most guilty of ignoring the continuity of.

Except DS9 (barring the Eugenics Wars dating flub). Ron Moore was actually very cognizant of the fact that Star Trek fans love continuity, and criticized the Berman and Braga-run VOY and ENT for exactly that lackadaisicality.

DS9 had an advantage there where most of its continuity was internal due to the lack of exploration and the war arc that kept filler scripts (that on TNG were normally call backs) to a minimum. Any references were usually to the concurrently airing TNG. Even then it's not perfect. They completely forget starships have shields for most of the space battles, can't keep a consistent sense of distance between Bajor and Earth, and the Romulans are even further from their TOS versions than the TNG ones were.

And the dating issue might have been a mistake but it ties into continuity from TVH, VOY, and TNG making it better than if it were 'corrected'.

They never forget the ships have shields, they're mentioned frequently in the script. Apart from the fact that Dominion weapons fire simply passed right through Alpha Quadrant shields until "Call to Arms", I suspect that they simply didn't model the shields because they had to save time and money somewhere. TNG used rotoscoping onto shots of models for its effects. They didn't have the budget to pull off Star Wars OT-level numbers of models and they weren't doing major fleet actions in that series anyway. But DS9 used CGI from day one, and they did it at far higher texture resolutions than the contemporary Babylon 5, to the point where it still holds up pretty well against current TV-quality CGI. And when you're modeling dozens of ships and lots of weapons fire and explosions, this sh*t gets expensive fast.

As for the rest, I disagree that DS9 Romulans are any different whatsoever from TNG Romulans, and scaling issues and inconsistent travel times are part-and-parcel of Star Trek. For starters, TOS traveled to the center and rim of the galaxy multiple times, and remember the alien command post in TNG whose shields had less power than a flashlight?

They did forget. Mirandas were being one shotted. That's due to them not being shielded. This is still going on by What You Leave Behind. It's not dominion superiority, it's a lack of continuity.

I know they're part of Trek, that's my point. DS9 is better at it but their approach always sucks so DSC won't be any different.​​

starkaos

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

starkaos wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

Personally I hope they completely toss "canon" which has only ever existed at the whim of writers and frequently changed from episode to episode and absolutely never should have been given any weight.

Tossing out canon means that Discovery will be the same as the new Star Trek movies and not a TOS prequel.

The KT films do not 'toss out canon', they side step it. They are an alternate timeline, but one that is created from consequences of canon.

Star Trek has not and will likely never be rebooted. Thankfully. That's the lazy way out. The only time it's worked so far is the MCU.​​

I never said that the Kelvin Universe films tossed out canon, I said that Discovery would be the same as the Kelvin Universe films if Discovery tossed out canon. Discovery would be set in another parallel universe just like the Kelvin Universe.

If Discovery is a TOS prequel, then it has to be aware of the canon already established like no Starfleet Officer knowing that Romulans and Vulcans are from the same planet until Balance of Terror. It also depends on what Prime Universe timeline they will follow. Is it the timeline shown in the first few episodes of TOS where there is no time travel **** up the past or the timeline shown in Nemesis with tons of time travel **** up the past?

Well it doesn't have to. Your own example is proof of that. ENT makes most of Balance Of Terror moot. DSC will have the same laxadasical approach as every other show did. Especially in regard to TOS which I think TOS is the show most guilty of ignoring the continuity of.

But did Archer or T'Pol ever see a Romulan on Enterprise? Enterprise had a few scenes on Romulus with Romulan characters, but the only interaction between the Romulans and the Enterprise was with their starships. TOS already mentioned the Romulan War where they only saw Romulan ships and the Federation had no idea what Romulans look like. So Romulans on Enterprise didn't violate the canon established in Balance of Terror.

So Discovery could have Romulan starships, interactions between the Romulans and Klingons, and scenes on Romulus without violating canon.

angrytarg

> @starswordc said:
>
>
>
>
> But DS9 used CGI from day one, and they did it at far higher texture resolutions than the contemporary Babylon 5, to the point where it still holds up pretty well against current TV-quality CGI.

DS9 didn't go all CGI prior to season six. Before they had some mixed in, but the majority was practical effects which is why it looks so good.