dangerouseddy
Gawd
- Joined
- May 16, 2007
- Messages
- 639
well maybe they can bring back Avery Brooks as Benjamin Sisko, I'm sure they wouldn't get bent out of shape by that.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Patrick Stewart to Star in New “Star Trek” Series as Jean-Luc Picard on CBS All Access
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
D
Deleted member 93354
Guest
No one can say if Discovery is failing or not. Personally I didn't like it. It's Trek in name only, but okay as a sci-fi series.
But there is a very strong vocal group who swear never to touch all access. And if all access gambit is to pay off, they need to tap those who like the old trek. If they do okay and don't screw it up like Discovery, then CBS wins my money. Otherwise I'll continue to give anger faces everytime there is a discovery post on facebook.
Star Trek Next Generation: 1.2 million followers on facebook
Star Trek Discovery: 224K followers
Kind of tells you something right there considering how long STNG has been OFF the air (25 years now?)
First comment right at the top of the STNG announcement (And most liked)
Last edited by a moderator:
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Interesting.
Its never off the air in the UK unless another Star Trek series is on the air.
We have permanent re-runs of at least one series.
Atm its STNG and TOS.
Seriously, no channel is broadcasting Star Trek in some form?
Monkey34
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2003
- Messages
- 5,140
I can watch it on Netflix or BBC America. I'm not sure who else might have it as I only have Netflix and SlingTv.
D
Deleted member 93354
Guest
I mean new episodes. Viewership falls off after that. But you can regularly find ST on streaming services.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Off the air for 25 years has specific meaning and makes a different point.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Its among the free broadcast channels over here (after the general license fee is paid, although theres nothing to stop you watching for free)
Currently they are both on Horror Channel (haha) but when they finish another channel will probably take over.
CBS Action previously showed all the full series.
Enterprise appeared on another channel, cant remember which.
Saturn_V
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2008
- Messages
- 2,296
They're conceding to a loud fan minority that doesn't know what they want; only that they're alarmingly obsessed with the continuity and nostalgia=good, and new=bad. They've announced a series with no storyline, a single actor and an hit-and-miss showrunner, and it's cart before the horse.
I'm certain they drove a dump-truck full of money to Patrick Stewart's house to do this. And any actor approaching his 80s isn't going to say no. But it's still fanservice for a diminishing nostalgia-craving audience.
D
Deleted member 93354
Guest
That's was kind of the point I was making of comparing fan bases of STNG to STD. The STNG fan base is 1.2 million strong even if it has diminished due to lack of new episodes. They tore Quarks Bar and the Star Trek Experience out of Vegas years ago due to the series dying and no new episodes to replace it. Yet despite all this the hoopla CBS is throwing the STD, the fan base is much much weaker than a much older series which hasn't had a new episode/movie since 2002 (16 years ago for the movie, and over 25 years for TV).
CBS is targeting streamers and cord cutters. This means the same group is likely social media friendly.
Even if you doubled the numbers of the fan page on Facebook and everyone paid for all access and stayed on for the entire season, by my rough estimates based on production cost (over $1 mil/episode), CBS is losing money.
They should have looked at JJ Verse and realized throwing money at the special effects, and progressive politically correctness at a situation does not mean good numbers. But that is their mia culpa.
Wasnt enterprise on CW? I cant remember...
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,030
We want respect, nothing less, nothing more. Respect of the material, and respect to the fans. Discovery gave us neither, and also it was bad. You saw those klingons not just how they looked, but the way they were howling at the moon. I never felt so sad and disappointed in my entire life as watching that.
And on top we get that main character. "The ego of one, outweighs the needs of the many"
Money should be less of a motivator at that age, not more. I'm pretty sure he did everything in his life he wanted to do, it's not like he needs this money to complete his bucket list. Suggesting that he's in it for the money is disrespecting the man. If anything he's the only one I believe to be genuine about what he says.
Now it's entirely possible that the producers sweet talked him into this, and promised everything, so I don't doubt this can still turn sour.
Blaming the fans for the failure is stupid and leads nowhere, just even more hostility. Make a worthy successor and there won't be blame to throw around. Hell it's enough to make a good enough one and you'll be all right. The "old fans hate everything" excuse is bullshit. If it were true why would rougue one be much better recieved than the other sw movies? Because it was freaking better.
Yes old fans are harder to please, because the old material set the bar high, but not nearly impossible.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1707758471){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
While the TNG/DS9/Voyager time period and universe is my favorite in all trek, IMHO Voyager was the weakest of the three.
I go back and forth between Picard and Sisko as my favorite captain. Don't get me wrong, Janeway wasn't bad. She really came into the spirit as a star trek captain after the first season (the first few episodes of the first season, she hadn't quite gotten the hang of it yet, and it shows) She just didn't have the writing and supporting acting to back her up. Voyager was pretty bad in that regard.
dgz
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 5,838
Voyagers becomes good after season 3. That's 4 good seasons in a row. 7, the doctor, their holo adventures. The never ending inventions and resourcefulness of the crew.
Discovery is also good. Orville, too
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
I agree that the criticisms of Discovery were overblown. It's a fairly decent show.
I'm still pretty pissed off they messed with the appearance of the Klingons though. Yes, I know there is precedent here (look at ToS episodes like Trouble with Tribbles) but still. They should have stuck with what they looked like in the TNG/DS9/Voy era.
Color inside the goddamned lines!
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
Side note:
How the hell did my comments wind up in this thread? I could have sworn I was posting in the new thread on the news page today?
Mine is the first post in this thread since August, so by the paper trail, I ma responsible for necroing this, but I certainly did not search for old threads to post in. I was just replying to posts in the new thread.
I am completely confused..
How the hell did my comments wind up in this thread? I could have sworn I was posting in the new thread on the news page today?
Mine is the first post in this thread since August, so by the paper trail, I ma responsible for necroing this, but I certainly did not search for old threads to post in. I was just replying to posts in the new thread.
I am completely confused..
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
Dunno, but it's about to start airing the second season, so why not?
Voyager was just a bad concept. I had great hope when it started, but ultimately it felt like Gilligans Island in space. Seriously, there's no way you leave yourself stranded in a distant quadrant as they did in Ep 1 and I recall othertimes where they said, "Oh we can't do that because...." Honestly felt like some of their best episodes were on the holodeck, which took us out of the daily space grind.
OTOH, DS9 is hands down my favorite trek. I don't know if Sisko is my favorite captain, but I liked him a lot. Truth is Liked all of them, but the writing for Voyager wasn't close to DS9 or Seasons 3-6 of TNG.
I think Discovery is probably the best first season of Trek (with the possible exception of TOS, but I haven't watched TOS in decades). As for things that are different, I'm willing to let it play out. Most of the complaints I read here about last season were not issues by the end of the season. Things simply werne't as they seemed.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
Now I know this is probably a controversial opinion, but here goes...
I have tried many times but I just can't get into TOS. The acting is SO BAD, the sets, effects and makeup absolutely abysmal, and apart from a few notable gems, the writing was trash too.
I also didn't find the reckless Kirk believeable as an officer. Picard was the anti-Kirk and that immediately made Trek much better, IMHO.
The only TOS I can enjoy are the feature films. The old TV series are just so bad.
dgz
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 5,838
I don't mind new klingons. I want to see the new borg, though. They should make them more like the strogg. Remember the borg in TNG? ahhaha oh god
I think you have to be able to look at it through the lens of the time. The writing was very much about current events and the sets may look cheesy, but they were probably about as good as it got at the time. TNG at times looks pretty bad too, and at the time I remember being in awe of how good everything looked from episode 1 on (and if you look at the original version Ep 1 of TNG it's got some really awful sfx (and probably not great sets, but I haven't watched it in years).
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,835
I remember the writing being poor for large parts of season 1 of TNG, and as good of an actor as Sir Patrick is, even he couldn't save that. As time went on it much improved. Some of the best episodes of the entire series are in Season 2 (S02E09, The Measure of a Man, being one of my favorites) and it really starts getting pretty consistently good in Season 3. 4 on are fantastic. While the late 80's special effects certainly aren't as good as modern stuff, I never find it to be bad enough to be distracting.
To me its all about the poor writing of the first season. It feels way too much like TOS to me. I hate to say it, but I feel like the series really improved after Gene Roddenberry's influence subsided after the first season, and gradually more and more after that with his stroke in 1989 afte the second season and his eventual passing in 1991.
He created something special, but under his vision it could only ever reach B movie levels, IMHO.
Last edited:
That could be. I think he had substance abuse issues. But I think a huge part was getting RD Moore and to a lesser extent Ira Steven Behr. RD comes in sometime in 89 (as did Behr) and suddenly the writing stories are much better (not that 2 was awful, but it wasn't in the same league as 3-6).
S1 of DS9 was decent but not great. It improved s2 and took off in S3-7. what happened in S3? RD Moore came on board. Of course the other thing that helped DS9 was that Berman was barely involved in it at all.
I feel like Voyager issues was you never get the sense of desperation from the crew during the voyage back home. Also, I really hated when the writers change the Borg from a menacing force to be reckon into a villain of the week.
sirmonkey1985
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,414
also have to remember what tv's we were watching TNG on in the late 80's/early 90's. you couldn't really see the flaws in the set/VFX like you can now. trying to watch TNG on a 65" 4k tv you can see all of those flaws plain as day.
Yeah I’m rewatching TNG right now and it’s pretty bad. Still enjoyable, though.
LOL yep. Sometimes the digital remasters are not in the best interest of the show as they really highlight the limited resolution of the time. 1 really old show.. i remember seeing a digital uprez and while it was a family show.. the digital version you could clearing see the womans bra through her shirt due to the lighting. but when it aired on TV.. that simply wasnt possible.
Another time on a uprez of the movie 2001, when in the space plane in the early scenes you could suddenly clearly see the clear plastic disk a couple pens were taped to that was rotating to show them "floating" in weightlessness
good stuff.
Is that the 1080 version or the original? If it's the original, I'd consider it unwatchable. I love DS9, but without an upgrade to the picture it's tough to watch. I wish they'd kickstart a 1080p (or 4k better still) of the show. I'd put my money where my posts are. OTOH, I had very little interest in buying TNG again. I like the show, but my heart is with DS9.
NeoNemesis
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2004
- Messages
- 2,466
As far as I know they can't do a 1080p version because it was never intended for widescreen. TNG anyway, I have no idea whether DS9 was filmed in widescreen.
The first two seasons were pretty terrible. Almost a throwback to TOS to be honest. The later seasons were great though and I still go back and watch some of the better ones from time to time.
They did a 1080 version. But since I assume it's 4:3, it's 1440x1080, but I may be applying the ratio wrong. I assume it's 4x1080/3, but my math skills are getting rusty
Saturn_V
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2008
- Messages
- 2,296
They did a 1080 version. But since I assume it's 4:3, it's 1440x1080, but I may be applying the ratio wrong. I assume it's 4x1080/3, but my math skills are getting rusty
1080 4:3 is still 1920x1080. The video is still 16:9, it just has pillarboxes for masking the 4:3 frame.
The cast and production staff from DS9 have crowd-funded/produced a documentary called "What We Left Behind: Looking Back at Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" It's basically complete short of getting excerpts from the show captured in HD. They're hoping that this could spur renewed interest and convince CBS to remaster the series once and for all. (which would require a re-assembly from camera negatives like TNG's remaster- and VFX re-created for 1080/4K instead of 480p- it would cost well north of $20M and three years of work)
I've read the Picard character was originally set to die at the end of the first season leaving the Kirk-like Piker in charge. Test audiences liked the char so much that was changed.
Warf was also a throw away character along with Garak in DS9, or so I have read.
Now Picard is a big deal.
Funny how things work out.
Warf was also a throw away character along with Garak in DS9, or so I have read.
Now Picard is a big deal.
Funny how things work out.
The St:NG Remaster is actually really well done, consider the source material. Just re-watched it with my kid in the kast few months.
However, apparently there were not enough sales for the remaster and the decided that thr kkney and time was not worth it to redo STS9
I'll watch the new Picard show, like I watched Discovery. I'll go into it with pre planned disappointment though.
Discovery was not the shit show that the initial outrage made it out to be. Was there pandering sure, and some of the writing was idiotic. The Klingon change was unneeded and ridiculous, they may as well made them all angry furry Muppets.
The biggest letdown of the season was Sonequa Martin-Greens' Burnham. I like her as an actor, but the completely idiotic "I'm emotionless because I was raised Vulcan" shtick was so poorly written that it took away from some of the actual good writing that made it into some of the episodes. They could have just made her a bad ass and ran with it instead of the pan faced zombie they wrote the character as.
The spinning super magic teleporting space ship was pretty stupid as well.
Outside if those issues I didn't hate it.
Maybe they'll hire some competent writers for the Picard series, who in knows.
However, apparently there were not enough sales for the remaster and the decided that thr kkney and time was not worth it to redo ST
S9I'll watch the new Picard show, like I watched Discovery. I'll go into it with pre planned disappointment though.
Discovery was not the shit show that the initial outrage made it out to be. Was there pandering sure, and some of the writing was idiotic. The Klingon change was unneeded and ridiculous, they may as well made them all angry furry Muppets.
The biggest letdown of the season was Sonequa Martin-Greens' Burnham. I like her as an actor, but the completely idiotic "I'm emotionless because I was raised Vulcan" shtick was so poorly written that it took away from some of the actual good writing that made it into some of the episodes. They could have just made her a bad ass and ran with it instead of the pan faced zombie they wrote the character as.
The spinning super magic teleporting space ship was pretty stupid as well.
Outside if those issues I didn't hate it.
Maybe they'll hire some competent writers for the Picard series, who in knows.
I understand, but I meant the resolution of the image minus that (since poster was saying he didn't think they could do 1080, which obviously the vertical resolution is identical to any HD.
As for DS9, as I recall, at least one SFX house said they created their FX at HD (or perhaps greater) resolution. Don't know how much that is. With that said, I think if they kickstarted the Blu Ray and got even a couple of million (and I think they'd get more) that should be enough, given that they would more easily be able to syndicate it in HD.
What I dont' know is how many copies of TNG were sold. Obviously it'd be ideal if they could expand it to 16:9 (ala Friends), but I'm going to guess they can't do that for anything other than (perhaps) CGI scenes, which still might be nice for the last few seasons, which had tons of space battles
I'm not sure what the original price of TNG was, but let's just say it's 200 for the entire series (which may be lower than they'd like), they'd get back 20 million if they sell 100k copies.
I never heard of this documentary. Looks like you can't do anything on that site now. Clicked on preorder but it went to a blank page.
I hope it happens at some point. I probably spent 500 bucks on the original DVDs, since I bought them as they were released (often from Best Buy at close to full retail).
Saturn_V
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2008
- Messages
- 2,296
Same here- even got those stupid bonus DVDs that were BB exclusives.
Still unashamed that I spent the equivalent of freakin' car payment on seven seasons of Star Trek. And it is the only Star Trek series that I own in it's entirety.
The TNG remasters weren't failures- (syndication air and leasing TNG HD to every streaming provider reaped in more money than retail) But they appeared just as DVD/BDs were on the downslide and it didn't help that CBS/Paramount initially (2012) charged over $118/season. TNG's greatest season can be bought for less than $20 now, and the whole series for just over $100- and that's the price point that's acceptable to those still willing to buy physical media.
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
![[Spectre]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/89/89728.jpg?1455675927){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,680
Amazon had a deal a while back during their big yearly thing for the whole series of TNG, DS9, and Voyager for stupid cheap. I think I paid $40 per series....or something like that.
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Damnit, wish I had seen that...
Unfortunately, I have to agree with the above statement for the most part. As cringe worthy as ST
can be, it is better out of the gate than the other Star Trek shows were excluding TOS. TOS's first season is hard to distinguish from later episodes. If anything, some later episodes are just terrible. Spock's Brain, the one with the space hippies, and Cat's Paw come to mind as examples of this. Each of these were in other seasons. Most of the plot issues of ST were in fact, not really issues by the end of the season. That said, it still suffers from some core problems. The primary issue is that the show focuses on a character that is not someone who is likable or someone you can relate to. You see back ground characters which raise interesting questions or are more interesting than the primary characters but no attention is placed on them. The cyborg / android woman is an example of this. Similar issues can be raised with the first officer who doesn't even remotely come across as a competent Starfleet Officer. At least, not one in the command division. Star Trek is of course no longer grounded in science fact or even scientific theory and it shows. The space shroom drive and people from the mirror universe having light sensitivity we don't make no sense.
There are missed opportunities in story telling and characterization. One of the characters is turned into a cyborg as a result of the battle in the first episode. She later runs into the main character (Michael Burnham) and the cyborg woman clearly holds hostility towards Michael Burnham. Later on, they don't talk but this hostility is clearly absent. Its evident they were at least somewhat friendly on the first ship. Other issues with characterization include the main character not being written as a woman at all, but rather a man. Its one of the reason's she isn't likable.
The Klingon ships are too alien looking and aren't cool anymore. The designs are so busy that you can barely tell what direction the things are moving in. The Klingon redesign makes no sense. It does make sense to make them more alien, but that's obviously problematic as characters like Worf and Engineer Torres in Voyager are well liked. Worf's half human girlfriend would make no sense as no human would have kids with something that looked like that and their biology would likely be so different that compatibility would be off the table. This is the same problem with the half-human half-Klingon on Voyager. It would even be somewhat problematic for Dax and Worf's relationship in DS9. Again, you can cry "its about the person inside, not the outside" all you want but attraction is what it is. In otherwords, the show is generally spectacular visually, but things were changed for no reason and created additional issues that made the show less palatable to long time fans.
I don't think the show is as SJW as people claim it is. If anything, its handled so badly from a writing perspective that it fails hard at that agenda. The main character being written as a man with a woman playing the part comes across as a message that "women need to act like men" to be treated equally or serious when that's not the case, nor is it the right message. This is the problem with today's "strong female" characters. They aren't actually strong women. They are women who basically act like men. This wasn't necessary back in the 1980's when we had characters like Ellen Ripley in Alien who clearly acted like a woman and still got the job done. People never said things like: "This movie would have been better if Ripley had been a man" or anything like that. Hell, in the face of that alien creature, gender really didn't matter.
One thing that does scream "SJW" is that all the antagonists are straight white males. So there is that.
As for Picard being in a new show, I can't help but think the character will get the Luke Skywalker treatment. I'm not looking forward to seeing that shit show.
My bonus disks are still about the way they were in the store
Yeah 100/season is too much, but if they did a uhd/hdr release of ds9, I'd be willing to pay it (so long as I get some exclusive bonus content)...but only for ds9..but I think at 100-200 for the series they'd eventually get it back. And streaming and syndication would make money too. Alternatively, they could make it a CBS all access stream and maybe that'd increase subs. I'd hold out for disks.
Attachments
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.