Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I watched the first episode on Prime UK.

It's... fine. But yeah, GEEZ, like Overread said, can they JUST SLOW DOWN a little. Everythings talking and happening so quickly I thought I had accidentally turned fast forward on...

 Compel wrote:
I watched the first episode on Prime UK.

It's... fine. But yeah, GEEZ, like Overread said, can they JUST SLOW DOWN a little. Everythings talking and happening so quickly I thought I had accidentally turned fast forward on...

It's the Rick and Morty style. Just throw joke after joke out there so if one doesn't land, it quickly just goes to the next.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I watched the first episode on Prime UK.

It's... fine. But yeah, GEEZ, like Overread said, can they JUST SLOW DOWN a little. Everythings talking and happening so quickly I thought I had accidentally turned fast forward on...

It's the Rick and Morty style. Just throw joke after joke out there so if one doesn't land, it quickly just goes to the next.

Probs why I’m not really getting on with it, as I’m not a fan of Rick and Morty.

Which is a shame, as I’ve only heard good things about Lower Decks.

A joke every 5 seconds isn't just Rick and Morty style.

It was MST3 style before that, and Simpsons style before that, and Police Squad/Airplane before that...

I'd argue at least classic era simpsons is slower on delivery. I'd also say that Simpsons, esp classic era, spent a lot more time building a story into its episodes - whilst Below Decks rushes even the story at hyperspeed.

Comedy is all about timing and I feel like they are just the wrong side of fast and too loose with the story to get the delivery of the jokes right. At least for me.

Lower Decks is probably the best modern Trek.
Its made by people that love trek.
First 4 or so episodes are rough, but it gets better and the fast paced makes it better.
The court episode still makes me laugh

I’m just finding it a bit....well, I wanna say ‘smug’. Just a wee bit up itself.

But I find the same of R&M, so might just be my own sensibliltiies.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m just finding it a bit....well, I wanna say ‘smug’. Just a wee bit up itself.

I find it a bit like that, but also somewhat like Team America in that its not just a childish humour, but a distinctly "drunken teen/adult" style of humour. It's not quite as bad as Team America, but its trying that same style of humour.

Team America I enjoyed, probably because it was unapologetically childish and daft - but never actually stupid.

Lower Decks. I dunno. Folk may have noticed I don’t tend to be on record criticising things, as I usually find a quick “not my bag” type comment to be justification in itself.

But here I wish I could put my finger on it properly. It’s kinda like me and Anime. I should like it. It’s got all the ingredients I enjoy. Just somehow the recipe and end product is unappealing.

Ah well. It is but my opinion, and absolutely no reason for anyone else not to enjoy it.

Unlike anything made by Seth McFarlane, the smuggest, gittiest smug git that ever smug gitted his way onto our screens. And anyone encouraging him should be taken out the back and, erm....sent to a farm in Wisconsin*


*I’ve no idea if Wisconsin has farmland. I’m not even sure whether it’s a State or not.

I really, really, really loathe him. Almost as much as I utterly loathe Jared Sodding Leto. Which is a lot.

But seriously, comedy skit on stuff I really do seem to have an allergic level distaste for, you do you dear reader.

Hmm I've heard positive things about The Orville but I've not seen it; that said almost all Seth McFarlane's animations - yep I'm right there with you on the dislike

Then again as someone who loves animation I'm not a fan of how the western media has generally treated it since the end of the 90s by relegating it to "adult humour" style shows with often very low animation quality and mostly just using it as an excuse to produce drivel in the name of being adult (its so adult its like a teen trying to be adult by being super edgy...). Granted I believe France and some other nations treat it better, though there's a translation barrier there. So some of my McFarlane hate is carry over

I only watched I think the first two-and-a-half episodes of Lower Decks when they were first airing. I feel similarly to what's been said above, although I went back and watched the finale and found it to be a bit better done. Overall the show was a little too self-aware, I think, taking a lot of memey parts of Trek but not really engaging with the world in a meaningful way. It didn't feel like it was adding depth to the lore. Which might not be what people want for a comedy show, but it's what I would prefer on a comedy Star Trek show.

I'm just not particularly impressed with any Trek that's come out since 2009, and honestly, I'm not a huge fan of the Next Gen movies either (except for First Contact). The market has changed, the audience has changed. Everything is grim and cynical and explosions.

TOS and its successors worked past their limitations. Good actors and stories made up for pretty goofy sets and effects - well mostly - especially when considering the budget, studio, and viewing audience of the time. So you have lots of scenes of tense dialogue. Characters debating things, and through those debates, we have plot progression and character development. One of my favorite TOS episodes is when Kirk is convinced a traveling actor is an escaped war criminal, but the actor has space-dementia and isn't sure himself. So! Much! Acting!

I don't want to dismiss things without giving them a fair shake, but having seen all of Picard, first four episodes of Discovery, three and a half of Lower Decks, it just hasn't grabbed me. I'm checking out.

Incidentally, Wisconsin is a state! Farmland it has, but delightful dairy is its specialty. Wisconsin Cheese Curds are part of most Midwesterner's religion.

 Don Qui Hotep wrote:


I'm just not particularly impressed with any Trek that's come out since 2009, and honestly, I'm not a huge fan of the Next Gen movies either (except for First Contact). The market has changed, the audience has changed. Everything is grim and cynical and explosions.

I enjoyed the first part of Enterprise, but the temporal war kind of mucked up how I envisioned the series going and I fell out of keeping up. Picard is actually the first series in a long while I've enjoyed greatly and in part because it felt like its the first Trek that actually built off what DS9 gave us - a more small-man view just outside of a Federation Flagship with a more gritty look at the darker side of the Federation. There's nothing in it that isn't in episodes and themes that are established (some even way back in Original series), but the series focuses on them rather than resolving them in a single episode.
I do get how some dislike the darker tone and it does have some cheesy elements - though I'm somewhat glad that they've written Data out of the story now. I like Data, but ever since the end of TNG series and the start of the movies I feel like they kept repeating Data's storylines over and over - they didn't really take him anywhere new and the hyper focus on Picard and Data made the rest of the core crew fall into the background.

Yeah. I really like Picard, and can’t wait for Season 2.

Disco? I get and agree with the criticism of it being Burnhamcentric. But the first two seasons were worthy watching me. Season 3 however lost me. It had high points with distinctly Classic Trek episodes - then sort of disappeared up its own arse in a way that made even Bonio out of U2 blush.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Guess I’m just stuck on the “DS9 Ruined Star Trek” concept.

As a show, it had a very ropey start, but went on to push the concept further than before in a fantastic successful way.

Yet what followed seems resolute in refusing to pick up its baton - though Picard has shown a glimmer of hope in that regard.

DS9’ strengths there? My personal trifecta of Quark, Garrak and Dukat. They all had their own agenda, and could be Hero or Villain as needed. Dukat in particular eventually boiled down to a gloriously petty dill weed. A tinpot dictator ousted and rejected by everyone. Just cracking stuff.

 Overread wrote:


Then again as someone who loves animation I'm not a fan of how the western media has generally treated it since the end of the 90s by relegating it to "adult humour" style shows with often very low animation quality and mostly just using it as an excuse to produce drivel in the name of being adult (its so adult its like a teen trying to be adult by being super edgy...). Granted I believe France and some other nations treat it better, though there's a translation barrier there. So some of my McFarlane hate is carry over

If you haven't already done so then I'd recommend trying out Bob's Burgers. The first season is a bit uneven, relying a bit too much on some lowbrow humour, but once it finds its feet and really gets running I'd say it is the closest an animated sitcom has come to picking up the baton left by classic Simpsons and has been consistently getting better with every season. It manages to find that balance between jokes for adults and for kids that early Simpsons was so good at, and it has so far managed to avoid Flanderizing any of its characters or jumping the shark in the plots of each episode. A thing I especially like in it is that the kids actually are kids, rather than just small adults. They go on kids adventures and approach the problems along the way as kids, with a kids view on the world.

 Overread wrote:
Hmm I've heard positive things about The Orville but I've not seen it; that said almost all Seth McFarlane's animations - yep I'm right there with you on the dislike

The Orville is pretty good with some decent character interplay between characters, some really good jokes.
But it really does suffer from his smugness. The way the show handles religion and spirituality is just bad. It has had several messeges be "Religion is only for lesser developed civilizations, by the time they are space faring, it should be gone"
Star Trek never once insulted or said religion wasnt a good thing. Bajorans and Ckakotay are prime examples. Star Trek believes coexistance is possible with all religions. Orville only believes it is possible if all religions are gone.

The Orville (IMHO of course) suffers because it can't decide what it is. Sometimes it's a nice update of TOS and TNG tackling tough issues like porn and relationships or virtual friends vs real. Though it sometimes stumbles, is zodiac signs really a pressing social problem?

Other times it's an hour long 'joke' about one of the crew having to go to the bathroom.

And still other times it tries to do something epic with a grand space war, but somehow everything is restored by the end of the episode.

It's an OK watch, if you have an hour to kill before bedtime, but that's about it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Guess I’m just stuck on the “DS9 Ruined Star Trek” concept.

As a show, it had a very ropey start, but went on to push the concept further than before in a fantastic successful way.

Yet what followed seems resolute in refusing to pick up its baton - though Picard has shown a glimmer of hope in that regard.

DS9’ strengths there? My personal trifecta of Quark, Garrak and Dukat. They all had their own agenda, and could be Hero or Villain as needed. Dukat in particular eventually boiled down to a gloriously petty dill weed. A tinpot dictator ousted and rejected by everyone. Just cracking stuff.

I think for me one thing DS9 did really well was it shattered the "Bridge Crew" focus entirely. One thing that has dogged ST for a long time is that the story almost always focuses on the top handful ranked characters on a starship - to the point where most of the rest of the crew actors could (and likely do) change on a weekly basis without us ever noticing that they are different people. Once or twice we might get an ensign rise up from obscurity, but they are normally gone by the end of the episode. Heck the "red shirts" are nameless people who die and yet oddly the ship and crew often show little to no remorse at their passing (I don't think we see one funeral for a redshirt in all the years of ST). I think the only one that rose up a bit was O'Brian.


Thing is following DS9 they seem to keep trying to want to go back to story telling somewhere between Original Series (random alien of the week) and TNG with linked stories. They also keep trying so hard to recreate Spock- Kirk-McCoy. It's like how BBC tried to recreate the Top Gear 3. When DS9 showed that you need the triad (ever notice how there's ALWAYS 1 vulcan.. never 2!) and that in fact you can spread your wings wider.

Yeah.

TNG didn’t really try to recreate OT’s trifecta. Instead we saw a Captain more adept at using the knowledge and abilities of his various crew members.

I think there’s also a loss of the “best we can be” Federation thing. The organisation as a beacon of what a united humanity might achieve one day.

DS9 did some deconstruction of that, without undermining the central theme. The Maquis and “In The Pale Moonlight” instead showed just how much such an ideal needs to be worked at to maintain it.

Again this is where Quark really came into his own, and never in a heavy way. My two favourite scenes?

1. Root Beer




2. Humans and their meals




At the time, they were just scenes. Yet when you can have a good old binge, you see their value.

Quark can be argued as a modern day human, in terms of his values. A bit overwrought and emphasised for effect sure, but still a more familiar lens to the man in the street.

He’s the first time we’ve seen a reflection on the Federation and humanity. And he’s pretty much right.

In The Pale Moonlight shows us the reality of the Federation at war. Sure, they’d prefer a diplomatic way out of things. But they’ll fight in the meantime, because they have to. Sisko’s deception was the right move. The mathematics of war make it the right move for the people’s of the Alpha Quadrant. And as Garak tells him, the price was very, very low.

And right at the very end of the war? We see Sisko tip out his tankard of blood wine. He doesn’t want to revel in glory. He doesn’t want epic songs sung of his deeds. He only ever wanted peace - and in that, we see though he got a little tarnished in the process, he’s still a man of Federation Ideals.

Man DS9 is just so incredibly bloody good!

Maybe modern day writers just don’t feel up to the task of following it up. Certainly Voyager, a contemporary, bailed on that challenge in favour of Captain Inconsistent and The Wasted Opportunities.

I think its also, Atleast with Discovery, Writers are trained for one continuous story for TV now. With nearly every single actor being a part of each episode. We would never have gotten an episode where is just Two actors climbing a mountain or just one trying to cure a plague. We dont get the character development we could anymore.

I don't think that's really true...

Season 3 episode 1 Disco, was all Burnham (of course), and Manchester Black.

Episode 2 was all Tilly, Saru and Phillipa. (And is arguably one of their best episodes for it).

Heck, I, at least, didn't learn most of the Discovery casts names until season 3, they were that irrelevant compared to Burnham.

I don't think really possible to say what 'writers are trained for' now. TV channels, production companies, all focus on different things, I don't think there's any general rule.

Take The Mandalorian for example, the title character is the only person that has been in every episode.

The scene is certainly far more complex and varied now. Studios are slowly accepting that non-episodic structure works so we've got haphazard themes from TV series like Game of Thrones which are fully story driven all the way to things like NCIS which are almost all episodic with big story driving events typically in the first and last episodes with little gains and losses through the series (where often acharacter leaving/entering mid-season is only because of real life commitment changes

Discovery and Picard don't understand what DS9 is or anything it was trying to tell message wise.

 BlackoCatto wrote:
Discovery and Picard don't understand what DS9 is or anything it was trying to tell message wise.

Discovery does not have a message - it has always been a fan fic about one person and her sidekick - everything else in the entire (multi) universe is about her, for her and to show how great she is is - thats it - there is nothing more.

I am not sure about Picard - there are probably trying to say something but what i have no idea. however I am happy to watch season 2 (depsite the awful final episode of S1) but I will no longer watch Star Trek Burnham

I think Picard spent a lot of time getting going and I think a big part of that is not just going through, but showing us how Picard, a very mature and powerful individual, basically has to have a large portion of who he was and what defined him broken down.

We then see him get lost in the middle and then steadily see him rebuild himself. He's still the same person, the same character, but he's also changed, his situation and the world around him has changed and he's had to very suddenly react to that change and either drown or swim.


It's a powerful bit of telling, especially for such a mature character; we are used to it with teen and young adult films; but its rarer to see it with a more mature character and to get to the end and not have him passing the reins onto a younger mentored character. Instead we see Picard remain on the ship, more settled in his role and his place in a changed world around him.

So this thread reminded me that Rogers (our local Terrible Phone/Cable/Internet Megacorp) has some kind of package deal with Crave - the Canadian mirror universe counterpart to CBS all access. Turns out, I got grandfathered into that because I have HBO.

So I marathoned Lower Decks, just in the background while I did work. And I rather enjoyed it.

The Rick and Morty but Star Trek comparisons are fair, it generally follows the same formula of dysfunctional people dealing with sci-fi high concepts with quips, mayhem, and occasionally shocking violence and doesn't really break new ground here. Though one notable exception is that it doesn't actually have a Rick, instead having a cast of four principle characters each occupying one of the four primary personality types: analytical, driver, amiable, and expressive. It's a common sitcom tactic but it's popular because it works, and without Rick sucking up all the oxygen in the room they each have room to contribute to the overall story (and more importantly, be funny!)

Most of all though, I loved the stupid amount of fanservice and inside jokes - something I hate in more serious works, but here it's fantastic. The showrunners clearly know their Trek, and more importantly the Trekkies, and as a result despite the whole project being the most un-Star Trek cartoon they could have possibly made, the internet hate machine just hasn't been able to put its hooks in it like they have with Discovery and Picard.

With both Pick and Horror channels insisting, I'm finally getting around to watching Star Trek Enterprise!

I don't know how it was received at the time. but I'm really enjoying it. Sexy Spock is creating some interesting friction with them sweet Southern boys driving the ship and the the friendship between Dr Phlox and nerdy Riho feels pretty natural.

Most importantly I guess is that it has those juicy moral quandaries.
I just watched an episode debating about whether to parachute in a cure to a deadly disease and whether the junior partner in a successful co-existence is being exploited.
Poor quantum leap guy was getting tied up in knots!

(Couple more episodes and I'll start remembering their names for sure XD)

 Overread wrote:
I do get how some dislike the darker tone and it does have some cheesy elements - though I'm somewhat glad that they've written Data out of the story now. I like Data, but ever since the end of TNG series and the start of the movies I feel like they kept repeating Data's storylines over and over - they didn't really take him anywhere new and the hyper focus on Picard and Data made the rest of the core crew fall into the background.

I liked the way they ended the Picard/Data story in the finale of Picard. It felt like a fitting way to bring that character to an end, and finally pay off what happened in Nemesis.

 Overread wrote:
and the hyper focus on Picard and Data made the rest of the core crew fall into the background.

That's a major problem with modern Trek. Outside of Detmer*, I can't name the bridge crew on that show (one of them is Bryce... not sure which one). The show is so hyper-focused on Michael, to the point of exhaustion (the final straw being the new Admiral's fawning "We should do everything your way! Also you are the captain now!" nonsense in the final episode), that it ends up leaving almost everyone behind.

Hopefully the new show with Pike doesn't have the same problem.

*Hot redhead, so obviously I remember her.

Season 3 of Disco was so frustrating because in terms of the rest of the crew, it was a dirty little tease.

Glimmers of delving deeper.....then cut to Burnham and her magic solution.

Normally I hold off judgement until I can binge it. I found season 1 and 2 to be beneficial when watched in larger blocks. But I just can’t bring myself to do it with season 3.

Picard feels like the writers only watched the TNG movies... for some reason. In those they made Data and Picard like that

TNG Data and Picard were close, but not abnormally so. It's clear that in the time after the series, when the movies were set, that Picard and Data became closer. Perhaps in part because in that time Picard was seeing some of the rest of his crew moving on whilst Data never had quite the same drive to leave.

Though I think whilst that is a good "in world" argument its not really best presented through the films.

But it makes a sensible point to at least stick with that development, even if its not something some of us find the best. It at least means that the series is remaining true to its original source material - to the lore of the setting.