Watch Star Trek: Discovery’s Main Title Sequence

SilverSliver said:
Orville is truer to Star Trek so far than this is.
Click to expand...

As someone that was steadfast against The Orville from the moment I heard about and it being created and helmed (both literally and figuratively) by Seth MacFarlane I have to agree with this because in the 3 episodes that have aired so far The Orville is more along the lines of what one should expect from a Star Trek series with a better story, at least so far, and of course that's my opinion on it, not the word of whoever. That 3rd episode of The Orville was pretty much brilliant and very well written.

The two episodes of Discovery so far, which I watched online at CBS All Access last night, were quite literally all over the space-map, so to speak. Unless something really awesome turns it around for me by the end of the 3rd episode I'm gonna have to write that series off as far as interest from me.

<damned typos, ugh>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I like the orville the same reason I liked galaxy quest. It doesn't take itself so seriously. BUT at the same time it has relate-able characters with flaws stuck in outrageous situations in a sometimes humorous way. I just can't relate to this new show given everything I read and seen in the previews.
 
Use VPN and watch it on Netflix jeez. You can experience media like the rest of the world had to.

Also, holy fucking lens flare man...


( I quite enjoyed it. It’s no expanse but I enjoyed it)
 
Outside of some of the cheesy early episodes, I really like the first two seasons of TNG. Season two may actually be my favorite. I even like Doctor Pulaski. I am also a fan of Voyager, which clearly isn't widely popular among ST fans. I didn't see an episode of Voyager for about ten years, but I've been watching it quite a bit since BBC America brought it back. Heroes & Icons channel also airs it in the evening six day a week. BBC America has practically become the Star Trek channel as they've devoted much of their schedule to TNG, Voyager, and TOS blocks/marathons. I didn't see Enterprise when it originally aired, but I've been trying to catch up as it airs late in the evening on H&I. I like what I've seen of it.

I enjoyed the first episode of Discovery. It looks amazing, certainly a step up from the typical ST series visuals. I'm not sure what to think of the new Klingons. It's certainly quite a change in visuals, at least. If the show continued on CBS I'd keep watching, but I'm not going to subscribe to CBS All Access. Perhaps later on I'll briefly subscribe just to binge-watch all the episodes.

Regarding the identity politics stuff... while I loathe much of the left-wing SJW bullshit that's all the rage in this country today, all of the movies and three of the five series have had a white male lead, so I think the new series is a good opportunity for another non-white female lead. The Star Trek universe has always been pretty diverse. Avery Brooks and Kate Mulgrew were very good hires.
 
harmattan said:
I believe the correct term is "Growing the Beard", one of my favorite TV tropes/terms.

Completely agree with you: give the show a chance. It's not the creative folks fault CBS is using the show as a hook for its stupid streaming service. Also, for those people decrying the "SJW" undertones in the show, I imagine you guys sound a lot like people who trolled TOS back in the 60s for similar reasons. I'm mean, c'mon... This is the show that had a positive Russian character cast at the height of the cold war, and the first interracial kiss on (American) TV. There was an entire episode of TNG where the cocksmith falls in love with a gender-confused hermaphrodite (and gets dumped in the end!) -- it's gonna be a bit boundary pushing and left-leaning.
Click to expand...
It wasn't the first one and if you watch it (or ask Shatner) they never even kissed, they just adjusted the camera to look like it. Fun trivia.
 
I will admit that last episode makes me want to play Stellaris with the Star Trek mod. Trying to resist because I don't have the time.
 
oldmanbal said:
It's going to be really hard to make a prequel to the original star trek given the goofy technology designs of that generation when compared to our modern technologies today that still precede what would have existed on the original show. You would have to make a show with inferior technology in EVERY ASPECT than to what was presented in the original series. No matter what you do, it is going to look more modern than the original series, and writing is going to have to take into account this technology curve. Unless we are just going to say 'forget all 3+ iterations of Star Trek ever existed' and this is a modern re imagining of a 'timeline' that existed prior to the general story line of the 1960s+ era with more realistic (future) space age technology (and textiles).
Click to expand...

They went YOLO and did exactly what you said.
 
M76 said:
Oh c'mon there are no direct windows on a starfleet bridge, they're viewports, you cannot be blinded.
Click to expand...

A brief exterior underside shot of this one--have made it clear those are, in fact, windows. When they pan across and show the bridge, you can see inside it. I mean, unless they were dumb enough to put viewscreens on the OUTSIDE.
 
Just watched the DVR recording. It would have made a better commercial for their All Access streaming service if they had showed the long STD commercial without all of the short commercials. Let's face it, Ep 1 WAS the commercial. I do wonder how many high level discussions took place at CBS over the STD acronym.

Thought it was a decent show for a season 1 episode 1 show. The looking at the anomaly through the telescope out the window was a weird moment. This modern exploration vessel has no optical backups to its sensor array? Really? And no unmanned probes? Pretty sure the Enterprise on Enterprise had probes. Find it hard to believe a humanoid in a space suit is more maneuverable then an unmanned probe. But a decent setup for the series.

No plans to sign up for the streaming service.
 
1_rick said:
A brief exterior underside shot of this one--have made it clear those are, in fact, windows. When they pan across and show the bridge, you can see inside it. I mean, unless they were dumb enough to put viewscreens on the OUTSIDE.
Click to expand...
Well either they were dumb enough to put viiewscreen on it, or dumb enough to put actual windows on it. But in the end I could look past such nonsense if the show was otherwise good.
 
I'm not a star trek fan...This TV show is darker compared to the others. The first two episodes are basically the pilot. It does a great job of building up to what will be the series. The main character from the pilot in hated by everyone else, in the main part of the series. The ship in the pilot is an "older" ship buy it must have been designed by Toyota engineers (the whole fly by wire thing comes to mind). This extended trailer is very good



It looks like it will also be on NETFLIX.

If you like star wars more than star trek This is the Star Trek to watch plus it has Jason Isaacs in it.

He's not in the pilot though because the pilot is a setup for him being in the series. Look at the IMDB for the show
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5171438/

For the record SW>ST.
 
damicatz said:
Transporters have been "eyeballed" before (e.g. the number of times Torres had to improvise the transporter to rescue the crew in Voyager using Maquis tactics).



Star Trek has always been left-wing. This is nothing new.



In Star Trek : TMP, McCoy asks "Why is any object we don't understand always called "a thing"?".



She is a human raised by Vulcans so the stoic-ness is to be expected.



There is established canon for the viewscreen being bright to the point of hurting people's eyes (e.g. DS9 "Shadows and Symbols").

Star Trek has always had sound in space.



Wrong. Amongst others, Picard, Data, Archer, Odo, and Seven of Nine have all used neckpinches.
Click to expand...

Nail meet head. I think some people here have a far, far different memory of what the past series were and where their sensitivities lie. Identity politics, optimism and morality play are core to ST (that, and the reality-eschewing special effects).

Watched both episodes on Netflix last night and it's actually a very good start. More Star Trek than the pop-reference Michael Bay'ed movies, in any case. It definitely seems more character-arc focused and has a "make it darker" feel, but the hallmarks are there. Effects were pretty top notch, although can see how the lens flare and oversaturation would not be to everyone's taste.
 
What bothers me is just a bunch of little stupid things.

There has been no contact with the klingons for 100 years, yet the first officer's family was killed in a klingon raid.

The Klingons turn on a bright light as a signal. OK. And it is seen light years away, instantly?

The Klingon ship is cloaked. Romulans were the first to cloak in TOS and the Klingons got the tech from them, 100 years in the future.

They need to hire some nerds.
 
M76 said:
Netflix only outside of north america, cbs all access in the us. For once you get a taste of what's it like to be gebonanned all the time
Click to expand...

Heh, as an American ex-pat, very happy to not need to modulate through VPNs every time I want to watch something not produced by Canal or BBC.
 
M76 said:
Netflix only outside of north america, cbs all access in the us. For once you get a taste of what's it like to be gebonanned all the time
Click to expand...

Did you mistype geobanned ? I prefer GeoBoned.

Well if nothing else this entire discovery cbs all access crap will perhaps help a few of our American friends understand how annoying and counter consumer geo locking content is.

Although I'm sure everyone who ever said I was a thief for admitting to pirating GOT when as a Canadian my only legal option is subbing to a $80+ cable package or waiting 6 months to buy it on blu ray will continue to consider it theft. Of course all access is a lot cheaper then a Canadian cable package including HBO... still. This time out we get the new trek on a pretty common inexpensive cable channel, it feels really odd not being the ones getting screwed for profit.
 
ChadD said:
Did you mistype geobanned ? I prefer GeoBoned.

Well if nothing else this entire discovery cbs all access crap will perhaps help a few of our American friends understand how annoying and counter consumer geo locking content is.

Although I'm sure everyone who ever said I was a thief for admitting to pirating GOT when as a Canadian my only legal option is subbing to a $80+ cable package or waiting 6 months to buy it on blu ray will continue to consider it theft. Of course all access is a lot cheaper then a Canadian cable package including HBO... still. This time out we get the new trek on a pretty common inexpensive cable channel, it feels really odd not being the ones getting screwed for profit.
Click to expand...

Us regular people in the US think the geobanning is stupid as shit. It's not up to us, it's the damn content owners who do that shit. I've bitched about that ever since they started with the regions on DVDs. In the long run it's just stupid.
 
I watched it last night
The first episode...to be honest I wasn't sure, and i am damn glad they released 2 at the same time.
By the end of the second episode, I was pretty happy with it.
I kinda expected a certain thing to happen, and there were other parts which weren't expected and were kinda cool

In regards to the Orville...I like it. Its Galaxy Quest in a TV series!
 
harmattan said:
More Star Trek than the pop-reference Michael Bay'ed movies, in any case.
Click to expand...

Looks like they took the criticisms of the first Michael Bay movie in this video to heart.



Edit: custom phpBB-style links for The Onion? Sorry, I don't know how to embed it properly.

http://www.the onion.com/video/trekkies-bash-new-star-trek-film-as-fun-watchable-14333
 
Jtal said:
What bothers me is just a bunch of little stupid things.

There has been no contact with the klingons for 100 years, yet the first officer's family was killed in a klingon raid.

The Klingons turn on a bright light as a signal. OK. And it is seen light years away, instantly?

The Klingon ship is cloaked. Romulans were the first to cloak in TOS and the Klingons got the tech from them, 100 years in the future.

They need to hire some nerds.
Click to expand...

Everything you said is true. Star Trek lore has always been all over the place. Even when they explained how the Klingon's lost their ridges in TOS and gained them back in TNG gets undone here. Archer's Klingon's looked like TNG's and now, here they look completely different. Personally I prefer these Klingon's to all the others. I've always felt that aliens in space shows need to look, act and be more alien. Not just human vikings with a small thing on their head.

The only way for fans to really approach a new Trek series/movie not hold onto these things. I know it drives the lore fans crazy, but the producers and writers don't respect the lore. It's time for the fans to move on too.
 
According to the lore the Klingon's used to have ridges, then between Archer and Kirk they made a human killing virus, only the virus spread to them and deformed them. Which is when they lost the ridges. Eventually over time a cure was found and they got their ridges back. But Discovery IS between Archer and Kirk and they look like something completely different from both. Now they have extra ridges. Ridges on their ridges. Whatever. At the end of the day it's just a couple guys in a room making this all up as they go along. It doesn't need to make sense. Just needs to be cool. Like sound in space.
 
akaliel said:
Everything you said is true. Star Trek lore has always been all over the place. Even when they explained how the Klingon's lost their ridges in TOS and gained them back in TNG gets undone here. Archer's Klingon's looked like TNG's and now, here they look completely different. Personally I prefer these Klingon's to all the others. I've always felt that aliens in space shows need to look, act and be more alien. Not just human vikings with a small thing on their head.

The only way for fans to really approach a new Trek series/movie not hold onto these things. I know it drives the lore fans crazy, but the producers and writers don't respect the lore. It's time for the fans to move on too.
Click to expand...

Ok it's possible to forgive the writers for forgetting that cloaking was introduced by the Romulans in Tos and the Klingons got it in TNG.

But

Saying that there has been no trace of the Klingons in over 100 years and then saying that the first officers family was Killed in a Klingon raid on a federation outpost in the same episode? That's Alzheimers.

And having the Klingons turn on a light beacon that's instantly seen light years away, well having light travel faster than light is just, well a little past nitpicking.

This isn't just a little change in makeup due to production values this is just having no idea what you are writing about.
 
Jtal said:
Ok it's possible to forgive the writers for forgetting that cloaking was introduced by the Romulans in Tos and the Klingons got it in TNG.

But

Saying that there has been no trace of the Klingons in over 100 years and then saying that the first officers family was Killed in a Klingon raid on a federation outpost in the same episode? That's Alzheimers.

And having the Klingons turn on a light beacon that's instantly seen light years away, well having light travel faster than light is just, well a little past nitpicking.

This isn't just a little change in makeup due to production values this is just having no idea what you are writing about.
Click to expand...

you obviously didn't finish watching the show did you? lol. she's half human half Vulkan(mind you her character is complete and utter bullshit attempt at creating a female version of spock yet doesn't fit in the timeline properly since spock was the first hybrid Vulkan). the federation hasn't dealt with the Klingon's for 100 years but the Vulkan's have. the Klingon attack happened before the Vulkan's joined the federation.

if you've never watched the original star trek you'll enjoy this show most likely, but if you have then stay away from it because it neither fits the original timeline nor does it fit the new timeline from the movies.

akaliel said:
Everything you said is true. Star Trek lore has always been all over the place. Even when they explained how the Klingon's lost their ridges in TOS and gained them back in TNG gets undone here. Archer's Klingon's looked like TNG's and now, here they look completely different. Personally I prefer these Klingon's to all the others. I've always felt that aliens in space shows need to look, act and be more alien. Not just human vikings with a small thing on their head.

The only way for fans to really approach a new Trek series/movie not hold onto these things. I know it drives the lore fans crazy, but the producers and writers don't respect the lore. It's time for the fans to move on too.
Click to expand...

fuck that, why should i all of a sudden give up on the lore when one terribly written show decides not to follow it? get a better production team. hell even the new movies that are an alternate timeline follow the lore better then this show..

this show is suppose to pre-date the original star trek. the original star trek takes place in 2266-2269, the new movies take place between 2258 to 2263.. the show takes place in 2256, 2 years before the movies and 10 years before the original tv show.
 
Last edited:
sirmonkey1985 said:
fuck that, why should i all of a sudden give up on the lore when one terribly written show decides not to follow it? get a better production team. hell even the new movies that are an alternate timeline follow the lore better then this show..

this show is suppose to pre-date the original star trek. the original star trek takes place in 2266-2269, the new movies take place between 2258 to 2263.. the show takes place in 2256, 2 years before the movies and 10 years before the original tv show.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, but Discovery is after Archer. And Archer's Klingon's looked like TNG Klingons.

You should give up on it because they're not going to change their production team. Because it's not up to you what they create and decide to call cannon. Next episode could give us Ferengi's that are purple and have no ears. They can call it lore and laugh as you pitch a fit about it. They don't care about following any of it too closely. Why should you? The alter-universe Abrams movies pissed all over the lore and gave us over the top action movies with hardly any connection to the messages and themes from the previous content. And they were far more successful than any of the TNG movies. In the end, that's all the lore CBS and Paramount really care about.

So just relax and enjoy it if you can. If you can't, well I don't really care.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
you obviously didn't finish watching the show did you? lol. she's half human half Vulkan(mind you her character is complete and utter bullshit attempt at creating a female version of spock yet doesn't fit in the timeline properly since spock was the first hybrid Vulkan). the federation hasn't dealt with the Klingon's for 100 years but the Vulkan's have. the Klingon attack happened before the Vulkan's joined the federation.

if you've never watched the original star trek you'll enjoy this show most likely, but if you have then stay away from it because it neither fits the original timeline nor does it fit the new timeline from the movies.


.
Click to expand...

Dude, She Is the adopted daughter of Sarek and Amanda Check out the ears, she's 100% Human. lol lol lol No hybrid here.
 
Jtal said:
Ok it's possible to forgive the writers for forgetting that cloaking was introduced by the Romulans in Tos and the Klingons got it in TNG.

But

Saying that there has been no trace of the Klingons in over 100 years and then saying that the first officers family was Killed in a Klingon raid on a federation outpost in the same episode? That's Alzheimers.

And having the Klingons turn on a light beacon that's instantly seen light years away, well having light travel faster than light is just, well a little past nitpicking.

This isn't just a little change in makeup due to production values this is just having no idea what you are writing about.
Click to expand...

It's TV dude. We can nitpick apart anything. Sci-Fi has always suffered the worst of it as TV writers clash with a fanbase that's scientifically knowledgeable. The signal bit probably started off as just Saru saying, "Captain, I'm detecting some kind of signal." But then the producers said, "That's boring! Make it a light or something." Welcome to Hollywood!

Remember there's sound in space in Star Trek. We've been letting that one slide for entertainment value for 50 years.
 
Checked out eps. 1 and 2 last night. Wasn't bad, but the inconsistencies and the lens flare were turn offs. I'm going to give it a chance, it has potential. CBS All Access can still kick rocks though.
 
harmattan said:
Nail meet head. I think some people here have a far, far different memory of what the past series were and where their sensitivities lie. Identity politics, optimism and morality play are core to ST (that, and the reality-eschewing special effects).

Watched both episodes on Netflix last night and it's actually a very good start. More Star Trek than the pop-reference Michael Bay'ed movies, in any case. It definitely seems more character-arc focused and has a "make it darker" feel, but the hallmarks are there. Effects were pretty top notch, although can see how the lens flare and oversaturation would not be to everyone's taste.
Click to expand...
Being unreasonable, and preferring egoism over the good of the many never were the values of star trek, in fact the exact opposite was there. Star Trek has Always been selfless, and didn't concern itself with race and gender at all, they really ended gender and race segregation and discrimination by not even mentioning it! It didn't matter what gender was a character, what mattered is their talent and experience. Janeway wasn't a female captain. She was a damn good captain, who happened to be female. There is a huge difference between putting in annoying self-serving female characters, over characters who naturally feel right in the role, and aren't in your face about their racial and gender identity. The best example of this was Dax from DS9, the absolute non-gendered character. And nobody cared, because the character was good regardless of gender. But of course if your understanding of the star trek universe is as deep as: there was no money in the old series and there is no money in the new therefore it's all communism, it might be all the same to you. Curiously in the real world all actual communist countries use money.

Star Trek is a post scarcity civilization. Meaning the production capability has far exceeded the needs and wants of the citizens, without the need of much actual labour from the population.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
I can't name ONE quote from the reboots. I don't think I watched them more than once.
Click to expand...
While I'm not a big fan of the reboots, there is one really cool line from Kirk that I'd love to quote one day: "So, go get some more guys and then it'll be an even fight."
 
As a life long fan of ST, I'm bored to death of prequels. Who are they trying to appeal to here? Most people have no idea who Kirk and the original Trek crew were and probably have a hard time recalling even the most recent trek shows. They should have gone with a show set 100 or so years after TNG.

Also, this new show lead sucks with terrible acting and most of the cast I saw so far are underwhelming compared to their predecessors. The new Klingons look fake as fuck and the actors playing them sound like they're just reciting gibberish awkwardly rather than speaking an actual language. The entire premise of uniting all their houses against the federation is a tired concept that shows how lacking in creativity Hollywood has become. Oh and naming the lead character Michael in an effort to push LGBTBBQ gender fluid politics on the Trek fanbase turned me off from this show and goes to show how out of touch Hollywood is from the rest of the country.

I subscribed to CBS all access for the show and then cancelled; put it on Netflix or no deal.
 
Last edited:
5150Joker said:
Oh and naming the lead character Michael in an effort to push LGBTBBQ gender fluid politics on the Trek fanbase turned me off from this show and goes to show how out of touch Hollywood is from the rest of the country.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you that this reeks of Hollywood pandering to a specific demographic, you have to remember Star Trek has expressed sexuality through the ages starting from TOS. Kirk's gotta have some alien STD by now. LOL. So a gay character or scene was bound to happen. The first I can remember was Judsia Dax with her previous host (Kurzon Dax) widow. But this Discovery is a bit more "Unnecessarily in your face, and unnecessary to plot development to be shoved out there." Sexuality shouldn't be an issue unless it is part of a plot device.

I remember other outcries of political correctness because of the first black Vulcan, Tuvok (Voyager) He has been the only black Vulcan I can remember. But to his credit Tim Russ was exceptional in the role. (He also appeared in DS9)

The whole logic versus emotion thing has been worn out:

Spock: Finding balance with being part human
Data: Trying to be more human
Tuvok: Attempting to be only logical
Tu'Pal: Trying to stay Vulkan and fearing emotion

And now we have an adopted child who's human with Vulcan parents? So let me guess: Identity crisis as to her heritage?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top