Star Trek: One More Time

[eddiew37]

Deep Space Nine was criminally underrated.

Yup. I thought Voyager was very good, action and alien-wise. The Kayzon, Species 8472, The Borg... And I don't care what anyone says, Captain Janeway was an awesome character. Tough as nails and always ready to fight.

The Ferrenghi now known as the republican party

 

[Synthaholic]

i thought the Orville was pretty good.....confused about what it wants to be?....and why would the show be like family guy?.....Stewie and Brian are the best things on that show....otherwise that show has gone past its expiration date....

They were the only thing that was ever good on that show, with occasionally Lois.

 

[toobfreak]

The race of any character in Star Trek is unlikely to make better or worse stories. It just doesn't matter in the context of the show.

Then why make a point of it? What has CBS told me about the show? Almost nothing, but I know they have a black first officer and a gay captain. The point is, why does it matter at all if he's gay? Sulu was really gay yet no one even knew it until decades after the show was over. And who is to say if the character Uhura or Scotty or Chekov was gay? It simply wasn't a point of the story. The only one we know for sure was hetero was Kirk. ;^) So the only possible point to being told he is gay is to:
A). Either explore gay issues in the story, and that was my original point.
B). Attract a gay viewership.

Why is it that all of these left wing liberal organizations have this obsession with every minority in the world except for the preponderance of their audience---- Normal average people.

I watched a bit of The Orville and did not like it at all.

Then I doubt you really gave it a fair chance. The show was good on every level: fun, creative, original, fresh and not predictable. It can only get better as the characters flesh out and develop chemistry.

I am a rabid Star Trek fan but I predict The Orville will KILL Discovery in the ratings as well as my own interest. You see, you will never outdo or reinvent the original Star Trek. Not the chemistry, not the quality of cast. Orville did the next best thing: rather than try to compete with it, they made a good-natured light parody of it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

i thought the Orville was pretty good.....confused about what it wants to be?....and why would the show be like family guy?.....Stewie and Brian are the best things on that show....otherwise that show has gone past its expiration date....

Yes, confused. The show, at least the first 15 minutes or so, couldn't decide if it was a drama or a comedy, and failed to do a good job at both. The jokes fell flat, and the characters were not overly interesting or sympathetic. It's like the writers couldn't decide if they want the show to be Star Trek or Galaxy Quest.

like many shows montro you have to give it a few episodes......TNG took the whole 1st season to be what they turned into...

I remember enjoying TNG from the start. Also, I don't think that show was really confused about what kind of show it was; it may have just taken some time to figure out how it was going to go about it, but it knew what it was from the start. I didn't see anything in The Orville to make me want to keep watching, and I certainly haven't seen anything from MacFarlane to trust him with a drama.

in the beginning it got a lot of flak from the fans for ripping off stories from the original series and for being kinda boring.....i was at a trek convention were Patrick Stewart was there and he took a lot of shit from people telling him if you guys dont get better episodes for the 2nd season you guys are going to lose a lot of fans.....he agreed and said the Producers are aware of that...and they got better....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Nope, from everything I've heard about ST: Discovery it will be every bit as clumsy, SJW-harrassing the viewer (other Star Trek let their diversity function as a casual, everyday thing) embarrassing and horribly dumbed down as Jar Jar Abrams horrid mockery of Star Trek movies. I can't tell you how the hyperactive, jackhammer-in-the-brain, stupid 2009 cine-feces ended because I walked out during the last half hour. I hated it so bad that I figured whatever I paid to get in, it was worth MORE to get out. Not only is it the worst Star Trek I've ever seen, not only is it the worst movie I've ever seen, but I've NEVER seen a megabudget movie more incompetent on a technical level. The lens flares, obnoxious set design lighting & cinematography, etc., etc. J.J. Abrams Trek has zero redeeming qualities of any kind. I haven't watched any newer Trek since that 2009 utter miscarriage of sci-fi.

My point being, everything points to Discovery as being in the same DELIBERATELY dumbed-down, obnoxious vein. And has so many talentless idiots involved, NOTHING good can come from it.

If the 2009 Star Trek is the worst movie you have ever seen, you must have seen very few movies.

The 2009 reboot is a fantastic movie. Karl Urban is a perfect Dr. McCoy.

but there was no reason to make it an alternate timeline.....that killed it....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Deep Space Nine was criminally underrated.

Yup. I thought Voyager was very good, action and alien-wise. The Kayzon, Species 8472, The Borg... And I don't care what anyone says, Captain Janeway was an awesome character. Tough as nails and always ready to fight.

have to concur.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

i thought the Orville was pretty good.....confused about what it wants to be?....and why would the show be like family guy?.....Stewie and Brian are the best things on that show....otherwise that show has gone past its expiration date....

They were the only thing that was ever good on that show, with occasionally Lois.

peter was getting pretty ridiculous....

 

[toobfreak]

But in The Next Generation, Roddenberry tried his Libtard vision and it failed

Don't take My word for it, Synthamoronic, those were Gene's words; he tried to have the show where the Captain never took any risks, never went on dangerous missions, and there was little confrontation, everything was solved with mediation, talking, contrition or whatever, you know, the 24th century had moved past all that primitive stuff------ and it didn't work as a television formula. It simply didn't grab the audience and the First Season was a flop. It is the least popular and revamping the show for action and drama made for most of the best stories they ever had.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The race of any character in Star Trek is unlikely to make better or worse stories. It just doesn't matter in the context of the show.

Then why make a point of it? What has CBS told me about the show? Almost nothing, but I know they have a black first officer and a gay captain. The point is, why does it matter at all if he's gay? Sulu was really gay yet no one even knew it until decades after the show was over. And who is to say if the character Uhura or Scotty or Chekov was gay? It simply wasn't a point of the story. The only one we know for sure was hetero was Kirk. ;^) So the only possible point to being told he is gay is to:
A). Either explore gay issues in the story, and that was my original point.
B). Attract a gay viewership.

Why is it that all of these left wing liberal organizations have this obsession with every minority in the world except for the preponderance of their audience---- Normal average people.

I watched a bit of The Orville and did not like it at all.

Then I doubt you really gave it a fair chance. The show was good on every level: fun, creative, original, fresh and not predictable. It can only get better as the characters flesh out and develop chemistry.

I am a rabid Star Trek fan but I predict The Orville will KILL Discovery in the ratings as well as my own interest. You see, you will never outdo or reinvent the original Star Trek. Not the chemistry, not the quality of cast. Orville did the next best thing: rather than try to compete with it, they made a good-natured light parody of it.

we saw scotty and chekov with woman....

 

[toobfreak]

we saw scotty and chekov with woman....

Yeah, I know. I could tell you the exact episodes, the production numbers and everything. I was just trying to make a point.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Will you watch?

I'll probably watch the opener out of curiosity but won't pay money to CBS to see the series. The premise is not fresh beyond the lady Captain and XO.

'Star Trek: Discovery' to Tackle Trump-Era Political Divide

It's all up to the quality of the writers.

What I'd like to see is what happened to the morons who cut the original series.

 

[Montrovant]

Nope, from everything I've heard about ST: Discovery it will be every bit as clumsy, SJW-harrassing the viewer (other Star Trek let their diversity function as a casual, everyday thing) embarrassing and horribly dumbed down as Jar Jar Abrams horrid mockery of Star Trek movies. I can't tell you how the hyperactive, jackhammer-in-the-brain, stupid 2009 cine-feces ended because I walked out during the last half hour. I hated it so bad that I figured whatever I paid to get in, it was worth MORE to get out. Not only is it the worst Star Trek I've ever seen, not only is it the worst movie I've ever seen, but I've NEVER seen a megabudget movie more incompetent on a technical level. The lens flares, obnoxious set design lighting & cinematography, etc., etc. J.J. Abrams Trek has zero redeeming qualities of any kind. I haven't watched any newer Trek since that 2009 utter miscarriage of sci-fi.

My point being, everything points to Discovery as being in the same DELIBERATELY dumbed-down, obnoxious vein. And has so many talentless idiots involved, NOTHING good can come from it.

If the 2009 Star Trek is the worst movie you have ever seen, you must have seen very few movies.

The 2009 reboot is a fantastic movie. Karl Urban is a perfect Dr. McCoy.

I wouldn't call it fantastic. Pretty good, but far from fantastic.

 

[Montrovant]

The race of any character in Star Trek is unlikely to make better or worse stories. It just doesn't matter in the context of the show.

Then why make a point of it? What has CBS told me about the show? Almost nothing, but I know they have a black first officer and a gay captain. The point is, why does it matter at all if he's gay? Sulu was really gay yet no one even knew it until decades after the show was over. And who is to say if the character Uhura or Scotty or Chekov was gay? It simply wasn't a point of the story. The only one we know for sure was hetero was Kirk. ;^) So the only possible point to being told he is gay is to:
A). Either explore gay issues in the story, and that was my original point.
B). Attract a gay viewership.

Why is it that all of these left wing liberal organizations have this obsession with every minority in the world except for the preponderance of their audience---- Normal average people.

I watched a bit of The Orville and did not like it at all.

Then I doubt you really gave it a fair chance. The show was good on every level: fun, creative, original, fresh and not predictable. It can only get better as the characters flesh out and develop chemistry.

I am a rabid Star Trek fan but I predict The Orville will KILL Discovery in the ratings as well as my own interest. You see, you will never outdo or reinvent the original Star Trek. Not the chemistry, not the quality of cast. Orville did the next best thing: rather than try to compete with it, they made a good-natured light parody of it.

Oh, I have no doubt that announcing a gay captain (and honestly, I didn't realize that there were 2 captains or that 1 was gay) and talking about the first black, female lead are, at least in part, attempts to pull in viewers. I'm OK with that; it's a TV show, getting viewers is what they want to do.

Sulu was not gay. George Takei turned out to be gay, and as you said, he didn't come out as gay until the 2000s. Takei actually opposed Sulu being gay in the new movies. Takei has said that he talked to Roddenberry about the possibility of bringing up homosexuality in Star Trek, and Roddenberry told him it was going to far, and would lead to the show being cancelled. George Takei Reacts to Gay Sulu News: "I Think It's Really Unfortunate"

You doubt I gave The Orville a fair chance if I did not like it? What, anyone who gives it a fair chance (however you are defining that) is going to like it?

Comparing ratings for The Orville and Discovery won't necessarily say anything about the comparative quality of the shows. They are going to be broadcast in different formats. I'm guessing Discovery will have poor ratings, however good it is, because of it being stuck on a CBS streaming service I don't expect to get that many subscribers.

Galaxy Quest was a good-natured parody of Star Trek. I found The Orville to be a poorly executed attempt to mix Star Trek and Family Guy, failing at both.

 

[theHawk]

No, Star Trek is nothing but libtard fantasy bullshit except the original series. In it, if the captain wasn't killing them, he was "kirking" them.

It's funny that Roddenberry's vision was one of a socialist utopia, no personal wealth, etc. Yet the old show and TNG did promote conservative themes, like personal responsibility, using logic over emotions, and of course finding the bad guys and blowing them up. There is a lot in the old shows that would be considered politically incorrect in today's Snowflake era.

 

[Synthaholic]

Nope, from everything I've heard about ST: Discovery it will be every bit as clumsy, SJW-harrassing the viewer (other Star Trek let their diversity function as a casual, everyday thing) embarrassing and horribly dumbed down as Jar Jar Abrams horrid mockery of Star Trek movies. I can't tell you how the hyperactive, jackhammer-in-the-brain, stupid 2009 cine-feces ended because I walked out during the last half hour. I hated it so bad that I figured whatever I paid to get in, it was worth MORE to get out. Not only is it the worst Star Trek I've ever seen, not only is it the worst movie I've ever seen, but I've NEVER seen a megabudget movie more incompetent on a technical level. The lens flares, obnoxious set design lighting & cinematography, etc., etc. J.J. Abrams Trek has zero redeeming qualities of any kind. I haven't watched any newer Trek since that 2009 utter miscarriage of sci-fi.

My point being, everything points to Discovery as being in the same DELIBERATELY dumbed-down, obnoxious vein. And has so many talentless idiots involved, NOTHING good can come from it.

If the 2009 Star Trek is the worst movie you have ever seen, you must have seen very few movies.

The 2009 reboot is a fantastic movie. Karl Urban is a perfect Dr. McCoy.

but there was no reason to make it an alternate timeline.....that killed it....

I don't pay too much attention to these Canons. The comic book world has been changed so many times, it doesn't matter any longer.

 

[Synthaholic]

i thought the Orville was pretty good.....confused about what it wants to be?....and why would the show be like family guy?.....Stewie and Brian are the best things on that show....otherwise that show has gone past its expiration date....

They were the only thing that was ever good on that show, with occasionally Lois.

peter was getting pretty ridiculous....

I didn't like that character since Day One.

 

[Synthaholic]

But in The Next Generation, Roddenberry tried his Libtard vision and it failed

Don't take My word for it, Synthamoronic, those were Gene's words; he tried to have the show where the Captain never took any risks, never went on dangerous missions, and there was little confrontation, everything was solved with mediation, talking, contrition or whatever, you know, the 24th century had moved past all that primitive stuff------ and it didn't work as a television formula. It simply didn't grab the audience and the First Season was a flop. It is the least popular and revamping the show for action and drama made for most of the best stories they ever had.

You're full of shit. Roddenberry never said any of that. And Picard went on plenty of missions.

"There... are... FOUR... lights!"

 

[Harry Dresden]

Nope, from everything I've heard about ST: Discovery it will be every bit as clumsy, SJW-harrassing the viewer (other Star Trek let their diversity function as a casual, everyday thing) embarrassing and horribly dumbed down as Jar Jar Abrams horrid mockery of Star Trek movies. I can't tell you how the hyperactive, jackhammer-in-the-brain, stupid 2009 cine-feces ended because I walked out during the last half hour. I hated it so bad that I figured whatever I paid to get in, it was worth MORE to get out. Not only is it the worst Star Trek I've ever seen, not only is it the worst movie I've ever seen, but I've NEVER seen a megabudget movie more incompetent on a technical level. The lens flares, obnoxious set design lighting & cinematography, etc., etc. J.J. Abrams Trek has zero redeeming qualities of any kind. I haven't watched any newer Trek since that 2009 utter miscarriage of sci-fi.

My point being, everything points to Discovery as being in the same DELIBERATELY dumbed-down, obnoxious vein. And has so many talentless idiots involved, NOTHING good can come from it.

If the 2009 Star Trek is the worst movie you have ever seen, you must have seen very few movies.

The 2009 reboot is a fantastic movie. Karl Urban is a perfect Dr. McCoy.

but there was no reason to make it an alternate timeline.....that killed it....

I don't pay too much attention to these Canons. The comic book world has been changed so many times, it doesn't matter any longer.

star trek did not come from the comic book world.....

 

[toobfreak]

You're full of shit. Roddenberry never said any of that.

Right from the horse's ass. Why don't you research it before you speak.

And Picard went on plenty of missions.

Right! After they made the format change I spoke of! The whole first season, they had Riker first sitting on him like a mother to keep him safe, then finally going to great lengths to "justifying" his going down to a planet on special occasions as the season evolved and the writers had increasing difficulty and frustration writing the episodes and the feedback from the network and ratings sank.

The show eventually ended right back to where it had to be and not where Gene wished: as a sci-fi TV drama driven by advertising rather than the cerebral realism and message that Gene hoped for, kind of exactly why his original first pilot 'The Cage' failed.

 

[longknife]

Will you watch?

I'll probably watch the opener out of curiosity but won't pay money to CBS to see the series. The premise is not fresh beyond the lady Captain and XO.

'Star Trek: Discovery' to Tackle Trump-Era Political Divide

A local TV cable channel shows all of the Star Trek franchises and I regularly DVR some of them.

As for this CBS piece of garbage, like someone else, I'll watch the opener but there's no way in Hades that I'm going to pay to see the rest.