Adventure Game Studio | Forums

Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: Gurok on 12 Oct 2017, 06:19

Title: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Gurok on 12 Oct 2017, 06:19
SPOILER WARNING! Please don't read any further if you haven't watched the series and want to avoid spoilers.

Is anyone else watching Star Trek: Discovery? I'm really enjoying it.

I've read rumours that the Discovery might be a section 31 craft. Some are saying it's the mirror universe (unlikely, I think). There's also a theory that the Discovery's spore drive might propel the crew into the future. It's certainly fun to speculate though.

Oh, speaking of the spore drive, I couldn't help but think of AnasAbdin when watching it. The Discovery's spore drive is Tardigrades powered!

What do you think of the Klingons? I don't like the look, personally, but I'm still holding out on an in-universe explanation that ties it together with both the 60s Peurto Rican gold lamé look and the 80s/90s/00s heavy metal lobster-on-head look.

I've got to say, I liked the series more at episode 3 than I did after episode 4. Episode 3 left me thinking it was some kind of weird X-Files ship where weird phenomena were present, but ep 4 cleared that up and now the whole things much more grounded again.

What do you guys think of the series so far? What do you like/dislike about it?

And while we're talking sci-fi, there's a lot on at the moment (the Orville, Red Dwarf). I watched the first few episodes of the Orville. I was expecting to hate it but I don't. I mean, I really don't like Family Guy and Seth Macfarlane in general, but it's better than I was expecting. The jokes are flat, Seth isn't much of a character, but if you can get past that, it's a good B-show for Star Trek: Discovery. The effects are surprisingly good. The stories are good and touch on some relevant social issues, though one episode clearly rehashed a Twilight Zone story. It's got heart and you can tell that Seth is a big Trek fan.

Enough of my thoughts. What do you all think of Discovery (and other sci-fi that's on right now)?
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Danvzare on 12 Oct 2017, 11:00
What do you think of the Klingons? I don't like the look, personally, but I'm still holding out on an in-universe explanation that ties it together with both the 60s Peurto Rican gold lamé look and the 80s/90s/00s heavy metal lobster-on-head look.
I don't think these current Klingons have an explanation. But those 60s Peurto Rican gold lamé Klingons got a pretty good explanation years ago. Which I'm sure all the Star Trek fans here already know. :-D
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: CaesarCub on 12 Oct 2017, 14:47
I'm enjoying Discovery so far.

I'm making an effort not to read much of the fan theories, so I don't get spoiled/disappointed because they do or don't follow the one I would like the most.

My main issue with the Klingons is that they are not re-dubbed. The prosthesis make a mess on the actors  ability to speak, making their dialogue too slow and broken. They should have had the actors talk faster and not caring much about the sounds and then re-do the dialogue later without the make up, so they wouldn't have that kind of speech impediment.
I'm really hoping they will add some of the other Klingon designs, just so they can establish that these are just how some of them look, and tie-up with the TOS and TNG/Movies looks.

As for the Orville, despite what some of us feel about Seth MacFarlane's comedy, he has always been a die-hard Star Trek fan (with actual cameos on the TV series), so I wasn't surprised to see his show become a sort of alternate reality version of the Next Generation. It did feel weird how the pilot episode was so heavy on the jokes (a lot of which didn't land), but they were mostly absent by the third episode.

Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Darth Mandarb on 13 Oct 2017, 13:21
I'm watching, and loving, The Orville to get my Star Trek fix because there's no Star Trek show on right now as far as I'm concerned.

Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Ryan Timoothy on 14 Oct 2017, 02:58
I'm watching, and loving, The Orville to get my Star Trek fix because there's no Star Trek show on right now as far as I'm concerned.
I'm a bit disappointed in Discovery as well. I don't like the "spores" for instantaneous travel or the use of an alien species as a super computer mapping the stars. It doesn't feel like a science fiction show at all, more like a science fantasy show. Then there's the 1000 light year mind meld - So does that mean Vulcan's have sub space (faster than light) communication and that humans are capable of receiving this? I feel it's trying to do what Stargate Universe did with the communication stones that would transfer the conscience of the people holding the stones on each end of the universe. It allowed them to speak to earth, but prevented the show from having that Voyager feeling of being alone.

I also thought the introduction to Captain Lorca was mirroring that of the poor introduction to Captain Picard, with "I don't like children" vs Lorca's "I have light sensitivity". WTF.

Edit: Oh right and I forgot to say but Orville IS awesome. Has its weak moments where it could have been funnier, joke opportunities that were missed etc. It feels very Galaxy Quest which I absolutely loved more than any Star Trek movie.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: AnasAbdin on 14 Oct 2017, 08:57
I got hooked on the series from the first episode. Honestly I think it's very well made and looks a lot like the movies. I can't decide whether to like or dislike the intricate details as the show is still revealing its elements. But so far it looks interesting and different.

Oh, speaking of the spore drive, I couldn't help but think of AnasAbdin when watching it. The Discovery's spore drive is Tardigrades powered!

I have a theory *ahem* I think the writers/producers/directors/designers/Uhura have been following my progress on Tardigrades and have seen my videos (specially the ones in this update (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=50444.msg636565781#msg636565781)). I will wait for a couple of more episodes before I sue them (laugh)
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Snarky on 14 Oct 2017, 14:37
I'm watching, and loving, The Orville to get my Star Trek fix because there's no Star Trek show on right now as far as I'm concerned.

Meanwhile I'm quite enjoying Discovery (it's not the greatest show in the world, but good clean spaceship fun), while I think The Orville is one of the most wretched things I've ever seen committed to screen. Like, I cannot comprehend how professional producers and a real honest-to-god TV network allowed such a boring, misconceived, and botched concept to make it to air. It actually makes me angry.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Darth Mandarb on 16 Oct 2017, 12:31
Meanwhile I'm quite enjoying Discovery (it's not the greatest show in the world, but good clean spaceship fun), while I think The Orville is one of the most wretched things I've ever seen committed to screen. Like, I cannot comprehend how professional producers and a real honest-to-god TV network allowed such a boring, misconceived, and botched concept to make it to air. It actually makes me angry.

Star Trek Discovery (STD... fitting) is CBS's desperate attempt to capitalize on Game of Thrones' success. They tried, and failed miserably, to make Game of Thrones in Space. It feels nothing like Star Trek and shows how incredibly out of touch w/ the fan-base CBS truly is. First; they put the nix on Axanar (which in only a few short teasers looks infinitely better and more treky than STD), then they put in those draconian "rules" for fan-films (absolutely ridiculous), and then they change things (the Klingons appearances and ship designs, holographic coms that sit on tables in the other rooms? seriously?) just to name a few.

Then on top of all that they try to launch their pointless paid service by piggy-backing it on a cherished franchise they have ruined.

All around not Star Trek and shameful.

As for the Orville and your... colorful... feelings about it. I thinks that's a tad harsh but if that's how you feel so be it.

I mean it's Seth MacFarlane ... I'm not sure what you were expecting from the guy known for fart-jokes and vomit humor?

I went in expecting silly and spoofy (a la Galaxy Quest) and was pleasantly surprised.

It's fun, doesn't take itself too seriously, and feels like Star Trek to me.

To each their own.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Snarky on 16 Oct 2017, 13:14
Star Trek Discovery (STD... fitting) is CBS's desperate attempt to capitalize on Game of Thrones' success. They tried, and failed miserably, to make Game of Thrones in Space. It feels nothing like Star Trek and shows how incredibly out of touch w/ the fan-base CBS truly is.

This, mutatis mutandis, is pretty much what fans said about the Battlestar Galactica reboot.

Quote
First; they put the nix on Axanar (which in only a few short teasers looks infinitely better and more treky than STD), then they put in those draconian "rules" for fan-films (absolutely ridiculous)

I followed the Axanar story a little bit, and that whole project seemed incredibly scummy, openly defying copyright for profit and making absurd claims to justify it, actually challenging whether Star Trek was effectively protected by copyright at all. They got deservedly smacked down. The rules seem a bit over-the-top, but that's what you get when some people try to exploit their indulgence.

There's no inalienable right to fan-fiction, it depends on both sides playing nice. And with Axanar, (people claiming to represent) the fandom violated that. Now you can't have nice things. I know who I'd blame.

Quote
and then they change things (the Klingons appearances and ship designs, holographic coms that sit on tables in the other rooms? seriously?) just to name a few.

Haha, yeah, it's great, innit?

Quote
Then on top of all that they try to launch their pointless paid service by piggy-backing it on a cherished franchise they have ruined.

Not a fault of the series itself, and anyway it's on Netflix outside the US.

Quote
I mean it's Seth MacFarlane ... I'm not sure what you were expecting from the guy known for fart-jokes and vomit humor?

I expected a comedy, which I quickly realized it wasn't (to the point of being painfully unfunny). But as a straight sci-fi show it's just... dull. I think the big hurdle for most sci-fi shows is to make us believe in the world it creates, so we care about the characters and their problems. And I can't remember the last time I saw a show that was more unconvincing than The Orville. From the sets and production design to the casting and acting, at no point does it feel remotely real. And just to rub it in further, the dialog is peppered with contemporary pop-culture references, as if we were ever in any danger of thinking that these were real characters talking about things in their own world, rather than some Hollywood screenwriter imitating not-even-jokes from today's talk shows.

If you enjoy it, good for you, but I hope it's canceled soon.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Ali on 16 Oct 2017, 15:00
I'm moderately enjoying Discovery, though I'd prefer if it had fewer lens flares and more ethical quandaries. The Expanse, on the other hand, is so good. Almost every dialogue scene in Discovery could use Chrisjen Avasarala saying "Get to the f****** point."
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Darth Mandarb on 16 Oct 2017, 16:02
Haha, yeah, it's great, innit?

Quite the opposite.

However, I really have no interest in one of our famous back 'n forth debates when it really just boils down to our individual tastes. If you're enjoying Star Trek Discovery I hope it lasts many seasons for your enjoyment!

Let's just agree to disagree and carry on.

The Expanse, on the other hand, is so good.
I have just started watching this. I am in complete agreement (so far). It is really quite excellent.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: AnasAbdin on 16 Oct 2017, 16:23
If you're enjoying Star Trek Discovery I hope it lasts many seasons for your enjoyment!

:)

The Expanse, on the other hand, is so good.
I have just started watching this. I am in complete agreement (so far). It is really quite excellent.

Oh I wanna see how you look after watching season 2 (nod)
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Gurok on 17 Oct 2017, 02:49
What do you think of the Klingons? I don't like the look, personally, but I'm still holding out on an in-universe explanation that ties it together with both the 60s Peurto Rican gold lamé look and the 80s/90s/00s heavy metal lobster-on-head look.
I don't think these current Klingons have an explanation. But those 60s Peurto Rican gold lamé Klingons got a pretty good explanation years ago. Which I'm sure all the Star Trek fans here already know. :-D

Yes, of course. I meant that I wanted to see continuity -- why we haven't seen flat-headed Klingons yet when they're due to (re)appear in 10 years.

I got hooked on the series from the first episode. Honestly I think it's very well made and looks a lot like the movies. I can't decide whether to like or dislike the intricate details as the show is still revealing its elements. But so far it looks interesting and different.

Oh, speaking of the spore drive, I couldn't help but think of AnasAbdin when watching it. The Discovery's spore drive is Tardigrades powered!

I have a theory *ahem* I think the writers/producers/directors/designers/Uhura have been following my progress on Tardigrades and have seen my videos (specially the ones in this update (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=50444.msg636565781#msg636565781)). I will wait for a couple of more episodes before I sue them (laugh)

I think this will act as publicity for your game. You should be able to use the Tardigrades link as marketing. Certainly, everyone will know what a tardigrade is now.

I'm moderately enjoying Discovery, though I'd prefer if it had fewer lens flares and more ethical quandaries. The Expanse, on the other hand, is so good. Almost every dialogue scene in Discovery could use Chrisjen Avasarala saying "Get to the f****** point."

Agreed about the lens flares and ethical quandaries. Better lighting in general would be appreciated. I watch it with the lights off and I get annoyed at how much of the great Klingon costume design work gets obscured most of the time because the lighting is so bad.

I tried the Expanse. Does it get better after the pilot? It seemed overly Canadian to me, like there's this vein of cheap sci-fi shot in Canada -- Travelers, Continuum, etc. -- that are built on a budget (few effects shots, mostly bottle episodes). It seemed very reminiscent of that, so much so that I switched it off about three quarters of the way through the pilot. Also, regarding Discovery's dialogue, I haven't had a problem with that, but if you're saying the Expanse does it better, I can't agree. The dialogue I witnessed seemed laboured and packed with clichés.

I went in expecting silly and spoofy (a la Galaxy Quest) and was pleasantly surprised.

Actually, it's interesting to note the different approaches here. I think the Orville underpromised and overdelivered, whereas Discovery hyped us all up and now we've got nowhere to go but to be disappointed.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Danvzare on 17 Oct 2017, 10:41
No matter if you like Discovery, Orville, both, or neither. You've at least got to be happy that there are finally some space operas on TV again.
We had an entire decade with no space operas! The closest we had to one was Doctor Who, and that is definitely not a space opera.
And now look! We have six of them at once!

Sorry, I'm just really happy that I can finally watch TV shows set in space again. :-D
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Snarky on 17 Oct 2017, 11:26
If you're enjoying Star Trek Discovery I hope it lasts many seasons for your enjoyment!

I'm enjoying it just fine, but I can barely keep up with shows I think are great (I'm two seasons behind on Fargo, I haven't got around to The Handmaid's Tale, and I hear The Leftovers is supposed to be good, too), so I wouldn't grieve if it went off the air. We are pretty spoiled for choice these days.

We had an entire decade with no space operas! The closest we had to one was Doctor Who, and that is definitely not a space opera.

Not quite true (without even getting into whether DW is space opera: in many episodes it definitely is). Between Battlestar Galactica going off the air in 2009 and The Expanse, Killjoys and Dark Matter launching in 2015 is just over half a decade*, and in between you had stuff like Ascension and the first season of The 100 (both 2014). I'll also give a shout-out to Other Space (2015), which is the show many people were probably expecting The Orville to be (basically an American Red Dwarf).

Quote
And now look! We have six of them at once!

Care to list them?

* Edit: And I forgot about Stargate Universe (2009–2011), which narrows the gap even further.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Danvzare on 18 Oct 2017, 13:02
Quote
And now look! We have six of them at once!

Care to list them?
You just did. :-D
Also, fair point. It was only half a decade. But it felt like a full decade!

I can barely keep up with shows I think are great
Same here. (nod)
I'm about a season behind on almost every show I watch.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Snarky on 18 Oct 2017, 14:12
Hmm... I only count five if we're not including Doctor Who:

1. ST Discovery
2. The Orville
3. The Expanse
4. Dark Matter
5. Killjoys

Are you counting Rick & Morty? (Aww jeez, R&M first aired in 2013, so if that counts there were only a couple of years without any space opera on TV.)
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Ali on 18 Oct 2017, 17:43
I tried the Expanse. Does it get better after the pilot? It seemed overly Canadian to me, like there's this vein of cheap sci-fi shot in Canada -- Travelers, Continuum, etc. -- that are built on a budget (few effects shots, mostly bottle episodes). It seemed very reminiscent of that, so much so that I switched it off about three quarters of the way through the pilot. Also, regarding Discovery's dialogue, I haven't had a problem with that, but if you're saying the Expanse does it better, I can't agree. The dialogue I witnessed seemed laboured and packed with clichés.

If you found the pilot a little dry and meandering, then I'd suggest you press on. However, if you just didn't like it, you made the right call.

Apart from Miller's trilby hat, I didn't find it to be heavy with cliché. As a series it's full of obvious choices that almost no sci-fi shows actually deal with. Gravity only works when you're moving. Moving really fast hurts. Forcefields don't exist - missiles punch holes in space ships and all the air gets sucked out. Belters talk like Afrikaner South Londoners.

Also, the Expanse's characters are given interesting things to do while they deliver expositional dialogue. They're at work, or in conflict. By contrast, the first two episodes of Discovery are heavy with characters standing across desks or in front of screens explaining things that they already know to each other. It's not as bad as the first episodes of Babylon 5... but not many things are.

But over all, hooray for sci-fi on TV!
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: SilverSpook on 23 Oct 2017, 08:48
(http://www.nerdzaffiliated.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Elias-Toufexis-adamBIGGER-537x260.jpg)

Adam Jensen from Deus Ex: Human Revolution (https://t.co/pLpSCBuFkb) shows up in Star Trek: Discovery, so as far as I'm concerned, the show now has a cyber-thumb up from me. (Well ok, I also liked the way things took a hard left turn down Battlestar lane and a hard right onto gritty avenue in episode 3. As a serial-cliche-inverter and plot-twist aficionado, I had to tip my fedora to that bit.)

Also, Doug Jones.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Joseph DiPerla on 12 Nov 2017, 02:12
 
Quote

If you enjoy it, good for you, but I hope it's canceled soon.

I can understand why you don't like it and why folks don't like Discovery. But I wouldn't wish cancellation on either as there are people who enjoy one or the other or even both. I suggest for anyone that doesn't particularly like one show to just change the channel or just choose not to watch it. As for me... I quite enjoy the Orville. I think the sets are decent. I enjoy the aspects that are ridiculous. I always say that if I were to watch a show so it can be realistic, then I will just watch a documentary or reality show. It's why I enjoy shows like the Orville or Dr Who or movies like Star Wars or justice league. You have to learn to not be so critical and just enjoy something for what it is. That's why I enjoy watching these shows. Darth, you and me will be the only Orville watchers here. Now go make an Orville adventure game!!!! ;-)
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Darth Mandarb on 12 Nov 2017, 19:12
Darth, you and me will be the only Orville watchers here. Now go make an Orville adventure game!!!! ;-)

I gotta finish that Firefly game first (laugh)
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Snarky on 12 Nov 2017, 19:43
One thing that's starting to bug me about Discovery is that it's so dark. (Dimly lit, I mean.) Early on there was an excuse in that the captain's eyes couldn't handle bright lights, but that doesn't seem to be an issue any more, yet the whole ship is still on dimmer. There's a not-so-fine line between moody and just underlit.

Quote
If you enjoy it, good for you, but I hope it's canceled soon.

I can understand why you don't like it and why folks don't like Discovery. But I wouldn't wish cancellation on either as there are people who enjoy one or the other or even both.

Usually I'm happy to just ignore a show and be happy for the people who enjoy it. But I found The Orville so wretched that I was hoping it would fail utterly, to serve as an example and warning that there are limits to the sort of crap you can put on TV. No such luck, though – it's been renewed.

You have to learn to not be so critical and just enjoy something for what it is.

That's the interesting thing: no, you don't.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Joseph DiPerla on 17 Nov 2017, 20:51
I really don't think Orville is Wretched. It literally, to me, feels like a Star Trek series that doesn't take itself to seriously. It also is a show that, though it exists in a future time line, lives in the past. And while I do not like Seth's raunchy stuff, I do get his sense of humor. And this show is a perfect blend of his sense of humor without going over the top. I think the show has 3 things working against people that do not like it: 1) It aims to be Star Trek but isn't. 2) You might not like Seth Meyer and just can not get over him being the star of the show and his production. 3) People think it is supposed to be a comedy, but it's not supposed to be.

I don't know. To each their own I suppose. But I hope it goes in for at least 3 seasons. It's entertaining, interesting on a light level and I enjoy it.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Lord Vetinari on 18 Nov 2017, 00:57
I have gripes with both shows, but I'm siding with The Orville.

I don't mind McFarlane's brand of humor, I enjoy the whole concept of Star Trek that doesn't take itself too seriously. Indeed it has been marketed in the worst possible way, trying to sell it as a pure comedy/gag show was a dumb move.
My main issue with it is that it seems to be lacking some worldbuilding episodes that give a bit of framework to understand how everything works, plus many episodes leave a lot of questions unanswered, and not in a "we'll let the audience form it's own opinion" kind of way, more in "it didn't even cross our minds that this situation could be interpreted this way too". There will be spoilers, you're warned.
Bortus' baby? The whole episode is very ambiguous about why Moclans are a single-gender species: it seems to swing between it being a natural occourrence to it being some kind of self-imposed alteration, and depending on which one is the topic of the episode turns itself upside-down. If The Stars Should Appear? Yeah, good luck changing two millennia of culture just by showing that their whole beliefe system is just trash. Real life belief systems are constantly debunked and shown to be trash, and the only result is that people cling to them even more fiercely; yet the episode goes for the very clichéed "they finally see that it was all bogus and everything changes overnight". Krill? Why the B-class crew is entrusted with this mission when there's a perfectly fine high class cruiser ready? At least they did not pretend that the kid wouldn't be upset by what they did on board the ship. Cupid's dagger? Darulio is basically a walking rape drug and no one even think to point that out (I'll accept that his culture does not see it as an issue, after all they all work like that, but how come that everyone else on the ship is so nonchalant about it when they find out?)
Despite all of this, the Orville managed to create a cast of characters that is likable and that I care about, that's why it wins.


Discovery, on the other hand, fails horribly both at creating a cast I care about and at telling a compelling story. Its writers seem to have forgotten the golden rule of "show, don't tell". They keep telling us a lot of reason why we should care or be interested, and they fail to show each single one of them which would, you know, actually make us start to care.
They keep telling us that Burnham is the best officer Starfleet has ever had, and they never show us any of her supposedly unmatchable skills except for the rare case when everyone else just gets dragged down to idiot level so that she can shine (no, the tardigrade thingy doesn't count: the guys on the sister ship figured it out before her). The horrible war? Never seen. They give us some casualties number that if you look too hard at them make you realize that actually not much has been happening except for the ships that were destroyed in the pilot and possibly just a couple more. 80000 deaths, they say. Compare it to 60 MILLIONS casualties in WW2 and you see that this is merely a petty border skirmish (that we never see anyway).
No one has yet bothered to explain why Burnam's mutiny is considered the cause of the war, when you had a klingon ship accepting a cease fire then immediatly breaking it and ramming through a ship during negotiations. Burnham roommate is annoying. Saru is The Alien Who Is Always Scared And The Writers Cannot Be Bothered To Come Up With A Second Personality Trait. Lorca is midly interesting, but his character arc suffers because the war is so poorly written.
The make-up is terrible. And not because of the continuty issues about the klingons' look, just because there's so much crap glued to these poor actor's face that they are phisically incapable of acting (same applies to Saru: mouth, eyes and brows are the key elements to convey emotion, one must be seriously mentlly challanged to consider hiding those bits on an actor. Extra weird faces are for side characters or CGI characters that can emote no matter what, not for rubber forhead aliens). Klingons are also halfway incapable of speaking due to the fake tooth inside their mout, even when they are speaking English. As to that the brilliant idea of making them actually speak in klingon with subtitles with scene direction that doesn't consider at all that you have your eyes fixed on the bottom part of the screen to read the subtitles for large chunk of those screen, and you have a nice trainwrek happening almost every time a Klingon appears on screen.
All these complaints apply even if you don't consider that there's "Star Trek" in the title. If you include that, I think that making it a prequel was a huge mistake as it causes more problem than it solves. Actually, let me repharese: it only causes problem, and it solves nothing. I can't see any reason why new fans that came with the JJ movies would care about it being a prequel or sequel (so it's an irrelevant move if the goal is to attract them), and all the inconsistencies are just going to anger long-term fans of the original series. Even if the parallel universe fan theories turn out to be true and they're going to merge it somehow with the prime timeline later, I can hardly find any reason that would improve such storyline by making it a prequel of the original series.

Overall, as I said before this whole rant, Orville wins.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Ali on 18 Nov 2017, 01:50
The Iraq war was a pretty big deal, and fewer than 5,000 American soldiers died. Fewer than 200 British soldiers died, and over here it is widely viewed as having been a disaster. So in a more advanced world in which (we hope) war is less common, 80,000 deaths is enough. Surely?

I do think that the Klingon prosthetic are a problem, although I like the design. They should have ADRed all the Klingon dialogue. They seem to have solved the Buffy vampire teeth lisp, but nasal sounds come out weird. I love the idea of the Klingons speaking Klingon, but L'Rell seems to be the only one who gets near to it sounding natural. Most deliver dialogue as a series of meaningless barks.
Title: Re: Star Trek: Discovery (and the Orville, I guess)
Post by: Lord Vetinari on 18 Nov 2017, 09:44
The Iraq war was a pretty big deal, and fewer than 5,000 American soldiers died. Fewer than 200 British soldiers died, and over here it is widely viewed as having been a disaster. So in a more advanced world in which (we hope) war is less common, 80,000 deaths is enough. Surely?

The Iraq war (I guess you're talking about the most recent one, not the one in the 90s?) was and still is a big deal for the controversy on how it started (basically ignoring the whole international community), for being somewhat unprovoked (no Al Quaeda in Iraq, 9/11 originated in Afghanistan; this was just Bush Jr trying to do something that his father was too smart to do, that is removing Saddham Hussein who, as much as a despicable and cruel dictator he was, was a stabilizing factor in the region that kept extremists OUT of Iraq becase he was too paranoid about them), and for the long term consequences it had (everything we're dealing with now started right there: Daesh/Isis formed around the nucleus of the disbanded Hussein's army, plus the war attracted fighters from basically the whole arab world, plus Isis was - at least initially - backed/leveraged by other regional powers that took advantage of the chaotic situation Iraq ended in because none of the nations who went to war against Iraq had any plan for the post-Hussein as if they hoped that it would go straight to normal because magic, to bicker with each other in an effort to extend their influence).
The war with the klingons has nothing that comes close to this, or if it has, again they failed to show it.

I do think that the Klingon prosthetic are a problem, although I like the design. They should have ADRed all the Klingon dialogue. They seem to have solved the Buffy vampire teeth lisp, but nasal sounds come out weird. I love the idea of the Klingons speaking Klingon, but L'Rell seems to be the only one who gets near to it sounding natural. Most deliver dialogue as a series of meaningless barks.

The Klingon language was created purposefully to sound like angry people barking, there's very little that can be done with that. To be clear, I'm not blaming any of the actors for whatever is going on in the Klingon scenes, it's all a production/writing problem. I don't even care if any of the main cast members are Trek fans or not, that's entirely irrelevant for the sake of making a good show and even a good Trek show.
IMO they should've transitioned from Klingon to English, at most keeping klingon around when members of the Federation are listening. I'm sure most viewers can abstract the concept that they're talking in English just for convenience's sake.

I have one thing to praise: I'm happy that Stamets is not The Token Gay Character with everything about him revolving around his sexual oriantation and hamfisted commentary added to it. It's presented in the most natural way possible, and that deserves praise. Unfortunately not much else of his character seems interesting to me, for now.