>>21805
The last episode was actually really good Star Trek with a court trial, themes of cultural relativism and exploring whether surgery on babies for cultural reasons is ever okay.

It's sad that the ratings have dropped out after the schedule got moved around it seems like the sensitive subject has pissed off a whole bunch of reviewers.

>>20478
> SISKO = GOD.
Couldn't agree more, lad. Best, most rounded Captain we've had on the best, most rounded series we've ever had. Enterprise could have got there too, but got canned just after it found its feet.

>>20504
> None of their capital ships have ever been specifically designed with military might in mind until the Defiant. Although these ships have offensive capabilities, they were built for the purpose of scientific exploration
Definitely they built them for exploration but they also armed them to the fucking teeth. Starfleet's capital ships are just brimming with weapons and routinely hold their own against warships of other races. The real difference is that Starfleet's ships have a shitload of science and exploratory gear onboard in addition to bonza weaponry.

>>20507
> the federation almost always succeeds only due to luck/flukes and ingenuity. Think about it, the Romulans are more powerful, the Klingons are more powerful, the Borg are more powerful, the Dominion are more powerful, a vast number of monster-of-the-week races are more powerful.
I disagree. The Federation is generally more technologically advanced than all the other Alpha and Beta Quadrant races it comes across, and leverages that technological lead to its advantage. The Borg, and later Dominion, are two enemies they *aren’t* technologically ahead of and it causes the Federation real problems.

How is it that we're onto episode 3 of Discovery and there's not a single post about it?!

I quite enjoyed it so far. It's not really properly 'Star Trek' the way I was hoping, and the dialogue was quite heavy on exposition in the pilot episodes, but overall I'm enjoying it so far.

The new Klingons don't phase me and I actually quite like them, but they seem to speak a bit slowly.

Iffy about the new grimdark Captain we've just been introduced to. I'll see where it's going before passing too much judgement.

>>21820
I've found the show is much better if you just pretend that it is an unrelated franchise with lots of homages and a cameos. It's worth a watch but if you think about it in the context of the Star Trek universe or in what it is trying to do you start to have a bit of an internal meltdown. For example:

1) Fucking space gulags?! Never mind the supposedly enlightened state of post-nuclear humanity, even the ECHR would be writing angry letters about this shit.
2) Third episode has superhero bullshit and the alien is a clone from Doom.
3) We know how this technology won't amount to jack shit. Put the Alice and Wonderland book down.
4) Why is Barclay in this dressed as a ginger woman...Oh right she is supposed to be the cute autism girl for the fans. I hope she dies.
5) The gay character is gay like Rick Berman would do a gay character "oomph you silly goose, no lurking!"

This has very much been a 3 episode pilot though. Maybe things will improve like how most Star Trek has rough early seasons. I hope it does because cultural historians have been known to use Star Trek as a measure of the society it was written in and in that sense things aren't looking too good.

>How is it that we're onto episode 3 of Discovery and there's not a single post about it?!

I assumed nobody here was interested given the Orville posts didn't get any replies.

>>21820

I haven't said anything because I thought the pilot episodes were awful And I wanted to see how it developed, and now that I've seen the third episode it is even worse.

If it didn't have the brand name Star Trek on it I probably wouldn't watch anymore of it. And it is just the brand name. They could have called it anything else really there is nothing in the tone or the visuals that is Star Trek. And nearly every character is an unlikable arsehole, with the exception of the painfully cringey character who seemed tonally out of place in the world of super competent arseholes, and Saru, Saru seems cool.

>>21820
I can't bring myself to watch it, I had very little interest before it aired and even less now. I'm re-watching DS9 then I'll try Voyager again.

Why the FUCK can't we get a proper continuation instead of another prequel? ENT was alright, shame it was never given a chance, but that was enough to bridge the gap between TOS and TNG. After TNG found it's footing was there a single person pining for a return to TOS? The lack of imagination is astounding, there is so much potential for a post DS9/VOY series but we're stuck referencing a show which ended in the fucking 60's. The least they could do is admit this is an Abramsverse show so I could think about watching it without getting unfathomably angry.

>>21820

I realised that it was mostly the visuals that were updated, and I definitely felt it was just as Star Trekky under the surface. The main difference is that it's mostly focussed on a single character's journey, rather than the ship as a whole, and that there is a strong focus on the series arc rather than (apparently) self-contained adventures. That's fine in my book.

We're seeing a dark side of the Federation because the Federation was always supposed to be an idealised, elevated version of liberal America. That was at a time when people still viewed America as the Land of the Free. Now, that vision is frayed and failing. Consequently we're seeing a hard look taken at Starfleet's authoritarianism, and its relationship to the civilian population. I like that.

>>21828
I agree entirely with the need to stop making prequels and other nonsense.

However:
>but that was enough to bridge the gap between TOS and TNG

Actually ENT was set a hundred years after First Contact. TOS comes much later with a season being planned in ENT for the Earth-Romulan War referenced in 'Balance of Terror'.

>>21829
>We're seeing a dark side of the Federation

I hate this meme and yes, I used the term 'meme' because STD is just a simulacrum. The charm and uniqueness of Star Trek is it's brightness where everything works out and that vision adds a unique spin that keeps Trek iterations relevant even when they look dated owing to context.

"but what about DS9?" I hear you say.

Well, DS9 was a series that put the federation ideals under pressure but I think they won out. The best criticism always came from outsider perspectives that you never saw in the show or those who lost the faith. Sisko's father is a perfect example where despite his pessimism of space travel he was a model federation citizen who worked his restaurant simply because he loved cooking for people.

>>21830
>We're seeing a dark side of the Federation

>I hate this meme

This just struck a note with me. It is the post-modernist obsession, 'I'm going to remake this much beloved classic, but I'm going to change it so that good is now evil and the evil is now good, I’m so clever and subversive'.

>Quentin Tarantino is getting all set to direct a Star Trek movie, and if the film materializes then, it will venture into a territory uncharted by any previous Star Trek movie: an R rating. J.J. Abrams the producer, as well as Paramount, have agreed to this stipulation. We had come to know earlier in the week about Tarantino’s pitch for Star Trek going to the writers’ room, and now the Deadline has reported that Tarantino met Mark L. Smith, Lindsey Beer and Drew Pearce and Smith (The Revenant) is likely to be the scriptwriter.
http://thegeeknerdom.com/it-is-confirmed-star-trek-by-tarantino-will-have-an-r-rating/

Why?

>>21945

Is he a Trek fan? I can't imagine him watching it.

I think there's definite promise in an R rated Star Trek, but you'd have to be very intimate with the whole idea of the show to do it any justice.

>>21945

I look forward to seeing how he manages to sneak in his foot fetish.

>>21947

It's bizarre that people are fine with him spending a day or two filming Uma Thurman's feet on every production. I'm incredibly surprised he hasn't been Wenstiened by anyone.

>>21947
It never occurred to me before but you are right. The man spends a lot of time focusing on feet in his films.

>>21949
Joss Whedon does too.

>>21950

Does he? I struggle to think of examples for Joss. But in retrospect there are loads in Tarantino.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCO-SBPTF5E

>>21951
Tarantino's famous for it, I'm more surprised you hadn't seen people discussing it than that you didn't notice it yourself.

>>21951

In From Dusk till Dawn, Tarantino sucks Salma Hayek's toes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-SAbcyco0o

>>21953
I saw this film recently and this ruined an otherwise sexy scene.

>>21953
I'd not seen that in HD before. The neon's pretty impressive. Any guesses as to whether it's real or painted on in post?
I always fancy making neon tubes, or otherwise dicking about with glassblowing.

>>21961

It looks real to me. In 1996, it would almost certainly have been cheaper to commission some neon signs than to do it in post.

Lampwork is surprisingly accessible - you don't need anything more than a cheap MAPP torch, some glass rods and a few basic hand tools. A proper Bethlehem or Nortel torch will cost you a cock and a bollock, but a Rothenberger or Bernzomatic will do the job if you're just getting started.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj1Oy0W3CbE

>>21964
There is a matte-painted scene at the end with the slow zoom out and it's visibly a painting, so I'm guessing you're right.

So STD Post midseason has been alright right? Almost makes me want to take back all the horrible things I said about it.

>>22050
Aye, it's not been bad. The thing is mirror universe episodes are always good clean fun and so far I think they've made a number of stupid decisions that have only detracted from that. Where is all the sexy PG eroticism for a start! It's been replaced by costumes from 40K and weird lines you hear now and again such as the empire being racist, Burnham being groomed by Lorca etc. that remind you that it is super-serious now.

>>22051

They aren't clean or good and you know it. And that's why they are fun.

I'd put up a picture of gimp garrek or the first tv lesbian kiss, to demonstrate, but I care about not spoiling the mirror universe thing.

>>22050

It may just grow the beard yet. New ST series are never very good to start with.

>>22052
I'm confused, is the episode with Dax kissing her/his ex-wife not counted because it was the symbiont acting?

>>22054

You are right, I knew it was DS9 but I forgot which episode it was.

I watched a couple of episodes yesterday and I'm curious, where should I start watching ST from and in what order?

>>22055
I would never have pointed it out but RLM used it as well so I was wondering if some new classification was going on what with us living in the future and all.

>>22056
If you can stomach mid-60s sci-fi on a shoestring budget then do the release order (it helps to warm up with the 1959 Twilight Zone):
http://startreklist.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/list-of-all-star-trek-episodes-sorted_05.html

Otherwise start on TNG. Most people (wrongly) suggest doing it by series which is simpler but forgets that the broadcast order exists. This looks complicated but things will never be as good again:

1) Start with the TNG episode 'Darmok' to give you a taste of peak Trek because the first season or two is going to be a struggle.
2) Watch solely TNG from the pilot* until S6E11 (the second episode of Picard talking about lights) and then alternate episodes with DS9 starting with the pilot.
3) TNG will end. Watch the VII movie Generations and continue DS9 up until the episode where Quark finds a baby then alternate with VOY episodes.
4) Before S5E6 of DS9 watch the TOS episode 'The Trouble with Tribbles' then watch the episode - trust me it is a really cool episode and I can't think of any other franchises that have done what this does.
5) After S5E8 of DS9 watch the VIII movie First Contact (important for main plot).
6) After S7E9 of DS9 watch IX movie Insurrection (movie plot motivation improved)
6) DS9 will end, VOY will end. Watch the X movie Nemesis then ENT from the pilot onwards. Feel a void in your life and start watching TOS.

*The movies can generally be watched at your own leisure up until VI and all aside from V and maybe I are high-quality (VI may seem essential but Roddenberry didn't consider it rigid canon). I'd recommend watching all the movies up to VI before S6E4 of TNG but I understand it is a tall order.

Note: Aside from TOS all series of Star Trek start pretty bad; TNG gets good when Riker grows a beard, DS9 gets good when Sisko loses his hair, VOY gets good when you meet 7of9, ENT gets good when American elections become more unpredictable. Keep the faith.
Note 2: There is an animated series but its not canon. Watch it after TOS if you want.

Games: Star Trek: 25th Anniversary and it's sequel Judgment Rites are legitimately good games and nicely conclude TOS. The last mission (if done right) perfectly sums up the message of ST come to think of it.

>>22057
I've seen the Darmok episode and all of the original TZ run so I'll go with the release order, thanks for the tip.

So I tried bumping this thread the other day and messed it up, but here goes nothing.

Isn't Star Trek Discovery fucking grim. It's like a bad acid trip, space looks like Dadaist nightmarescape and everyone's a prick, what happened to the Federation's utopian society? And now there's terrorist Vulcans?! It's so depressing. Was watching TOS in the sixties this upsetting?

Careful on any spoilerino's, I'm only on episode six.

>>22355

Your spoiler text is definately the most offensive point of the whole series paticularly the label they are given. I found discovery more indearing in the secound half but I might have been punch drunk from how awful the first half was I'd be willing to accept anything that was remotely reasonable.

There's so much cannibalism.

>>22355
It's all... "gritty". If you pretend it's not Star Trek it's a resonable SciFi series but it does lack the promise of utopia, there within grasping distance even if enternally out of reach, that the series up until ST:V had.

>>22358
That's my big problem with Discovery, it's "not Star Trek", which is fine, except they call it Star Trek so I'm constantly second guessing it against my own expectations. Maybe they should have done a Mass Effect TV show or something, then you can be as bleak, sleezy and sarcastic as you want. Michael would have made a good Renegade Shep, to be honest.

Anyway, I liked the mirror universe and the characters are mostly quite good. It just rang very, very hollow when they decided genocide against the entire Klingon homeworld was not-exactly-cricket as far as the Federation was concerned, and I can't see that lady Klingon lasting long in charge, "holding the planet hostage with a bomb its enemies put there" isn't a win for the ideas of Klingon Jesus.

Lense flares and dutch angles aren't my idea of great cinematography either. THERE'S SO MANY LIGHTS EVERYWHERE IT HURTS MY POOR BRAIN!

>>20481
>Its a shame that it got canned as soon as it was finding its feet despite most Trek needing 3 seasons to find its feet.

I think all Trek seasons have their good and bad episodes, season 2 of Voyager simultaneously has both my favourite (Death Wish 9/10) and most hated (Twisted 1/10, Threshold 1/10) Voyager episodes.

>>22359
>Lense flares and dutch angles aren't my idea of great cinematography either.

Speaking of cinematography, why are the ships in Discovery so blue?

>>22361
I'm not sure, but in fairness they did mention that the Terrans are photosensitive and prefer the dark.

>>22361
The alternative is orange, and who wants to work in an orange ship?

>>22363
The alternative is normal just like in TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT.

>>22364
Those were all made back in the days when colours other than orange or blue were still acceptable.

http://www.startrek.com/fan-films

CBS and Paramount Pictures have unreasonable restrictions on fan fiction.

>The fan production must be less than 15 minutes for a single self-contained story, or no more than 2 segments, episodes or parts, not to exceed 30 minutes total, with no additional seasons, episodes, parts, sequels or remakes.

>The fan production must be family friendly and suitable for public presentation. Videos must not include profanity, nudity, obscenity, pornography, depictions of drugs, alcohol, tobacco, or any harmful or illegal activity, or any material that is offensive, fraudulent, defamatory, libelous, disparaging, sexually explicit, threatening, hateful, or any other inappropriate content. The content of the fan production cannot violate any individual’s right of privacy.

>>22366
In what way do you consider those particular clauses to be unreasonable?

>>22367
Because it ruins his idea for a story, where Troy and Crusher are beamed down to a planet to provide medical aid and counselling to some stranded chaps, but get brutally gang raped.

>>22368
>Because it ruins his idea for a story, where Troy and Crusher are beamed down to a planet to provide medical aid and counselling to some stranded chaps, but get brutally gang raped.
You missed the part where the gang-rape takes 19 minutes.

>>22369
I'm not sure anyone's ever produced a 19-minute gang-rape scene before, on video or in animation. At least, based on what I've been told.

>>22371

I have a collection that would disprove this greatly.

>>22372

Ah! I see you are well versed in Japanese culture.