Started by Grizz, September 24, 2017, 02:47:37 pm
Quote from: Klaw on September 24, 2017, 03:02:47 pmWatching the premiere tonight, imo - gonna be hard to beat the Orville
Quote from: Grizz on September 24, 2017, 03:07:31 pmQuote from: Klaw on September 24, 2017, 03:02:47 pmWatching the premiere tonight, imo - gonna be hard to beat the Orville The Expanse, you mean
QuoteVFX: absolutely stunning, almost if not actually movie quality. Character design is great. Ship design is excellent. Space VFX are amazingly good, beautiful on their own much of the time. They clearly put a lot of time and money into this. Note, though, it is JJ Abrams' style more than anything. If you didn't like that, you won't like this. Personally, I enjoy the style, so I thought it was fantastic. I'm also digging the new Klingon designs. 10/10The writing/characterization is solid, but not perfect. Some significant things to be worked on, but I can't go into details without spoilers. However, in my opinion if you watch both episodes 1 and 2 (and you really should watch both), there's nothing so glaring or unresolved/unfixable that it really detracted from the experience. 8.5/10The music is good, but nothing new/unexpected. It doesn't reach michael giacchino levels, but it's well-executed. For sound effects, the same rating/statement. It's the sound suite expected from Star Trek, mixed with some modern stuff like the Expanse. 8/10The acting is a mixed bag. Honestly, this is probably the weakest part of the episodes so far for me; issues with delivery/directing more than capability, I think, but we'll see. Again, can't be too specific without spoilers. Work is needed here. While I agree that the writing is not perfect, I think it'd come across a lot better with better directing and acting. I didn't have issues with pacing/style of direction that other people here did, but I am going to watch again soon and think about these things specifically. The directing is definitely not perfect. 7/10 for both, I'd say.In terms of streaming experience, while All Access is dumb, and putting the show back 18 minutes online because of football, which is on TV makes absolutely zero sense, for me (streaming on a desktop computer over a decent Internet connection), the streaming worked flawlessly; it was high quality thewhole time with no interruptions or downtime whatsoever. There was no HBO-Go-first-ep-of-game-of-thrones downtime here. I strongly recommend ditching your TV or mobile apps and streaming through a browser for this platform. For me, the streaming was 10/10. For others, I hear it is much worse.Finally, the most important part - is it Star Trek? YES. IT IS STAR TREK. IT IS ABSOLUTELY STAR TREK. It's modernized to a certain extent and it's more action-oriented than Star Trek usually is, but I think that's because it's a pilot/season-opener, which is similar to what TNG/DS9/VOY all did during all their first episodes. It is absolutely Star Trek, it hits all the right beats and I feel like it means them. 10/10 will space voyage again.Overall, if this were just any scifi TV show, I'd call it an ~8, 8.5/10. But I love Star Trek, and I want to love this, so it gets a 9/10 for me, with hope for the future.
QuoteGuys, we have to talk about this. I realize that everyone has specific ideals about what Star Trek is supposed to be, and that those ideals are important. I promise, I'm right there with you. The trouble is that Discovery, good or bad, is never going to be your platonic ideal of a Star Trek show, because its creators are not you. I think we need to remember a few things:Every major Trek series since TOS has changed things, sometimes significant things, often for the better.Every major Trek series since TOS was criticized harshly by at least some contingent of fans at first, regardless of how it ultimately turned out.Every major Trek series has occasionally (or more than occasionally, looking at you, Voyager) suffered from bad writing, bad acting, bad directing, or all three - including in the pilot episodes.Everyone has their list of things Star Trek is and should be. Those lists aren't necessarily equal to what Star Trek is.I believe that at its core, Star Trek is about a theme: idealistic, optimistic science-fiction that keeps the "human" factor in mind, even when dealing with aliens. Star Trek is a show about ideals and values. Those ideals and values can be brought under discussion in a myriad of ways and under a myriad of artistic styles and visions, because at its core, Star Trek is not about whether there's lens flares or not, what the commander's name is, or how many scenes of Klingons talking about destiny and the ancestors there are. Star Trek is about vision, and vision takes time.Personally, I really enjoyed these first two episodes. I don't think they're perfect - acting and writing need work, directing was sometimes heavy-handed - and yes, they are modern scifi designed for a modern audience (just as TNG was in its time, and ENT in its, as examples). But to me, they have the spark of what Star Trek is and should be about. They're character-driven, they're focused on the meaning behind the actions shown, and they are at the same time about big ideas and cosmic conflicts bigger than any single person - or at least, personally, I can see them getting there if they're not there 100% yet.Even if I liked it, it can be improved, and I want it to be improved. But at the same time, even if someone didn't like it, I think they are more likely to be rewarded for giving the show time and watching it with an eye towards what works than by throwing their hands up, declaring "it's not Trek!" and storming out. You miss all the shots you don't take.
Quote Everything about it is solid and universally consistent.