Star Trek strange new Worlds. The reviews are in.

[martin-w 3,235]

15 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

Unfortunately, JJ Abrams and co decided that Star Trek takes place in the middle of particularly blingy Apple stores, and its hard to come back from that all of that egregiously overengineered eye-candy to something a bit more subtle and functional.....

 

I didn't get that impression, not with the movies anyway. I get what you are saying but regard that as somewhat hyperbolic, (no offence intended) I liked the aesthetic. Can't say the same for Discovery. Sometimes I think its worth putting to one side what went before in terms of aesthetics and set design and accepting that we have moved on, and what may have been a believable aesthetic in the 60's, 70's or even 80's, isn't now. 

Futurology is difficult, rarely do we get it right, but if we remake something like Star Trek we certainly should consider the  technology and aesthetics now and predict where that will lead, rather than copying the aesthetic of the past. 

I tend to judge remakes on their own merits rather than comparing with the original. 

 

11 hours ago, n4gix said:

They still haven't installed any seatbelts or other form of restraints!  🙄

 

They have inertial dampening. 😁 Although I recall a restraint system for when the inertial dampeners were off-line.

[dave2013 1,130]

4 hours ago, martin-w said:

Sometimes I think its worth putting to one side what went before in terms of aesthetics and set design and accepting that we have moved on, and what may have been a believable aesthetic in the 60's, 70's or even 80's, isn't now. 

Yes, I sometimes cringe when I watch Star Trek the Next Generation.  The displays are what we in the USA would call "cheesy" - not believable, insincere, looked good then but now looks silly.  I won't even mention the original Star Trek series hardware.

So, I have to watch it for the story itself and not the props and special effects, and the stories are mostly pretty darn good.

Movies and TV shows lately focus too much on special effects and bling, not to mention other issues which are delicate and controversial and best left out of entertainment altogether IMO.

Dave

[charliearon 3,024]

16 hours ago, n4gix said:

They still haven't installed any seatbelts or other form of restraints!  🙄

Only when getting ready to crash!  No need during normal flight!  Don't forget inertia dampers are on! 🤔

 

[HiFlyer 9,359]

LOLZ.....

 

[HiFlyer 9,359]

And by the way.... I loved Silent Running. (Nice Homages)

 

[martin-w 3,235]

4 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

And by the way.... I loved Silent Running. (Nice Homages)

 

As a matter of interest... have you seen Altered Carbon and The Expanse? And what about Raised by wolves and the new Foundation series?

[HiFlyer 9,359]

Never saw altered carbon, never really got into the expanse, don't know anything about Raised by Wolves, and as for foundation, honestly it just seems like one of those sci-fi shows that takes the name of a beloved property to catch your attention, and then goes off and does it's on completely different thing.

Like The Wheel of Time for instance, which I couldn't get past the first episode cuz it seemed to have nothing at all to do with the books.

Or most recent Star Trek shows, who's main point seemed to be claiming the name to attract the dedicated and built-in fan base, while not actually being Star Trek.

Or the horrible things done to Doctor Who.

Even the new Lost in Space wandered off in its own direction, using only the basic scaffolding of the original show, which was intriguing for a while but then got boring so I never finished watching the series......

Edited May 9, 2022 by HiFlyer

[Christopher Low 5,353]

I recently read the Foundation series of books. I managed to make it through the original trilogy, but it was hard work. If the TV series is anything like the books, then I would struggle with it. I am much more interested in the upcoming Rendezvous with Rama movie, as I enjoyed that book (and the premise of an alien vessel passing through the solar system on an interstellar journey).

Edited May 9, 2022 by Christopher Low

[Tim_Capps 474]

I thought The Expanse was very good, and at least got an ending, although it felt a bit rushed. Raised by Wolves is surprisingly good, and managed not to hose up the second season like so many series do. The problem I'm seeing with it is the LOST vibe. Since literally anything seems to be able to happen on this world, it saps narrative tension (although narrativity isn't what it used to be).

Outer Range was the personal sleeper hit for me, with its Twin Peaks flavor wound around a tighter storyline. The only disappointment was the exposition dump of the season finale, which I thought was unnecessary took and some of the fun out of figuring out certain things.

One of the things that made the new Star Trek series work for me was it seemed pretty faithful to the formula of the original series plus did some interesting things with Pike's character (since we already know what happens to him). It will be interesting to see if they can capture something like the chemistry of Kirk-Spock-McCoy. Even the almost subliminal injection of contemporary politics felt okay, since the original series had its share of "issue statements." I liked Uhuru, although I was distracted by wondering when it occurred to her, "I'd really rather have a swinging mini-dress."

Great catches on the videos, HiFlyer. Love Galaxy Quest Kirk!

[dave2013 1,130]

53 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I recently read the Foundation series of books. I managed to make it through the original trilogy, but it was hard work.

Yes, the Foundation story is interesting, but the series becomes a bit tedious, especially if you go on to read the other books.  I never got through all of them.

The RAMA series is more interesting and I can't wait for the movie.

Dave

Edited May 9, 2022 by dave2013

[martin-w 3,235]

2 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

Never saw altered carbon, never really got into the expanse, don't know anything about Raised by Wolves, and as for foundation, honestly it just seems like one of those sci-fi shows that takes the name of a beloved property to catch your attention, and then goes off and does it's on completely different thing.

 

Altered Carbon is excellent, series one is the best but series two is passable. The Expanse starts off slow but evolves into a superb series. Raise by Wolves is excellent. No, I wouldn't say Foundation is taking the name to catch out attention, its doing the best it can to reproduce it in the form of a TV series. The books span hundreds of years, attempting to reproduce that in a TV series isn't easy, but so far they have done a good job. 

 

2 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

Or the horrible things done to Doctor Who.

 

Err... yes but it was always garbage. Worst writing and acting and direction in the history of the multiverse. 

[HiFlyer 9,359]

2 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I recently read the Foundation series of books. I managed to make it through the original trilogy, but it was hard work. If the TV series is anything like the books, then I would struggle with it. I am much more interested in the upcoming Rendezvous with Rama movie, as I enjoyed that book (and the premise of an alien vessel passing through the solar system on an interstellar journey).

The series (to me!) only has a glancing resemblance to the books. Or, to put it another way, if it was not named Foundation, thereby drawing on my positive memory of the original books to catch my (initial) interest, would I find it compelling science fiction?

Maybe...

But also just as likely maybe not.

I essentially have to see it as "What would happen if somebody completely different and with almost entirely different sensibilities and priorities had written foundation?"

Kind of what suddenly happened with the Wheel of Time, when the original author died and a replacement did his (very) best to finish out the series, but inevitably changed almost completely many of the unique dynamics that had held the whole thing together so long.

It was an ending, but I will never feel that it was the ending that it could/should have been.

It seems a truism nowadays that authors/producers/directors/actors brought in to recreate beloved original properties almost inevitably feel they've not done their jobs unless they reinterpret things to such a degree that whatever made the original memorable is often lost.

[bic 44]

Back in November T-Mobile US offered Paramount+ for a year.  At first there were  no commercials, but lately there have been commercials.  It seems that they have different tiers....  The offer is still active:

https://www.t-mobile.com/offers/paramount-plus-deal

Edited May 9, 2022 by bic

[HiFlyer 9,359]

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

Err... yes but it was always garbage. Worst writing and acting and direction in the history of the multiverse. 

Its not like I was ever the most avid watcher. I really started viewing as a kid seeing it on local public television, along with things like Fawlty Towers, Monthy Python, etc.....

Accidently got hooked by the unique strangeness of it all, which hit me at the exact right time in my life.

Not to paint a broad brush, some of it was passe, and some was (I thought) pretty brilliant, all on an apparent shoestring budget.

Especially Tom baker and David tenant.

[Fielder 3,673]

I cant watch Discovery because Harvey Cthulhu would come and punish me if I did.

 

Edited May 9, 2022 by Fielder