Author Topic: Star Trek Discovery  (Read 35167 times)

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #160 on: 10/16/2017 09:10 PM »
So, anyone got any thoughts about the last few seconds of Ep 5?

You mean the fact that (spoilers--although not really), for the first time in Trek, we have an openly gay couple?

Trek's pretty late to the party. Other science fiction shows did that quite awhile ago.

But rarely with men.

And they've often lacked the courage of their convictions. Babylon-5 in the 1990s (briefly) had a gay character. Caprica and Battlestar Galactica also did it. Trek did not want the controversy (look up what George Takei has written about his conversation with Gene Roddenberry about that).* But we're now at a point where it's no BFD. Society has moved on.


*You could actually write a book about how Trek has tackled some tough social issues and then run away from others. (The best example of the former is the Kirk-Uhura kiss.) It's always been a business, and they avoided certain issues because they didn't want TV stations refusing to air certain episodes.

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2025
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 145
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #161 on: 10/16/2017 09:13 PM »

2-Go look up the tweet from Jonathan Frakes a few weeks ago.


Oh crap :(
« Last Edit: 10/16/2017 09:13 PM by nacnud »

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7000
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 555
  • Likes Given: 643
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #162 on: 10/16/2017 09:25 PM »
What I was hinting about above was that Paul Stamets reflection in the mirror is no longer in sync with him. I hope this isn't some reference to the 'mirror universe' of past treks.

Given that the Spore Drive apparently works on a quantum level, it's possible that, Stamets is beginning to suffer from some kind of 'uncertainty drag' with other possible states begin to manifest. Purest Trek technobabble, I know.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Thorny

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 647
  • San Angelo, Texas
  • Liked: 107
  • Likes Given: 93
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #163 on: 10/16/2017 09:40 PM »
You do realize you're not making the case you think you're making, right?

Doesn't 'male privilege' imply only men? There were five names on Saru's list, one a woman. And this was supposed to be 'the best Captains in Starfleet history' or words to that effect. I guess I'm just missing the point of IO9's slam. On the one hand, they're arguing that Discovery isn't adhering to Trek standards (complaining about Lorca's less than ideal morals), but on the other they're complaining that Starfleet Captains are all men (something that was true of Trek all the way to 1986's Star Trek IV) while at the same time showing a screen-cap display that shows one woman on the list (and she is from this very series.)

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #164 on: 10/16/2017 10:54 PM »
Doesn't 'male privilege' imply only men? There were five names on Saru's list, one a woman. And this was supposed to be 'the best Captains in Starfleet history' or words to that effect. I guess I'm just missing the point of IO9's slam.

Their point was:

1-it's the future (and Star Trek)
2-80% of the names on that list are male
3-doesn't seem very balanced



Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2025
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 145
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #165 on: 10/17/2017 12:20 AM »
So Tyler is Voq, right?

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #166 on: 10/17/2017 12:43 AM »
So Tyler is Voq, right?

I dunno if he's Voq, but almost from the first time he spoke I thought "He's a spy." They just introduced him too blatantly--put him in, team him up with the captain, have the captain escape with his help. And rather obviously, the female Klingon commander does not get vaporized by the captain, unlike every other Klingon he shoots with the rifle. It just struck me as lazy writing, like TV shows where the bad guy always escapes at the end of the episode even though the good guy could have just SHOT HIM.

Offline nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2025
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 145
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #167 on: 10/17/2017 01:01 AM »
I thought Lorca shot L’Rell in the eyes on purpose for the way she tortured him. Did we find out how exactly he damaged his eyes in the first place?

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1061
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1271
  • Likes Given: 3313
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #168 on: 10/17/2017 01:02 AM »
In all honesty, I don't understand why they are combining this series and the name Star Trek. Well, other than trying to milk the brand.

Exactly same stories without the twisted version of Star Trek universe they're building here would probably be a fine show.

But Star Trek it ain't.
I disagree. It's going to be the story of how the Federation survives through a dark time.  It's not like all of the history leading up to TOS was humans being perfect. Lorca is a war monger, no two ways about it. Burnham has seen slaughter at the hands of the Klingons which may or may not be a blind spot. In just this episode several characters struggle with ethical issues and choose to (eventually) take the high road.

Modern TV is not "bottle episodes" [*] so the story will unfold over time and with the characters actually growing. And if the writers do their job, this series will lead to a Federation committed to Kirk and friends galavanting around the galaxy on an actual voyage of discovery.

* I loved TNG but it gets really annoying that virtually no episode affects any other episode.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #169 on: 10/17/2017 03:06 AM »
I thought Lorca shot L’Rell in the eyes on purpose for the way she tortured him. Did we find out how exactly he damaged his eyes in the first place?

My point is that "the bad guy escapes at the end of the episode" is cliched television writing. In order for it not to be a cliche, it would have been nice to see a major character simply killed off suddenly. That's what they did with the beginning of the show, setting it up on the Shenzhou only to blow up that ship and most of the characters, including the captain. I was disappointed that this episode had that cliche in it.

We have not been told how he damaged his eyes, but it seems to me like a somewhat dumb plot point. Does it serve a larger storytelling purpose? And we've already been told that he could get them fixed but has not done so, which makes him seem rather stupid.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #170 on: 10/17/2017 03:12 AM »
* I loved TNG but it gets really annoying that virtually no episode affects any other episode.

Yeah, I'm with you. And at times they could be really blind to their own potential. For instance, "The Inner Light" is widely regarded as one of the series' best episodes. It's the one where Picard is taken over by an alien probe and lives almost an entire life on the doomed planet, where he has a wife and children and a family. It's a beautiful story and should have profoundly affected him. But except for one or two later episodes where he is seen with the flute from that story, they just dropped it. It would have been more powerful if at times he referred to his "family," and his crewmembers reacted to that (either disturbed, or supportive, because it was real to him). Later, Star Trek Generations had the opportunity to include that in the story line and just ignored it completely.

I just chalk this up to the fact that television was mostly written differently those days, and the idea of story arcs that lasted entire seasons, and characters who changed substantially over time, just was not common. Also, TNG was syndicated, and individual stations wanted to be able to show episodes in any order, not in a specific order, and that drove the writing.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #171 on: 10/17/2017 03:22 AM »
I disagree. It's going to be the story of how the Federation survives through a dark time.  It's not like all of the history leading up to TOS was humans being perfect. Lorca is a war monger, no two ways about it. Burnham has seen slaughter at the hands of the Klingons which may or may not be a blind spot. In just this episode several characters struggle with ethical issues and choose to (eventually) take the high road.

The writers have already established one theme that existed as subtext in a lot of early Trek: the military mission of Starfleet vs. the scientific and exploration goals.

I can enjoy the current series for what it is, but I do think it is lacking some of the things that made Star Trek unique compared to many other science fiction shows: its optimism and its belief in a set of values like strength through diversity, and conflict resolution.

Right now the show is dark. Star Trek occasionally did go dark. But it went dark, it didn't start dark. Maybe we'll see the show eventually end up with the values that we recognize in Star Trek. And maybe that's why the writers set the show at this point in time, because they wanted to show how things were in the before time.

The protagonist is Burnham, and obviously she's supposed to have the key story arc in the show. But I find myself agreeing with the io9 article: "Burnham’s only defining characteristic continues to be “I do what I want,” and it’s unappealing. She learns every week to not do it, and then she’s right back there the next week."

I agree with that. Maybe we need to keep a running count of how many times Burnham disobeys orders. And she keeps getting away with doing that. It's not really an arc, it's Groundhog Day. 
« Last Edit: 10/17/2017 03:23 AM by Blackstar »

Offline Steve G

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 140
  • Edmonton, AB
    • Stephen H Garrity
  • Liked: 44
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #172 on: 10/17/2017 12:51 PM »
I remember watching the original series when the episodes were first aired. I can remember the time and place I watched my favourite episode "The Doomsday Machine". All I can say is that Discovery IS NOT STAR TREK. It's good science fiction, but re-inventing the entire Star Trek universe is sacrilege.  All I can say is this is FAKE Star Trek. I much prefer The Orville simply because it's fun and lacks the ego or taking it too seriously as Discovery.

They should just have Michael get smashed in the head, wake up, and this has all been a dream, and return to the real Star Trek universe. Other than that, I hope it dies. You don't abandon Star Trek fans without a price.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8031
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 2220
  • Likes Given: 5203
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #173 on: 10/17/2017 01:46 PM »
I disagree. It's going to be the story of how the Federation survives through a dark time.  It's not like all of the history leading up to TOS was humans being perfect. Lorca is a war monger, no two ways about it. Burnham has seen slaughter at the hands of the Klingons which may or may not be a blind spot. In just this episode several characters struggle with ethical issues and choose to (eventually) take the high road.

The writers have already established one theme that existed as subtext in a lot of early Trek: the military mission of Starfleet vs. the scientific and exploration goals.

I can enjoy the current series for what it is, but I do think it is lacking some of the things that made Star Trek unique compared to many other science fiction shows: its optimism and its belief in a set of values like strength through diversity, and conflict resolution.

Right now the show is dark. Star Trek occasionally did go dark. But it went dark, it didn't start dark. Maybe we'll see the show eventually end up with the values that we recognize in Star Trek. And maybe that's why the writers set the show at this point in time, because they wanted to show how things were in the before time.

The protagonist is Burnham, and obviously she's supposed to have the key story arc in the show. But I find myself agreeing with the io9 article: "Burnham’s only defining characteristic continues to be “I do what I want,” and it’s unappealing. She learns every week to not do it, and then she’s right back there the next week."

I agree with that. Maybe we need to keep a running count of how many times Burnham disobeys orders. And she keeps getting away with doing that. It's not really an arc, it's Groundhog Day. 
I guess she is supposed to be the "female version" of Kirk...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob, Physics instructor, aviator, vintage auto racer

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #174 on: 10/17/2017 02:49 PM »
They should just have Michael get smashed in the head, wake up, and this has all been a dream, and return to the real Star Trek universe.

She opens her eyes and sees a Klingon standing over her, and he looks like this:


Offline Firehawk153

  • Member
  • Posts: 70
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #175 on: 10/17/2017 03:32 PM »
They should just have Michael get smashed in the head, wake up, and this has all been a dream, and return to the real Star Trek universe.

She opens her eyes and sees a Klingon standing over her, and he looks like this:



And he is NOT a merry man...

Offline mme

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1061
  • Santa Barbara, CA, USA, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Virgo Supercluster
  • Liked: 1271
  • Likes Given: 3313
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #176 on: 10/17/2017 06:02 PM »
...

The protagonist is Burnham, and obviously she's supposed to have the key story arc in the show. But I find myself agreeing with the io9 article: "Burnham’s only defining characteristic continues to be “I do what I want,” and it’s unappealing. She learns every week to not do it, and then she’s right back there the next week."

I agree with that. Maybe we need to keep a running count of how many times Burnham disobeys orders. And she keeps getting away with doing that. It's not really an arc, it's Groundhog Day. 
Yeah. From the beginning of episode one it almost seems like she has a death wish and/or can't conceive of any impulse of her's being suboptimal. But being a human trying to be a Vulcan can't be easy. I think the writer's are just trying too hard. Hopefully they'll settle down.
Space is not Highlander.  There can, and will, be more than one.

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 874
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 263
  • Likes Given: 311
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #177 on: 10/17/2017 06:12 PM »
Oh, like Kirk.

Sorry, but it seems very Trek like for "I know better" to be the reason why the episode occurs.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10992
  • Liked: 2460
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #178 on: 10/17/2017 06:42 PM »
Yeah. From the beginning of episode one it almost seems like she has a death wish and/or can't conceive of any impulse of her's being suboptimal. But being a human trying to be a Vulcan can't be easy. I think the writer's are just trying too hard. Hopefully they'll settle down.

We all forget that many shows take a season or two to figure things out. TNG had two lousy seasons before it started to get good. DS9 had a weak first season and took awhile to find its groove.

I do think there are some writing flaws in the show, including Burnham. One of the problems I have with her is that she's not internally consistent. We're led to believe that one of her strengths is that she was raised and educated on Vulcan. And yet she's incredibly impulsive, even more so than the other human characters. It just isn't consistent.


Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7000
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 555
  • Likes Given: 643
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #179 on: 10/17/2017 09:32 PM »
Burnham is toeing the line dividing her from being a Mary Sue and an Author's Pet. We're told that she's this genius of an officer, probably the best and the brightest of the best and the brightest. However, we, as the audience, are asked to take this on faith as we have had very little actual proof of this presented to us except affirmations from other characters.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Tags: