Bait and Switch: rollout of new Star Trek series

[Braininvat]

I am used to subtitles, didn't mind them. I am used to Klingons being remodeled with each new ST series - don't mind. I am used to conservation of momentum being violated when uncloaked ships skid to a halt without using thrusters. What I mind is seeing the first episode and then learning it's an ad for a streaming service I have no interest in subscribing to. Guess that's what broadcast tv is becoming - how soon will it all be reality shows, sports, and extended trailers for streaming series?

Wow, they are really banking on Trekkies being so devoted that people who already pay for Hulu and Netflix will pay another $6-$10/month to watch Spock's little sis kick Klingon asses.

Pass.

[zetreque]

It seems that thousands of people agree with you Brain.

I actually just spent 2 hours reading comments about this instead of watching the new series... Yeah you can make fun of me for that lol. Glad I didn't even try to watch it after hearing about that "dirty trick" they pulled.

I did a deal of reading about the new series the past couple weeks and am not excited about it at all.

The creators have a horrible background IMO. They come from writing B-TV shows and I loved everything ST up until the new movies when Kurtzman got involved. The new movies were just to squeeze out money and that's what it seems the new TV series is about. They care nothing about Star Trek and all about money.

What is preventing me from even watching the first episode is that not only do I know I will have to pay for a subscription but

Fuller's vision is something I don't want.
1. I do not want a long drawn out never ending plot that is basically a 10-20 hour movie. I like the weekly single adventures that are for fun and have deeper concepts to think about.
2. I don't want drama and internal conflicts. I mean Fuller's vision is one that's more dark and sinister no doubt coming from the other shows he was from that I don't like. If you read up on him, he never liked the style of Star Trek so I don't think he has any business being a creator for a new one. I also just read that he dropped out from the series. so he basically started a shit series then quit before it failed.
3. Social Justice issues are fine but I don't need that .... shoved in my face right now. People need to chill out with all that and just overthrow our damn govt already. This is yet another thing our douche bag president ruined. It should be more about talented actors and actresses and not forced to pick people based on being politically correct and social justice. I'm really tired of the extremists in the world that have made things so messed up over this. The far right and far left have ruined the center.
4. It's frustrating as hell when they don't actually follow the universe story line. The new movies were altered and had some really funky timeline stuff that bothered me a lot. I read multiple comments about how in the new show the technology is all wrong for the time and the Klingon's are all wrong. Why even bother making something with the Star Trek name if you can't keep the story right? Just name it something else.

I came to these conclusions before I even read literally hundreds of other comments that are bashing it. Mostly for the profit grab CBS is doing. Everyone thinks it will fail because no one is going to buy into the subscription. I think it might succeed though because if you look closely, it's the younger generation that is into this new Trek-verse that is growing up in a shittier world and just plays right along. Ugg.

Oh and I watched the opening credits. Total fail! It might be best that I forget this series even exists and then try to watch it in another time in the distant future when things are different looking back.

This has got me brainstorming for a new TV show. The world needs a really good intelligent show right now.

[Serpent]

We waited through something like 17 ads in a row to see a premier start half an hour late, that we turned off after two more spates of commercials, about 10 minutes apart.
Trekkies? Bah!
They talk like the youngsters on their cellphones: fast, high and soft - with too much background music, so we couldn't understand most of the dialogue, which didn't make any more sense than the way-too-many flashing coloured lights or the [why doesn't all this] advanced technology [actually work?]
Never found out what the [over-made-up] Klingons were upset about. Don't care.

[zetreque]

Never found out what the [over-made-up] Klingons were upset about.

I read something about it being a metaphor for the extreme right make the empire great again. I don't care either because I get enough of that in reality.

[zetreque]

They talk like the youngsters on their cellphones: fast, high and soft - with too much background music, so we couldn't understand most of the dialogue

Are you talking about the actors actresses LGBTQLMNOP or the commercials? Sounds like a typical bad creator/director movie/show feature.

[Serpent]

Are you talking about the actors actresses LGBTQLMNOP or the commercials? Sounds like a typical bad creator/director movie/show feature.

The show. Commercials vary - some are aimed at the geriatric presumed hypochondriac, presumed high-end car consumer, and those are clear enough, even without a hearing-aid.
Back to the show: I notice they still haven't cottoned-on to seat-belts.
Off-topic: When a spaceship, in any series or movie, is damaged, where does all the steam come from?

[Braininvat]

And do they not have circuit breakers in the 22nd - 24th centuries? Always with the massive sparks and gouts of flame shooting from electronic consoles.

I don't know about the social justice issues, the first episode didn't seem all that concerned with them, and the cast of ST has always been pretty diverse - the OS led the way on casting ethnic minorities back in the 60s. Now it just seems normal. I guess one could gloss current affairs onto the Klingon situation they are setting up, but I just took it as standard space opera.

Agree that the Trek format works best with standalone episodes, the encounter-of-the-week. This is more following the Netflix House of Cards plotting template. Bad decision.

I have good hearing and found the mumble factor too high. I would need CC for this. Or quality headphones at min.

[JMP1958]

I am used to subtitles, didn't mind them. I am used to Klingons being remodeled with each new ST series - don't mind. I am used to conservation of momentum being violated when uncloaked ships skid to a halt without using thrusters. What I mind is seeing the first episode and then learning it's an ad for a streaming service I have no interest in subscribing to. Guess that's what broadcast tv is becoming - how soon will it all be reality shows, sports, and extended trailers for streaming series?

Wow, they are really banking on Trekkies being so devoted that people who already pay for Hulu and Netflix will pay another $6-$10/month to watch Spock's little sis kick Klingon asses.

Pass.

If you just learned that the series was only going to be shown on the CBS streaming site after the premier, you haven't been paying attention. This was stated as the plan way back when they originally announced the new series.

As for the ships "skidding to a halt" , assume that effect was just their dropping out of warp.
I was a bit more irked by the continuity error of Klingon ships of that era having cloaking devices in the first place. Especially as I kept hearing about how the series had a team of experts devoted to maintaining continuity. I can deal with a lot of the technology the new series has (holographic projection for communication. etc), Because when you predict technological progress for SF today you extrapolate forward from where we are now, and you are not going to make the same predictions as they did 50+ years ago. The cloaking device, however, is not one of those technologies that can be extrapolated from present day tech.

[zetreque]

The fractured continuity is not something I can tolerate. I mean if they just came right out and said this was a different time line (which is a bold statement that it's not really ST) then that's fine, but I can't handle the altered Abrams universe. Like the planet Vulcan was never destroyed. That was a major reason I didn't like the new movies. Instead of enjoying the show I'm left scratching my head with wtf?

[Braininvat]

I am used to subtitles, didn't mind them. I am used to Klingons being remodeled with each new ST series - don't mind. I am used to conservation of momentum being violated when uncloaked ships skid to a halt without using thrusters. What I mind is seeing the first episode and then learning it's an ad for a streaming service I have no interest in subscribing to. Guess that's what broadcast tv is becoming - how soon will it all be reality shows, sports, and extended trailers for streaming series?

Wow, they are really banking on Trekkies being so devoted that people who already pay for Hulu and Netflix will pay another $6-$10/month to watch Spock's little sis kick Klingon asses.

Pass.

If you just learned that the series was only going to be shown on the CBS streaming site after the premier, you haven't been paying attention. This was stated as the plan way back when they originally announced the new series.

As for the ships "skidding to a halt" , assume that effect was just their dropping out of warp.
I was a bit more irked by the continuity error of Klingon ships of that era having cloaking devices in the first place. Especially as I kept hearing about how the series had a team of experts devoted to maintaining continuity. I can deal with a lot of the technology the new series has (holographic projection for communication. etc), Because when you predict technological progress for SF today you extrapolate forward from where we are now, and you are not going to make the same predictions as they did 50+ years ago. The cloaking device, however, is not one of those technologies that can be extrapolated from present day tech.

If you read my post, I indicated that I didn't mind the ships screeching to a halt without any apparent reverse impulse to cancel leftover momentum. (it was sort of a tongue-in-cheek comment - I tend not to use emoticons...) As for having "just learned" about the streaming plan, well, yes, you are correct. I am not a tv person, watch very little tv except for an occasional PBS docu or the occasional binge with a DVD of a premium series, and I do not follow the machinations of the media much. I don't have cable, Hulu, Netflix, or any other subscription service. I have a bizarre infatuation with reading and books and cling to the antiquated notion that my print fetish makes me smarter and possessed of a longer attention span. Go figure.

[zetreque]

I'm not a comic book fan but I just realized that the lack of respect for continuity and the star trek time line is possibly due to the creators and public liking for the marvel comic book universe these days? Not to mention the recent popularity of graphic novels. In the comic book world people can get away with nonsense. Kurtzman came from making marvel movies (and to me the very disappointing Transformers movies that I don't even care to see after the first one) and old tv shows like Hercules and Xena. He has no business in working with Star Trek.

They threw quality out the window just to get money from the majority that don't want to think about what they are watching.

[JMP1958]

If you read my post, I indicated that I didn't mind the ships screeching to a halt without any apparent reverse impulse to cancel leftover momentum. (it was sort of a tongue-in-cheek comment - I tend not to use emoticons...) As for having "just learned" about the streaming plan, well, yes, you are correct. I am not a tv person, watch very little tv except for an occasional PBS docu or the occasional binge with a DVD of a premium series, and I do not follow the machinations of the media much. I don't have cable, Hulu, Netflix, or any other subscription service. I have a bizarre infatuation with reading and books and cling to the antiquated notion that my print fetish makes me smarter and possessed of a longer attention span. Go figure.

I was just pointing out that CBS did not spring a surprise with the premier. They did not hide the fact that the series would only available on-line until the last moment. While I watched the first episode, I have no intention of paying for the streaming service to see the rest of the season.

As for books go, I'm an avid reader myself, but that does not preclude me from enjoying a few TV series or movies also.

[zetreque]

Actually I was paying attention and it was a surprise to me that it was available ONLY online. I don't have TV but I assumed it would be on regular cable CBS (someone correct me if I am wrong). I also think people were surprised that they showed the first or part of the first 2 part episode and then forced people to subscribe. I think the surprise was in the fine print for people who are not yet used to this new type of TV watching and grew up in the days when everyone just had regular affordable cable tv or even rabbit antenna ears free TV.

[zetreque]

Not to mention what I heard that everyone everywhere in the world other than the US can watch it on netflix. That's a bit strange too.

[Serpent]

I'm not a comic book fan but I just realized that the lack of respect for continuity and the star trek time line is possibly due to the creators and public liking for the marvel comic book universe these days? Not to mention the recent popularity of graphic novels.

It's made for and by denizens of a post-literate world?
Explanation sufficient. THX

[Watson]

I was pleasantly surprised to see it available to-nite online and enjoyed it. But I had not heard anything about it to this point. I saw a bit of a trailer, about the first Klingon encounter, but miss the part about Star-Trek. I was giving it some tolerance as a new series and would watch it if it is available as it was this week, but if it is a commercial to watch somewhere else then, it was lacking. Initially I had hoped for the return of a weekly series. They have been doing the lesser budget series's on-line for sometime now, with some of the original actors. May not be a dirty trick, but a cheap one for sure.

[Braininvat]

I have amended the thread title to reflect the experience that casual watchers, say those who just saw the tv listing and had not followed any prior media coverage, might have had Sunday evening. Others, like the Trek cognoscenti who know of glad tidings of a new series months or years in advance, would have not had this experience.

[Braininvat]

What do people think of the endless tinkering with timelines, going back to the OS episode, "City on the Edge of Tomorrow." And then the old Trek timeline where Vulcan is an intact planet where Spock can go Amok, etc., while new (JJ Abrams) Trek has Vulcan imploded by Nero and only a few wise elders are rescued. Do Trekkies consider this evidence for a multiverse theory, or will Vulcan somehow be restored in a new Trek movie down the road? I'm still puzzled why just being in the 1930s, eating food, bumping into pedestrians, talking to people, wouldn't have a Butterfly Effect and still subtly change the future for Kirk, Bones, and Spock when they re-emerged from the time portal. (or why they didn't just wink out of existence when Kirk saved social worker Edith Keeler the first time, obviously making their timeline FUBAR?) This would suggest you never can change your own past timeline, yet it seems that, the first time back through the portal, they had indeed done just that.

[zetreque]

Should be obvious that I hate Abrams universe. Simply because there is no thought behind the altered timeline. To me the movies and now series just seem like a way to make money appealing to the masses. If there were thought behind it giving us an explanation to think about like regular ST did then it would be ok.

[Serpent]

I disapprove of changing anything that was in the sequential series, but can disregard whatever happened in the movies, since I never followed them. (Don't like prequels at all, not even Enterprise, though I liked the cast.)
But the time travel episodes of all the series were too much fun to worry about consequences.
My favourite has to be the DS9 one where Quark goes to 1947.

[JMP1958]

What do people think of the endless tinkering with timelines, going back to the OS episode, "City on the Edge of Tomorrow." And then the old Trek timeline where Vulcan is an intact planet where Spock can go Amok, etc., while new (JJ Abrams) Trek has Vulcan imploded by Nero and only a few wise elders are rescued. Do Trekkies consider this evidence for a multiverse theory, or will Vulcan somehow be restored in a new Trek movie down the road? I'm still puzzled why just being in the 1930s, eating food, bumping into pedestrians, talking to people, wouldn't have a Butterfly Effect and still subtly change the future for Kirk, Bones, and Spock when they re-emerged from the time portal. (or why they didn't just wink out of existence when Kirk saved social worker Edith Keeler the first time, obviously making their timeline FUBAR?) This would suggest you never can change your own past timeline, yet it seems that, the first time back through the portal, they had indeed done just that.

One might argue that small effects tend to get swallowed up as noise in the big picture of time flow. (much in the way that the Quantum indeterminacy that occurs at subatomic levels doesn't exhibit itself at macroscopic scales.) As far as them winking out due to changes to make goes: They didn't wink out when Bones changed history but the Enterprise did, so we have to assume that the guardian has a localized effect that shields anyone in its near vicinity from being effected from changes in the time flow. This likely extends to anyone who uses the guardian to travel to the past.

Time travel is one of those concepts that doesn't come with a built-in set of rules. You can't say "Well, in real life, time travel would be like this..." The most you can hope for is that it's used consistently in the story.

I've always felt that Spock's statement about Kirk preventing Edith from falling down the staircase was illogical. Sure, she could have broken her neck and died, but she could just as easily just injured herself, and then been laid up so that she missed her appointment with the truck.

This also raises another interesting issue. What if Kirk and Spock had not been able to stop Bones from saving Edith Keeler? The whole issue was that she needed to die in order to prevent her from interfering with The US entering the war, which eventually leads to the Nazis winning. This can still be prevented by her death, but now, instead of just allowing her to be killed, active measures would have to be taken to ensure her death. They would be faced with the moral dilemma of killing Edith Keeler themselves or letting Nazi Germany take over the world and thus wiping out their own history.

[hyksos]

What I mind is seeing the first episode and then learning it's an ad for a streaming service I have no interest in subscribing to.

I say go ahead and bait-and-switch your millennials into subscription services for one channel. No skin off my back. However, we are talking Star Trek, and that's where I have to draw the line. Star Trek is such a traditional TV series spanning decades. To squirrel it away onto some weird internet streaming website is nearly.. criminal.

[Braininvat]

This also raises another interesting issue. What if Kirk and Spock had not been able to stop Bones from saving Edith Keeler? The whole issue was that she needed to die in order to prevent her from interfering with The US entering the war, which eventually leads to the Nazis winning. This can still be prevented by her death, but now, instead of just allowing her to be killed, active measures would have to be taken to ensure her death. They would be faced with the moral dilemma of killing Edith Keeler themselves or letting Nazi Germany take over the world and thus wiping out their own history.

- JMP

It's sort an extreme variant of what philosophers call the Trolley Car conundrum. (discussed over in Ethics forum in PCF, IIRC)

Agree that the quantum analogy, where small effects are swallowed up as historical noise, might apply well to many tv episodes and movies like that. I would love to see Seth McFarlane, with his new Trek hommage show "The Orville," do a sendup of the Keeler episode. The second ep of Orville was a somewhat amusing (on the sophomoric side) take on the famous Trek episode "The Cage." (the original pilot which was rejected, and then later incorporated into the 2-parter "The Menagerie.")

[JMP1958]

Agree that the quantum analogy, where small effects are swallowed up as historical noise, might apply well to many tv episodes and movies like that. I would love to see Seth McFarlane, with his new Trek hommage show "The Orville," do a sendup of the Keeler episode. The second ep of Orville was a somewhat amusing (on the sophomoric side) take on the famous Trek episode "The Cage." (the original pilot which was rejected, and then later incorporated into the 2-parter "The Menagerie.")

I've been enjoying "The Orville". In many ways it has been truer to the spirit of Star Trek than the new series has been. For example, the first season of Discovery deals with a war between the Klingons and Federation. This is one thing Roddenberry didn't want for the original series.
This is why in the episode that introduces the Klingons (Errand of Mercy) he has The Organians prevent the war and impose a peace treaty. This didn't lessen the antagonism between the two parties and allowed the Klingons to still be an adversary, but it prevented a full out war that likely would have ended up being the focus of the series.

[Braininvat]

"The presence of beings such as yourselves is...intensely painful to us."

Due to schedule craziness, I missed the next 2 eps of The Orville, but hope to resume next week. I have to wonder if the "Discovery" rollout will inadvertently bump up the numbers of "The Orville," especially those with both an aversion to adding streaming services and an appetite for more Trek whetted.

Structure last sentence of terrible, but lazy too much fix it to.

[zetreque]

I had never heard of The Orville until reading about ST Discovery. I'm still going to pass on both of them.

[DragonFly]

The first two episodes of Star Trek Discovery were epic!

My Star Trek book, written long ago, dealing with Klingon battles, with names changed so not to infringe:

https://austintorney.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/star-track-a-parody/