quote:Originally posted by Lee: It occurred to me - and this probably won't happen - that you could still have a Fargo-style quasi-anthology show under the criteria revealed so far, all on the same ship. After the first series set in (say) 2255 (also the approx time of the TOS pilot "The Cage," and when the first Abramsverse film is set) you jump forward 15 years. The Lt. Cdr. is now Captain and it's TOS/TMP period. Another 15 years in season 3 she's an admiral and you're into the red film uniforms. After that you still have 75 years to play with before you hit TNG. When you want to you replace the original Whatever-class Discovery with a new ship design, same name, new registry (NOT NCC-1031-A).
posted
"History never repeats itself, but it does rhyme." I remember the stories about Enterprise wanting to do the entire first season on Earth, a la " The Right Stuff", but that got torpedoed by the network.
Sigh.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Yep - looks like I would have liked Bryan's original concept a lot better than what we are about to get... Typical...
Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
To be honest, I'm fine with that. The show isn't being made just for die-hard fans: it's being made for a wider audience that will hopefully *include* as many fans as possible, but harsh as it sounds, we're not the main target audience. If they were to cater the show to die-hard fans (many of whom probably wouldn't be able to agree on what they actually wanted, anyway) the show wouldn't appeal to a broader audience.
You, me and others on this board might well know our warp plasma conduits from our warp coils from our intake manifolds, and it's great that we do and can enjoy the shows to that extent, but we're a small percentage of the fan population in general, and an even smaller percentage of the overall audience of people watching TV. I'm ok with someone acknowledging that and I don't think he's being unnecessarily harsh or disrespectful to say that out loud.
-------------------- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm actually quite looking forward to watching the show. It's been a long, long time since there was any new Star Trek on TV. Will I like everything about it? Most likely not. Will I have fun trying to fit it into the existing continuity and my own personal headcanon? Oh hell yeah. I'm enjoying having some new TV Trek to look forward to :-D
-------------------- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
About the Isaacs article: he did clarify his statement on twitter and says he never made a comment about replacing the legacy of previous captains. Considering the article was published by the New York Post, I'd take it with a grain of salt.
Oh and yeah, new Star Trek! Whether you want or not its coming, soon!
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by FawnDoo: To be honest, I'm fine with that. The show isn't being made just for die-hard fans: it's being made for a wider audience that will hopefully *include* as many fans as possible, but harsh as it sounds, we're not the main target audience. If they were to cater the show to die-hard fans (many of whom probably wouldn't be able to agree on what they actually wanted, anyway) the show wouldn't appeal to a broader audience.
You, me and others on this board might well know our warp plasma conduits from our warp coils from our intake manifolds, and it's great that we do and can enjoy the shows to that extent, but we're a small percentage of the fan population in general, and an even smaller percentage of the overall audience of people watching TV. I'm ok with someone acknowledging that and I don't think he's being unnecessarily harsh or disrespectful to say that out loud.
COFFINS stuck to the OUTSIDE of spaceships....stupid...in battle Coffins GET BLOWN UP OR BLOWN OFF....stupid...they use tractor beams to get coffins back.The coffins are are racing away in an ever expanding radius...STUPID...STUPID..STUPID...BEYOND STUPID.
For me what made star trek be star trek was not having that constant source of conflict. Every scifi show these days has crew conflict. It's refreshing to watch star trek(not discovery, obviously) and see a set of competent, professional people working together for a common good. They may have philosophical disagreements from time to time, but they respect each other and work it out. That's the utopian star trek universe and I miss it. If i want inner conflict between main characters, ostensibly on the same side, i'll go watch battlestar galactica, dark matter, or one of umpteen other "dark future" scifi shows.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic