(TV) Star Trek: Discovery

[Low Hanging Fruit]

The UPN thing was a problem but it showed the same downward trend in viewership that DS9 and VOY had unfortunately. I think fatigue might be the best explanation. Although if VOY and ENT were better shows ratings might've been better.

It was. I mean I love Star Trek. I grew up as a little kid watching ToS with my dad in reruns. Then we watch TNG when I was a little older. Will always be an important part of my memories. I even like DS9 and VOY but by the end of both even I could feel a little happy that the "TNG Generation" of Trek was wrapping up. But it was a satisfied happy to wrap up not a "thank god" wrapping up. IMO.

I just wish they would work more towards going forward in the franchise instead of backwards. The move from ToS to TNG was nice after people got used to it and the show found its way to be itself. A move from TNG to "the next generation" would be nice as well. The franchise just seems obsessed with going backwards in progression on the timeline.

[Hammerfest]

There are lots of reasons why ST: ENT only lasted 4 seasons. Franchise fatigue was definitely one of them. Having two ongoing TV shows at the same time as a movie series definitely wore the franchise out by the late 90s/early 00s. I also tend to think that a big reason why it struggled in the beginning was because fans weren't willing to give it a chance, particularly those vocal fan "experts" who preferred their own head canon to what was now being officially established by Paramount on ST: ENT.

[Alzay]

The reason ENT didn't do well was because it's a terrible show. I'm a huge Trek fan and could barely sit through a episode of it. Hollywood is OBSSESSED with prequels and reboots. No one wants to see a dinky little tug boat ship of a pre pubescent Federation struggle to learn what a phaser is, fighting with poor technology as an underdog. Especially with an actor as awful as Scott Bakula as a Captain. We've seen the TNG+ era, and its way more interesting. Going backwards is a mistake, if we are refusing to go forward with the prime timeline at least make something parallel to the modern Trek era. They are literally repeating the exact same mistakes with this Trek Series as they did with the last. It's heartbreaking. Stop sucking Hollywood! Come on!

[draynay]

Enterprise was a bad show, it didn't have the same creative talent that buoyed the other shows. Michael Piller wasn't involved, neither was Ron Moore, and that left Berman and Braga who were not equal to the task.

I'm not a big fan of Bakula, but the writing for Archer was so bad and inconsistent I don't know that anyone could've pulled it off.
Some of the supporting cast made due, Billingsley, Trinneer, and Jeffrey Combs of course.

Then later they tried to make it more actiony and had all that horrible shaky cam shit which made it literally unwatchable.

[Bigvizz]

Sorry, but The acronym for Star Trek: Discovery will be STD....I'm sure someone else has pointed this out in the this forum. Yes I'm being childish, I'll move along.

[Frontenac]

Sorry, but The acronym for Star Trek: Discovery will be STD....I'm sure someone else has pointed this out in the this forum. Yes I'm being childish, I'll move along.

TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT... Discovery will be DIS.

And at this point, everybody has repeated what someone else has said before. So, it's not that bad.

[Sunseeker]

The reason ENT didn't do well was because it's a terrible show. I'm a huge Trek fan and could barely sit through a episode of it. Hollywood is OBSSESSED with prequels and reboots. No one wants to see a dinky little tug boat ship of a pre pubescent Federation struggle to learn what a phaser is, fighting with poor technology as an underdog. Especially with an actor as awful as Scott Bakula as a Captain. We've seen the TNG+ era, and its way more interesting. Going backwards is a mistake, if we are refusing to go forward with the prime timeline at least make something parallel to the modern Trek era. They are literally repeating the exact same mistakes with this Trek Series as they did with the last. It's heartbreaking. Stop sucking Hollywood! Come on!

Honestly, I didn't mind that aspect of it that much. "The Underdog" is a great story premise and seeing the Federation grow and develop into it's own, against the wishes of the Vulcans, into a power that threatened the Klingons, to discover new enemies like the Romulans are interesting elements....but they really just did all of that sooooo badly. And I think the recognition element of Scott Bakula was just BAD and while I think anyone can dream of playing a role on a Star Trek series, having a literal porn star for the "hot vulcan chick" was just tacky. Honestly Hoshi was just fine as the "hot nerd" and I think I would have enjoyed T'pol much more as a much more reserved, much less skin-suit wearing space tramp. I enjoyed most of the other characters, Trip was good, whatever that military guy's name was good, the doctor, but Archer and T'Pol just really killed my interest with how prominent and poorly they were written.

And the Mirror Universe, just, wow. I mean it's great for comedy...but as a whole season? Ugh.

EDIT: just watched the commercials. The "we sense death" alien thing was dumb but didn't have a problem with the rest of it.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

The reason ENT didn't do well was because it's a terrible show. I'm a huge Trek fan and could barely sit through a episode of it. Hollywood is OBSSESSED with prequels and reboots. No one wants to see a dinky little tug boat ship of a pre pubescent Federation struggle to learn what a phaser is, fighting with poor technology as an underdog. Especially with an actor as awful as Scott Bakula as a Captain. We've seen the TNG+ era, and its way more interesting. Going backwards is a mistake, if we are refusing to go forward with the prime timeline at least make something parallel to the modern Trek era. They are literally repeating the exact same mistakes with this Trek Series as they did with the last. It's heartbreaking. Stop sucking Hollywood! Come on!

I thought Scott Bakula's performance as Captain Archer was great; he had a forceful presence that made him feel like THE captain; the problem was that he was in Starfleet, and ENT's more militaristic inclination clashed with the theme of the series. Captain Picard and Sisko had commanding presences as well, the difference being that they didn't need to intimidate or be so forceful when dealing with the enemy like Archer.

That said, it is indeed disappointing that the show (Discovery) is yet another prequel bound with less interesting tech and a setting that is pretty much set in stone by nature of being a prequel, albeit with a few changes since it's an alternate timeline.

[Kithelle]

its not jj canon, its normal canon. His bullshit didnt happen with kirks dad in discoverys timeline. Just ignore jj abrams movies.

- - - Updated - - -



this is what we get when people didnt support enterprise.

Except this is way worse than Enterprise could have ever been...

- - - Updated - - -

Oh stop moaning. Some people like it, some don't. Just because some loudmouths on the internet don't like it, it doesn't mean nobody likes it. I personally love a lot of reboots, be it in games, movies or series.

I've been a fan of the franchise since I was a kid and guess what, Enterprise is my favorite one ...

Well no accounting for taste for some people...is a reason why so many reboots fail.

- - - Updated - - -

TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT... Discovery will be DIS.

And at this point, everybody has repeated what someone else has said before. So, it's not that bad.

But STD really fits it much better!

[Deleted]

it will be a good one, for sure.
I cant wait

and who cant wait either: THE ORVILLE its a parody

[Hammerfest]

The reason ENT didn't do well was because it's a terrible show.

I would say it was better than Voyager. I would also say that ENT's first season was better than TNG's first season. Fans weren't willing to give it a chance the way they did with previous Trek shows.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Hmmm well it's been in the can for over a year, that is not generally a good sign.

[Sunseeker]

and who cant wait either: THE ORVILLE its a parody

Yep, saw that when I watched the Discovery promo, def interested.

[Deleted]

The reason ENT didn't do well was because it's a terrible show. I'm a huge Trek fan and could barely sit through a episode of it.

Sorry what you mean is VOYAGER - that was the only ever AWFULL ST show.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd like to see more documentaries made by Axanar Productions. To me, Prelude To Axanar was a lot closer to actual Star Trek than what I've seen so far from Discovery...

Not gonna happen....

[I Push Buttons]

I would say it was better than Voyager. I would also say that ENT's first season was better than TNG's first season. Fans weren't willing to give it a chance the way they did with previous Trek shows.

I agree, TNG's first season was pretty cringe in my opinion, apart from the episode "Conspiracy", which I thought was great. A lot of overacting and 80s pizzazz... While I enjoyed Enterprise's first season, apart from the cold war shit.

I don't think it was so much fans not giving it a chance so much as a combination of factors... It was to be UPN's main draw and got a budget to match that, but didn't draw in 10 million viewers an episode like TNG did... So right out the gate studio execs hated it. There were also apparently various internal disputes in which direction the show should go, with the producers disagreeing among themselves and studio executives disagreeing with them on top of it. And as the ratings dropped and UPN in general failed, they put the show out to pasture (Friday night death slot), reducing its ratings even more and finally killed it off.

If they had a solid vision and put it on a big network instead of trying to launch a second tier network with it, I feel like it would have been great.

Discovery sounds like its in the exact same situation now... One show runner with a vision, studio execs disagreeing and that show runner leaving... Trying to launch/sell their new "network" with the show... And it will probably not only fail just as hard, but even harder because people actually have to pay for CBS All Access, unlike UPN back in the day.

[Risale]

TNG started of rocky but grew into a show that you can rewatch again and again, the same can be said for DS9.

Voyager pissed me off from the start with Janeway not going home when she had the chance (several chances), the saving grace of that show was for me at least the episodes that either focused on Tom Paris and the doctor. Neelix by the way I loathe him on the same level as Jar Jar Binks, Tuvix made 2 annoying characters good.

ENT some hated it and it isn't my cup of tea either but at least some of the stories gave better insight into the founding of Starfleet & the Federation and the mentalness of the Sung family to create a better human no matter what the cost to everyone else.

STD (I won't call it DIS) it as we are told takes place in the Prime timeline but so many things shown in the trailers go against canon that it feels to me that everything Kirk and crew did is going to be tossed out in the not so distant future.
The Enterprise already exists and Spock is already serving on it (episode the cage takes place in 2254) and unless Starfleet has multiple wildly different uniform styles going on at the same time the Discovery (takes place 2255) crews gear just doesn't match (the new movies did a better job they followed the style at least).
Also the design of the ship I just don't know but it feels wrong some how if you also look at the ships from that time period.
The Klingons WTF is going on with them well we have to wait and see what is wrong with them but jesus they look shitty.
As for the actors well the look like a good bunch and I always like Doug Jones so that is a big plus.

My final thought is simply this what ever happened to "to boldly go where no man has gone before"?
This show has always been at its best when it went forward even if it was only a little from TOS to TNG/DS9/Voy (the first a big jump and the 2 latter a few years later) to back to the start with ENT and now century jump to STD (but still in the past).
Star Trek has so much lore they could have gone forward to the J Enterprise as that would tie in with the period refered to in the time war in ENT or they could have skipped perhaps only a decade or 2 to take us to the Star Trek Online time or make a sideways jump from TNG to the New Frontier stories.
I think they screwed the pooch on this one but that is my opinion and only time will tell.

[Hammerfest]

Not gonna happen....

We'll see.

[I Push Buttons]

They released some more promo videos... The show is apparently rated TV-MA.

All the other Star Trek shows were rated TV-PG.

[Gallahadd]

They released some more promo videos... The show is apparently rated TV-MA.

Oh really? Interesting... maybe Discovery is channeling a bit of BSG.

[Ivanstone]

The reason ENT didn't do well was because it's a terrible show. I'm a huge Trek fan and could barely sit through a episode of it. Hollywood is OBSSESSED with prequels and reboots. No one wants to see a dinky little tug boat ship of a pre pubescent Federation struggle to learn what a phaser is, fighting with poor technology as an underdog.

Why not? Enterprise was very inconsistent at times but I liked that they were flying in a time when the technology wasn't up to par. It made things a little more dangerous and we got to see things in a much different way than any other ST show. Admittedly, the ship was at times more interesting than its crew.

Having said that the going back approach is not warranted for Discovery. We have TOS, we don't need to rehash it. TNG, DS9 and VOY at least built on each other.

I'm going to watch it regardless but I would've prefered the 25th century.