Jump to content

Star Trek Discovery is a Dumpster Fire


JohnRogers
 Share

Recommended Posts

Have you read or heard rumors of this show potentially being a disaster??? Let's discuss it.

 

 

 

I remain cautiously optimistic. I want this new Trek to be really good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They recast janeway after filming started.

 

Picard sounded British and Janeway sounded French...oh my.

 

What concerns me most is the rumor that Les Moonves who doesn't know Star Trek might have micromanaged the series.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CBS should've just scrapped Fuller's vision the minute he jumped ship.

 

That being said, this 'dumpster fire' is nothing compared with the disasters surrounding the leadup to TNG.

 

I don't know, this is shaping up to be a contender for the worst.

Already have reformatted Klingons AGAIN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.

So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.

So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.

Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the Klingon penchant for fighting, even among themselves, It's entire possible that the Klingon smooth forehead mutation was not total across their species, and that ridged klingons and unridged Klingons separated into two factions or castes.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the Klingon penchant for fighting, even among themselves, It's entire possible that the Klingon smooth forehead mutation was not total across their species, and that ridged klingons and unridged Klingons separated into two factions or castes.

Sure. They have an opportunity to tell a potentially good story.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.

So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.

Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is.

 

 

It's been established in the canon? I know of no official decree about anything in Star Trek TV shows or films being "canon". With so many time-travelling and alternate universe conflicts, the possibilities for any species - Human, Klingon, etc. - are endless. The only "canon" about Star Trek is that anything goes.

 

The changes to Klingon anatomy in The Next Generation and other series and films were a great move. They look like a real alien species - not just humans with goatees.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.

So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.

Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is.

 

 

It's been established in the canon? I know of no official decree about anything in Star Trek TV shows or films being "canon". With so many time-travelling and alternate universe conflicts, the possibilities for any species - Human, Klingon, etc. - are endless. The only "canon" about Star Trek is that anything goes.

 

The changes to Klingon anatomy in The Next Generation and other series and films were a great move. They look like a real alien species - not just humans with goatees.

I get it. And I don't disagree. I'm just pointing out that it was explained why the ridges disappeared.

 

And for the record, sans the animated series, anything on the television shows and the movies is considered canon. I know it's true because I read on the internet and some official Star Trek book now gathering dust on my book shelf.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.

It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.

So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.

Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is.

 

 

It's been established in the canon? I know of no official decree about anything in Star Trek TV shows or films being "canon". With so many time-travelling and alternate universe conflicts, the possibilities for any species - Human, Klingon, etc. - are endless. The only "canon" about Star Trek is that anything goes.

 

The changes to Klingon anatomy in The Next Generation and other series and films were a great move. They look like a real alien species - not just humans with goatees.

I get it. And I don't disagree. I'm just pointing out that it was explained why the ridges disappeared.

 

And for the record, sans the animated series, anything on the television shows and the movies is considered canon. I know it's true because I read on the internet and some official Star Trek book now gathering dust on my book shelf.

 

I have quite a few of those books, and I know what Okudagrams are.

I have the ENT-D blueprint book, the complete DS9 episode behind the scenes guide or whatever it is for all 7 seasons, and "The Klingon Way" which has phrases and etc. in both English and Klingon.

 

And somewhere I also have the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition.

 

It's amazing I'm married and have children when you think about it!

Edited by Del_Duio
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Discovery character and casting news that Original Series fans might appreciate: LINK

 

Harry Mudd? Bah, I'd almost rather they make up all new characters at this point. Same thing with having Sarek in this.

They already soured me on "prequel".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Discovery character and casting news that Original Series fans might appreciate: LINK

 

Harry Mudd? Bah, I'd almost rather they make up all new characters at this point. Same thing with having Sarek in this.

They already soured me on "prequel".

It all depends on the writing and the stories. Good writers will pull it off.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.

 

Personally, I feel Star Trek is done. Enjoy the re-runs, I say.

it wasn't all the Klingons. while most of the population was infected with the human augment virus, the Klingons were curing their population on a rolling basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The uniforms and tech look too advanced to pre-date Kirk. They should have went with the JJ Abrams look. Still I'll be watching.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of prequels though I admit Enterprise grew on me although I hated it to begin with. Trying to squeeze a new story into the existing canon is a recipe for disaster and a head honcho who doesn't know the canon is worse. Kill it now. Edited by IwillchooseFreeWill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...