|
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited
|
Phantom
Charter Member
160 posts |
Nov-06-15, 10:29 AM (EDT) |
|
8. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #1
|
>Call me a buzzkill, but I'm going to wait until after the first >episode or two to decide whether I'm going to be hyped. :) > >--G. :) Hey Buzzkill! I am with you. Especially since they are trying to kick start a CBS-centric Steaming Services with the show. Phantom "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
897 posts |
Nov-04-15, 01:16 AM (EDT) |
|
7. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #3
|
>While there were a variety of flaws to Enterprise, I think it probably >would have been successful enough if they'd just left out the >"temporal cold war" that permeates so much of the first couple >seasons. With that out of the way, it would have been no worse than >TNG, IMHO. The TCW was a nuisance, but it could have been something worthwhile. No, what let Enterprise down what the lack of attention to detail to a franchise where fans are known to obsess about the details. B&B sold the series as this great look into a period before Kirk, before phasers and shields...and then promptly wrote the series like a Voyager sequel rather than a serious attempt at a retro series. -------------------------- CdrMike, Overwatch Reject "You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
Silver
Member since Nov-17-15
2 posts |
Nov-18-15, 01:44 AM (EDT) |
|
10. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #7
|
Yeah. I can't figure out whether B&B really didn't learn anything from Voyager's mixed reception and were making the same mistakes, or if they were trying to play it safe and ended up making the same mistakes because Voyager made them afraid to take risks with the show out of fear of the network meddling again, or fan reaction, or what-have-you. Or maybe it's something altogether different. I don't know. That being said, I did enjoy Enterprise at times. While there was a lot of stupid, some of it was surprisingly good. Mind you, it took two seasons and a bit to get to the good, but still. So...Yeah. I'm optimistic, but only just. So I'm definitely in the "Wait and See" group with it, too. |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
SpottedKitty
Member since Jun-15-04
605 posts |
Nov-03-15, 10:24 PM (EDT) |
|
5. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #0
|
Holding off on an opinion until I hear what sort of storylines in which era they're going to use. They will remember to put in a storyline, I hope... -- Unable to save the day: File is read-only. |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
897 posts |
Jun-25-16, 07:42 PM (EDT) |
|
11. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #0
|
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-16 AT 07:43 PM (EDT) Apparently the latest news now is the first season of the new series will be a single story arc. And that's an approach that does not fill me with confidence. Any new Trek series would already have to deal with the stigma of being "weak," either due to actors feeling out their characters or writers getting a feel for the series. DS9 and ENT didn't attempt story arcs until they had a couple seasons under their belts. I'm honestly beginning to wonder if CBS is trying to burn down the franchise in order to collect the insurance money. -------------------------- CdrMike, Overwatch Reject "You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
Gryphon
Charter Member
22401 posts |
Jun-25-16, 08:07 PM (EDT) |
|
12. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #11
|
LAST EDITED ON Jun-25-16 AT 08:08 PM (EDT) >DS9 and >ENT didn't attempt story arcs until they had a couple seasons under >their belts. Eh? Enterprise opened with a story arc, or at least a Really Prominent Running Subplot, and as a result was all but unwatchable until like season 3. (And then got canceled for its nonperformance just as it was hitting its delayed stride, because there is no justice in broadcasting.) --G. -><- Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/ zgryphon at that email service Google has Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
Mercutio
Member since May-26-13
942 posts |
Jun-25-16, 09:28 PM (EDT) |
|
13. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #12
|
>Eh? Enterprise opened with a story arc, or at least a >Really Prominent Running Subplot, and as a result was all but >unwatchable until like season 3. ENT was nearly unwatchable until like season 3 for reasons completely unrelated to it trying to do story arcs. I was actually heartened by the notion they're going to keep up a running plotline, because Star Trek series that aren't DS9 have an enormously high filler-to-quality ratio. (And even DS9s isn't amazing, it's just better than the others.) I am constantly surprised by how terrible I find the vast majority of TNG to be. I kind of want there to be a story arc. I have nothing against sci-fi shows that only have loosely bound stories. I liked Firefly well enough. But, well... when I go to re-watch Babylon 5, I skip season one and jump straight into the Shadow War. DS9, I sort of skim over all that dull stuff in the first couple seasons. Hell, when I occasionally get the urge to look in on Voyager, I jump right to the later-season Borg and transdimensional invasion storylines. More story arcs, please. I like me some story arcs. Let me sink my teeth into something. (Sidebar: has anyone heard anything about CBS trying to use a new Star Trek as a way to get people to sign onto their new streaming service? Because if that's not just one of those things you hear on the internet, fuck THAT noise.) -Merc Keep Rat |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gryphon
Charter Member
22401 posts |
Jun-26-16, 00:03 AM (EDT) |
|
16. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #15
|
LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-16 AT 00:04 AM (EDT) >I have a friend who works at CBS All Access. That is literally their >whole strategy for CBS All Access. Hey, it worked for the Paramount Network. Both times! Oh wait. --G. -><- Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/ zgryphon at that email service Google has Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matrix Dragon
Charter Member
1893 posts |
Jul-21-16, 00:48 AM (EDT) |
|
20. "RE: Speaking of Trek..."
In response to message #19
|
>>Did Abrams finally not fuck up the franchise? I'm skeptical but >>intrigued. > >Well, he didn't direct this one, so that's presumably a start. There's a lot less lens flare in this one, that's for damn sure. For me, the big thing is that it felt like a Star Trek movie, which is more than I can say for Into Darkness. The characters did pretty well, there's some silly technobabble moments, especially at the end, but it felt like the fun Trekky style technobabble. But even when it stumbled, it wasn't horribly so. Matrix Dragon, J. Random Nutter |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
|
CdrMike
Member since Feb-20-05
897 posts |
Jul-24-16, 08:10 PM (EDT) |
|
25. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #0
|
So two new bits of info came out of Comic-Con about the new series. The first is that it will be called "Star Trek: Discovery." The creative team's insisting the series abbreviation be "DSC," but it's not hard to see a lot of "STD" jokes in the future. The other revelation is the first bit of footage of the new starship, USS Discovery. Youtube link And, honestly...it's ugly as sin. I honestly can't think of a good thing to say about the design, even if the quality of the CGI didn't look like it was nicked from a late-90s video game. It's not exactly a sign of confidence when the design team has to tell fans that "the design is not final." -------------------------- CdrMike, Overwatch Reject "You know, the world could always use more heroes." - Tracer, Overwatch |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
pjmoyer
Charter Member
1856 posts |
Jul-24-16, 08:46 PM (EDT) |
|
26. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #25
|
>So two new bits of info came out of Comic-Con about the new series. >The first is that it will be called "Star Trek: Discovery." The >creative team's insisting the series abbreviation be "DSC," but it's >not hard to see a lot of "STD" jokes in the future. > >The other revelation is the first bit of footage of the new starship, >USS Discovery. > >Youtube link > >And, honestly...it's ugly as sin. I honestly can't think of a good >thing to say about the design, even if the quality of the CGI didn't >look like it was nicked from a late-90s video game. It's not exactly >a sign of confidence when the design team has to tell fans that "the >design is not final." *looks* Sooo... Star Fleet Engineering's been infiltrated by Romulan designers, then? (I seem to recall designs like this for pre-TNG work, etc.) --- Philip
|
|
Philip J. Moyer Contributing Writer, Editor and Artist (and Moderator) -- Eyrie Productions, Unlimited CEO of MTS, High Poobah Of Artwork, and High Priest Of the Church Of Aerianne -- Magnetic Terrapin Studios "Insert Pithy Comment Here" Fandoms -- Fanart -- Fan Meta Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mercutio
Member since May-26-13
942 posts |
Jul-25-16, 12:45 PM (EDT) |
|
30. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #25
|
>And, honestly...it's ugly as sin. I honestly can't think of a good >thing to say about the design, even if the quality of the CGI didn't >look like it was nicked from a late-90s video game. It's not exactly >a sign of confidence when the design team has to tell fans that "the >design is not final." The last Star Trek series with really good ship designs all across the board was DS9. Voyager had a lot of successes but also a lot of failures, as did Enterprise. This thing, as others have said in the thread, looks like the weird child of Klingon and Federation engineering, with all the worst parts of both. And that CGI is 90s-era, at best. In fact, the hybrid CGI/model ships of late-era DS9 looked better than it, and DS9 had to try and portray enormous fleet battles on the budget of a low-rated network show! But let's be real. The ship design is an easy metric to hit. Despite the people who still bitch about the Galaxy-class, all you need to do is jump over a fairly low hurdle. Our attachment to the ship will not be based on the quality of the design; it will be based on the characters and stories surrounding said ship. If the characters and stories are good, we'll love the ship. If they are not, we will cease to care. -Merc Keep Rat |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
Gryphon
Charter Member
22401 posts |
Jul-25-16, 01:10 PM (EDT) |
|
31. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #25
|
>the quality of the CGI didn't >look like it was nicked from a late-90s video game.... because no one has ever rushed out a sketchy preliminary trailer in order to hit a major con before. Honestly, people, kvetching about the quality of the CG in this trailer is like watching one of the pencil test teasers for a Disney animated film and saying, "Man, Disney's animation quality has gone massively downhill, this isn't even in fucking color." :) As for the design itself, as others have noted here and elsewhere, it's pretty obviously rooted in the Ralph McQuarrie concept sketches for the Enterprise in Star Trek: Phase II, the canceled 1970s revival TV series that ultimately, tortuously led to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. And, well, I have a hard time saying anything bad about a Ralph McQuarrie design. --G. -><- Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor-in-Chief, & Forum Mod Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/ zgryphon at that email service Google has Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
Mercutio
Member since May-26-13
942 posts |
Jul-25-16, 03:35 PM (EDT) |
|
32. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #31
|
>>the quality of the CGI didn't >>look like it was nicked from a late-90s video game. > >... because no one has ever rushed out a sketchy preliminary >trailer in order to hit a major con before. I'm inherently sympathetic to this argument, but... we're six months out from the premiere date. At this point in the production timeline many shows have an episode or two already shot and ready for post. Discovery has... a name, and about a minute of sub-par CGI. It doesn't even have a cast, or if it does they've exercised a shocking amount of information control. They almost certainly haven't started shooting yet, for something that premieres in, again, six months. That's not necessarily a completely bad set of signs. Back in the old days they could crank out twenty-six hour-long episodes over a timeline of six to nine months. Plenty of shows still do this, such as the various CSI's and NCIS's, although that sort of grueling production schedule has become less de rigeur for non-network shows. (And yes, this is a non-network show despite the CBS label.) But still. Somewhat troubling that this is ALL they have to show six months out. -Merc Keep Rat |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TheOtherSean
Member since Jul-7-08
246 posts |
Jul-26-16, 07:22 PM (EDT) |
|
37. "RE: New Star Trek series starts January 2017"
In response to message #33
|
From the YouTube clip, <i>Discovery</i>'s registry number is NCC-1031, so I'm thinking it would be much older than the post-ST:VI period. The timeframe you're talking about might make sense other than that. ISTR relations between the Federation and the Klingons improved after the <i>Enterprise</i>-C was lost defending a Klingon colony from Romulan aggression. Another thought: most of the simpler, blockier ship shapes seem to be earlier in the ST universe's history. >Or maybe they could get the guy who modeled >this >to overhaul the Discovery. > >Although I'm liking the crazy fan theory rumor that the reason >Discovery looks so chunky and Klingon is because it's a sort of >joint venture between the Federation and the Klingons, set between The >Undiscovered Country and Next Generation. > >"This is probably a stupid question, but . . ."
-- The Other Sean - Don't accept substitutes! Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? |
|
|
Printer-friendly page | Top |
|
|
|
version 3.3 © 2001
Eyrie Productions,
Unlimited
Benjamin
D. Hutchins
E P U (Colour)
|