Star Trek Discovery

[Panther_99FS]

I totally love it!

[Penzoil3]

Oh yeah, me too! It's the only reason I subscribed to CBS all access. It's great. A biological star drive based on spores... what a notion.
LOL
sue

[Terry]

To add some balance, I found it to be horrible as were the movies by Amrams. It's not Star Trek, it's more like some childish transformers movie.

[MrZippy]

I'll watch the reruns when it dies in the first season. I'll be danged if I'm going to pay to watch something for broadcast TV. I am a Star Trek fan.
Went to the first ever convention in San Francisco 1975.

[HyFlyer]

I actually thought it was ok, even though the plotting was a bit uneven with all of those flashbacks.

What it wasn't, was ten years before Kirk and Spock. No way knowhow. Even the next generation didn't have instant galaxy wide communications and communications holographs.

And ten years before Spock and Kirk would mean that in that universe, right at that moment, Captain Pike and the Enterprise were tootling around somewhere, maybe even with Spock as first officer. What does the enterprise in this universe look like?

Nothing like the original series.........!

Prime timeline, my foot!

This is either a complete reboot, or a completely different universe.

[n4gix]

Neither did Star Trek Voyager, which was the most "far future" of the franchise!

It's got to be a different universe, or another dimension at least.

I don't have access to it here so I can't miss what I cannot see anyway.

[fallenphoenix1986]

It isn't star Trek, its Star Trek inspired fan fiction.

Personally I'd far rather have seen something pushing forward again chronologically, post Dominion War/Voyager... but no... 3 rd prequel/re-boot in a row.... yawn...

Don't even get me started on the "Klingons"

[Ivan]

The problem with doing Prequels to any Movie or TV series is that there is an established "History" that the story must tie in to at some point and not contradict. Building a story with those requirements requires A LOT of knowledge of what was in the original series and general premise and a knowledge of the "Physics" of that universe.

The folks doing Star Trek prequels do not seem to be doing what is required from the descriptions posted thus far.

- Ivan.

[Panther_99FS]

Some interesting & good comments across the board
But we have to honest here - a new show in 2017 with cardboard 1960s sets just isn't going to fly these days.

However, I will agree with some here in that "Discovery" probably fits better in the JJ Abrams "Kelvin" timeline rather than the "Canon" line...

[Chuck_Jodry-VJPL]

Beyond belief , yes , part of the TOS universe or Gene Roddenberry's vision , Not for a moment , entertaining as hell ? decidedly.

I have been an avid fan of the franchise since I saw the first series air and every iteration and film since , discovery too has its failings, I am going to enjoy having the opportunity to appreciate these as well while they develop a new universe, the past in Star Trek has a habit of getting altered, as has the future .

Will Discovery survive ? , in all probability, I ran the first three back to back on the projector with the full sound system for a cinematic experience and it held up well. An altogether darker universe, all hero's flawed, the federation at war and willing to do anything to win, the only softness seen , a recurring role for the tribble .. Nice !

Best CJ