That's pretty much here I am at. I just check expectations at the door completely and 100%. I watch, experience, and decide whether or not the raw experience entertains me. I think it s cool that we see Sarek and Mudd and the Enterprise. That's a plus for me, and again with absolutely no expectations of what things are supposed to look like or whatever. Don't care. I've never considered Star Trek this giant intricately-woven universe and singular coherent story. So none of this stuff bothers me. I'm in it to be entertained and enjoy stories that are being told within the same general Star Trek structure as everything else. I'm actually quite thankful I'm capable of this approach. I can't imagine being as frigging picky and unhappy as some people can be about the franchise.
I suppose it’s a matter of investment. Let’s not forget the term “fan” derives from “fanatic”. To some, being picky is on the “fanatical” spectrum - if we can call it such a thing. I enjoy being picky about Star Trek, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it makes me unhappy. Although I would enjoy a grand universe unication theory as has been suggested elsewhere Otherwise I’m looking forward to taking DSC at face value in s2 - or at least trying to. It is what it is - and if I’d have written it in the “spirit” of picky, technobabbly, canon-adherent Star Trek, I guarantee you that *nobody* (but me) would have enjoyed it
I don't mean to imply that I'm not fanatical about Star Trek or haven't applied some level of investment. I've been a fan since 77. I went to the Star Trek Las Vegas experience twice. I've made the trip to Ticonderoga twice (last time was the Shatner event this spring). Many, many conventions. Thousands of dollars worth of collectibles,books, etc. Every movie except TMP in the theater (and every one since TFF on opening night). I simply mean that I've trained myself to enjoy it all for what it is. It's entertainment. It exists for joy and for fun. I never let myself get in a state that is contrary to that intent.
Indeed. Star Trek is first and foremost for fun and entertainment. As much as I love debating the minutia of technical details the level of pickiness is becoming odd, to say the least. Checking "my" interpretation of Star Trek has allowed for a lot more fun.
Yeah, I tried this -- just pretend it's an independent sci-fi adventure and see where it goes -- and then they spent an entire episode buried deep in Sarek/Spock backstory before hopping over the Mirror Universe. And now we're spending the first few episodes of s2 with the Starship Enterprise before doing a Spock story. I would love to have forgotten that the show was branded Star Trek, because it would have been a (slightly) better show if it weren't. But they made that impossible. Sarek The Genocidal Maniac is just not something I'm wired to ignore. I had somewhat more success pretending that Discovery is a TV adaptation of some sixteen-year-old kid's "edgy" R-rated Star Trek simm from Bravo Fleet. And, honestly, a lot of the creative choices make sense if you realize that the dysfunctional, chaotic writer's room really did operate a lot like a dysfunctional Bravo Fleet RPG.
The interesting thing about Sarek that I have enjoyed is that it further informs why Sarek opposes and increases his resentment of Starfleet. How far he was willing to allow himself to go paints an interesting picture of the character. Of course, not everyone will find that as fascinating as I do. I certainly don't like it but I do find it fascinating all the same.
The real question is: Why isn't Discovery as good as the stuff that came out during my formative years? Now to get serious again: I think DIS had probably the biggest production problems of all the Treks before, even than TNG. TNG was a clusterfuck as well - but it was at a time where they could slap together two carboard-walls and pretend it's a cave on an alien planet. And the did that plenty of time - giving us some great stories, even if the production values were shit. It seems the makers of Discovery wanted everything to look perfect - which resulted in that THE ENTIRE SEASON basically took place on only three starships: The Discovery, the Shenzhou (which share ALL the same sets, except the bridge set), and the boooring scenes on the klingon ship. That simply isn't enough. We know the planet "Pavho" was literally forced upon the creators, because the CBS wanted at least one planet-side episode in the season. But it felt as forced as it was. The only exception being the episode "Lethe", which took place both on Vulcan and a Vulcan starship, and had a nice epilogue with a klingon-Federation conference with great backgrounbd aliens. And Lo and behold! I LOVE that episode. It's really good. It's what I expect from Star Trek. Character focused stories in a fantastic universe with nifty and strange ideas - I would actually like to learn more about the Vulcan "logical extremists". It's a concept woth exploring IMO. So for Discovery season 2 to get better, IMO a BIG help would already be to leave the ship more often, and have stories set on other exotic planets, alien starships, strange worlds or whatever. Insteead of seeing the very same grey hallway set every week standing in for every single starship. And the teaser promises exactly that. So even if the overall story-arc of season 2 might be somewhat disappointing overall as well - I guess I'll be much happier with the season anyway, because there is actually a journey worth having in the meantime.
I understand what you mean. Lethe was one of the only episodes of the series which actually felt...well...about something. Which is, as I said upthread, important for Trek. Trek is seldom (at least when on TV) just a popcorn-munching spectacle. Episodes are supposed to have themes, and either say something about the characters, or about a social issue. At the same time, that weird whispered infodump that Burnham laid on us in sickbay was very offputting and unnatural. Worse, some of the things she brought up (like the whole discussion of Katras) were already covered in the first episode. Anyone with any experience in writing knows that while infodumps are sometimes inevitable, they are there to inform the viewer, not other characters. Thus in a serialized drama there's never any reason to spend precious screen time factually explaining something that we've already been told.
I think it’s too early to judge that. Yes, Spock is involved but the bigger plot is the red glowy things. I think Spock is just a side thing.
I still think the episode Lethe is the beginning of a tie-in to TOS in some way, or was intended to be. I think Cornwell is Lethe from Dagger of the Mind. It was a huge hint just thrown out there with the title. Whether the new writing staff will continue on there or not, Admiral Cornwell's story is far from over. "Does it matter? That person no longer exists."
Doesn't make much sense? Wouldn't Kirk/Noel know if an Admiral went crazy and ended up in a mental institution? Or is this something else that was/is so secret that no one knows it happened?
Depends on what happened, I suppose. Have no idea how many admirals were left after the Klingon War. She herself already showed she was willing to commit genocide (and basically got blackmailed into avoiding it and gave awards to the crew of Discovery who have presumably and collectively kept the matter shut about what she and Sarek were willing to do) . She vaporized a bowl of cookies in a public space. Discharging a firearm like that would get any officer in some serious trouble. She's not stable, at best. So, if she did something that got her listed as KIA/MIA and shows up as a remarkably similar looking woman at a mental health treatment center on Tantalus V, well, Kirk's seen a lot of faces, she might look familiar, but what of it?
I don't think this was the original intent. Jayne Brook said on After Trek their original intent was to have her character have her throat cut in the final scene, but because they liked her performance they decided to keep her on through the season.
I think their plans were all over the place, honestly. But I do wonder if they changed the episode name to Lethe after they decided to keep her on. i mean.. this doesn't matter, but she even LOOKS like Lethe.
man that would be so interesting, i hope you're right. however, i think this represents the type of tight plotting, attention to detail, and dedication to the pre-TOS setting that discovery has not demonstrated.
Lethe is a reference to the river in Hades - or rather Plato's interpretation of it, which is more or less a symbolic representation of the episode's plot and theme. Incidentally, Person of Interest (also a CBS skiffy product) had an episode with the same name and the plot and theme were very similar. This Cornwell theory is nonsense.
That's usually enough evidence for me! Absolutely. But then doesn't that make it frighteningly plausible in the sphere of Discovery theories? This is the show that gave us the pre-TOS mushroom-powered warp ten engine.