Season 2 Teaser

[eschaton]

For the most part? I mean, there were these DS9 original things called the Prophets and the Dominion which I think played a preeeetty big role in the series.

Yes, but compared to the other two post-TNG Berman Trek shows, it focused more on building upon the foundations which were already established in TNG (and to a lesser extent TOS) rather than striking out on its own. Much of the starting premise of the series, from the Cardassian occupation of Bajor, to Sisko losing his wife in the battle of Wolf 359, to Dax being a Trill, to Quark being a Ferengi, to the uneasy peace with the Cardassians in the demilitarized zone, to O'Brien coming over, flowed out of what TNG had already established.

 

[Belz...]

Seriously, I'm getting the impression here that you jus't don't like the original Star Trek and don't really give a damn about it.

That smacks of black-and-white thinking. Either you defend TOS no matter what, or you hate it.

No, there's plenty of middle ground.

Each show exists in its own bubble.

Sometimes I have the impression that each episode is in its own bubble.

 

[Kemaiku]

Sarek knew what he was doing, he couldn't always show it.

He loved them all, and it haunted him to his last breath. Maybe let him show it for once?

 

[CorporalClegg]

Sometimes I have the impression that each episode is in its own bubble.

Of course. The only continuity any story is beholden to is that of its own making.

That's been true for thousands of years.

 

[Longinus]

I think that if anything the season finale strayed from Sarek's previous portrayal, but his previous apperances on Discovery were pretty in-character, IMO.

I really liked Frain's Sarek until they character assassinated him for one of their stupid twists in the last episode (and didn't even realise they had done that.)

I really wish they rectify this. I hope it turns out that the Kronos bomb is actually a dud, because Sarek tampered with it (or more plausibly knew that it would not work like Cornwell expected, because, realistically, it wouldn't) but he played along because he knew he couldn't convince Cornwell to drop this idiotic plan.

 

[Belz...]

Probably true. So? Who gives a damn about what "most of the rank-and-file Christians" think? Most ordinary Christians probably couldn't even tell you what the word "synoptic" refers to. I care about what people who've paid attention and thought carefully about things think.

Well ok here's what I think: I'm very keen on continuity and it's always bugged me that Trek's never been more consistent. But the nature of fiction is to evolve with the authors, and that's been the case since the dawn of time. Stories change with time and get adapted to the audience or the fashion of the day. So although it keeps bugging me, I've accepted it; and given the choice between no more Trek or Trek adapted to current times, I'll take the latter.

 

[marsh8472]

Looks like it could be good. Told you! I'm glad I stuck by Discovery through thick and thin while so many people bashed it instead

 

[gblews]

No, the poster is correct. Which was a more significant rock and roll pop culture phenomenon, Elvis or the Beatles, was one of those Kirk v Picard type questions (notice that Kirk and Picard were also different generation).

The question at hand wasn’t which one was the “more significant pop cultural phenomenon”, between Elvis and The Beatles, it was simply ‘who did people like the most”. Who “you” thought was funnier, the Stooges or Marx Bros. At least that’s the way Lawman’s post read (which is what ITDUDE was responding to).

Like the Marx Bros and the Stooges, The Beatles and the Stones are closer stylistic comparisons than the Beatles and Elvis. Plus they had a life long rivalry anyway. Thus, the better comparison is the Beatles and Stones.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The question at hand wasn’t which one was the “more significant pop cultural phenomenon”, between Elvis and The Beatles, it was simply ‘who did people like the most”. Who “you” thought was funnier, the Stooges or Marx Bros. At least that’s the way Lawman’s post read (which is what ITDUDE was responding to).

Like the Marx Bros and the Stooges, The Beatles and the Stones are closer stylistic comparisons than the Beatles and Elvis. Plus they had a life long rivalry anyway. Thus, the better comparison is the Beatles and Stones.

As if you can't rephrase the tongue-in-cheek maxim to read, there are two kinds of people in the world: those who like Kirk and those who like Picard. Or, those who like rock and those who like classical. Or, those who like Elvis and those who like the Beatles. The whole "there are two kinds of people in the world" business is not to be taken too seriously in the first place.

 

[CorporalClegg]

There are two kinds of people in the world: those who get to be captain and those who clegg.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Yes, but compared to the other two post-TNG Berman Trek shows, it focused more on building upon the foundations which were already established in TNG (and to a lesser extent TOS) rather than striking out on its own. Much of the starting premise of the series, from the Cardassian occupation of Bajor, to Sisko losing his wife in the battle of Wolf 359, to Dax being a Trill, to Quark being a Ferengi, to the uneasy peace with the Cardassians in the demilitarized zone, to O'Brien coming over, flowed out of what TNG had already established.

And much of the starting premise was brand new, from the Prophets to the wormhole (and the Gamma quadrant exploration it represents), to Odo the mysterious shapeshifter, to the stationary location of the series, to the idea of a combined crew not entirely beholden to Starfleet ( which DS9 actually followed through on, unlike VOY), to the deliberate focus on the imperfections and failings of the Federation and its people.

DS9 was designed from the ground up as the crossroads between old and new and it very much walked that line throughout its run. Its not entirely unfair to say the early seasons leaned more old than new, but they still carried the seeds of the much more original later seasons. So, imo, it simply isn't credible to say that the show in general was mostly recalling prior material. It was very balanced over all.

 

[Visitor1982]

And scripts were all done (though of course subject to change but probably not much at this stage) before B&H departed.

The writers are still writing... Not all of the scripts are done. They shot the first five episodes and I think they may have finished scipts for episodes 6, 7 and 8 or something.

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Further thoughts
I just can't get into the spinny one-person mini-ships dodging the asteroid field. It feels too much like a video game, the sort of thing that gets plugged into a summer blockbuster movie when the formula says "we need an action scene here." (The kind of thing that ruined the Hobbit trilogy, for instance.) Trek has never relied on that sort of over-the-top action, and it shouldn't need to.

You‘re right. It‘s way cooler with just basic EV suits.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[eschaton]

And much of the starting premise was brand new, from the Prophets to the wormhole (and the Gamma quadrant exploration it represents), to Odo the mysterious shapeshifter, to the stationary location of the series, to the idea of a combined crew not entirely beholden to Starfleet ( which DS9 actually followed through on, unlike VOY), to the deliberate focus on the imperfections and failings of the Federation and its people.

DS9 was designed from the ground up as the crossroads between old and new and it very much walked that line throughout its run. Its not entirely unfair to say the early seasons leaned more old than new, but they still carried the seeds of the much more original later seasons. So, imo, it simply isn't credible to say that the show in general was mostly recalling prior material. It was very balanced over all.

My point wasn't that DS9 had no original content created. And I mentioned that the format of the show was very different from any other Trek series (DIS actually comes closest). But that it was the most successful post-TNG series from a writerly perspective, despite the fact that unlike VOY or ENT it didn't consciously set off to place itself in a new space/time in order to be forced to tell "new stories." This is because it realized that there are always new and interesting stories to be told if you build from the characters up, rather than trying to come up with some brand new off-the-wall sci-fi concept or yet another "planet of hats" alien race.

 

[BillJ]

But that it was the most successful post-TNG series from a writerly perspective...

I always found it the dullest of the Berman shows.

 

[eschaton]

I always found it the dullest of the Berman shows.

Different strokes for different folks, but I can't even comprehend this. I could rewatch DS9 back to back endlessly, while most of VOY and ENT makes me fall asleep.

 

[BillJ]

Different strokes for different folks, but I can't even comprehend this.

They hit it out of the park from time to time, but overall, I found the show tedious.

 

[Longinus]

Different strokes for different folks, but I can't even comprehend this. I could rewatch DS9 back to back endlessly, while most of VOY and ENT makes me fall asleep.

I really don't like DS9 as I don't appreciate the deconstruction of TNG utopia that they did. However, I can appreciate that it was a show which was about something; they had a vision and a viewpoint, and they committed to it (even though I may not agree with that vision.) Both Voyager and ENT pretty much ended up ignoring the potential of their premises and being pale imitations of TNG instead.

 

[eschaton]

They hit it out of the park from time to time, but overall, I found the show tedious.

Every Trek show had "quality control" issues, but I honestly feel like in terms of "hit" vs. "miss" they pretty much hit the mark more than any other show. Part of it is because episodes are seldom totally self-contained, you can find little elements of even bad episodes which are great. An example is Let He Who is Without Sin...an absolutely dreadful Risa episode, but it has a heartfelt discussion between Worf and Jadzia in the middle of it where we finally discover why unlike other Klingons he's such an uptight prig - something we've been waiting for nine years to discover. Or the little "lunch dates" between Garak and Bashir. Hell, I just love the shit out of the characters, far moreso than any other Trek series, meaning I'm willing to forgive some of the terrible choices DS9 made - like Section 31 and the Pah Wraiths.

I really don't like DS9 as I don't appreciate the deconstruction of TNG utopia that they did. However, I can appreciate that it was a show which was about something; they had a vision and a viewpoint, and they committed to it (even though I may not agree with that vision.) Both Voyager and ENT pretty much ended up ignoring the potential of their premises and being pale imitations of TNG instead.

I can understand people who don't like DS9 because they think it's "not Trek." I think the experience of VOY and most of ENT showed that within the strictures of the Trek universe and the classic Trek format (self-contained episodes with a crew which changes little from episode to episode) there really wasn't that much left to do. I mean, how many more episodes could be written about a random-ass spatial anomaly or an alien race almost exactly like 20th-century humans, except for one weird trick?

 

[Longinus]

I can understand people who don't like DS9 because they think it's "not Trek." I think the experience of VOY and most of ENT showed that within the strictures of the Trek universe and the classic Trek format (self-contained episodes with a crew which changes little from episode to episode) there really wasn't that much left to do. I mean, how many more episodes could be written about a random-ass spatial anomaly or an alien race almost exactly like 20th-century humans, except for one weird trick?

I really don't think there is anything wrong with the format, merely that the writers of VOY and ENT were lazy and bad and most of the actors mediocre. Though I don't mind breaking the format a bit, as long as it doesn't mean breaking the certain premises that I find central to Trek. When I watched TNG, I never thought that, you know what, this show needs is more war, religion, capitalism and morally shady main characters, but apparently some people though just that because DS9 happened (and a lot of viewers though that too, as DS9 was somewhat popular.) Both VOY and ENT had interesting premises, but they did very little with them. ENT in particularly was disappointing, everything being new to the characters and technology being way more limited could have given fresh perspective to 'boldly going' but that rarely happened.

I think exploration and meeting aliens and weird phenomenons is central to Star Trek, and it is possible to write good stories around that (and if you can't then perhaps you shouldn't be making a Star Trek show...) I really hope this is what we see in the second season of Discovery.