• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x06 - "Lethe"

Rate the episode...


  • Total voters
    303
Vulcan has no moon! Idiots.
Didn't get the klingons right. Didn't get that right. :guffaw:
Vulcan has no moon, but did have a number of nearby planets, most notably T'Khut, with which it shares an orbit around a common center of gravity; the two worlds were a mere 149,895.3579 kilometers apart, and T'Khut would fill the sky of the single hemisphere of Vulcan it was visible from due to the planets being tidally locked.

T'Khut itself does have a moon, called T'Rukhemai, home of the Vulcanis Lunar Colony. (TOS novel: Sarek; VOY episode: "Unimatrix Zero"; VOY novel: Pathways)

Also passing near enough in its orbit that Vulcan can be clearly seen in the sky was the icy planet Delta Vega. (TOS movie: Star Trek; TOS comic: "Nero, Number Four")
 
Talk about trek all you like, however there are dedicated areas for demonizing groups of folks you don't like. I suggest you take your hatred of Christians,Trump Supporters, or whoever else you'd like to demonize to TNZ.

Though I am not well read into the dispute you're having, as an atheist and a liberal I have to say, I am very glad little to none of that happens here, I mean I've seen some, and It really bothers me. Some people just have to bring their own politics and project their own politics in such a narrow way.

I am not saying the person to which you responded did that or not, just to piggy back off you a little, if and when it happens it's kind of obnoxious.
 
I seem to remember Janeway dressing someone down for calling her sir and demanded to be called ma'am. I thought it seemed kind of a backward sentiment but I guess they felt it would be less awkward for the series going forward.
"Despite Starfleet protocol, I don't like 'Sir'. 'Ma'am' is acceptable in a crunch, but I prefer 'captain'".

Sad that I can remember that. :rommie:
 
Though I am not well read into the dispute you're having, as an atheist and a liberal I have to say, I am very glad little to none of that happens here, I mean I've seen some, and It really bothers me. Some people just have to bring their own politics and project their own politics in such a narrow way.

I am not saying the person to which you responded did that or not, just to piggy back off you a little, if and when it happens it's kind of obnoxious.
I am referring to the last few pages of comments from @Nyotarules. Everyone has their own opinion, but this is a Star Trek discussion - maybe we can focus on that?
 
Now, I'm not a canonista, I'm fine with things mismatching as long as the story's good, but I have to admit that when that piece of the puzzle clicked into place, it was very satisfying.
For me, that was really the highlight. The rescue and the other stuff was fine and all, but fitting those pieces together was great. And, we get a little peak also into why Sarek married a human to begin with. That angle was never really explored in TOS. Instead, it seemed more like--well Spock is half-human so one of his parents has to be human. Now it's part of a larger story of how Sarek is fighting against Vulcan racists and believes that humans are equal.
 
For me, that was really the highlight. The rescue and the other stuff was fine and all, but fitting those pieces together was great. And, we get a little peak also into why Sarek married a human to begin with. That angle was never really explored in TOS. Instead, it seemed more like--well Spock is half-human so one of his parents has to be human. Now it's part of a larger story of how Sarek is fighting against Vulcan racists and believes that humans are equal.
Does he believe that humans are equal?
 
Nor everyone that belongs to a race of people are bigots, and even bigots can join a multispecies organisation. As for the USS Intrepid perhaps it was the leverage Starfleet used to get Vulcan to join or it was the only way Vulcans would allow their people to join Starfleet. Who knows, the novels do not limit all Vulcans in Starfleet to Vulcan only ships. but they are not canon.
There are probably good reasons for species-specific ships as well. Andorians like it much colder than anyone else, for instance. Vulcans find human odors offensive. Tellarites.. well.. Tellarites. For the larger member species of the UFP, species spefic ships in Starfleet might make the norm. Since we know Vulcans still have their own exploration group, (and the UESPA still exists too in TOS) it stands to reason Andorians and others still have theirs as well.

Mixed species ships may be less the norm, or else where those who are from species with only a few members in Starfleet wind up. Saru for instance, according to Desperate Hours, is possibly the only Kelpian in Starfleet.
 
Constitution Class ships are in the thick of it.

Either you get some promotions, and a transfer off the ship, or you die.

Logically, you can't get "regular" promotions on the Discovery, until all it's missions stop being highly classified. In two years Tily is going to have have had 4 field promotions from Lorca, return to the regular fleet, and they are going to have no official record of why she is still not a cadet.

Ugh. Field promotions, I get...if you're already a line officer or NCO in extremis. But a cadet? And, really, I have yet to figure out why on Earth a cadet is on a supposedly classified, experimental ship. I'm not talking about the real reason why Tilly is there--which, I presume, is to appeal to certain demographics CBS believes, rightly or wrongly, will help keep the show afloat--but the in-universe reason. If she's an uber-genius, she's certainly not demonstrating it, yet. She's no more or less intelligent than any of the other uber-geniuses we've seen thus far on the ship, which appears to be the entire compliment (arguably, minus Saru, who, whilst canny, doesn't appear to be written as overly-intelligent). She simply seems to be built from the Wesley archetype and, like the latter, gets the same kind of split-reaction from fandom. Some think she's adorkable, others think she is rather less-than-appealing, personality-wise.

During the run with Burnham, when Tilly took to lecturing her, I actually turned to my wife and said "This is probably the first time I actually felt sympathy for Burnham!" For me, at least, Tilly falls flat and until I find an in-universe reason for her existence on Discovery, I can only assume it's bad writing to put her there, combined with big data analytics from producers who feel they need to include certain archetypes to round out the cast.

Or, heck, maybe they'll kill her off later on, thus doubling down on the grimdark. Or maybe they just felt that they ran the risk of making Discovery too dark and they needed comedic relief. Hence...Tilly.
 
Off the top of my head:
Mr Robot
The Expanse
Man in the High Castle
Better Call Saul
Game of Thrones
House of Cards
Rectify
Narcos

There are many more.

When I said this day and age, I'm talking about the past 10 years so, which IMO is a new golden age of television. The shows listed above are just some of the active ones. I could start listing off Breaking Bad and others that have ended but are contemporary shows that have come out in the past 10 years.

STD's writing can't hold a candle to the well written dramas of today. Hopefully they turn things around.

TBF I think he is talking specifically about sci-fi programs still being made. With this in mind, I'd say the following are all superior to DIS:

1. Black Mirror (probably the best show on TV right now regardless of genre)
2. Stranger Things
3. The Expanse
4. Legion
5. The Gifted (I'd consider this a 7/10 show along with DIS)
 
Mr. Robot has an excellent first season. It's not Sci-Fi, but it's really fascinating. Man In The High Castle is an alternative history show where the Japanese and Nazi's won World War II. Japan controls the western half of the US, and the Nazi's control the Eastern half. It's really good setup. Very interesting.

I watched the first five episodes of Man In The High Castle and found it to a pretty uninspiring and middle of the round dystopian drama which failed to live up to the book. See 'The Handmaid's Tale' as another example of this. Mr. Robot is indeed fantastic.
 
I have to disagree here, I think the drama's of today seem to function on "lets shove as much drama on screen as we can at any one given time" and often I find the drama doesn't have room to breathe.

I happen to think, as exciting as GoT is, I don't think the drama is so well written or conceived that it's worth writing home about. I happen to think what we're getting on Discovery is more interesting.

The writing on GoT has been utterly awful for at least two seasons now. I'd much rather watch DIS.
 
As I mentioned in my episode 6 comments I was instantly suspicious as soon as Saru informed Lorca that she was actually there in person, she must have been keeping track and following Lorca using standard warp drive from the start.

Her reason for being there was bull as well, she was on a fishing expedition and I think Lorca knew that full well from the look on his face when he is told she is parked right outside.

Very unethical for a practicing Psychologist but as an Admiral on Star Trek its par for the course really as they can do pretty much whatever they want.

I liked the episode a lot because there was a complete lack of black and white from Lorca, everything he does is shades of grey and can be taken so many different ways.

Absolutely. And I hear you on Cornwell, too. I got to thinking how long she would've had to've been planning making that drive-by, what the logistics would have been, etc., and I pretty much came to the conclusion that she was on a mission from Minute One and knew what she was doing every step of the way, from the canned speech at the beginning, through the "Hey, let's talk as friends," to the faux-seduction (who was seducing whom?), to the canned speeches at the end, both in the room and as her shuttle was taking off.

Sadly, yes, par for the course for Starfleet admirals but, still, it rankles a bit.
 
She's simply not a likable character, from my perspective.

I've seen this criticism repeatedly. Maybe it has merit - after all she was raised vulcan, and her main story arc is her inability to successfully compromise between her logic based detached up bringing and the fact that she is a human with real emotions that can't be ignored. Thats her story, and its difficult to see how 'likeable' such a character can be.

Leaving this aside, where is it written that a lead has to be likeable? That hasn't been an expectation for years now. Nevermind the fact that there are a number of intentionally 'likeable' characters in the show to appease fans (Stamets and Tilly for example).
 
I've seen this criticism repeatedly. Maybe it has merit - after all she was raised vulcan, and her main story arc is her inability to successfully compromise between her logic based detached up bringing and the fact that she is a human with real emotions that can't be ignored. Thats her story, and its difficult to see how 'likeable' such a character can be.

It's basically the same description as Spock, one of the most beloved characters in television history. Michael's problem is a failure of the writing, IMO.
 
I would argue that Stamets and Tilly only became likeable in the last couple episodes, as we have seen more to their personalities than the initial impressions of snippy jerk and annoying know-it-all, respectively.

Kor
 
I think Saru subconsciously marked Burnham as a threat after the mutiny and that is why the ganglia were constantly reacting to her presence, as soon as he realised that he was the problem they didn't react any more.

Which makes me think they are not quite as independent from him and reliable as he thinks they are.

They are still most impressive as they even sensed that Burnham didn't get on the shuttle in the 3rd episode and Saru had no way of consciously knowing that, the problem is that he marked her as a threat when she wasn't one and I think he realised that at the end of the 5th episode.

The problem I see here is that the only way these threat ganglia work, barring some kind of telepathy or prescience, is if we presume they are simply a kind of hyper-pattern recognition faculty. We have our own form of that in the form of intuition. It's what powers abductive reasoning. If you figure the Kelpians are a species who've been bred and domesticated by another species, you could conceptualise their threat ganglia as something like our intuition, only dialed up to an '11.'

If that's the case, then it, like our intuition, can be fooled. After all, it is only pattern recognition and sometimes...well, a cigar is only a cigar and not a phallic symbol ;-)!

But unless the writers have it down iron-clad under which circumstances they will appear, what we'll end up with is threat ganglia being a MacGuffinesque plot device that has no rhyme or reason. Personally, I'd prefer if they don't take that route because it makes him much less interesting. I would rather they have some kind of flow chart which identifies under which conditions he'll pop off.

Which would, of course, leave open the possibility that Lorca doesn't ping Saru because, as of right now, Saru has no reason to suspect that things may be awry.

Still, from my perspective, I would like to think that the things some fans think are 'awry' are simply Lorca being a hardened commander with realistic issues instead of Hollywood's latest iteration of moustache-twirllery.
 
Stamets is the current navigator and it seems to be having affects on him, lightening him up alot it would seem. Clearly something dark will come of it if the mirror scene has anything to do with it.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top