Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Unless of course CBS decides to screw things up.

https://filmdaily.co/news/cbs-plans-...ket-star-trek/

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

This is a really good summary of the current state of play around the reason for the differences between Discovery (and the recent films) and the older shows and films. However it's almost an hour long, so be prepared!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojtX_Oz4WsU

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

All the shows announced thus far do sound good. I am happy to see Trek back on screens though.

I think I did list all the shows in a previous post.

EDIT: I didn't must have been on another forum.

There is

The Picard Show
Adult animated show
Animated Short Treks
Section 31 show

They are the ones I know off the top of my head.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

This week’s Discovery featured a violation of the prime directive James T Kirk himself would have been proud of. Top viewing. :D

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Well I think when it comes to a race or population being in trouble, then breaking the rules slightly is valid ;)

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Picard would never have intervened in those circumstances. We’d have just got a long, impassioned speech about non-interference. Remember at the point they first decided to broadcast to the planet nobody was in danger. It was regime change on a global scale, because Pike decided he didn’t like the way they did things down there. Kirk would have done exactly the same.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

yeah, key things like the prime directive which we are all too familiar with and is establish lore are the kind of things which absolutely kill my realism factor. The same thing happened when they went down to that churchy planet a couple of weeks in search of the red angel. I am letting it go because of how early the series is set and the Federation are still finding their feet. It is missions like this which Starfleet will reflect on, decide whether it was the right of wrong thing to do and then come up with the rules and prime directive in the future.

Last weeks episode was my favourite so far this season. When I saw the short for it I was banging my head against the wall when Georgiou said to Saru "you can come with me but if you do we can never come back to this planet" and I was like "well you obviously will do". I am happy for the reason and justification for it. They went because of the red angel and even then they still tried to stick to the rules and avoid any interaction and changing the culture and it is Saru's medical condition which did that. I actually like the character he is turning in to. In season 1 he was a wet nelly and I thought it was a joke he was acting captain and Burnham as a crewman had to keep telling him what to do. Pike is my favourite character atm. I love how he has had the training and knows the rules but he leads less by rules and directives and more cowboyish and what he thinks is the best thing to do. It is like the best of both worlds.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

They’re indicating the difference by referring to it as “General Order One” rather than the Prime Directive, as if the policy was re-stated and strengthened at some later date.

There’s a throwaway line somewhere in DS9 ... possibly in the 30th anniversary tribble episode, and possibly spoken by Dax ... which refers to the cavalier attitudes of ships captains in this era. I actually think they’re being rather more faithful to established Trek lore than it might first appear.

And since the show is now being run by people who actually understand what Star Trek is, I tend to put any glaring nonsense down to stuff bequeathed them by Fuller etc. which they’re still forced to work with.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

And he was forced into changes by the current Star Trek licence, same as the Kelvin timeline films were.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

I have to admit, while I like most of the characters in Discovery season 1, season 1 didn't feel much like Star Trek to me. They changed too much, particularly the Spore drive and the bald Klingons. The Spore drive would have been believable if, rather than pointing out how much faster it is than Warp, they explained why, in the existing series (TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager anyway), Starfleet would go back to the apparently inferior Warp technology.

it also lost the sense of fun that all the previous Star Trek series had.

Season 2 has bought the fun back, and at least attempted to explain why the spore drive isn't used in other series.

I am thankful, however, for Series 1 being the way it was. I enjoyed it, but had it had more of a sense of fun, I might not have looked at Seth McFarlane's series "The Orville", which I am thoroughly enjoying.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

yup, and just like the changes with the Klingons and holographic displays, it all adds to my realism factor because if it doesn't make sense then I cant believe it is real and it spoils it for me.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Season 3 confirmed

https://www.denofgeek.com/uk/tv/star...-season-3-news

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

nice, I like it when stuff like this happens because it lets them plan way in advance and gives them to time to write great stories and get everything moving in the background which they need to make it happen.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1551460302

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Half bad news although most of us knew about it anyway.

I knew they were only supposed to be in it for one season but Anson Mount has proved to be very popular and I think some of us were hoping he would somehow find a way to stay on.