Well for what it’s worth, Battle of Midway won some sharp handicappers who boxed him in with the favorite a lot of money. After this gamely performance he has to race near the anniversary in June.
New Star Trek TV Series 2017
-
http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/12/sonequa-martin-green-to-lead-star-trek-discovery/
Sonequa Martin-Green to Lead STAR TREK: DISCOVERY -
@CWO:
http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/12/sonequa-martin-green-to-lead-star-trek-discovery/
Sonequa Martin-Green to Lead STAR TREK: DISCOVERYInteresting.
-
Discovery runs its course, but what I would really love to hear is progress with Axanar. Just read about the latest legal battles, I hope they get over it soon.
-
Not really all that much in the video.
However the write-up states that Discovery takes place 10 yrs before TNG. Which is very odd because I had been operating on pre-TOS for some time and I found out why: http://trekcore.com/blog/2016/08/bryan-fuller-reveals-long-awaited-star-trek-discovery-details/
I linked to this article a few pages back, which appears to officially confirm 10 yrs pre-TOS.
The author of the gamesradar article is a hack. Only conclusion.
-
CBS has made yet two more casting announcements today for 2017’s Star Trek: Discovery.
British actor Jason Isaacs, best known to genre fans as the evil Lucius Malfoy in the Harry Potter films, is “Captain Lorca” – commanding officer of the starship Discovery.
In addition, relative newcomer Mary Wiseman joins the series as “Tilly,” a Starfleet Academy cadet in her final year of schooling, assigned for field studies aboard the Discovery.
http://trekcore.com/blog/2017/03/jason-isaacs-is-the-uss-discoverys-captain-lorca/
-
That’s awesome. Jason Isaacs is great.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km5qVwZvjm8
The video above is mostly unsubstantiated rumors, but it fits the timeline of events for this show. It also fits with a wider theme of studio meddling in productions, for the worse.
Hard to know what is true, but it’s worth ten minutes if you are following Trek. Sidebar: I didn’t know they had again postponed the show to late summer/early fall release. Or I glossed over that.
-
so there has been an Axanar settlement. The new fan-film guidelines dont sound promising…
OC, fan fiction has to be balanced with copyright somehow, but 15 minutes…I wonder what special deal Star Trek Continues has. -
what you guys make of the Discovery trailer?
Also, I read they bring Harry Mudd back to the show.Nice, I like all the connection stuff, that was great on Enterprise, too. Hope there is more of that, 10 years is not that long a time.
-
Well I certainly need to see more. I didn’t like the look and lighting of the bridge of the other ship but hopefully that’s a minor quibble.
-
10 years isn’t enough time.
Heard the show will only be available on CBS’s streaming service which requires a subscription though. IMHO, it needs to be on broadcast TV. But that’s just me.
Still, excited to see a reboot.
-
It’s not just you. Was unaware of this. What a disappointment
-
http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-first-trailer-for-star-trek-discovery-is-here-to-b-1795312040
Thanks for the update. Didn’t know a trailer came out.
Last I heard, the pilot is supposed to air on CBS, but then the rest will be on CBS All Access streaming service. - That is in North America for sure. I thought at one time that the rest of the world may get it on Netflix, but I don’t know how those negotiations panned out.
I didn’t like that it was relegated to All Access either, seemed greedy and smacking of hubris. I suppose it is a logical decision for the network: nothing they have will draw interest like Star Trek, so why not use it to get traffic and subscriptions? I just hope that if it fails on All Access they don’t immediately try to cancel the show.
I liked about half of the content in the trailer. The feel seemed to hit a modern but definite Star Trek balance, which was nice. The actors appear well cast, particularly that weird looking alien officer and the Vulcan. I did not like the ultra modern, JJ Abrams-esque bridge with all the 3D blue crap on the viewscreen and transparent consoles. And get rid of the effing lens flare! God in heaven.
By request of my wife, viewing over my shoulder, I use Mr Green for no real reason. :mrgreen:
-
Last I heard, the pilot is supposed to air on CBS, but then the rest will be on CBS All Access streaming service. - That is in North America for sure. I thought at one time that the rest of the world may get it on Netflix, but I don’t know how those negotiations panned out.
I can’t recall where I heard this, and I can’t vouch for the information, but in Canada the new series will supposedly air on the Space cable channel.
-
Watched the trailer - not impressed. This looks like a fan film.
Not to mention, if it is supposed to take place 10 years before Kirk’s mission, the Enterprise NCC-1701 should already be out there under Captain Pike. The uniforms should look the same or similar as in ‘The Cage’. Looks like a hot mess from a continuity standpoint.
-
Watched the trailer - not impressed. This looks like a fan film.
Not to mention, if it is supposed to take place 10 years before Kirk’s mission, the Enterprise NCC-1701 should already be out there under Captain Pike. The uniforms should look the same or similar as in ‘The Cage’. Looks like a hot mess from a continuity standpoint.
interesting. I never really checked how long Pike commanded the Enterprise before Kirk.
-
Not to mention, if it is supposed to take place 10 years before Kirk’s mission, the Enterprise NCC-1701 should already be out there under Captain Pike. The uniforms should look the same or similar as in ‘The Cage’. Looks like a hot mess from a continuity standpoint.
I have resigned myself to the fact that timeline continuity (particularly as it comes to aesthetics) in a sci-fi franchise is not going to happen. I don’t think that it has to be that way; art departments could easily spiff up 1960s designs (uniforms, ships, etc.) without changing them considerably. But from a branding standpoint, I know that will never happen. The show has to be new and slick and modern to appeal to a modern audience, regardless of its place on the timeline. At least that is what studio execs think.
-
Last weekend I was listening to the audio commentary track (by Rick Berman and Brannon Braga) to the pilot episode of the Enterprise series. At one point, one of them remarked that one of the things they’ve learned over the years is that no matter what they do with the show they will never please all the fans: for every fan who loves what the studio did with such-and-such an element, there will be another fan who will hate it. To pick just one example, there were fans who loved the fact that Enterprise was set a century before TOS, and there were fans who felt adamantly that the series should have been set after VOY rather than having gone backwards. It’s the inevitable result of the fact that Trek fans are diverse, are passionate about the show, and are opinionated. B&B described Trek fans as a contentious group, but in my opinion that’s not a bad thing: if all Trek fans accepted uncritically anything that the studio produced, the studio would have no incentive to try to produce quality work; and if Trek fans didn’t care about the show, it wouldn’t have lasted (in various incarnations) for half a century. Just to quote one set of statistics: when Enterprise wrapped up, it marked the end of 18 consecutive years of episodic television production on Star Trek, which saw the production of 624 episodes of 25 seasons of 4 distinct series, bringing the overall total to 704 live-action Trek episodes (not counting the movies or The Animated Series). That’s not something which gets seen very often in the world of TV production.
-
@CWO:
B&B described Trek fans as a contentious group, but in my opinion that’s not a bad thing: if all Trek fans accepted uncritically anything that the studio produced,
[…] they would be Star Wars fans. :lol:
@CWO:
Just to quote one set of statistics: when Enterprise wrapped up, it marked the end of 18 consecutive years of episodic television production on Star Trek, which saw the production of 624 episodes of 25 seasons of 4 distinct series, bringing the overall total to 704 live-action Trek episodes (not counting the movies or The Animated Series). That’s not something which gets seen very often in the world of TV production.
That is very impressive and a testament to both the concept of Star Trek and the legacy of people invested in developing the concept. Change or progress, in some form, must happen. So we have to take the good with the bad. Hindsight will provide some perspective, like it does now on TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT.
However, the prequel genre is relatively new in Star Trek. Enterprise still provokes mixed reviews from fans and few legacy Trek fans (whose conception of Trek comes from the different TV series) approve of the narrative and style shown in the JJ Abrams prequels. I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with telling prequel stories, the most important part is getting the ‘storytelling’ aspect right. Meaning the fundamental character of Star Trek and why people like it. If that can be done well, the aesthetics and more shallow aspects production will become acceptable.
-
The Abrams Trek films are more of a “requel” to TOS than a prequel, since most of what they show takes place in what is nominally the same era as TOS (albeit in a different version of that era) and reprises the same characters. ENT was a true prequel, as will be the new Discovery show. Though I’ve heard the interesting argument that the Abrams films are partially a reboot of TOS and partially a continuation of the overall primary Trek timeline because a character from that primary timeline (the original Spock) got looped back into the alternate timeline of the reboot films.
At any rate, I agree that the prequel concept in and of itself isn’t (for me personally) what makes me like or dislike a Trek TV series or film series. And in a sense I don’t have a particular issue with the visual style of the Abrams films in and of itself; what bothers me about those films is that they don’t have much substance or coherence to them. They not only put too much emphasis on the action-adventure elements, they also don’t seem to be overly concerned about whether the action pieces and the overall story make much sense (“Beyond” being the most glaring example of this problem in my opinion). There’s no reason why a high-octane action thriller can’t have a coherent and engaging storyline, combined with well-developed characters: the Nicholas Cage / Sean Connery film The Rock is one example of how this can be done.
Suggested Topics
