USS DISCOVERY vs TOS E THOUGHTS

[MadManMUC]

Although I outright blame CBS and their horrible handling of the franchise for Roddenberry's spinning, I also attribute it Ronald D. Moore.

You know what the irony is? RDM is actually an excellent sci-fi writer (BSG was mostly excellent until the second half of the third season), as well as an excellent Trek writer. The fact is, I guess he felt way too boxed into Roddenberry's show bible, and the moment the old man left us, he veered into dark territory the moment he was able to.

Just a thought here, but maybe CBS's insistence about the darker nature of ST Discovery was one of the reasons Bryan Fuller walked away.

This really isn't clear, but the rumour mill is mostly grinding around the idea that Fuller was sacked. Possibly because he didn't make that combo of JJ-Trek-meets-BSG-meets-GoT that CBS and Kurzman clearly wanted to make. Which is a shame, because his anthology idea — I found, anyway — really had legs, and would have given writers ample creative space in which to play. And it would have given us fans lots of different flavours of fresh Trek.

Here's an interesting article I read this morning:

https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/star-trek- ... an-fuller/

Specifically:

Executive producer Alex Kurtzman has hinted that "more Star Trek series" could follow the latest incarnation, returning us to an age when Starfleet dominated the airwaves.

One such idea that might be revisited is Bryan Fuller's original plan for Discovery – an anthology series that would explore different periods in Trek history.

"I think that's totally possible," Kurtzman said. "It was a really cool idea, but it wasn't necessarily an idea that everyone immediately agreed with."

I hope they do this ... but I also hope they get Fuller back on board to realise this idea.

[SKO]

To be honest I don't particularly care what Gene Rodenberry would think. The Trek that Gene had the most direct control over (ST: TMP, S3 of the show, the first two seasons of TNG) was kind of the worst trek. He supposedly went around to conventions in 1982 urging fans not to see TWOK because it was "not real trek."

I think the key isn't what Rodenberry necessarily would have wanted story-wise, creatively, etc, but if it plays well within what should be the fundamental principles of the Federation that Rodenberry established: characters should be humane, tolerant, compassionate, should seek violence as a last resort, etc. In that regard Discovery fails whereas DS9 was a success.

DS9 worked because it showed how very important the Federation ideals we'd seen for 3 decades to that point were because it tested them. I think Ronald D. Moore's point in the Dominion War, etc was to show the cost of maintaining that way of life and why it was worth it. It's made very clear that the decision Sisko made in In the Pale Moonlight, for example, takes a tremendous chunk of his soul with him. They very pointedly reject Section 31.

The problem is Real Trek has been gone for so long Discovery isn't deconstructing the values that we've taken for granted like DS9 did with the nice, clean world TOS and TNG had built, it never re-constructed those values in the first place. The Federation of this world just seems pretty damn crappy.

[SKO]

Also the anthology idea was very exciting to me and I was sad they abandoned it. I would kill for anything in the Lost Era between ST VI and TNG.

[MSgtUSAFRet]

Although I outright blame CBS and their horrible handling of the franchise for Roddenberry's spinning, I also attribute it Ronald D. Moore.

You know what the irony is? RDM is actually an excellent sci-fi writer (BSG was mostly excellent until the second half of the third season), as well as an excellent Trek writer. The fact is, I guess he felt way too boxed into Roddenberry's show bible, and the moment the old man left us, he veered into dark territory the moment he was able to.

Don't get me wrong, MadManMUC, I will not deny RDM is an excellent writer with many awards and recognition to his name; not to mention as very successful career in the cut-throat industry known as Hollywood. I just don't care for his darker view of Sci-fi. I kinda see him as a rebel against the establishment - in the same pea pod as Steven Ira Behr. Both are excellent and successful men. I, personally, just don't like dark Sci-fi.

I know this is the wrong thread, but I like "The Orville" more than the current offering of Star Trek BECAUSE of its "hopeful" nature, the optimistic view of humanity. Yeah, it's not perfect (crude humor included), but I think I captures the spirit of Trek better than CBS' latest offering.

Jus thinkin...

Steve

[OrokaSempai]

I do find it amusing about how people call The Orville more Trek than Discovery... but it is clearly Galaxy Quest, which was a light hearted take on Star Trek.

I enjoy the story telling in Discovery. If they produced Discovery the same way they did TNG-DS9-VOY... it would be doomed. There are 21 seasons of that Trek... it was tapped. Enterprise was just hitting its stride when it got canceled, and I see similarities with the storytelling of Enterprise and Discovery. I think Enterprise was just ahead of its time, or too close to Voyager. There needed to be more time for people to forget what the TNG era trek was. I would rank some of season 4 Ent as some of the best trek put on film.

Star Trek is a business, and unfortunately Gene's wagon train to the stars no longer draws crowds. My tastes have matured over the years, and Discovery is closer to what I like that an episode of TOS is. I get all nostalgic about TNG, and when I go watch it... Im disappointed. It can never match the feeling it gave me back in the 90s. Discovery is not TOS, it is not TNG. It can never match the feelings I get thinking back to rushing home from school to catch TNG... so why try to hold it to that? It will disappoint every time.

Now, lets see how Discovery handles being stranded far far away. Hopefully its not a 65 year trip.

[patrickivan]

I do find it amusing about how people call The Orville more Trek than Discovery... but it is clearly Galaxy Quest, which was a light hearted take on Star Trek.

I enjoy the story telling in Discovery. If they produced Discovery the same way they did TNG-DS9-VOY... it would be doomed. There are 21 seasons of that Trek... it was tapped. Enterprise was just hitting its stride when it got canceled, and I see similarities with the storytelling of Enterprise and Discovery. I think Enterprise was just ahead of its time, or too close to Voyager. There needed to be more time for people to forget what the TNG era trek was. I would rank some of season 4 Ent as some of the best trek put on film.

Star Trek is a business, and unfortunately Gene's wagon train to the stars no longer draws crowds. My tastes have matured over the years, and Discovery is closer to what I like that an episode of TOS is. I get all nostalgic about TNG, and when I go watch it... Im disappointed. It can never match the feeling it gave me back in the 90s. Discovery is not TOS, it is not TNG. It can never match the feelings I get thinking back to rushing home from school to catch TNG... so why try to hold it to that? It will disappoint every time.

Now, lets see how Discovery handles being stranded far far away. Hopefully its not a 65 year trip.

Well, Galaxy Quest was just a parody of Star Trek... The Orville, while parodying Star Trek, is doing it with more homage to what Star Trek is, than what STD is doing so far. I wouldn't say it was parodying GQ at all really.

That feeling you're talking about is nostalgia. There's nothing wrong with trying to infuse that into new Star Trek, because that's what made fans keep coming back.

I want some nostalgia, and I want new contemporary ideas and stories. But what STD seems to keep harping on is this dark mean spirited universe. It's just some sci-fi show using Star Trek's name and some of their ideas to try to suck in fans. I don't get that.