Discovery tackles current political divide

[cultcross]

Here's something I'd not like to see on Discovery. When one of our crew members goes off all crazy and breaks all the rules and ignores the chain of command and ethics and everything they allegedly stand for, but in the end they turn out to be right, so they don't even get a slap on the wrist. Can you tell I've been rewatching TNG? Nearly every character should have been fired at least once. So in short, I'd like:
1) Discovery to challenge the idea that ethics is based on the right outcome - the end justifies the means. Maybe this is what Starfleet believes, but I think it bears exploring. Does Starfleet evaluate decisions on outcome, or method? Is it OK to break the rules as long as you turn out to be right? What if you follow the rules and are wrong?
2) Discovery to give our characters consequences to deal with when they make big decisions. Seems like Burnham will get some consequences in the pilot - this is actually my favourite thing about what we know of it so far. Long may this continue.

 

[Refuge]

Here's something I'd not like to see on Discovery. When one of our crew members goes off all crazy and breaks all the rules and ignores the chain of command and ethics and everything they allegedly stand for, but in the end they turn out to be right, so they don't even get a slap on the wrist. Can you tell I've been rewatching TNG? Nearly every character should have been fired at least once. So in short, I'd like:
1) Discovery to challenge the idea that ethics is based on the right outcome - the end justifies the means. Maybe this is what Starfleet believes, but I think it bears exploring. Does Starfleet evaluate decisions on outcome, or method? Is it OK to break the rules as long as you turn out to be right? What if you follow the rules and are wrong?
2) Discovery to give our characters consequences to deal with when they make big decisions. Seems like Burnham will get some consequences in the pilot - this is actually my favourite thing about what we know of it so far. Long may this continue.

Often an ethical choice still has a cost. Example, the life that is killed in battle/war has still been taken. A different life sacrificed in times of 'peace' because that peace enabled a dictator to continue killing a citizen for example, is still a life lost. Not doing something has consequences as well and I'm not so sure the high moral ground is in turning a blind eye to reality. That is where characters might disregard the Prime Directive. The end not so much justifying the means but having chosen a different end.

I would like consequences too for not following the chain of command and ethics. Pre- Prime Directive but nevertheless along its lines. If the rules cannot be upheld maybe they are not working, not the right rules.

 

[Kor]

Let's hope that any potential commentary does not get in the way of entertaining storytelling.

As the writer's guide for TOS said:

Then, with that firm foundation established, interweave in it any statement to be made about man,
society and so on. Yes, we want you to have something to say, but say it entertainingly as you do on any other show. We don't need essays, however brilliant.

The "firm foundation" was entertainment value through solid storytelling about people. Commentary should take a back seat to that, rather than being the very basis in and of itself.

Kor

 

[Jayson1]

One thing I am hoping for and I'm on the fence about if we will get it is witty banter. I love banter instead of characters just exchanging information. I love shows when the dialogue is one of the main attractions. I think that is why I am such a huge fan of Whedon,Tarantino and Aaron Sorkin.

Which reminds me that if the show could touch modern day issue in a Aaron Sorkin way it would be awesome. He is one of the few writers who can be kind of preachy but still make it interesting. It would be nice if liberal idea's were presented in a cool way. Also humor and tons of humor. Trek needs that just as much if not more than it even needs gritty darkness.

Jason

 

[Refuge]

Let's hope that any potential commentary does not get in the way of entertaining storytelling.

As the writer's guide for TOS said:


The "firm foundation" was entertainment value through solid storytelling about people. Commentary should take a back seat to that, rather than being the very basis in and of itself.

Kor

Maybe they should leave current politics out then..

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Maybe they should leave current politics out then.

Then it's not Star Trek. I'm not saying every moment has to be dedicated to an allegory on current events and social commentary; there's plenty of room for general action/adventure plots, but an essential part of the Star Trek formula from the beginning has been holding up a mirror on our present day issues from the perspective of a society that has resolved or largely mitigated those issues.

 

[Refuge]

Then it's not Star Trek.

True, we do have some pretty easy targets to turn into over the top characters currently.. be hard to make them look any crazier.

 

[Zeppster]

US is a political party system that is mostly homogenized with very little difference between the 2 political parties. Trump is essentially doing the same things Obama did just like Obama essentially ran a similar government as Bush did etc. I've seen very little political difference between parties in my 34 years of life. I'm not a republican or a democrat for that reason. It's all rhetorical and media driven.

Most people don't care for politics or don't associate with others for political reasons. I've got friends on all political spectrum and guess what it never really comes up or if it does we end up agreeing government is fucked up and needs to get out of our lives. Doesn't matter if you are liberal or conservative anymore. To me you are just going to isolate fans from watching it already as is. With putting it on a pay service it'll isolate fans already. This show is already isolating itself from as many fans as possible now it's trying to isolate even more? Doesn't really make sense. Seems like it only wants a small amount of viewers as possible.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Yeah...

No.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Trump is essentially doing the same things Obama did

What the...?!!!

 

[Jayson1]

US is a political party system that is mostly homogenized with very little difference between the 2 political parties. Trump is essentially doing the same things Obama did just like Obama essentially ran a similar government as Bush did etc. I've seen very little political difference between parties in my 34 years of life. I'm not a republican or a democrat for that reason. It's all rhetorical and media driven.

Most people don't care for politics or don't associate with others for political reasons. I've got friends on all political spectrum and guess what it never really comes up or if it does we end up agreeing government is fucked up and needs to get out of our lives. Doesn't matter if you are liberal or conservative anymore. To me you are just going to isolate fans from watching it already as is. With putting it on a pay service it'll isolate fans already. This show is already isolating itself from as many fans as possible now it's trying to isolate even more? Doesn't really make sense. Seems like it only wants a small amount of viewers as possible.

Even if you agree that Bush and Obama ran a similar government I don't see how anyone can see Trump as, business as usual. They guy is a traitor who sold America to Russia, embraces Nazi's and other world dictators while using the entire presidency to make money for himself. He truly is the worst we have seen in a very,very long time.

Jason

 

[Tomalak]

But her emails...

 

[Galaxy]

1) Discovery to challenge the idea that ethics is based on the right outcome - the end justifies the means. Maybe this is what Starfleet believes, but I think it bears exploring. Does Starfleet evaluate decisions on outcome, or method? Is it OK to break the rules as long as you turn out to be right? What if you follow the rules and are wrong?

I would not say that Federation ethics is based solely on the right outcome. The Prime Direction in a situation like TNG: Homeward is, imo, immoral from an outcome pov. Obviously they only cared about method at least in this case.

For the record, I do agree with the Prime Directive in general, and also believe that a civilization that is on the verge of exterminating itself should be left to do so, but watching a civilization get wiped out by natural phenomena, well that crosses a border for me.

 

[Jayson1]

But her emails...

I don't think anyone cares or ever cared about her emails just like nobody cared about Bengazi because none of those things have anything to do with them. Republicans hate her because she is to liberal for them and liberals who hate her ,hate her because she isn't liberal enough.

Since none of those 2 issues had anything to do with the economy,health care,equality or sex I doubt people really gave a dam after the first week even if the media and politicans carried on as if anyone was still invested in the stories. Even if one was sort of military./terrorist oriented I think that stuff fades from our attention pretty quickly nowdays,probably because we seem to have given into the idea of endless war and the normal way to live.

Even when Comey talked about the investigation that didn't even make people care about the emails. That story was about Comey and his motives and people wondering how it would effect the election which seems silly because if the story had been about a more popular person running for office and they were found guilty it wouldn't change peoples views anyone than Trump's endless crimes seemed to matter or the sex stuff with Bill CLinton or Obama being black in a country were racism is still a huge problem. People will forgive or overlook any issues if they like them and believe they will try and help them with their problems.

Jason

 

[Zeppster]

Even if you agree that Bush and Obama ran a similar government I don't see how anyone can see Trump as, business as usual. They guy is a traitor who sold America to Russia, embraces Nazi's and other world dictators while using the entire presidency to make money for himself. He truly is the worst we have seen in a very,very long time.

Jason

Not really. He's been more anti russia in his policies than even Obama was. Remember Obama ripped Romney a new one for being anti Russia and was correct. But we are probably even more tense in our relations with Russia under Trump than we were under Obama so far. We'll see how it goes. I do like we've seen Trump back down on Syria because fact is we would be supporting terrorist otherwise. We still support a terrorist nation in Saudi Arabia which is a disgrace. And we still are at war in Afghanistan for no real reason. Most of our foreign policy is business as usual.

Trump's domestic policy is mostly business as usual as well. Trump ran on a center left platform and is really running it like a center leftest.

But all this doesn't really matter. It's not the real issue in Discovery. Discovery is buying into political hype like you do and putting up false narratives and will probably isolate it's fan base further on an already isolated platform.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Guys, let's stick to discussing what part current politics will play in DSC rather than just discussing current politics by themselves.

 

[Noname Given]

I see it playing out the same as well and isn't that part of the problem? If we can predict how things play out then won't that hurt the quality of the show? I want the show to be unpredictable and that is something that I gets lost sometimes when a show is trying to send a message. I like it when a show trusts the audience to already know the issue's and simply tries to use it for drama instead of trying to teach people something they most likely already know. I also love it when they surprise you so maybe in this show the character that is sort of like Donald Trump ends up being the hero or maybe you flip the switch and Georgiou becomes more hawkish and Lorca starts to see armed conflict as a bad idea. Heck I wouldn't even mind if the klingons kill everyone except for Burnham and season 2 is her living with the Klingons or who knows what they could do if they are willing to take chances and really try new things.

Jason

Will it hurt the show? Doubtful. If that were the case Cop show procedural shows should be dead and buried as you can usually predict the ending. It's how the story of and journey of the characters in the story that will make or break ST: D season one.

 

[Zeppster]

Will it hurt the show? Doubtful. If that were the case Cop show procedural shows should be dead and buried as you can usually predict the ending. It how the story of and journey of the characters in the story that will make or break ST: D season one.

Biggest problem with STD is it won't be watched by most of it's fans on an actual network.

 

[Kemaiku]

Fans never entered into this, people did, audiences, television. Nerds are no longer vogue.

 

[Jayson1]

Will it hurt the show? Doubtful. If that were the case Cop show procedural shows should be dead and buried as you can usually predict the ending. It how the story of and journey of the characters in the story that will make or break ST: D season one.

I'm not a fan of procedural shows so I hope it ends up much better than those type of shows. If the show doesn't take the big risks I would much rather it at least be at the level of DS9. I do wonder if people might have some unrealistic expectations for it. I think some people are thinking it's going to be cable tv level of quality and I still have my doubts CBS is ready to do that. Can a show be both overated and underated at the same time? If the show isn't a masterpeace many will claim it sucks and it was all because it didn't follow canon and if it's just okay how many will claim it's great and makes all other Trek look inferior.?

Jason