Wow, you missed out then. In my opinion, one of the most unique interesting episodes of trek ever, and certainly one of the most emotionally impacting episodes.
All of this is correct to the best of my knowledge, except for the "terribly written" part, because the writing this season has been magnificent, so far!
Just watched episode five. So far like the movies, the even numbered episodes are excellent while the odd numbered episodes are not as good. Spoiler To my way of thinking, if you plan to bring back a character, then you should never have killed them in the first place. They should have just brought back the mirror universe doctor. At least that could have been somewhat interesting.
I'm betting Spock will be on the last third of the season at best. But honestly the one absolute consistent this season has been Pike's character and he has been portrayed marvelously in every episode. I'm fine if Spock doesn't show up until the last 5 minutes of the last episode this season as long as we get Pike every week!
I’m thinking last episode then they’ll send him back to Enterprise. Having a major character like that on the series for long would be distracting to the continuity police.
They're already setting pitchforks on fire in preparation. I say screw it, play with canon, let some heads explode.
When continuity is played with well, people generally love it (like the Arik Soong / augments / Klingon genetic disaster from Enterprise).
Just give me a good story and I'm fine, I just always assume this is an alternate reality from TOS and I'm always good. One of the least interesting parts of all of the series is when they feel they need to try and shoe horn in cannon. A waste of script pages, in my opinion. Holograms, video screens, heck for all I care they can project images in a pool of water, but give me a worthwhile story and acting.
CBS Chief Touts Star Trek As All Access Hits 4 Million Subscriber Goal Early While I don't see the appeal of All Access (nothin' on there I want to see but Trek, and when I looked, it wasn't presented well!), it's certainly not the failure that some hoped for (yes, apparently wishing Trek will die off just because you don't like it is somehow logical to some "fans").
All this so called controversial "bombshell" that the ST Discovery haters are shotgunning all over the internet the last few days that was referenced above is based on a largely speculative "expose" video from a YouTube channel that is vocally anti Bad Robot era Star Trek. The video is generally somewhat interesting and informative when it doesn't devolve into a " Discovery iz ruining muh Star Trek and if you disagree you aren't a REAL fan" passive agresive wank fest , which it manages to do ultimately. Admitingly he makes a good case for some of the hows and why's but again it's all speculation colored by a particular predisposed narrative . (I.E. Discovery and the Kelvin movies aren't real Star Trek and if you like it even a little you suck.) Even if this is the case of what is happening with the IP, I don't see the big deal. I mean given the way things are laid out here, the alternative would be is that NO new Star Trek content of any type or kind or continuity ever being made as long as the rights remain divided, which even if CBS and Paramount somehow merge could conceivably still be the case for another 5 years maybe more. That would have meant no Kelvin movies , no Discovery, no other Star Trek until 2023-24. That would have meant nearly 20 years without any Star Trek once Enterprise wrapped. That would have meant Star Trek would have probably been permanently killed... Which is actually what some of these "fans" seem to want. I personally like the fact that there is new Star Trek content that keeps the IP alive and allows for a future revival of the old "prime" Star Trek Canon timeline eventually,but I guess this 30+ year fan isn't a real Star Trek fan. Edit: sorry posted wrong video somehow. Fixed the embed link.
Finally watched the new episode tonight. This show is bananas, in a delightful way. Going where no Trek has gone before and in spurts definitely the gayest Trek yet still a biiiiiig runaround to skip over certain harmful tropes but I love me some Trek pseudoscience cranked up to 11 so I am absolutely ready to keep rolling. Looks like more Kelpian action next week so definitely go back and watch the Saru-focused Short Trek episode for a refresher.
I think that, perhaps, the original plan wasn't to do this but that the new show runners thought it would be an opportunity to do so. I have no problem with this if it is indeed a prequel to the original series. The differences in technology, etc., as William Shatner stated, TOS was about the 60's made in the 60's. Discovery is neither. Yes, the writing has been largely exceptional this season and Anson Mount has been perfect as Chris Pike making the character very much his own.
Since TOS never had any sense of "continuity" compared to later series, I'm totally OK with that. I think the whole continuity aspect puts a straight jacket on creative portrayal an decisions myself.
It's interesting but understandable that the one thing not included in this version of Pike is the self doubt he expressed in the "Cage," pilot. My guess is this is because it is three years after the "Cage" and Pike mostly dealt with that self doubt and weariness by the end of that original pilot episode. Though I would like to see that revisited sometime on a future episode. Favorite Pike quote from the Cage Star Trek pilot, "I'm tired... Tired of deciding who lives... and who dies." Favorite scene in most any Trek.
Well, that and the male chauvinism. Pike states that he “just can’t get used to a woman on the bridge” in “The Cage.” That mode of thinking is obviously very outdated and would not work in a 21st Century series. But of course, as pointed out in an above post, the original series is a series about the sixties, made in the sixties.
It would be interesting if there were some attempt to roll out the mini-skirted uniforms and the crews reaction.
This timeline stuff doesn't really bother me, I just don't care. All I know is that this is the most entertaining Trek since the 80s movies.
I find it hilarious how the Discovery haters rant about how much the visual design of the series and the minor continuity niggles retroactively ruins all past and future Star Trek forever. The original series barely had any continuity with itself, let alone with what came after. Hell, the 6 movies that followed the series barely shared any hard continuity with the series aside from Wrath of Khan, and even THAT played fast and loose with certain details. Even the first movie which Roddenberry oversaw is very tenuously connected to the original series if one really wanted to nitpick. I'm sorry, but there is no way the original series Enterprise and the movie Enterprise could possibly be the same ship. Yes,we are told the ship underwent and 18 month refit but if you took it literally ( as the Discovery haters do when it comes to the visuals not adhering to 100 percent to the look of the TOS) basically every single part of the ship would have been replaced. Inside and out, stern to Starboard, deck by deck. The refit thing is a hand wave to account for the obvious budgetary upgrade a huge film has over a low budget television show and of course the advancement in set building and construction in the decade since the original show. In the same way Discovery is a hard visual reboot of the TOS era of Star Trek, so was the Motion Picture, and it was done for the same reason...you have to update the visuals to keep things relevant with the competition. Imagine had Roddenberry and Wise literally brought the visual design of the TV series to the motion picture and didnt attempt to update it in any way. In the age of Star Wars it would have been laughed off the screen, and deservingly so. Yet that's the demand the hardcore haters of Discovery are making. They demand that everything looks like the TOS to keep the sacred biblical text known as Canon consistent to satisfy their obsessive compulsive need for every single minute and every line of dialogue and every visual of every single episode to match up and be consistent and in a strict continuity with the preceding hundreds of hours of TV and movies in Star Trek. I'm sorry but that's impossible to do if you actually want to tell new stories and not constantly gatekeep bloated and overrated continuity. In my head it all loosely counts,but truth is there has been five different Star Treks. 1)The Roddenberry TOS, the basic blue print for everything that came after (yes even Discovery). It was a wagon train to the stars with elements of adventure, morality tales and old fashioned sci fi weirdness done on a shoestring budget and crude visuals and effects. 2) Harve Bennett ran movies that are basically their own thing that are only on the surface are informed by the series (the basic characters and their relationships and the ship called Enterprise) but was a complete visual and a soft continuity and tonal overhaul. Some could argue these movies were the legit start of what Star Trek is today. 3)the Rick Berman 24th century era (initiated by Roddenberry) again, a visual overhaul and eventually continuity retcon that used the device of the setting jumping ahead a century to account for all the changes,but it was for all intents and purposes a fresh start for Star Trek that spanned 17 years,four series and 4 movies. Tonally much more in line with Roddenberry's colder and more subdued philosophy for Star Trek circa the first film. Eventually less reliant on the adventure and morality tales and more on techno bable and a certain stoicism and a slow methodical flow to the episodes. (Enterprise attempted to move away from this but it went over poorly with the hard core fans.) When the most virulent of Discovery haters refer to "real" Trek, this is what they are usually referring to. 4) The Kelvin timeline which is it's own parallel thing. Three movies with maybe more coming. A visual and continuity overhaul. An emphasis on the adventure and action elements that were more prevalent in TOS. 5) Discovery and New prime. A visual overhaul and soft continuity reboot set in the pre TOS era (Discovery) and in the Post TNG ( the upcoming Picard series) and everything in between. Tonally has more in common with the original series than the later Berman era even if the continuity isn't 100 percent consistent to TOS. The Discovery haters would have you believe Discovery is the first and only time Star Trek has diverted from Gene Roddenberry's pure original vision and everything else is visually and tonally consistent with itself. That is simply not the case. Since 1979,Star Trek has always changed and evolved. In order for Star Trek to continue to survive it needs to be of it's time and evolve. To attempt to hold it to what was done 20 years ago is asking for its irrelevancy and eventual death.
My wife and I thoroughly enjoy Discovery. Love the characters and the storylines. Wasn't sure how Anson Mount was going to play out as Pike, after watching him on Hell on Wheels, which I loved and loved him in it, but he is a perfect casting for Pike in my opinion. I couldn't care less that all of the storylines and plots and canon from every other Star Trek series/movie doesn't line up...I love it for what it is, as a life long Star Trek universe fan. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Simple as that.
I've been very pleasantly surprised by Star Trek: Discovery, and while continuity has kind of gone out the window, I think it might have gotten old real fast if they used the shabby sets of the 1960s and kept things going purely to fit in with what we saw 50 years ago. Clearly, the producers and the CBS execs decided, "this is a show for 2019 audiences, and let's just make them act sorta/kinda like they're in the Federation era before Kirk." So the ships and equipment are generally much more advanced than anything that has been seen in the 1960s TV shows or the 1970s-1990s films. (Plus they have Panavision-sized viewscreens and see-through computer monitors, so there's that, too.) You could make a bigger argument about the problem of re-conning the existence of an adopted sister for Spock, since she was never talked about in 79 episodes and 6 or 7 different feature films. Does that bother me? Maybe on a microscopic level, but at some point you gotta just judge the show on its merits. What they have is fairly well-written and acted, and by god, it's lavish in terms of budget (reportedly over $10 million per episode, and it shows). I'm bracing myself for the new "young" Spock to see how good/bad he turns out... but CBS is getting my ten bucks a month for the moment.
