Star Trek: Discovery

For reviews and close examination of sources - episode reviews, book reviews, raves and rants about short stories, et cetera.
359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 359 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:07 am

Is bad.





More to come later.

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 359 » Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:16 pm

And is much better watching episode 2.



Episode 1 is still bad, but creates a nice backdrop to set off a much better second episode.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 2046 » Fri Sep 29, 2017 2:25 am

Much as they had some novel that was a riff on the "West Wing" genre of super-busy multitasking leadership, this is a riff on every Netflix binge series. It's perfectly fine taken as a reboot and mini-series on that level, disconnected from the rest, but it's Star Trek in name only and simply doesn't fit the existing continuity.

Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by Sothis » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:50 am

Well I would give Discovery a B at the end of its first season. A slow start and the finale was a little disappointing, but some nice moments all the same.

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:49 pm

Sothis wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:50 am
Well I would give Discovery a B at the end of its first season. A slow start and the finale was a little disappointing, but some nice moments all the same.
If it's a B, I should give it a solid watch sometime.

Sothis
Bridge Officer
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:17 am
Contact:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by Sothis » Tue Feb 20, 2018 4:05 pm

It’s pretty good. It’s a different take on a few ideas and continues Star Trek’s ideals of social commentary, but in a new way.

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 359 » Wed Feb 21, 2018 4:41 pm

Indeed, now with the whole first season worth of material I will change my stance of "It's bad" to "It's good."

Plus, I think we get the best incarnation of the mirror universe yet. *And* they've made a beautiful upgrade to the awkward geometry of the Constitution Class (If only the Discovery herself weren't so hideous).

Mike DiCenso
Security Officer
Posts: 5779
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by Mike DiCenso » Sun Feb 25, 2018 12:34 am

Good start and a fantastic take on the Mirror Universe and then they kind of blew it at the end by turning a very interesting character into a two-dimensional villain.

The new take on the classic Enterprise is a amazing, frankly. It's exactly the kind of update that people had been hoping for with the Kelvin Timeline Enterprise, but we didn't get. This version keeps the original TOS ship's proportions for the most part, along with the details, like the copper navigational deflector dish, but add in the shapes and details to the primary and secondary hulls reminiscent of the partially abandoned Phase II Enterprise that Mike Minor and Matt Jefferies designed. This addresses interestingly enough the issues with the TMP-era refit and how such a radical refit could have been produced out of the TOS design. So well done to the DSC staff on that and I look forward to seeing more of it next season.
-Mike

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 359 » Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:06 am

Watched the first two episodes of season 2; I was not impressed by episode one, but I got to say, the second was amazing. I like how they're developing the story and characters, particularly the angle taken with captain Pike. He seems to be a captain style that we haven't quite seen done before. His primary characteristics seem to be compassion, trust, and empathy while still having the rounded wisdom of typical lead captains. And on the story front they seem to be moving back to the DS9 style blend of episodic events within a greater arc, in contrast to the modern "clips from a larger movie" episode style of season 1.

And on reflection Mike, I must disagree. While the final villain we see in captain Lorca is quite two-dimensional, I don't feel that compromises the more complex character he was able to play in order to fit in with the Federation.

The added views of the Enterprise from this season have only made its design feel even better. Again what I would expect from such a successful and attentive art crew, like the one they have on the show [klingon design and USS Discovery aside].

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 2046 » Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:21 pm

This review is fantastic . . . skip down to the breakdown of the episode with colored text.

https://crudereviews.net/2019/01/23/dis ... ethod/amp/

As for the attentive art crew . . . I am curious to know what examples you'd point to.

Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3897
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by Praeothmin » Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:10 pm

Just got my Blue-Rays of season 1 (was really cheap) and I have to say, I like it...

It's not on par with the best TOS or TNG had to offer, but is far superior to the worst...
And frankly, I prefer it to Voyager...

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 359 » Thu Feb 07, 2019 8:20 am

2046 wrote:As for the attentive art crew . . . I am curious to know what examples you'd point to.
I'd point to just about anything visual in the show. The sets, props, and costumes all hold up under examination in terms of quality of design. But let's take the phasers as an example. In every other show they are just bits glued together or geometrically-simple cast resin for 2370s era (still my favorite). But these are crafted in detail to blend a modern look into the classic and hideously-classic look of the 60's show phasers and "The Cage" laser-pistol.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 2046 » Fri Feb 08, 2019 1:29 pm

Insofar as they made good use of the extensive pre-production time to design in on the computer a lot more detail on things that they were going to be 3-D printing rather than casting or sculpting, yes I agree. 3-D printing allows for a lot more detail to be added with a lot less time and effort, meaning things can look incredibly flashy and expensive with just a little more time in the computer chair versus actually doing extensive detail work.

(That's similar, in principle, to the point I've made previously about replicators . . . in the modern world, a high-end smartphone and an antique handheld monochrome game like Mattel's Missile Invader or Coleco Alien Attack are incredibly different to produce, with the smartphone being wildly more expensive. But, when you have a replicator, they basically cost the exact same amount.)

I would only quibble with the definition of "attention to detail" insofar as consistency is concerned. They did make a nice mix of the Cage/WNMHGB pistols and the classic TOS phaser, visually, but they were inattentive to the timeline in doing so. It'd be like making a Single Action Army / 1911 mix for a story set circa 1900 . . . okay, visually interesting, but utterly senseless, historically.

It's basically the Kahless hair problem, though of course they've half-assedly retconned that after being reminded of it over and over.

User avatar
Khas
Starship Captain
Posts: 1229
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: Protoss Embassy to the Federation

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by Khas » Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:43 pm

For what it's worth, the Season 1 Klingon design wasn't actually the producers' fault. It was caused by, surprise surprise, executive meddling.

359
Jedi Knight
Posts: 471
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Star Trek: Discovery

Post by 359 » Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:28 pm

2046 wrote:Insofar as they made good use of the extensive pre-production time to design in on the computer a lot more detail on things that they were going to be 3-D printing rather than casting or sculpting, yes I agree. 3-D printing allows for a lot more detail to be added with a lot less time and effort, meaning things can look incredibly flashy and expensive with just a little more time in the computer chair versus actually doing extensive detail work.

(That's similar, in principle, to the point I've made previously about replicators . . . in the modern world, a high-end smartphone and an antique handheld monochrome game like Mattel's Missile Invader or Coleco Alien Attack are incredibly different to produce, with the smartphone being wildly more expensive. But, when you have a replicator, they basically cost the exact same amount.)

I would only quibble with the definition of "attention to detail" insofar as consistency is concerned. They did make a nice mix of the Cage/WNMHGB pistols and the classic TOS phaser, visually, but they were inattentive to the timeline in doing so. It'd be like making a Single Action Army / 1911 mix for a story set circa 1900 . . . okay, visually interesting, but utterly senseless, historically.
On the contrary, many of their props are machined, cast, or otherwise assembled. And having worked with 3-d printers and modeling for many years I can say that even with such technology creating pieces like that is still no small task. But that is an aside, I agree that the show lacks a fine attention to canon consistency, I see that as nothing new to Trek at this point. However, what I am saying is that the visual artists who create the props, sets, and costumes have done an amazingly well thought out and detailed job. They have successfully blended two very different styles and then added more detailing on top of that, be it by finer engraving with the Klingons or the smooth curves and chamfers on federation equipment.

After 10 years now of people complaining about things being different in Star Trek, regardless of quality, my patience with people extending a valid criticism of one aspect to demean the production as a whole is starting to wear thin. So if I am overly snappy on the topic of DIS, I apologize.

I accept that it has story issues, characters that could use improvement, and there are significant departures from previous canon. However I refuse to let that stop me from appreciating what it does well. I think it has been visually astounding, it has developed a couple interesting and unique characters, it has realized a long-term arch fitting of Star Trek (albeit one that would traditionally take one episode), it has presented the best rendition of the Mirror Universe (not a high bar in my opinion), and it has presented a sufficiently novel and complete technology with the spore drive; which is still being fleshed out more to its potential. On the flip size, there have been episodes, plots, choices, and characters that have lead to hour long rants with the people who watched it with me. It is by no means TNG, but it is equally far from being Star Trek: V.

Khas wrote:For what it's worth, the Season 1 Klingon design wasn't actually the producers' fault. It was caused by, surprise surprise, executive meddling.
Sounds suspiciously like a Voyager problem...

Post Reply