STD - The War Without, The War Within

[Yukaphile]

Oh, and giving Spock a half-sister. I thought Sybok was stupid. I thought Anakin's apprentice was stupid. This reeks of the same thing.

[clearspira]

Chuck should eviscerate these early episodes just as harshly. And this isn't the early 2000s. We've had to wait a year and a half before Season 2 came out. I guarantee it won't improve. At all.

Care to elaborate why it won't improve?

Because we are getting a redesigned PRIME 1701. Let me just elaborate that for you: the 1701 goes from looking like a cross between the Enterprise C and Abramsprise in STD, then gets refitted for the Cage into the familiar old style, then gets refitted for Where No Man Goes Before to change the nacelles, then gets refitted again for the Motion Picture. Consistency? Making sense? These are things this show can only dream of.
Other tidbits from the trailer include our third Spock and out of place Marvel/Orville inspired humour. They seriously must be bricking themselves that Orville is getting such high audience reviews on RT if Kurtzman is trying to out Seth Mcfarlane, Seth Mcfarlane.

Gee, why do some of us think that it won't improve. You're an optimist i'll give you that.

[clearspira]

Oh, and giving Spock a half-sister. I thought Sybok was stupid. I thought Anakin's apprentice was stupid. This reeks of the same thing.

This is why I maintain that Star Trek V is better than anything we've had since Enterprise ended. Sybok being a traitor and an exile makes sense that Spock would not have mentioned him. They better have a bloody good reason why Micheal, who is shaping up to have a huge role in the Star Trek universe, was never mentioned to Kirk or Bones. Unless we are also getting our third Kirk at some point (don't be surprised when this both happens and he is closer to Pine than Shatner AKA a skirt chasing frat boy.)

[Makeshift Python]

Oh, and giving Spock a half-sister. I thought Sybok was stupid. I thought Anakin's apprentice was stupid. This reeks of the same thing.

It's more than that. Losing your racism by sleeping with a Klingon? Employing the "bury your gays" trope? Dear God, STD is a flaming debris field.

Given what you took out of DISCOVERY, I'm surprised you're not as harsh over ENTERPRISE for featuring Archer committing genocide by withholding a cure for a race. That's something Chuck never lets go of as his "Observer Effect" review shows.

What I ultimately like about the show is the characters, the standouts being Tilly and Stamets. I also look forward to the show taking on a much more jovial tone now that we're no longer dealing with the undercurrent of an interstellar war. That storyline was the weakest element for me, and if it weren't for the characters I probably wouldn't have finished the first season.

Chuck should eviscerate these early episodes just as harshly. And this isn't the early 2000s. We've had to wait a year and a half before Season 2 came out. I guarantee it won't improve. At all.

Care to elaborate why it won't improve?

Because we are getting a redesigned PRIME 1701. Let me just elaborate that for you: the 1701 goes from looking like a cross between the Enterprise C and Abramsprise in STD, then gets refitted for the Cage into the familiar old style, then gets refitted for Where No Man Goes Before to change the nacelles, then gets refitted again for the Motion Picture. Consistency? Making sense? These are things this show can only dream of.
Other tidbits from the trailer include our third Spock and out of place Marvel/Orville inspired humour. They seriously must be bricking themselves that Orville is getting such high audience reviews on RT if Kurtzman is trying to out Seth Mcfarlane, Seth Mcfarlane.

Gee, why do some of us think that it won't improve. You're an optimist i'll give you that.

One of the things I was glad about Chuck's reviews was him not giving a shit about the change in aesthetics, opting to focus more on the story and its characters. Chuck understands it's not 1966 anymore and that the old sets would not sell for modern audiences for a longrunning show.

[Karha of Honor]

It's more than that. Losing your racism by sleeping with a Klingon? Employing the "bury your gays" trope? Dear God, STD is a flaming debris field.

It's more than that. Losing your racism by sleeping with a Klingon?

Happened to which character?

Employing the "bury your gays" trope?

You know they just wanted to get rid of a gay character for no plot reason whatsoever?

[clearspira]

One of the things I was glad about Chuck's reviews was him not giving a shit about the change in aesthetics, opting to focus more on the story and its characters. Chuck understands it's not 1966 anymore and that the old sets would not sell for modern audiences for a longrunning show.

And I agree believe it or not. However my argument is very simple: there are such things as sacred cows and the original Enterprise is one of them. Note how TNG, DS9 and ENT when they showed this ship gave it to us in its full cardboard glory because I am guessing that even Berman and Braga realised this. Whatever their intentions are with showing this ship (and I am quite sure it is fanservice) it is going to backfire horribly.

And on the subject of aesthetics, this is where ENT got it right as there is a design lineage on the NX-01 bridge. There is T'Pol's view scanner, the viewscreen that is actually a viewscreen, Hoshi's earpiece, the touchscreens with TOS style flashing lights. There are ways to do it with a dash of love and effort to update a show and keep lore consistent. Or even better, sidestep the whole problem and set it in the 25th century because none of these conversations would now be happening as we would be expecting Discovery to look advanced. By far STDs greatest own kick to the balls was trying to fit this radically different looking ship into a period of Trek history where it does not belong.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

One of the things I was glad about Chuck's reviews was him not giving a shit about the change in aesthetics, opting to focus more on the story and its characters. Chuck understands it's not 1966 anymore and that the old sets would not sell for modern audiences for a longrunning show.

And I agree believe it or not. However my argument is very simple: there are such things as sacred cows and the original Enterprise is one of them. Note how TNG, DS9 and ENT when they showed this ship gave it to us in its full cardboard glory because I am guessing that even Berman and Braga realised this. Whatever their intentions are with showing this ship (and I am quite sure it is fanservice) it is going to backfire horribly.

And on the subject of aesthetics, this is where ENT got it right as there is a design lineage on the NX-01 bridge. There is T'Pol's view scanner, the viewscreen that is actually a viewscreen, Hoshi's earpiece, the touchscreens with TOS style flashing lights. There are ways to do it with a dash of love and effort to update a show and keep lore consistent. Or even better, sidestep the whole problem and set it in the 25th century because none of these conversations would now be happening as we would be expecting Discovery to look advanced. By far STDs greatest own kick to the balls was trying to fit this radically different looking ship into a period of Trek history where it does not belong.

Though I was holding consideration for aesthetic reformatting due to generational design, I think this is pretty sensible.

The Klingon ridge situation is something I've come to regard as officially not part of continuity. The disappointing thing for me is that, aside from the 300th episode special, where that exchange with Worf can be given a pass given that it was a very clever wink to the fan theories, they also had earlier gave respect to the distinction in Star Trek VI. Christopher Plummer wanted to look more like a classic Klingon. What's brilliant about it to me is that the ridges are on the top of his head instead of his forehead. The klingons had ridges the whole time, just that their hair was covering it! Was there ever a bald klingon before ST 6??

[BunBun299]

I maintain that the doctor was never really a character on the show. He was a box on a PC checklist for them to check off. And hey, they still have his partner around, so that box is still technically checked off.

Even ignoring all aspects of continuity I might have regarding a prequel, I'd still have this problem with the series. Most of the characters are completely unlikable. They're either assholes or boring. Or killed off, like Georgiou. Bringing her back through Evil Twin does not help. Maybe Lorca could have been interesting enough to overcome this, but I feel that making him just evil because Mirror Universe ruined that potential.

Tilly seems the one exception, and she can't save the series.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I maintain that the doctor was never really a character on the show. He was a box on a PC checklist for them to check off. And hey, they still have his partner around, so that box is still technically checked off.

I was kinda pondering about this too. The established rule just seems to be don't ever kill off a character that's homosexual. I can sit on that not begrudgingly, and of course I might not be caught up on everything, though it doesn't seem to be an accurate measure to what the problem came to be recognized as. If there was a trend that suggested such objectification and it was never that explicit, then the agenda seems to be to assume that every happening of it is part of the trend.

[clearspira]

One of the things I was glad about Chuck's reviews was him not giving a shit about the change in aesthetics, opting to focus more on the story and its characters. Chuck understands it's not 1966 anymore and that the old sets would not sell for modern audiences for a longrunning show.

And I agree believe it or not. However my argument is very simple: there are such things as sacred cows and the original Enterprise is one of them. Note how TNG, DS9 and ENT when they showed this ship gave it to us in its full cardboard glory because I am guessing that even Berman and Braga realised this. Whatever their intentions are with showing this ship (and I am quite sure it is fanservice) it is going to backfire horribly.

And on the subject of aesthetics, this is where ENT got it right as there is a design lineage on the NX-01 bridge. There is T'Pol's view scanner, the viewscreen that is actually a viewscreen, Hoshi's earpiece, the touchscreens with TOS style flashing lights. There are ways to do it with a dash of love and effort to update a show and keep lore consistent. Or even better, sidestep the whole problem and set it in the 25th century because none of these conversations would now be happening as we would be expecting Discovery to look advanced. By far STDs greatest own kick to the balls was trying to fit this radically different looking ship into a period of Trek history where it does not belong.

Though I was holding consideration for aesthetic reformatting due to generational design, I think this is pretty sensible.

The Klingon ridge situation is something I've come to regard as officially not part of continuity. The disappointing thing for me is that, aside from the 300th episode special, where that exchange with Worf can be given a pass given that it was a very clever wink to the fan theories, they also had earlier gave respect to the distinction in Star Trek VI. Christopher Plummer wanted to look more like a classic Klingon. What's brilliant about it to me is that the ridges are on the top of his head instead of his forehead. The klingons had ridges the whole time, just that their hair was covering it! Was there ever a bald klingon before ST 6??

Chris Plummer, perfect example. There are ways to do it with thought and love, and STD didn't. And as for the klingons, again, when ENT tried to explain the foreheads (wisely or not, well done or not) we got a three part dedicated special. STD just went ''uh, different houses, deal with it.''
Tbh, I would dearly love to know what the likes of Scott Bakula thinks of STD and how his show stacks up to this.