Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Maybe the setting of the series around the original era is for budget reasons.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Who do you think will take the place of "alien, robot, hologram" that acts as the foil????

I.e. Spock, Data, Odo, the Doctor, Seven of Nine etc.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

yup because they made it crystal clear that it isn't going to tie in with the movies

it is going to be a robot (as opposed to an android) so I just pray that they make it look like a realistic technologically advanced robot and not like something from Lost in Space.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

I don't know although I bet they find the human condition strange and illogical!

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2016/08/10.jpg

:D

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

that is what I am worried about. Sometimes they go OTT is trying to make things look "classic" and they forget that we aren't in the 60's anymore and technology has moved on.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

But the series is set in the Trek era from the 60s.

So it will have to look like tech from the 60s. It can't be more advanced than what they had when they made the original series.
.

---------- Post added at 21:33 ---------- Previous post was at 21:31 ----------

They could have set it after Voyager though. It was always to follow the timeline of the original series and movies.

I think they picked the era deliberaty to make it cheaper for sets and things.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Why? the sets didn't look cheap or look like tech from the 60s for Enterprise? :/

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Enterprise sort of looked like an advanced submarine or something like that.

This series is 10 years prior to Kirk so will have to look very similar.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

and that limits them in the scope of the stories, ships, in-story technology, aliens etc which they can use because they have got to stick to what is already known and established. I enjoyed Enterprise but I think what I just said was the reason for its downfall. Look at Voyager; new quadrant means new aliens and planets which means new technology which means unlimited possibilities for stories. Even if you tried to make it adventurous and say they are out exploring space for the first time like Archer and Kirk, they can only discover what we already known about and is already part of Federation and Starfleet history. The best you can get is learning the nitty gritty details about it and exploring some stories in depth. It is probably the wrong time frame but I would love to see them cover aspects of the Federation-Klingon war similar to the odd eps in seasons 5 and 6 of DS9 covering the Dominion war.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Nothing to stop them discovery species only to have them wiped out or something, so they then do not exist during the Original Series timeline.

Or inventing certain technologies that do not work or aren't great.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

If the writers of Discovery obsess over the tech then the series will fail. Enterprise was turgid because they wanted to do Star Trek without a lot of the scaffolding that allows those stories to be told, then made a great song and dance about it. Thus it became a very self conscious documentary of the making of Starfleet when it should have just told rip-roaring tales that were defined by their own times.

I'm glad Discovery will be set close in time to TOS. The tech of that period is well understood. They should just go with it, and use it the way the original writers did - simply means to enable the stories they wanted to tell.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

I still can't make up my mind about this but I am a proper sucker for Star Trek so I guess I'll be giving it a shot.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

I like pure scifi like Star Trek and BSG so even if it isn't good, I think I will still enjoy it more than I do most other series.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
 

Is this accurate?

The new Star Trek series coming out on CBS All Access.

From If true and it's exclusive in the US to a separate paid subscription then he has a point, ratings won't be huge. We'll likely get it via something else of course but if it tanks in the US then it'll have a knock on effect here.

An American's glum opinion on it: I love Netflix and Prime Video but these American ones HBO's and CBS are the start of something stupid and costly for the rest of us. If it comes off you can bet your ass, BBC will start a version of it and other UK broadcasters will follow suit. Are we moving towards the point of paying separate sub's now for different channels. Netflix and Prime are well worth the money for value vs content. These spin offs really aren't though and need shot down before they lift off. I'm happy with the BBC content on Netflix, if they played this card I wouldn't be caught dead paying them for it whilst maintaining the platform they removed it from.