The age of the antihero

[Refuge]

We've been friends and have had disagreements.. but this show just seems to foster an attitude of, if you don't like it, then tough, sod off. You're wrong, and we don't need you anyway.. how adult is that?? It also translates now to how we as fans react to one another in discussion. Not healthy at all.

There is a lot of that going on.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Oh Please.. The show is already in live action, how much more real do you need to get? I mean, come on.. the hangups and the drama between characters is a non-stop argument and Bitch fest. It's not fun to watch, in fact It is kinda like watching those talking heads going back and forth on network and cable news. I watch Science fiction because I like the genre, I watch Star Trek to get away from everyday political B.S. the show itself is a frickin disaster as it is serving only to push a political point of view.. let me give you an example..

Science fiction author Anthony Ha agrees, noting that Star Trek has always had a political agenda. He says it was odd to see people complaining about the Discovery actors ‘politicizing’ Star Trek by expressing solidarity with protesting NFL players. “Look, if you disagree with that—well, you’re wrong there too, but at least that’s a position you can take,” he says. “But if you’re saying ‘Star Trek should not be political,’ that is a completely invalid and dumb position.”

the statement above just shows why it's a turn off, if you're going to tell people they are wrong because of a political disagreement, then you're obviously pushing an agenda in the show, and no one wants to sit thru that preachy crud while trying to escape from the hum drum of everyday life (unless of course you believe the politics reflects your attitudes, then I'm sure you don't mind). Politics of the day to day trend should not be a factor in a universe and setting that is for pure entertainment and escapism. To turn a TV series into a Social Justice activist propaganda piece is just the right formula for Star Trek hate to ensue.. Why not make the show for everyone, instead of the old tired cliche' of this show is for us, not "Those People".. how very sick and sad is that, not to mention divisive!

Go back thru this thread and you'll see it cropping up all over the place. If they wanted a show everyone could get on board with, and yet still have minor disagreements, then they have done the opposite. Think about how many arguments over this program seem to always flow back to a political POV, and divides people as fans. It's not a healthy way to bring a show out that could become a great thing.. it's tainted the waters and caused a lot of hangups, not to mention the ability to shut down a fan who doesn't like something by implying their true feelings lie else where.

This is echoed by the recent article which is asking the question as to why all the Discovery Hate?
https://www.wired.com/2017/12/geeks-guide-star-trek-discovery/
It's got to be something, otherwise why would articles like this start coming out? I think there's a lot that can be fixed, but it's kinda late for that now, they obviously don't care about fan detractors, and doing stuff like stating the Klingons represent President Trump supporters as Bigots, Racists, and Protectionist Xenophobes, they really aren't making a good case for the show, why alienate half the audience with stupid politics. Not EVERYTHING has to reflect the current environment, it's a damn TV series for God's sake, why go there at all. I watch to escape that stuff, not get preached to about it in coded presentation. To a certain extent the classic and TNG series did it, but always in universe, and always in a veiled way, only lightly touching on it, not making it a focus.

The worst part is, the Characters are unlikeable, and when you complain about that, you're immediately suspect, and considered one of the "those People" masses and ignored. it's a frightening time to be a fan of anything unless you go with the flow and accept all that is being done. If not, you must be a troll, or one of the "despised". it doesn't matter the disagreement.. Anything you come up with that you don't like seems to always flow back to some stupid Political back and forth. if they kept their mouth's shut and just wrote and acted in a professional manner, maybe the show would have more supporters then they seem to be losing.

That's quite an epic rant there, but as far as "alienating half the audience with stupid politics" goes, DSC is actually one of the very few shows that both liberals and conservatives like equally:

http://www.businessinsider.com/tv-shows-that-both-liberals-and-conservatives-like-2017-10
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonath...tives-dont-agree-on-much-when-it-comes-to-tv/

Whoops.

-MMoM

 

[Refuge]

Did you read the descriptor about Discovery from that first article? "The newest addition to the "Star Trek" series centers around the crew of the Discovery ship as they travel on an array of missions throughout the galaxy."

Okay, an array of missions throughout the galaxy. That's accurate - not. Also whoever wrote the second article hasn't even watched Discovery! It was interesting though the references to media activity being a gauge.

 

[O_Kav]

I watch Star Trek to get away from everyday political B.S

Okay, let me see if I understood you correctly... You watch a Sci-fi Franchise that is known for being Political and disapproves when it starts talking about politics ?

Pop Culture remembers the Original Series as the 1960s TV Series with an Interracial Kiss among the first ever aired on Television, an Episode with a strong Anti-Racism message like "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" airing just a few years after the Jim Crow laws were repelled, constant Anti-War messages in the height of the Vietnam War and a big argument against the Cold War bringing together a multinational crew that included a Soviet. Also, its most known villain is a Far-Righter that would later appear in the most memorable Movie of the whole Franchise.

Sure, there were missteps and the occasional reactionary message here and there. But it's kinda of a consensus that Star Trek is known for being Leftist/Progressive. It's unfair for you to blame Star Trek for being Star Trek.

I think there wasn't much of that in Stargate Universe.

I doubt that. I still haven't watched Stargate Universe but I know it was made by the same people responsible for SG-1 and Atlantis. And those two TV Series had a lot of political messages on them. Why would they pull a 180 and stop doing that sort of thing ?

On the back of my head I remember two Stargate Episodes that were political as hell: "The Other Side", where SG-1 refuses technology that would serve as a game changer in the War against the Goa'uld because they discover the people supplying those technologies had Far Right beliefs. They were so horrified, they helped to overthrow that Fascist regime. The other Episode is "The Road Not Taken". In a parallel universe, Earth is more secure against Alien threats but the United States becomes a Dictatorship who uses Alien tech to intervene in other countries affairs.

Like @Ovation mentioned, you're going to have a very hard time finding any piece of Art that isn't Political.

I'm not going to continue on this matter because I believe it would derail the conversation. The thread is about Anti-heroes, not about Politics and Star Trek. Since I don't wish to give the Mods a headache, this is my last post on the subject.

 

[fireproof78]

Oh Please.. The show is already in live action, how much more real do you need to get? I mean, come on.. the hangups and the drama between characters is a non-stop argument and Bitch fest. It's not fun to watch, in fact It is kinda like watching those talking heads going back and forth on network and cable news. I watch Science fiction because I like the genre, I watch Star Trek to get away from everyday political B.S. the show itself is a frickin disaster as it is serving only to push a political point of view.. let me give you an example..

That may be why you watch the show, and others, but that isn't the only thing Star Trek does. Please do not tell me that a live action show means the characters are real. That is a ridiculous supposition and honestly short changes the reasons why people want to watch the characters. I don't watch DISCO because i want likable characters, or no political divisions or minor disagreements. I watch it because it feels like real people, fully fleshed out, dealing with extremely difficult situations.

And you know what that is for me, as a viewer? Refreshing, and interesting. It isn't the same old thing, it isn't Star Trek having a reset by the end. It's a show of consequences, shades of gray and difficult decisions.

If that isn't for everyone, that's fine. That just means that Star Trek's tent has started to get a little bit bigger, rather than remaining the sole territory of genre fans.

 

[Refuge]

And you know what that is for me, as a viewer? Refreshing, and interesting. It isn't the same old thing, it isn't Star Trek having a reset by the end. It's a show of consequences, shades of gray and difficult decisions.

Consequences? No.

 

[fireproof78]

Consequences? No.

Yes.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

The closest thing we have to a seriously righteous hero character in Trek is Spock.

And yet...

"Where No Man Has Gone Before" (TOS):

SPOCK: It is the only possible way to get Mitchell off this ship.
KIRK: If you mean strand Mitchell there, I won't do it. That station is fully automated. There's not a soul on the whole planet. Even the ore ships call only once every twenty years.
SPOCK: Then you have one other choice. Kill Mitchell while you still can.
KIRK: Get out of here.
SPOCK: It is your only other choice, assuming you make it while you still have time.
KIRK: Will you try for one moment to feel? At least act like you've got a heart. We're talking about Gary.
SPOCK: The captain of the Valiant probably felt the same way, and he waited too long to make his decision. I think we've both guessed that.
KIRK: Set course for Delta Vega.

[...]

KIRK: Are you reading all our thoughts, Gary?
MITCHELL: I can sense mainly worry in you, Jim. Safety of your ship.
KIRK: What would you do in my place?
MITCHELL: Probably just what Mister Spock is thinking now. Kill me while you can.


"The Man Trap" (TOS):

CRATER: We don't want you here! We're happy alone! I'll kill to stay alone! You hear that, Kirk? Or you'll have to kill me! I don't care either way!
SPOCK: Obviously, taking him alive is going to be difficult.
KIRK: Set your phaser on one quarter. I'll leave mine on stun.
SPOCK: Why risk your life for his?
KIRK: He's not trying to kill us, he's trying to frighten us...

[...]

CREATURE-AS-MCCOY: Well, we could offer it salt without tricks. There's no reason for it to attack us.
SPOCK: Your attitude is laudable, Doctor, but your reasoning is reckless.
CRATER: The creature is not dangerous when fed.

[...]

SPOCK: It's killing the Captain! Shoot it, Doctor, quickly!


"The Menagerie" (TOS):

SPOCK: You know why I've come, Captain. It's only six days away at maximum warp and I have it well-planned.
PIKE: [flashes twice for "no"]
SPOCK: I have never disobeyed your orders before, Captain, but this time I must.
PIKE: [flashes twice for "no"]
SPOCK: I know. I know it is treachery and it's mutiny. But I must do this.
PIKE: [flashes twice for "no"]
SPOCK: I have no choice.
PIKE: [flashes twice for "no"]

[...]

KIRK: Once more, Jose. Spock stated he received a message for us to come here. He entered same in his log. That's all the proof I require.
MENDEZ: And what do those record tapes show? No message sent from here. No message received by your vessel.
KIRK: Then I suggest the record tapes have been deliberately changed. A computer expert can change record tapes, duplicate voices, say anything, say nothing.
MENDEZ: The fact remains that your first officer's former captain is hospitalized, horribly injured, at this base, and that same first officer seems to be the only one who heard that message.
KIRK: If he had wanted to see Captain Pike he could have requested a leave. I would have granted it.

[...]

MENDEZ: How do you plead to the charge of unlawfully taking command?
SPOCK: Guilty.
MENDEZ: Of sabotaging the computers of this vessel and locking it on a course for planet Talos IV?
SPOCK: Guilty.
MENDEZ: And of forcibly attempting to transport Captain Pike to that planet?
SPOCK: Guilty.


Are we sure Spock isn't actually an anti-hero who's getting off way too easy not rotting in prison for the rest of his life?

-MMoM

 

[fireproof78]

Are we sure Spock isn't actually an anti-hero who's getting off way too easy not rotting in prison for the rest of his life?

Kirk is more psychotic than he is! O_o Just listen to the way that he yells at Commodore Mendez...insubordinate.

 

[Refuge]

Yes.

Maybe there are.

Burnham is sentenced for mutiny. Consequence? Science specialist on Discovery and regular away mission goer.
Lorca kills his crew. Consequence? Top job on Discovery.
Mudd in the most reset episodes of Trek I've seen in a while causes all kinds of destruction. Consequence? Goes home to wifey.

 

[fireproof78]

Maybe there are.

Burnham is sentenced for mutiny. Consequence? Science specialist on Discovery and regular away mission goer.
Lorca kills his crew. Consequence? Top job on Discovery.
Mudd in the most reset episodes of Trek I've seen in a while causes all kinds of destruction. Consequence? Goes home to wifey.

Burnham has a deferred sentence, as has been repeatedly stated. Just because she isn't in prison right now doesn't mean she will not face her punishment.

So far, I feel like the only way that there would be satisfaction is if she was flogged. Can we please condemn Kirk with the same vitriol?

Lorca's consequences are still being explored.

As evidenced in TOS, Mudd going home to wifey was not a pleasant prospect. So, yeah. consequences.

Come back to me when the season is over. Consequences do not always mean "what the characters deserve" or "happen immediately." Since the story isn't concluded, then maybe this drumbeat can pause for a bit.

 

[O_Kav]

Okay, an array of missions throughout the galaxy. That's accurate - not.

Are the Discovery missions bound to only one Planet in the Galaxy ? No. So the assessment that they complete several missions across our Galaxy is a correct one. Technically, because of the Spore Drive, they could've easily crossed larger distances than the Enterprise ever did.

Burnham is sentenced for mutiny. Consequence? Science specialist on Discovery and regular away mission goer.
Lorca kills his crew. Consequence? Top job on Discovery.
Mudd in the most reset episodes of Trek I've seen in a while causes all kinds of destruction. Consequence? Goes home to wifey.

Wrong. Like @The Mighty Monkey of Mim has already mentioned, at this point Federation Penal Colonies are nice comfortable resorts. Instead of risking her life everyday on the flagship of the War, Michael would've been sipping Mojitos and resting on some paradise planet. The same goes for Mudd, after enduring Klingon Prison he would've felt relieved being arrested by the Federation. Instead, he's being watched 24/7 by his arms-dealer Father-In-Law, presumably not a very nice person.

And @fireproof78 is right. Discovery characters do face consequences for their actions. Saru has an identity crisis that impedes him to act as a proper Starfleet officer because he failed to stop Michael's mutiny. T'Kuvma and Kol poked the Federation and now both are dead. L'Rell is a persona non grata in the Empire because of her actions. And Voq did something that "cost him everything", yet to be seen.

Now, about Lorca, you just have to be patient. Sure, he's good at evading consequences. It's obvious everything will catch up to him at some point, though. Cornwell is alive and well, remember ?

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

Wrong. Like @The Mighty Monkey of Mim has already mentioned, at this point Federation Penal Colonies are nice comfortable resorts.

To be fair, the one Burnham was headed to didn't sound like one of those. This is sort of mid-transition where those reforms have begun but seem not to have reached all of them yet. And even then, it turned out Adams was subjecting at least "incorrigible" prisoners to experimental mind tortures!

-MMoM

 

[Refuge]

Yeah those other prisoners that got sent on looked thrilled to be going to prison 'paradise'.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

So what do you think of Spock from the examples I posted, @Holly Day?

 

[Refuge]

So far, I feel like the only way that there would be satisfaction is if she was flogged. Can we please condemn Kirk with the same vitriol?

Lorca's consequences are still being explored.

As evidenced in TOS, Mudd going home to wifey was not a pleasant prospect. So, yeah. consequences.

Come back to me when the season is over. Consequences do not always mean "what the characters deserve" or "happen immediately." Since the story isn't concluded, then maybe this drumbeat can pause for a bit.

Don't know about flogging. As for wanting Kirk to be equated to Burnham and suffer the same vitriol I see that happening in this thread, so knock yourself out

 

[fireproof78]

Don't know about flogging. As for wanting Kirk to be equated to Burnham and suffer the same vitriol I see that happening in this thread, so knock yourself out

Kirk did the same if not worse. Why not hate on him? Burnham is not unique in Star Trek universe to be a person who breaks regulations.

 

[Refuge]

So what do you think of Spock from the examples I posted, @Holly Day?

Truth? You see I think to find of examples with Spock is fair enough, don't get me wrong, you are perfectly in order to do that. It is part of his history. BUT there is a wealth of Spock's history and in balance the what I would call 'heroic' and decent, far outweighs the other. That's just my take on Spock, I actually see a genuine, logically and morally driven being.

 

[Refuge]

Kirk did the same if not worse. Why not hate on him? Burnham is not unique in Star Trek universe to be a person who breaks regulations.

I don't feel the response to 'hate' on Kirk. I like Kirk. Much like I said about Spock, Kirk has a core of doing the right thing. His mistakes are not outweighing that. Whereas Burnham has been show far less she has been shown to have made mainly bad decisions. (I won't list them but I could).

 

[fireproof78]

Truth? You see I think to find of examples with Spock is fair enough, don't get me wrong, you are perfectly in order to do that. It is part of his history. BUT there is a wealth of Spock's history and in balance the what I would call 'heroic' and decent, far outweighs the other. That's just my take on Spock, I actually see a genuine, logically and morally driven being.

And Michael might end up being the same way. We don't have enough information yet to judge her and condemn her.

I don't feel the response to 'hate' on Kirk. I like Kirk. Much like I said about Spock, Kirk has a core of doing the right thing. His mistakes are not outweighing that. Whereas Burnham has been show far less she has been shown to have made mainly bad decisions. (I won't list them but I could).

I don't feel like Burnham could ever do enough good to satisfy.