[aceman67]

I'll just come out and say it: I never liked the TOS. Mostly because I can't stand Shatner, and the show, while the writing was good for the most part, the visuals have not aged well, AT ALL.

And along comes Discovery, and people are up in arms over the fact that they made a prequel in the same rough time period as the original TOS Pilot that doesn't look like the TOS visuals.

Is it really that bad?

Let's face it, if they remained true to TOS, and made the sets and ships look like something made 50 years ago, on a shoe-string budget by todays standards (An episode of Discovery costs $8-8.5 million, while the most expensive TOS episode, City on the Edge of Forever, cost $250,000 in the '60s, translates to $1.9 million today), the show just would not appeal to new fans, especially the bulk of new fans that were brought on through the Kelvin-Timeline movies. The show would look dated.

I firmly believe that if Roddenberry had been given the same budget as Discovery has now, and had access to the same technology we have today, I'm pretty sure TOS would NOT look like it did.

And when you think about it, is arguing or showing displeasure over something that in the grand scheme of things, isn't that big of a deal (You have Star Trek on TV again), doesn't that seem a little petty?

Look at the Mass Effect Andromeda for example: Functionally, it's an OK game, lacklustre story and EA dropped the ball by out-sourcing the animation and character design to a 3rd party. But people LOST THIER ♥♥♥♥ over the animations. Seriously, the ammount and level of hate and vitriol that ME:A got was not warranted (one of the games developers got Death and Rape Threats for Pete's sake.), and because of that, we might not ever get a Mass Effect game again.

All because people complained about how the game looked. What happened with ME:A is as much EA's fault as it is the Fans. "This is why we can't have nice things" argument applies.

So I got to ask, with CBS's reputation for being the money-grubbing A-Holes they are (while not to the scale as EA, they're close), do you want the same thing to happen to Trek? When you think about it, that thought isn't that much of a stretch.

I sure as hell don't. It's been 12 years since we've had Trek on TV, and I want more.

[Mack]

When Discovery was announced - no, people didn't expect to have imitation of blinking lights on bridge ToS visuals being re-enacted. What people did expect was a respect for the pace of development in technology already set in the Star Trek universe. What people furthermore expected was to not meddle with already established facts.

This is why CBS striked down Axanar - to be honest they were deliverying what the Trekkies wanted and they couldn't have Axanar airing on Youtube deliverying exactly just that with them taking this route. Axanar in no means is obslete - with updated visuals, and respecting the Star Trek continuum, even the ship designs met those consistencies.

I can't speak for everyone, but something close to Axanar was what I was expecting. Updated visuals, respecting the already established Star Trek technology and continuum. Some great writing, acting and character development displayed in just 21 mins.



Keep in mind, this was merely just the prelude.

Discovery took the JJ route but declares itself to be part of Prime universe. I would've been okay if they declared themselves in JJ universe personally.

[aceman67]

It's not the visuals I'm talking about here, it's the Reaction to them.

There seems to be a subset of the fandom that is just digging in their heels when it comes to Discovery. To them, everything must be perfect and look like TOS, and if it isn't, they pull out their megaphone and start saying stuff along the lines of "Stop liking what I don't like!", and poo-poo on anyone who disagrees with them.

I know they're in the minority, but I seriously can't go through any comment section of something relating to Discovery without finding a handful of people crying foul about the visuals.

It would be funny at this point if it just wasn't so sad. Discovery, when judged by its own merits and not by the fact that it's Star Trek, is a good Science Fiction Serial. It's almost as if they would rather not have any Star Trek at all if it doesn't suit their tastes.

[Mack]

It's not the visuals I'm talking about here, it's the Reaction to them.0

There seems to be a subset of the fandom that is just digging in their heels when it comes to Discovery.

This in my opinion should not be an issue. They took a decision to go back right behind ToS era, ofcourse there is going to be alot of scrutiny over just about everything.

To them, everything must be perfect and look like TOS, and if it isn't, they pull out their megaphone and start saying stuff along the lines of "Stop liking what I don't like!", and poo-poo on anyone who disagrees with them.

Not sure what you mean by this. If you mean people shouldn't voice their distate, then that's pretty much ignoring freedom of speech. Not everything is an appreciation, sometimes there is criticism. From here it depends how the staff of Discovery make decisions or decide which demographic they have prioritized to cater, that's all.

I know they're in the minority, but I seriously can't go through any comment section of something relating to Discovery without finding a handful of people crying foul about the visuals.

People can be passionate but I've personally not read anything so far that deems to warrant such a description. I'm myself not a fan of Discovery visuals for everything mentioned in my first post.

Discovery, when judged by its own merits and not by the fact that it's Star Trek, is a good Science Fiction Serial. It's almost as if they would rather not have any Star Trek at all if it doesn't suit their tastes.

This is something which is open to a wider discussion disregarding a "let's keep it TOS". For example, all Star Treks have been majorly discussing about societal issues and war (DS9), and how the prime directive played an important role in the Star Trek Universe. Star Trek displayed an indepth explanation of their technologies in the former series, all this has been highly lacking in Discovery. Which is, again, fine. It's a new direction - Axanar had none of those either, then again - Axanar respected TOS era so it didn't have to, to be fair. I compare Discovery to Game of Thrones with the kind of story telling I've witnessed thus far. This doesn't mean I don't like Discovery, but I don't necessarily conform with it either as its not the kind of Star Trek I'm used to, nor what I expect off from Star Trek. This new take on writing is fine, except I already watch Game of Thrones.. so, it's alright.

[Bridger]

I totally agree with Mack on this, Axanar was the perfect middle ground between updating the visuals and staying true to the original.

[Bridger]

Also people don't see Discovery to be good Star Trek, The Orville does a much better job doing this.

Looks at the people rating of the shows:

Discovery 56% - The Orville 93%

[Sagison Brandt]

I watch and enjoy both Discovery and Orville. They scratch different itches, I suppose.

I like the modernization of the visuals on Discovery on the Federation side, but I'm jarred by the re imagination of the Klingons, species wide, and of their ships. When I see the Crossfield or Walker class, I can instantly say "Starfleet". I'm not sure that if I was shown the Klingon ships with no other context that I'd recognize them as "Klingon".

As for the show itself, I'm enjoying seeing an era in Star Trek where the values of the Federation are still more easily articulated than live up to. By the time of TNG, I'd argue the Federation had largely matured and knew itself, even when faced with the Dominion and the Borg (both existential threats). In the Discovery era, that sense of self is still evolving and under pressure. It makes for interesting story telling. Burnham's arc captured that sense-of-self conflict well. I think that regardless of whether the Burnham character is appealing to an individual viewer, the arc of her story is still compelling, and fits within the themes of Star Trek - diversity, self exploration, overcoming challenges, redemption, and ultimately, hope.

[aceman67]

Not sure what you mean by this.

A good example is this 'review' on Ex Astris Scientia (scroll down to "continuity' section, 3rd bullet, he refers to the new visuals of the Connie as a 'Slap in the face' to the fans) http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ep...lyoutakemyhand

Also, pretty much any Youtube comment section....

[Mack]

A good example is this 'review' on Ex Astris Scientia (scroll down to "continuity' section, 3rd bullet, he refers to the new visuals of the Connie as a 'Slap in the face' to the fans) http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ep...lyoutakemyhand

Also, pretty much any Youtube comment section....

I stick to the UFP Community for Star Trek discussions. STO/ST Reddit is a stretch, but nothing too bad. In my years of online gaming I've heard worse, so I guess my tolerance towards statements has innately incremented over the years to not find them offensive. I see where you're coming from though.

[Tain]

I didn't know how I would feel during the buildup to Discovery, but I tried to go in with an open mind. I was very pleasantly surprised when it was finally released, and for everything that I didn't like, there were several things I loved.

Everyone has an image in their mind of what Star Trek is, from the clothes they wear to the ships they fly, and so on. We can accept what Star Trek now is or we can go watch that terrible Police Academy in space (aka Orville). What I don't understand are the people who have hated Discovery since day one, and still do, why are you still watching it? Move along, nothing you want to see here.

Gene Roddenberry once said about the backlash on how the Klingon's changed from TOS to TMP, just ignore it, pretend they always looked like that. Through the entire history of Trek, they have made changes to canon and beyond.

For me every Star Trek show brings something special, and they each effect the legacy of the franchise (for better or worse). Everyone has a favorite, ship, captain and so on. Watch the show if you enjoy it, move on if you don't.

[Adster94]

Overall, I think Discovery is ok, but when you slap a Star Trek name on the front of it, and say the exact period where it fits in with everything else, you are going to have to measure it - for continuity - with the other Star Trek's. Say what you will about Enterprise, but I am in the process of re-watching it and it is believable that it is before TOS, whereas Discovery isn't - at all. Namely holographic control panels; comm systems (this especially doesn't fit as in DS9 the holo-communicator was a brand new invention - "DS9: For the Uniform") and many more. If they just said this was after Nemesis, EVERYTHING would be fine. The fact that it isn't believable in the timeline, ruins it for me.

I think it is an okay show, with storylines being way too rushed and the mysteries a bit too obvious (Tyler being Voq; Lorca being Mirror) - considering the fact that it is established canon that Garth of Izar became famous due to a turning point in the war (Battle of Axanar), yet that seems to be non-existent, only Starfleet getting absolutely wrecked but then magically coming out of it with very little effort...

I won't talk about the Conny, as well...it just is a big mistake. I am now worried that there will be a young Spock in the next series, and who will play him. But hey ho, it is what is, I am just sad that the amazing Star Trek that was the Axanar fan productions was amazing at keeping the timeline going, whilst delivering good Trek, but it is blindly obvious why CBS shut it down.

[Trekster]

I began to watch Discovery a week ago. I am really surprised by how much I like it. Obviously, it looks nothing like the original series, but for some reason it doesn't bother me. I guess, for me anyway, I just roll with the fact that it's 50 years later and technology has advanced to the point where special effects look beyond realistic. As for interiors and uniforms, there's no way they wouldn't go high tech with visuals that audiences today would gravitate to.