I'm sure it'll be a future version of someone we know. But they've woven a story where whoever it is, I won't be disappointed.The red angel plot is reminding me of the infamous JJ Abrams mysterious box. Alex Kurtzman is a close friend of Abrams and helped write the two trek movies Abrams directed. the red angel story line is been hyped a lot, I see it everywhere in many media sites.
It is starting to make me worry that whatever is the red angel, would be a let down and another empty mysterious box similar to JJ Abrams movies and tv shows (Lost, Cloverfield, Into Darkness)
The Red Angels are Harry Mudd's advanced androids from the 28th century (yeah he somehow found a way to live that long, look out for him on the Picard show! :O )
I wouldn't say the "reveal" will be a letdown, but its certainly possible for some conclusions to be better than others. For instance, something I think is fairly likely at the moment which would bother me isregardless of whether or not the Red Angel is Burnham, the conclusion involves changing history in some way so that Burnham isn't fostered by Sarek and Amanda, perhaps by saving her parents, who we were just reminded of, and that's how they "reconcile canon," unhappening the show thus far and having the remainder take place in a more fannishly TOS-styled universe with Spock not having a sister, no Klingon War, no spore drive, and so on, a la that time half the cast of Eureka altered history and the series was wildly and irreversably retooled when they got back.
Something like that wouldn't be great.
Honestly, I don't watch shows worrying about whether they will let me down. The way I see it, if TV watching makes you angry or anxious, you're doing it wrong.
In general, I prefer to give shows the benefit of the doubt rather than worry in advance about whether I'll be disappointed.
I wouldn't say the "reveal" will be a letdown, but its certainly possible for some conclusions to be better than others. For instance, something I think is fairly likely at the moment which would bother me isregardless of whether or not the Red Angel is Burnham, the conclusion involves changing history in some way so that Burnham isn't fostered by Sarek and Amanda, perhaps by saving her parents, who we were just reminded of, and that's how they "reconcile canon," unhappening the show thus far and having the remainder take place in a more fannishly TOS-styled universe with Spock not having a sister, no Klingon War, no spore drive, and so on, a la that time half the cast of Eureka altered history and the series was wildly and irreversably retooled when they got back.
Something like that wouldn't be great.
Trek fans these days use terms like "afraid", "fear", "concerned" so often when describing the franchise. If a media franchise elicits such feelings perhaps take a break for a while.
And there in lies the reason I never watched TWD or GOT for that matter.Yup. Don’t understand that. Or hate watching. Realized I needed to stop watching TWD when I realized I literally didn’t give a shit about what was going on nor did I care if a single character lived or died.
And there in lies the reason I never watched TWD or GOT for that matter.
Star Trek or not, if it isn't entertaining and enjoyable I'm not watching it.
You are far more patient and open than I am. I can watch the Orville, but it's largely for worldbuilding and not TNG sensibilities.I find that shows can be entertaining for a variety of reasons myself. For instance, while I don't find Orville usually what fans of that show call 'enjoyable' I am 'entertained' at how MacFarlane is filtering TNG through his own personal 'sensibilities' (usually a few palmfaces, WTF? moments in each ep).
I'm open to all sorts of stuff, but a show had to not have anything that I'm going to get much out of in order to completely let it pass. Had to narrow my field more and more of late, however, as there are dozens of shows on now that have a least something interesting about them.
You are far more patient and open than I am. I can watch the Orville, but it's largely for worldbuilding and not TNG sensibilities.
I can general find positive things in what I watch but just have the time to watch all that much.
It does sometimes seem like the internet tends to assume the worst too often. A new movie or TV show can be a year away and people will already be worrying about worst-case scenarios. "What will happen to STAR TREK if DISCOVERY fails?" or whatever.
The revelation about the Red Angel will come when it comes. Not going to worry about it until then. I didn't vote in the poll because how can I possibly know how I'll feel about it before I see it.?
Same here. I was willing to let a lot slide with that show, but enough is enough. I give up, and that's saying something.Yup. Don’t understand that. Or hate watching. Realized I needed to stop watching TWD when I realized I literally didn’t give a shit about what was going on nor did I care if a single character lived or died.
That itself isn't really a letdown. I know there was some speculation early on the Red Angel might actually be a divine entity, but I would have found it very surprising if Star Trek actually went there. So the revelation of the Red Angel's more rational origins was more or less expected by me.One would think that the "let down would already have occurred for some, since we now know that the Red Angel is a ...Humanoid in a Spacesuit.![]()
Precisely. Especially with all the handwringing over this season being "faith vs. science" and how Trek would handle it.That itself isn't really a letdown. I know there was some speculation early on the Red Angel might actually be a divine entity, but I would have found it very surprising if Star Trek actually went there. So the revelation of the Red Angel's more rational origins was more or less expected by me.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.