Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x07 - "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad"

[Vger23]

You seem awfully needy of someone to make fun of.

If you take the amount of times you've needlessly inserted "...but the show just doesn't do anything for me..." or some other needless negative comment into ANY topic even remotely related to DSC, which I can only assume at this point is intended to dredge up ire and discontent because your frequency is so heavy that there is absolutely nobody who has ever opened a thread in this forum who doesn't know where you stand...and you compare that to the parodying I do of certain postings we see in this forum...I think you've got me about 2-to-1.

So let's not start hurling stones quite yet, shall we?

 

[137th Gebirg]

There has to be a degree of technobable in any futuristic sci-fi show. I think that the premise of the story is what makes or breaks the enjoyability of it. The sci-fi of the Disco's story is so far into fantasy, that there is no explanation for it. Any possible plausibility is out the window.
If the writers are willing to go this far, just to be different. Why not create a new title and leave the words star trek out of it. Then you can go full fantasy mode with no expectations whatsoever.

Well, sure. My gripe is that they always use the exact same uninventive speech pattern (or some similar variant) to deliver the technobabble. It's like when Gul Dukhat (or Gul Macet - same actor) always said, "Captain, I assure you..." and gets cut off by either Picard or Sisko mid-sentence at the exact same spot, you KNOW he's lying! If the writers must use technobabble, at least try to be innovative about its delivery in the dialog!

 

[BillJ]

If you take the amount of times you've needlessly inserted "...but the show just doesn't do anything for me..." or some other needless negative comment into ANY topic even remotely related to DSC, which I can only assume at this point is intended to dredge up ire and discontent because your frequency is so heavy that there is absolutely nobody who has ever opened a thread in this forum who doesn't know where you stand...and you compare that to the parodying I do of certain postings we see in this forum...I think you've got me about 2-to-1.

The difference? I'm talking about the show, you've decided on a holy crusade against posters you disapprove of.

What do you care what I post? There's an 'Ignore' feature if it bothers you that damn badly. Or do a better job of discussing the merits of Discovery instead of criticizing other folks posts.

Or, if criticism generally bothers you. Rip the internet connection out of your wall, flush your cell phone and go back to living in the 1970's.

 

[Vger23]

What do you care what I post? There's an 'Ignore' feature if it bothers you that damn badly. Or do a better job of discussing the merits of Discovery instead of criticizing other folks posts.

Or, if criticism generally bothers you. Rip the internet connection out of your wall, flush your cell phone and go back to living in the 1970's.

Turn it around, and fire it right back at you.

You don't like fun-poking because it hits too close to home? Hit ignore or log out. See, we can play this game all day!

It's like I've said...if the series just "doesn't do anything for you" (as we are abundantly aware) then explain why you keep watching and why you expend energy posting about things that frustrate you. If not to purposefully create conflict with a forum comprised of people who are largely in opposition to your viewpoint...then what? I think the simplest explanations are generally the truth.

No bullshit about "I'm a fan and I'm going to give it a chance" because that's crap. You don't like the show, the writing, the premise or the characters. It ain't gonna change next week, and you know it. So that's bull.

No bullshit about "I'm just expressing concerns blah blah blah mah freedom of speech it's a message board for debate" because that's also crap. You're not debating or looking for meaningful exchanges of opposed viewpoints. You're taking shots and seeing what sticks when you say "it's just not working for me, folks" every other post. What are you looking for, a mutual Support Society Of Peoples For Whom It Is Just Not Working? I think you've come to the wrong place.

Look, I'm genuinely sorry, but if you're gonna call me out for perceived shit behavior, I'm going to tell you what I think of you too. I don't hop around in the Voyager forum waving my arms like an irritant telling fans what I think of that show because it's a meaningless and ultimately damaging pursuit that's going to do nothig but piss people off and waste my time on something I don't care about.

Can you say the same? Nope.

So let's bury the crap. I'm not getting into perpetuating a pissing contest and bringing the thread down any further than I already, apologetically, have.

<hangs up>

 

[BillJ]

No bullshit about "I'm a fan and I'm going to give it a chance" because that's crap. You don't like the show, the writing, the premise or the characters. It ain't gonna change next week, and you know it. So that's bull.

I guess you missed where I complimented most of the work on the last episode? But, hey, that fucks with your whole martyr complex.

 

[Vger23]

I guess you missed where I complimented most of the work on the last episode? But, hey, that fucks with your whole martyr complex.

Since I generally avoid your postings, yes I probably missed it.

One "this was a little better, I guess" posting doesn't make you a "looking objectively at things" hero. Not by a long shot.

Again, let's cut the crap and get on with it. The argument will go nowhere. At the end of the day, you busted my balls directly. I was happily and successfully ignoring your endless rivers of excrement "I dunno guys...I'm going to watch Orville...this just isn't grabbing me." You called me out directly though, and I responded.

Now, if you don't mind, I'd like to stop this before the mods bust both our asses for being weenies about it.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Yes, and that is a huge problem with Discovery technobabble: it uses actual terms for actual known things and then gives them completely absurd, counterfactual properties.

Right. Which we know because they're alluding to real scientific concepts on the show instead of just making up sciency gibberish. If you look up terms like "pansperma" or "tardigrade" or "horizontal gene transfer" you find out that they really don't work the way in reality that they do on Star Trek. This makes them equivalent to things like lasers, plasma weapons, forcefields, antimatter, FTL travel, cloning, silicon-based life forms...

Star Trek is full of things that don't really work the way in reality that they do on the show. If you care to look them up, that is indeed what you will find (remember the deuterium refinery in Marauders? And one of the miners telling Archer "Deuterium can burn as hot as plasma when it's ignited.")

If you're gonna have 'magic tech', then better just leave it to be an unexplained black box or explain it using things with unknown properties, rather than try to use real things that we know for a fact do not work even remotely like that.

No, see, that's the trap mentioned above. Science fiction is supposed to be at least INSPIRED by actual science. The question "Could that really happen in real life?" is one you want your viewers to immediately ask themselves, knowing that one in ten of them will bother to find out and only one in fifty will actually care that the answer is "no." When you start building your storylines around bullshit-flavored word salads, however, NOBODY asks that question, because it's plainly obvious that the science in this story is completely made-up nonsense and doesn't even have a veneer of believability.

Even TOS wasn't above making things up at various points, but the things it made up SOUNDED like they could be real. Dikironium is some sort of super rare element that only forms in cloud creatures... okay, cool. Tritanium? Kinda like Titanium, only harder. Cool. Pergium? Like Uranium, only way more nuclear. Okay, got it. Cast Rhodinium... okay, I'm not a materials science and I'm pretty sure there are WAY harder substances than Rhodinium, but Spock says "This is the hardest substance known to our science." Point taken.

 

[Jack Watkins]

Look! I pulled a Harry Mudd out of my hat!

My review of the episode. Mixed feelings, but liked it overall.

https://earnestnotions.wordpress.co...very-magic-to-make-the-sanest-man-go-mad/amp/

 

[Crazy Eddie]

How does multidimensional fungi allow starship sized objects rapid transition between twon points in our universe?

With SCIENCE!

What does the fungi use for energy?

SCIENCE!

Where do ther waste products go?

Wisconsin!

Kill the entire network and the transport conducts are gone?

Um... yes? Probably.
Holy shit, I never actually thought of that. It's a huge multi-dimensional fungus, so KILLING the fungus with some kind of subspace defoliant would probably render the spore drive useless.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Should have worked "Mudd" into the title...

"Mudd to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad"

"Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mudd"

"Magic to Make the Sanest Mudd Go Mad"

Mudd to Magic the Sanest Mad go Man
Man to Mudd the Sanest Mudd go Magic
Magic to Mudd the Maddest Man go Sane
Mudd to Sane the Magic Man go Mad

Stick in the Mudd

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Kill the entire network and the transport conducts are gone?

Um... yes? Probably.
Holy shit, I never actually thought of that. It's a huge multi-dimensional fungus, so KILLING the fungus with some kind of subspace defoliant would probably render the spore drive useless.

I've been thinking that's exactly what might happen by DSC's conclusion, ever since they "explained" how the spore drive worked! Or maybe they'll have to stop using it in order to prevent killing the fungus entirely. (Or themselves, if we later find out there are cumulative deleterious effects to the crew.)

 

[jaime]

With SCIENCE!


SCIENCE!

Wisconsin!


Um... yes? Probably.
Holy shit, I never actually thought of that. It's a huge multi-dimensional fungus, so KILLING the fungus with some kind of subspace defoliant would probably render the spore drive useless.

Unless it turns out to be sentient as is therefor protected, or it does a VGer with Stamets.
Both of which, along with the option of destruction you mentioned, are likely contenders for a finale.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

^ Yeah. The problem with a networked multi-dimensional fungus is that you can probably wipe out the whole species just by causing a large enough trauma to any one part of it. It probably would have to be something really specific... either some sort of biological contaminent or a burst of subspace energy that can propagate across the entire network. Of course, this would also have some potentially scary implications for the cohesion of the galaxy as a whole since the mycelium network is supposedly the "veins and capilaries of the galaxy" but I'm sure Trek Science will find a solution to that just in time to save the day...

Unless it turns out to be sentient as is therefor protected, or it does a VGer with Stamets.
Both of which, along with the option of destruction you mentioned, are likely contenders for a finale.

DUDE!

 

[Longinus]

Right. Which we know because they're alluding to real scientific concepts on the show instead of just making up sciency gibberish. If you look up terms like "pansperma" or "tardigrade" or "horizontal gene transfer" you find out that they really don't work the way in reality that they do on Star Trek. This makes them equivalent to things like lasers, plasma weapons, forcefields, antimatter, FTL travel, cloning, silicon-based life forms...

Star Trek is full of things that don't really work the way in reality that they do on the show. If you care to look them up, that is indeed what you will find (remember the deuterium refinery in Marauders? And one of the miners telling Archer "Deuterium can burn as hot as plasma when it's ignited.")

So first your point was 'Discovery's way of doing technobabble is better than in the previous shows' and when I criticised Discovery method of technobabble your answer is 'but the other shows did that too!" So which is it?

Also in Voyager deuterium was suddenly a super rare thing that needed to be mined. And that was painfully stupid. That is exactly the sort of thing that shouldn't happen.

No, see, that's the trap mentioned above. Science fiction is supposed to be at least INSPIRED by actual science. The question "Could that really happen in real life?" is one you want your viewers to immediately ask themselves, knowing that one in ten of them will bother to find out and only one in fifty will actually care that the answer is "no." When you start building your storylines around bullshit-flavored word salads, however, NOBODY asks that question, because it's plainly obvious that the science in this story is completely made-up nonsense and doesn't even have a veneer of believability.

But the science in Discovery is blatantly completely made-up nonsense and doesn't even have a veneer of believability. It is not in any meaningful sense 'based on real science.' Using real 'science words' all wrong is not basing it on science.

Even TOS wasn't above making things up at various points, but the things it made up SOUNDED like they could be real. Dikironium is some sort of super rare element that only forms in cloud creatures... okay, cool. Tritanium? Kinda like Titanium, only harder. Cool. Pergium? Like Uranium, only way more nuclear. Okay, got it. Cast Rhodinium... okay, I'm not a materials science and I'm pretty sure there are WAY harder substances than Rhodinium, but Spock says "This is the hardest substance known to our science." Point taken.

Right, so they realised that using real terms and giving them fantastic properties would be a bad idea. That's why they changed lithium to dilithium and lasers to phasers.

 

[Longinus]

^ Yeah. The problem with a networked multi-dimensional fungus is that you can probably wipe out the whole species just by causing a large enough trauma to any one part of it. It probably would have to be something really specific... either some sort of biological contaminent or a burst of subspace energy that can propagate across the entire network. Of course, this would also have some potentially scary implications for the cohesion of the galaxy as a whole since the mycelium network is supposedly the "veins and capilaries of the galaxy" but I'm sure Trek Science will find a solution to that just in time to save the day...

Idea that you could destroy a galaxy spanning network of matter which probably has more mass than the rest of the universe is completely absurd.

 

[jaime]

Idea that you could destroy a galaxy spanning network of matter which probably has more mass than the rest of the universe is completely absurd.

It’s not in the universe though is it...it’s on a different layer...it’s also some form of giant biological organism. You can kill it. Which is functionally the same as outright destroying it. Otherwise we shouldn’t worry bout forests, rainforests, coral reefs...these are all huge biospheres or organisms, and all are capable of being destroyed.
It may seem ridiculous...but only about as ridiculous as it’s existence in the first place basically. If you can accept it can exist, logically, it’s non-existence and destruction must also be accepted as possible. Trek nearly wiped out the whole galaxy at least once after all.

Heck. Maybe Stamets and his Dentist partner pull a Decker and Ilia, become one with the portobellos and become the Q continuum...but ultimately, the iconian mushrooms have to become a non issue by the end of the series if it’s in continuity...and possibly even if it’s a reboot.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I'm not sure leaving Mudd with Stella is much of a punishment.

Look closely at the scene where Stella confronts Harry in the transporter room. Sure, she's all smiles and all that, but when Harry babbles that he can't explain why he's done what he's done, check it out: Stella (very briefly) gets VERY cold-bloodedly badass and grabs his shirt and says "TRY."

 

[GeekUSACarl]

Look closely at the scene where Stella confronts Harry in the transporter room. Sure, she's all smiles and all that, but when Harry babbles that he can't explain why he's done what he's done, check it out: Stella (very briefly) gets VERY cold-bloodedly badass and grabs his shirt and says "TRY."

To add,

He was running from her, running to the federation. He is clearly more afraid of her than the federation, must be a reason.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

IMHO, Harry is afraid of Stella because she represents the one thing he doesn't want: a stable and legitimate home life. With her, he can't be the greedy, amoral, borderline sociopathic piece of whale shit he longs to be.

 

[matthunter]

A disturbing thought.

Assuming Tyler isn't Voq, and thus his backstory is real... he's being portrayed as ready and willing to jump into a physical relationship with Burnham very, very soon after suffering repeated rapes by L'Rell. It seems like he would shy away from such contact for a while, although I'm prepared to be proven wrong - perhaps he desperately wants to feel a normal relationship again? But it does seem a bit abrupt and a bit of a double standard - if Tyler were a female character, I doubt the show would have her seeking sex so soon after her abuse, even if it otherwise glossed over the trauma itself.

In either event, if Tyler IS genuine it would be nice to see more than the typical TV show treatment of rape (i.e. cathartic beating of his abuser and he's right as rain). The Weinstein stuff and Rapp's revelations show this is a problem we often gloss over on TV, in both female and male cases.