Star Trek Discovery SUCKS.

[PussyGalore]

Ok , since the front end spins and the whole thing rolls , I want the nacels to twirl like 2 batons in a parade ...
What the hell ... Why not right ...

The spinning and gyrating of the ship is so asinine. It doesn't make sense from a physics perspective. It's not like the ship spins to create centrifugal force for artificial gravity because obviously they have that covered with a different method. So why have parts of the ship rotate at all? And the world's best inertial dampeners aren't going to be able to instantaneously and completely stop the effects of centrifugal force. Crew members wouldn't be casually walking around from section to section as the fuselage spins around them no matter how good the dampeners. There would still be a severely noticeable effect.

*I know we often suspend our disbelief when it comes to scifi shows and how they handle gravity and the physics of motion in general. But there comes a point where one can no longer turn a blind eye because the physics have become nothing more than visual shenanigans. It's intellectually insulting. But that's not surprising coming from this show.

 

[Tripler]

My daughter has been filming in 8k for a year or more now ... Agree . Why and bother if your eyes won't let you see the quality better than a 4k ...
No video quality on the planet is gonna make me want to watch S T D ,,,no where , no way , no how .
The spinning and twirling still has me laughing my ass off ... It wins a 5 Star dumbest space craft ever award .
Hold on everyone ,,,were gonna show em what we can do and spin and flip dis bitch around and around we go , were it stops , nobody want's to know ...
Please please please spin off into oblivion !!!

 

[Overmind One]

My daughter has been filming in 8k for a year or more now ... Agree . Why and bother if your eyes won't let you see the quality better than a 4k ...
No video quality on the planet is gonna make me want to watch S T D ,,,no where , no way , no how .
The spinning and twirling still has me laughing my ass off ... It wins a 5 Star dumbest space craft ever award .
Hold on everyone ,,,were gonna show em what we can do and spin and flip dis bitch around and around we go , were it stops , nobody want's to know ...
Please please please spin off into oblivion !!!

From what I understand, filming in 8K gives the video editor a lot more wiggle room if he/she wants to zoom in, enhance or otherwise manipulate the raw image. Rendering 8K video to 4K is lossless. Sorta like when you take HD photos and then print them on a printer that can only manage HD. Super sharp photos.

 

[heisenberg]

That is only true when one gets specific. Many tech advancements have made the world less pleasant and less productive. Why make cars that park themselves? Doing that removes this skill from human drivers. Cursive handwriting has been removed from school curriculum because TPTB know that computers and optical readers cannot read cursive handwriting. The Millennial generation is being crippled by tech. They are not being prepared for real life because of tech.

Because self parking cars can save money, lives and save on insurance bills? A lot of accidents happen in shopping parking lots. People make mistakes and that's the reason why automation will make things much safer than they are now. People and this includes any age group, can't drive for shit or drive so aggressively that they don't have any sense or they have this superiority complex.

Except that 8K cannot even be perceived by the human eye, and looks identical to 4K visually. Why even try and push 8K?

8k will be able to perceive with the human eye but you are thinking of small scale tvs which I agree is pointless. Large TV will take full advantage of 4k and 8k.

My point is that the younger generations are simply not as well rounded as those that came before them. A show which is based in science or philosophy is just going to give a Millennial a headache. Star Trek Discovery sucks for the same reason the Kelvin movies suck. They are empty shells of stories which look great on the outside but have nothing but stuffing on the inside.

That's not true at all. Millennial are being royally fucked by babyboomers because they can. Basically, they've pushed up property prices, increased debt to record level, making education out of reach and extremely expensive. The fact is, the media has brainwashed you to believe that the younger generations are dumber, uneducated and aren't resourceful, but then I see people like the people that whatsapp/facebook, snapchat, and all these young billionaires and millionaires who had better ideas than anyone else could have thought of, so no, this show isn't just made for the newer generations, just the idiots out there that love BSG, love Star Wars and never had a single interest in Star Trek whatsoever.

Publicity most definitely can and will hurt them! They have damaged the property permanently already. Once the Star trek fanbase dumps Star Trek for something else like The Orville, it really won't matter what CBS/Paramount does with the Star Trek license. None of the fans of the new show are going to create fan films, and they are not buying any of the merchandise for the NuTrek movies, and the conventions are just not about any of the NuTrek stuff.

How so? If they did give a shit, they wouldn't have greenlit this piece of shit. They damaged the IP by putting in restrictions so that fans can no longer create high quality products, even if they are trying not to profit from them. They've all but surely cut out competition by doing this. They are in control hence why they did this. They did not want to have any competition against Discovery but little did they know, that Seth was working on his own Star Trek. He changed it enough to keep those pesky lawyers at bay.

 

[heisenberg]

From what I understand, filming in 8K gives the video editor a lot more wiggle room if he/she wants to zoom in, enhance or otherwise manipulate the raw image. Rendering 8K video to 4K is lossless. Sorta like when you take HD photos and then print them on a printer that can only manage HD. Super sharp photos.

Have a read of this review.

8 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

Star Trek RULES

Author: leecun1701 from Canada
6 November 2017

Best Star Trek ever. I love everything about it from the new unorthodox ship to the highly flawed captain to the not even in StarFleet lead character. He visuals are great, acting is good and stories are interesting.

What I'm not impressed with are the fans. Or maybe the trolls that are on here leaving they're poorly written reviews hacking down a billion dollar franchise. I mean, can you imagine, making a TV show and expecting to make a profit? Making a show to attract new viewers?! Crazy talk.

If you don't like it fine. Don't watch. Please. If your ashamed of where the new Trek is going, don't worry. We're all ashamed of you as well.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5888594/reviews?ref_=tt_urv

 

[Tripler]

Oct 14 post but excellent funny points and observations of STD ...
http://www.pajiba.com/tv_reviews/star-trek-discovery-is-actually-getting-worse.php

 

[Overmind One]

Have a read of this review.



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5888594/reviews?ref_=tt_urv

What was the purpose of posting that shill review? Still, over at IMdB, the overwhelming majority of the "Best" reviews is still one star. When anyone goes to IMdB and does not change any of the filters, they will get more than THIRTY pages of bad reviews for Discovery. What gives? One minute, you say how you dislike the show, then next, you appear to be defending it. The review you reference has already been pushed way back to the last page where all the other shill reviews are. Here is the full user review page on that episode:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5888594/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt

The indications are that this show is extremely unpopular with Star Trek and scifi fans. I can find shill reviews too, but why would I post them here?

 

[Lord Ba'al]

There was absolutely nothing of any interest to me in episode 8.

 

[Overmind One]

Whaa...? Do you know that costs of cars only come down when they mass produced, right? If you tried to sell your car parts individually, you would make 2-3 times as much. This is regardless of how old it is. Car parts are expensive because they are build to last. If the industry was struggling, we wouldn't see car industry shipping record number of cars, and everyone joining tesla in the electric car revolution. There is a growing apetite for cars which is why Google and Apple are also joining in on it too. Oh yeah, and another thing, you can buy a very cheap car called the nano. It's absolutely disgusting and it's worth 1500 bucks but not very safe to drive.

Huh? The US auto industry has been in a decline for quite some time, and fewer cars are being sold now than any time in the past. Where are you getting the idea that there is a "growing appetite for cars"? What cars on the market for sale at car dealers are NOT mass produced?

http://fortune.com/2017/04/12/auto-industry-decline/
http://www.freep.com/story/money/ca...-sales-fall-16-march-industry-cools/99985380/
http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...ouble_and_it_could_cause_bigger_problems.html

And no, new car parts are NOT built to last. That statement only applies to cars built before 1990, and only on certain luxury vehicle makes. The parts on an old 900-series Volvo or Mercedes or even VW are much better made than the parts made for current Volvos, Mercedes and VWs. It has been said that to make a well-made car like the Volvo 900 series, the Mercedes W124 series or the VW Golf or Jetta of the 1990s would cost twice as much to make today as they did then. I see for myself how new cars fall apart.Today's cars are built to LEASE, not LAST. In the US, more than 90% of all new cars are leased. Please show me where the car industry is "shipping record numbers of cars". I just posted three links that contradict that statement. Tesla and the companies which are making small hybrids or electrics are likely to replace the US automakers in the future.

Can you please post something that backs up your claim?

Are you sure?
Right now, there is no content for 8k or 8k cameras but don't throw 8k out just yet. Technology will continue to grow. Hell, I remember a time when I said that dailup was 'good enough'. I also remember a time when I said, adsl1 was super fast.

Okay, but 8K and above TV technology is wasted because your eyes cannot perceive it. Sure, you can film in 8K, 16K or even 32K but your eyes cannot tell the difference at 8K and above. Film at 8K and above, but render at 4K. Internet speeds still have lots and lots of room to get faster, and there is no brain limitation on how fast your pages load. But your eyes cannot ever see infrared or ultraviolet or above 8K resolution.

shake my head...Have you seen the screenwriters of star trek discovery?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5171438/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast
They is only 1 that fits into your complaint department category. The series is written by older people, so again, it's not the type of people to blame.

Older or younger is irrelevant in this scenario. My statement was that these writers do not care about science. None of these writers have any science fiction under their belts, and none of them came from the original Star Trek shows. The show itself has NO science in it whatsoever. My statement:

"Star Trek Discovery is one of those shows you can easily pick apart because it is simpleminded. It lacks science because the writers lack interest in science. It lacks any relationship with any Star Trek creations made before 2009"

I stand behind that. Star Trek discovery IS simpleminded. The writers DO lack interest in real science, and this show has nothing in common with any Star Trek made before 2009.

 

[heisenberg]

What was the purpose of posting that shill review? Still, over at IMdB, the overwhelming majority of the "Best" reviews is still one star. When anyone goes to IMdB and does not change any of the filters, they will get more than THIRTY pages of bad reviews for Discovery. What gives? One minute, you say how you dislike the show, then next, you appear to be defending it. The review you reference has already been pushed way back to the last page past the first page where all the other shill reviews are. Here is the full user review page on that episode:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5888594/reviews?ref_=tt_ov_rt

The indications are that this show is extremely unpopular with Star Trek and scifi fans. I can find shill reviews too, but why would I post them here?

It was just to show you the lengths someone is going to keep this garbage a great score. Sorry for the useless post there.

 

[Overmind One]

It was just to show you the lengths someone is going to keep this garbage a great score. Sorry for the useless post there.

Okay, but it is okay to like this show! I don't like it but so what? I am just one guy. The one thing I will not argue is that this Star Trek is visually the best ever made for Star Trek TV.

 

[heisenberg]

Huh? The US auto industry has been in a decline for quite some time, and fewer cars are being sold now than any time in the past. Where are you getting the idea that there is a "growing appetite for cars"? What cars on the market for sale at car dealers are NOT mass produced?

http://fortune.com/2017/04/12/auto-industry-decline/
http://www.freep.com/story/money/ca...-sales-fall-16-march-industry-cools/99985380/
http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...ouble_and_it_could_cause_bigger_problems.html

And no, new car parts are NOT built to last. That statement only applies to cars built before 1990, and only on certain luxury vehicle makes. The parts on an old 900-series Volvo or Mercedes or even VW are much better made than the parts made for current Volvos, Mercedes and VWs. It has been said that to make a well-made car like the Volvo 900 series, the Mercedes W124 series or the VW Golf or Jetta of the 1990s would cost twice as much to make today as they did then. I see for myself how new cars fall apart.Today's cars are built to LEASE, not LAST. In the US, more than 90% of all new cars are leased. Please show me where the car industry is "shipping record numbers of cars". I just posted three links that contradict that statement. Tesla and the companies which are making small hybrids or electrics are likely to replace the US automakers in the future.

Can you please post something that backs up your claim?

Sure, I used to work in the automative industry and I know how many new loans got drafted and how many cars people bought each year. We were getting 1000s of applicants each month. Some of our clients used to buy a car and then buy the next model up. These were celebrities, CEOs/CFOs of companies.


The only reason why the US car production industry is in decline is because they are simply moving certain productions offshore to save on costs but at the sametime, a lot of the other little bits of the vehicles are still made in the USA which require highly specialized and skillful minds to craft/create and engineer delicate parts of a vehicle. Call it streamlining if you will. Though, the Tesla gigafactories is another indication that manufacturing isn't slowing down but countries are just becoming more specialized. Compared to last year, 6.1% more people bought cars compared to last year. The fact is, if people want to keep pushing the envelope, companies will need to cut costs somewhere to keep their customers happy.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/10/usa-auto-sales-brand-by-brand-results-september-2017-ytd/

Now the brand is another story because it could be down to several reasons. People not having the funds, people not interested in buying their new vehicle, people simply shifting brands, but the trajectory is up.

http://carsalesbase.com/global-car-sales-2017-q1/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/200002/international-car-sales-since-1990/

Okay, but 8K and above TV technology is wasted because your eyes cannot perceive it. Sure, you can film in 8K, 16K or even 32K but your eyes cannot tell the difference at 8K and above. Film at 8K and above, but render at 4K. Internet speeds still have lots and lots of room to get faster, and there is no brain limitation on how fast your pages load. But your eyes cannot ever see infrared or ultraviolet or above 8K resolution.

Again, we don't know until you've seen it. I was told that 1080p was the best the eye could see, but then 2k came out and then 4k. The fact is, I think putting a limit on something is quite shallow. We won't know until we see it. There will however, will be a point where it will be good enough, but that will be depended on the user itself.

Older or younger is irrelevant in this scenario. My statement was that these writers do not care about science. None of these writers have any science fiction under their belts, and none of them came from the original Star Trek shows. The show itself has NO science in it whatsoever. My statement:

"Star Trek Discovery is one of those shows you can easily pick apart because it is simpleminded. It lacks science because the writers lack interest in science. It lacks any relationship with any Star Trek creations made before 2009"

I stand behind that. Star Trek discovery IS simpleminded. The writers DO lack interest in real science, and this show has nothing in common with any Star Trek made before 2009.

We agree that Sexual Transmitted Disease does suck, and there is no science in this whatsoever, but you were blaming the birth of discovery because of the younger generation, when it's not their fault for having this piece of crap. It's the shitty writers who wanted to make a Lame of Thrones/Walking dead/BSG/Star Wars hybrid.It's the same blame game people gave when SGU came around.

 

[heisenberg]

Okay, but it is okay to like this show! I don't like it but so what? I am just one guy. The one thing I will not argue is that this Star Trek is visually the best ever made for Star Trek TV.

It's up to the individual but what gets my gears grinding is the people that defend it. Not to mention TPTB keep trying to throw these tiny easter eggs that has no relevancy to the story. These idiots who defend this piece of crap, keep bringing the canon reference.

Go to 22:51 and you'll know what I mean.

 

[Overmind One]

Sure, I used to work in the automative industry and I know how many new loans got drafted and how many cars people bought each year. We were getting 1000s of applicants each month. Some of our clients used to buy a car and then buy the next model up. These were celebrities, CEOs/CFOs of companies.

That is the luxury segment (less than 5% of all cars sold). Luxury cars were never large volume cars. I was referring to the auto industry as a whole. Less cars are being sold worldwide than ever before, and even leasing cars is declining.

The only reason why the US car production industry is in decline is because they are simply moving certain productions offshore to save on costs but at the sametime, a lot of the other little bits of the vehicles are still made in the USA which require highly specialized and skillful minds to craft/create and engineer delicate parts of a vehicle. Call it streamlining if you will. Though, the Tesla gigafactories is another indication that manufacturing isn't slowing down but countries are just becoming more specialized. Compared to last year, 6.1% more people bought cars compared to last year. The fact is, if people want to keep pushing the envelope, companies will need to cut costs somewhere to keep their customers happy.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/10/usa-auto-sales-brand-by-brand-results-september-2017-ytd/

The market is changing. Cars are too expensive for what you get, and millennials are not buying cars like the Boomers did. There is uber, bikes, walking, and choosing to work much closer to home when they can. When trying to measure the growth or shrinkage of auto sales, you can't use the luxury segments. You have to go to the middle of the market and lower.

Now the brand is another story because it could be down to several reasons. People not having the funds, people not interested in buying their new vehicle, people simply shifting brands, but the trajectory is up.

http://carsalesbase.com/global-car-sales-2017-q1/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/200002/international-car-sales-since-1990/

I agree with those articles for the most part.

Again, we don't know until you've seen it. I was told that 1080p was the best the eye could see, but then 2k came out and then 4k. The fact is, I think putting a limit on something is quite shallow. We won't know until we see it. There will however, will be a point where it will be good enough, but that will be depended on the user itself.

Well, this paragraph is a bit unrealistic. The limitation is not arbitrary, it's biological. The human eye cannot see resolutions above 8K. It has nothing to do with just saying it. It's a physical, biological limit that has nothing to do with opinions. I don't have to wait to see 8K in action cause I have already seen it at CES. It's really not any different than 4K visually. Not even close up (like less than 12" away). Limits are on things because there are limits that are inherently part of the human body. We cannot see infrared or ultraviolet. Coming out with a TV that plays in infrared is not going to make us able to see it. 8K TV will make it to market, but there is really no reason to buy one if you have 4K.

We agree that Sexual Transmitted Disease does suck, and there is no science in this whatsoever, but you were blaming the birth of discovery because of the younger generation, when it's not their fault for having this piece of crap. It's the shitty writers who wanted to make a Lame of Thrones/Walking dead/BSG/Star Wars hybrid.It's the same blame game people gave when SGU came around.

You have a good point there. It isn't their fault this show exists. But it is their fault that they are uninterested in science as a generation. The shows are being created according to metrics. The most watched shows are analyzed for why people are watching them, then newer shows imitate the popular elements. That is why Discovery's intro looks a lot like Game of Thrones.

 

[Overmind One]

Just for balance:

 

[Tripler]

Pok ,,, pok pok pok ... Cluck ...
That was my best will not come off , I mean STD Klingon

 

[Overmind One]

Pok ,,, pok pok pok ... Cluck ...
That was my best will not come off , I mean STD Klingon

They sound awful. And the subtitles do not look cool or feel cool or gritty. And they want to make the whole show about this and Mike the Insane?

 

[Tripler]

Yah , we get derailed easily but it gives us a break from std which is stress inducing and wondering why anyone would watch that crap ...

 

[Quetesh]

Fair enough, but having worked in the car business for 12 years, I find that more monotonous. LOL. No worries, I can just keep skipping over the posts.

For STD, this last episode was a smidge interesting but yet totally annoying. The magic flying dust is uber powerful but yet screwed over the crew in the end. Bleck! Best part of ep was the possible glimmering portion of a chance of a redeemable Klingon in the woman that wants revenge for the death of her loved ones. If they do kill her off instantly, it would suck. Now, all she needs to do is keep speaking English so I can stand watching the screen. I still find the death sensor to be a whiny cry baby and the spore chair machine is just ridiculous. I did not even care for the newest addition in this ep, because he seemed to now be dependent on Michael to say the day as well. He did not need her around before he met but now he is just another prop for her. Double Blech.

Can this stop being the Michael show at some point?

 

[Tripler]

Haha ... It's all about him , I mean her ... I am amazed you can stomach this show ...
I still have never seen the last 3 eps of sgpoo and will never watch this other than stuff that pops here for comedy relief ...
Keep the updates and spoilers coming ...