I was initially upset that DSC wasn't going to look more like the shows we are used to, but honestly the only thing that bothers me is the CBS all access thing. I pay for too many services as is and cannot justify paying CBS, too. No other networks make you pay to use their apps. Either put it on TV or stream it in Netflix in the USA like the rest of the world. Making it All Access exclusive just feel like trying to take advantage of Trek fans to increase CBS' bottom line.
Rant over.
I really wish I could watch the new series, though.
> @saurializard said: > > > If that's the case, then, instead of completely **** up decades of mostly-respected timeline and continuity, they could have changed "set 10 years before Kirk" to "set in the 26/27th century" or "set in an entirely new timeline". > > A couple of changed words and swallowed ego and pride Vs upsetting the fans, giving the finger to decades of series and movies continuity and aesthetics, losing the first show runner, etc.
That's my point exactly. Why choose a point in time which we basically know (The Cage give or take a bit) and then have it emulate literally nothing of it. If those rumours are true (no way of knowing), it all makes more sense: Show was genuinely planned as Prime pre-TOS, first concepts were shown, CBS blocks - of course they want the recent movies' success, that's the only reason DSC was greenlit in the first place. And since the movies are KT Kirk, the show will be KT pre-kirk. But they don't change the "prime" stamp because it gets even more viewers, the "old-timers" will get their all access sub because they want a prime show.
^ 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
No aesthetic changes are gonna explain how Discovery looks FAR MORE advanced than a Constitution in the same timeline.
It's 2017, not 1966. A new generation (who this show is targeting) is going to expect something more modern looking.
You all are so hung up on whether or not there will be 60's bright techno-color cardboard sets.... how about concentrating on whether or not the writing, direction and acting are good? That is what is important IMO.
Considering the continuity seems to be thrown off the roof, it's already a massive writing and directing failure. The rest may be good or great but this point is already a failure.
A new generation (who this show is targeting) is going to expect something more modern looking.
Explain the success of Rogue One and Rebels, then.
They have been financial and critical successes, yet, despite having access to technology allowing them to make augmented reality viewscreens/cockpits, weapons that aren't a weird old-looking mix of WW2 ones, futuristic uniforms and outfits, more credible, CGI exosuit for Vader without a plastic-looking control chest panel, big storage devices, computer graphics higher than 80s wireframes, etc., they both respect the aesthetics of the original trilogy to preserve the continuity.
For example, they could have given the Death Troopers CGI exosuits, collapsible helmets, weapons with many moving parts firing a different type of energy, jetpack boots and a bunch of unique and cool-looking tech, but they decided to go with the current, more continuity-respectful armor and weapon.
Instead, they used the tech to show what the Death Star laser can do on low power to a planet, show many OT TIEs, AT-A(C)Ts, X-Wings, Galofree Transports, Nebulon frigates in combat with angles and moves not possible with models, and bring back Peter Cushing, among other things.
That is something of a straw man argument as everything you talked about was the in-universe technology being used, and speaks nothing about the visuals of the movie itself, which absolutely do **** all over the original Star wars movies by about the same factor as Discovery does to TOS.
And just how does Rogue One "****" all over the OT?
LMAO! You've seen 2 minutes of footage. That's like reading a small part of the first sentence of a book and saying "this whole book sucks."
More like reading the blurb at the back of the book which is meant to be as interesting and informative as possible to get you to buy the book in the first place.
I am unconcerned about the so called "pc diversity checklist"
Don't get me wrong, I believe they should include the most varied assortment of beings the budget allows. But not as the central, noteworthy feature. Not interested in a show that's substantially a vehicle for "look how modern and progressive we are!" and not much else.
Considering the continuity seems to be thrown off the roof, it's already a massive writing and directing failure. The rest may be good or great but this point is already a failure.
LMAO! You've seen 2 minutes of footage. That's like reading a small part of the first sentence of a book and saying "this whole book sucks."
If the sentence is telling me that this:
is 10 years older than this:
Or that this:
is 10 years older than this:
then, my apologies, but this book and I aren't gonna get along very well.
So we should be constrained by 50 year old sets and visual effects, because you have decided they are essential to your experience? That's silly. Be less silly.
then, my apologies, but this book and I aren't gonna get along very well.
People who make this argument always give me a chuckle.
It speak of severe mental illness, and an ability to separate fiction from reality.
Point out about how the aesthetics don't match for a prequel even when considering the difference of technology both in meta and the future representation of the future and you are considered to have severe mental illness.
Please continue your straw man and accuse me of those.
I'm all for the nostalgia, and I love my TOS Connie bridge, but that equipment simply is not functional based on what we've learned about computers since the 60s. Go on and run a big database query using a couple flashing lights and some toggle switches. I dare you! The question, then, is whether you want some tiny degree of plausible realism, or a religion-like adherence to the visual themes developed within the limitations of 60s TV effects.
We all become tired of gaming from time to time but if we really love a title we will return to it again and again. Sadly my fellow 1960s and 70s generation friends are now uninstalling or at least mothballing the game. I am not exactly excited in logging in myself to find yet another re-balance, bait and switch item sale etc and that is rather saddening. A common thread is they feel insulted that, as an example, after the purchase a 60" 4K Samsung smart TV, the shop turns up 12 months later, cuts 20" off it, fits a new surround, ensures it works, and with their best politician grin say to us that our original purchase retains value.
I suppose the new blood are the ones who are bringing in the $$$'s now and are the ones being catered for. I cannot blame them for that but It does not help with the feeling of being cast off that I and my old Trekkie friends feel.
In case it is about the current bug fest on the TOS constitution interior I payed good money for around December/January I agree. Its a shameful disgrace how that gets ignored to fix.
No aesthetic changes are gonna explain how Discovery looks FAR MORE advanced than a Constitution in the same timeline.
It's 2017, not 1966. A new generation (who this show is targeting) is going to expect something more modern looking.
You all are so hung up on whether or not there will be 60's bright techno-color cardboard sets.... how about concentrating on whether or not the writing, direction and acting are good? That is what is important IMO.
Nobody is saying that you need the 60's technocolor cardboard sets. Stop using stawman arguements for why you think this abomination is still trek. Axanar, done by an amateur looks better. And that doesn't use a cardboard set now does it. This new show really does give credence to Peters...unfortunately. It really does look like they went after him because they couldn't do any better and wanted any competition off the board. I think Peters is a thief at this point, but seriously if I had to support one of the two, I'd take him over CBS right now. Fortunately for me, I can say **** both of them...so I will.
Umm...am I finally in agreement with Cold? Wow! But yes he's right. You can update the aethestic to modern standards and still make it like the original. Why can't people see that.
Point out about how the aesthetics don't match for a prequel even when considering the difference of technology both in meta and the future representation of the future and you are considered to have severe mental illness.
Please continue your straw man and accuse me of those.
See, thats the problem with your argument, you base it all around as if the aesthetics were actual canon lore, and not just something that was the result of the era in which the show was made.
Your entire argument is based on a fallacy.
Please provide your credentials to diagnose any mental illness. You use this response all the time when you come into a thread just to simply contradict someone. Your schitck is gettin old.
Point out about how the aesthetics don't match for a prequel even when considering the difference of technology both in meta and the future representation of the future and you are considered to have severe mental illness.
Please continue your straw man and accuse me of those.
See, thats the problem with your argument, you base it all around as if the aesthetics were actual canon lore, and not just something that was the result of the era in which the show was made.
If those shows chose and could afford to make reference to the TOS era without altering its visuals to adapt to the 2000s views of the future, then why can't Discovery do the same thing?
Once again, I'll also point to the very recent Rogue One and Rebels that kept the aesthetics of the OT, despite aspects of it looking very outdated for our current vision of the future (like those Death Stars schematics, those weapons and Vader's suit).
Umm...am I finally in agreement with Cold? Wow! But yes he's right. You can update the aethestic to modern standards and still make it like the original. Why can't people see that.
Consider the possibility that people see that but don't want it.
Umm...am I finally in agreement with Cold? Wow! But yes he's right. You can update the aethestic to modern standards and still make it like the original. Why can't people see that.
Consider the possibility that people see that but don't want it.
If those shows chose and could afford to make reference to the TOS era without altering its visuals to adapt to the 2000s views of the future, then why can't Discovery d the same thing?
B. Took the easy way out by simply super imposing, or green screening, the characters over the old footage to save time/cost
Now, digitally transposing characters to a whole ancient episode, recreating the old costumes, props and scenery and making it work in a coherent story is cheaper and faster than simply using the existent current sets and costumes, making a story set in the old show era and pretending the old show was supposed to look like that?
Now, digitally transposing characters to a whole ancient episode and making it work is cheaper and faster than simply using the existent current sets and costumes and pretending the old show was supposed to look like that?
In many cases yes because there is a whole production crew who has to do things like set building for all the sets used in an episode, and other such things.
In the case of DS9, all they would need are the actors, the costumes, and a green screen crew, which would save considerable time, personnel, and other costs that would be sunk into trying to redo an entire episode with a new set.
Not to mention the TOS era actors had all gotten old, meaning they couldn't just haul them all back in for the episode and have them look the way they did when the episode originally aired.
I am also amused by how you took that one point out of context from the rest of the post ,and tried to act like that was the whole of my argument. Very disingenuous on your part.
You mean like how you do with my own examples and arguments you still have ignored, while simultaneously trying to discredit me by throwing around "straw man", "mental illness" and now "hypocrisy"?
Comments
Rant over.
I really wish I could watch the new series, though.
>
>
> If that's the case, then, instead of completely **** up decades of mostly-respected timeline and continuity, they could have changed "set 10 years before Kirk" to "set in the 26/27th century" or "set in an entirely new timeline".
>
> A couple of changed words and swallowed ego and pride Vs upsetting the fans, giving the finger to decades of series and movies continuity and aesthetics, losing the first show runner, etc.
That's my point exactly. Why choose a point in time which we basically know (The Cage give or take a bit) and then have it emulate literally nothing of it. If those rumours are true (no way of knowing), it all makes more sense: Show was genuinely planned as Prime pre-TOS, first concepts were shown, CBS blocks - of course they want the recent movies' success, that's the only reason DSC was greenlit in the first place. And since the movies are KT Kirk, the show will be KT pre-kirk. But they don't change the "prime" stamp because it gets even more viewers, the "old-timers" will get their all access sub because they want a prime show.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Explain the success of Rogue One and Rebels, then.
They have been financial and critical successes, yet, despite having access to technology allowing them to make augmented reality viewscreens/cockpits, weapons that aren't a weird old-looking mix of WW2 ones, futuristic uniforms and outfits, more credible, CGI exosuit for Vader without a plastic-looking control chest panel, big storage devices, computer graphics higher than 80s wireframes, etc., they both respect the aesthetics of the original trilogy to preserve the continuity.
For example, they could have given the Death Troopers CGI exosuits, collapsible helmets, weapons with many moving parts firing a different type of energy, jetpack boots and a bunch of unique and cool-looking tech, but they decided to go with the current, more continuity-respectful armor and weapon.
Instead, they used the tech to show what the Death Star laser can do on low power to a planet, show many OT TIEs, AT-A(C)Ts, X-Wings, Galofree Transports, Nebulon frigates in combat with angles and moves not possible with models, and bring back Peter Cushing, among other things.
More like reading the blurb at the back of the book which is meant to be as interesting and informative as possible to get you to buy the book in the first place.
Don't get me wrong, I believe they should include the most varied assortment of beings the budget allows. But not as the central, noteworthy feature. Not interested in a show that's substantially a vehicle for "look how modern and progressive we are!" and not much else.
is 10 years older than this:
Or that this:
is 10 years older than this:
then, my apologies, but this book and I aren't gonna get along very well.
Please continue your straw man and accuse me of those.
In case it is about the current bug fest on the TOS constitution interior I payed good money for around December/January I agree. Its a shameful disgrace how that gets ignored to fix.
Umm...am I finally in agreement with Cold? Wow! But yes he's right. You can update the aethestic to modern standards and still make it like the original. Why can't people see that.
Please provide your credentials to diagnose any mental illness. You use this response all the time when you come into a thread just to simply contradict someone. Your schitck is gettin old.
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/In_a_Mirror,_Darkly_(episode)
memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Flashback_(episode)
And that image from Beyond:
If those shows chose and could afford to make reference to the TOS era without altering its visuals to adapt to the 2000s views of the future, then why can't Discovery do the same thing?
Once again, I'll also point to the very recent Rogue One and Rebels that kept the aesthetics of the OT, despite aspects of it looking very outdated for our current vision of the future (like those Death Stars schematics, those weapons and Vader's suit).
Consider the possibility that people see that but don't want it.
you mean some people
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!