I'm not liking this entire deal one bit. One would assume a future human colony would be less... American-ized. More multi-cultural. But apparently we're straight up back into the 90's with their planets of the hats. This time: A whole planet solely colonized by a small, American mid-western town centered around the local evangelical church. Ugh.
SG-1 was smart though, and built that right into their premise: All worlds are connected through the Stargates, thus even small and non-self sufficient settlements near a Stargate made sense, as well as a similar vegetation and animal life compared to Earth (and other "normal" planets). On Star Trek, the same thing makes less and less sense.
Nitpicking over names of tombstone names that will be shown on screen for two seconds, maybe. Don’t know if that’s just sad or what. Then again, I am here posting on the the thread about tombstones that will be shown for two seconds, maybe. So nothing to see here, move along please
Which kind of shows that whoever picked them doesn't know how uncommon "common" names really are. The top 30 most common put together still only make up only around 9.2% of the total U.S. population. It would be, statistically speaking, very, very unlikely you'd randomly come up with a list of last names this boring and generic. It would be better to just pick whatever names struck your fancy.
Has there been a good Star Trek episode about religion? My memory of those episodes is that they were heavy handed in their treatment of religion. Personally, there are three things which Star Trek has failed at miserably: stories about children, stories about religion, and stories with the love interest of the week. When I heard them say that the next season will explore the relationship between science and faith, I was like,
Remember, it shouldn´t be about some inherent qualities of the franchise (although pattern can be seen), but about writing itself. So far, writing of Discovery was entertaining but not very smart or even deep.
One could say, however that it also led to terrible "Fantasy narrative" there in the end. Or it is something else when worshipped beings are actually part of the story. Or the fact that apart of that education controversy episode (which logic might be kinda debatable) it mostly stayed in the background.
Well that is all true. Having the Prophets become a bigger role on the show was a mistake. They should have stayed mysterious. Still I liked it for the most part especially with how it effected Kira and Sisko. I also liked how they even expanded it by showing Quark and the Ferengi religion. Worf even got the good line about how the Klingons killed their God's because they were more trouble than they were worth. Jason
Yeah, DS9 was full of good religious elements, even if it went over the deep end once the Pah-Wraiths were introduced. Aside from Covenant, which was the only time they were used properly. This little dialogue snippet from Rapture is a good example of how DS9 dealt with religion properly: DS9 always stayed true to the basic naturalistic understanding of the universe. The Prophets/Pah Wraiths were just energy beings - not even the most powerful ones we've ever seen. Yet the religious beliefs of the non-human characters were always treated with respect by the writers, not strawmen to be torn down.
I was always impressed with how well DS9 handled religion. I say this as someone whose father is Muslim, mother was Christian, and where my parents allowed me to choose my own religion, then I chose none. They were also both Republicans and I turned out to be a Democrat. So, yeah, interesting family discussions about religion and politics. But anyway... One episode that stands out is "In the Hands of the Prophets". You'd think Vedek Winn would be the only side to the religious argument but then they they show Vedek Bariel later on, who's more open-minded. Then they have Sisko defending to the Bajorans' faith to his son. And, of course, we had Keiko defending to the right to teach science to her students and not hide it from them. All sides were well presented.
I agree @ITDUDE!!!! Cancel red alert folks..........location shoots need a base camp for trailers, caterers, wardrobe. Basically they just need a nice place that is accessible by cars. Just because the camp is located here, does it mean the FILMING is happening here. Could be in the woods anywhere within 5-6 miles of the base camp. So don't freak out just yet and try to make up your own storyline that you HATE already. Last week I was at a base camp that was an old English estate home. After having breakfast and going through hair and makeup I hopped into a transport full of Roman soldiers and we were driven out to the middle of the woods and dropped of for 12 hours. Base camp has nothing to do with the filming location 90% of the time.
I also immediately thought "Terra Nova." But haven't we seen location shoot leaks before that were totally bogus?
That's in California, though (Paramount Ranch, I believe). Do we know for certain this is Discovery-related? It could be something else. If the season wasn't already through filming, it could have potentially been from the Handmaid's Tale. Maybe New Eden is another breakaway state similar to Gilead. That shoots not too far away, in Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge region. Do we have anything concrete linking this to Trek, other than the OP/twitter link?