To tell you the truth, I just skimmed really fast.
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x11 - "Perpetual Infinity"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
To tell you the truth, I just skimmed really fast.
I'm still ok with it. Borg origin. If it is. I surprise myself. I have been WAY happier with the Spock-Burnham-family soap opera arc than I thought I would be. Because oddly I wanted more for DSC than it wanted for itself (go off and have its own adventures rather than be connected at the hip to TOS; it's like the showrunners had self-esteem probs.).
If (and this is a big if) they can come up with something unique I would be interested. VOY had some interesting concepts, if inconsistent, and I think "Scorpion" is among the best of the Borg stories. However, things like "Unimatrix Zero," "Dark Frontier," and "Endgame" all muddied the waters quite a bit and reduced the Borg from enigmatic to petty.
Hollywood has self-esteem problems. Sadly, this is not unique to Star Trek.
After a second viewing I'm just as disappointed as I was after the first
Rated the episode a 6 (meh)
Would like to retract on my thoughts on Pike being relegated to an extra, he did actually get more screen time than I thought
But Saru, Tilly, Nhan, and Tilly were tragically underused
The technobabble didn't get any easier to get into
The last 15 minutes were ok, and rescued a duff episode
How can anyone rate an episode so flawed and ordinary as this as a 10 ?
Rated the episode a 6 (meh)
Would like to retract on my thoughts on Pike being relegated to an extra, he did actually get more screen time than I thought
But Saru, Tilly, Nhan, and Tilly were tragically underused
The technobabble didn't get any easier to get into
The last 15 minutes were ok, and rescued a duff episode
How can anyone rate an episode so flawed and ordinary as this as a 10 ?
Pike is getting plenty of screen time even in the back half of the season. The problem is though he's kind of being written as being so laid back he's kind of a pushover now. It's not even really like it's because he has to be the second to Burnham's first. It's like the whole cast technobabbles a solution and he's basically "sure, whatever, sounds good, carry on."
He's a good character, but being a shitty captain.
He's a good character, but being a shitty captain.
IDIC.
I thought Disco was a Section 31 ship. They have guards in some places with the black badges.
I thought the premise of the show was "visit alien planets and shoot things. If there's hot women bed them."
Well, I can't say for sure that you're wrong. But, I suspect you are.
However, even if you're correct, the Borg aren't going to be an ongoing threat. We know that Control must go off across the galaxy and evolve. Probably not to be seen again on Discovery. That might not even be a bad story. Depends on the execution of course.
Still hoping it's misdirection and an homage!
It's misdirection. Control used Borg-like technology to take over Leland--nothing more. Control has shown itself to be more powerful than the Collective (otherwise it wouldn't have been able to destroy the Borg in the future, would it?) and Leland is more powerful than any drone.
Nothing more to see here. Move along.
Nothing more to see here. Move along.
Weren't they only in "Context Is For Kings" (DSC)? I think the implication is that they were gone by the time Tyler came aboard, because he says in "Point Of Light" (DSC) that he has "heard of" but "never seen" them, and he was Security Chief.
-MMoM
Weren't they only in "Context Is For Kings" (DSC)? I think the implication is that they were gone by the time Tyler came aboard, because he says in "Point Of Light" (DSC) that he has "heard of" but "never seen" them, and he was Security Chief.
-MMoM
Oh I'll have to watch again now i'm not sure if they have gone.
JMO, but I think a show containing heavy elements of family drama, and/or relationship drama is NOT necessarily a "soap opera". There are a ton of prestige shows out there that are focused on both of the above without the sci fi backdrop and are most definitely not soapish in quality. I tend to gravitate towards sci fi, fantasy genres which can, admittedly, be schlocky in a fun way, but Discovery is pretty serious about its drama and its narrative story compared to TV fiction of the daytime/night time soap variety. YMMV, but I think it's a bit derogatory to use that term to describe certain aspects of this show.
But, then again, I tend to place much more importance on character development, on character relationships and conflicts and larger themes with regard to the human condition compared to stuff that other fans may obsess over and value - such as the future tech, ship specs, Federation lore, alien lore etc. Ship or military command talk, for example, bores me to tears. I couldn't care less if the use of the spore drive wrecks the continuity, or Michael not being mentioned threatens the prime timeline. I do, however, care about whether Paul and Hugh can overcome their issues and rekindle, or Tyler will find a place where he belongs, or Michael and Spock will continue to bond as siblings, or if Tilly will ever get a shot at more command responsibility, or Saru will adjust to his changes in physiology and mindset.
It's just what interests me more.
Yes, there are dozens of us!!!
But, then again, I tend to place much more importance on character development, on character relationships and conflicts and larger themes with regard to the human condition compared to stuff that other fans may obsess over and value - such as the future tech, ship specs, Federation lore, alien lore etc. Ship or military command talk, for example, bores me to tears. I couldn't care less if the use of the spore drive wrecks the continuity, or Michael not being mentioned threatens the prime timeline. I do, however, care about whether Paul and Hugh can overcome their issues and rekindle, or Tyler will find a place where he belongs, or Michael and Spock will continue to bond as siblings, or if Tilly will ever get a shot at more command responsibility, or Saru will adjust to his changes in physiology and mindset.
It's just what interests me more.Yes, there are dozens of us!!!
Initially, the only connection between the Sphere and the main plot arc was that it was one of the emergencies to which the Red Lights led the ship. It was a pretty good story in its own right, and exemplified the Trekian principles of nonviolence and exploration. Control needing the data was grafted on later, and still doesn't make any particular sense even though it's been explained a couple of different ways.
She said that, yes. IMHO it seemed oddly contradictory to the presentation of the RA throughout the previous episodes, which involved just a handful of carefully (and mysteriously) selected interventions across the timestream. If Mama Burnham really has been watching all of history, and creating (and seeing the end of) multiple timelines, one is compelled to wonder how she can even remember it well enough to keep everything straight — i.e., why is her own perspective not constrained by the "current" timeline? And also to wonder why she felt compelled to save Michael in the previous episode, if she's already seen her die umpteen times. And also how she even stays sane, frankly.
Perhaps it would have been more convincing and more emotionally evocative if (as others have suggested) we had an entire "interlude" episode from Mama Burnham's POV, filling in the backstory through actions rather than expository dialogue. (Lost often used that approach to excellent effect.) But we didn't, so instead it comes across as just another line the writers threw in to keep the plot moving, without bothering to think through its implications.
Not quite sure how that landed in this dicussion, but FWIW, some people just like a sense of adventure, you know? They're not content with the path of least resistance. Why do you think extreme sports are so popular? Heck, why do you think people have ever left comfortable homes to go explore a frontier?
No. And that's why the supposed stakes of the storyline shouldn't be "OMG maybe everyone will die!" It's way more interesting (and less predictable) when the stakes are about what happens to the characters on a personal level, or to the new alien they just met, or to the planet they just discovered.
Exactly. This. Many of the best episodes of TOS (and TNG, and DS9) were about this.
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't rewatch the first season of any Berman-era Trek series. Can't imagine why anyone would, really. So if that's the quality bar you're setting for DSC, it's pretty damn low...
Are you seriously suggesting that SG-1 represents the high-water mark for SF TV, and if someone doesn't enjoy it then there's nothing better to choose from?
Hear, hear. I love SF (on screen or in print); it's one of my favorite genres. But a badly told story doesn't get bonus points just for being in that genre. On the contrary, if anything I'm liable to judge it more harshly, because it betrays its own potential and misleads others about what the genre is capable of.
How do you figure? There's The Expanse and Counterpart and Game of Thrones and Colony and The Man in the High Castle and Westworld, and that's just off the top of my head, within the SF/fantasy genre, among shows that are currently airing. Go back in time a bit and you can add Lost (despite the bad finale) and nuBSG (ditto) and Firefly and Buffy and Babylon 5... step outside of genre material and you can add a whole host of shows from amongst current "peak TV," not to mention older shows ranging from The Wire (IMHO a contender for best TV show ever) to The West Wing all the way back to M*A*S*H... and that's still just off the top of my head. Sturgeon's Law applies, yes, but the world of TV is so vast, the top 10% still offers enough selection to keep anyone watching for a long time.
IMHO, if a new Star Trek show doesn't clearly deserve a space in that top 10%, then it has an uphill battle justifying its existence at all.
Hear, hear!
I think a number of us here have done a solid job of describing how utterly fucking stupid a retcon that would be. I'm still clinging to the hope that you're wrong and @SolarisOne is right and it's a misdirect, though. If the vast majority of us here can agree that it's a dumb idea, I have a hard time imagining how all the folks in the writers' room could have escaped that same conclusion.
Actually, there are oodles of Iron Man suits (did you see IM3?)! So the story logic here is even more simplistic than that.
Word. When the writers can't even be consistent from one episode to the next why Control needs it, it might as well be waving a sign saying McGUFFIN in neon capital letters. (And it's a shame, because it only serves to undermine what made the Sphere episode enjoyable in its own right.)
Again, right on the money. Control didn't get more than a couple of (inscrutable) passing mentions in dialogue before the episdoe where Cornwell sketched out the exposition on what it was, which happened to be the same episode in which we discovered it had been corrupted/gone rogue.
Its registry number is even 1031.
Discovery might have been a Section 31 ship when Fuller was in charge. Who knows?
I think Star Trek would do well to be let die if this is the case.
But, unlike many of the other shows you listed, I at least have fun with this current iteration of Star Trek, while many other shows always come across as "uber-serious" and lose me for that reason.
By your standards, one could argue that no Star Trek series is justified. That a good Star Trek series doesn't deserve to exist or even a great Star Trek series should be abandoned before it is even made. Because to make a top 10% list means a show has to be fucking brilliant and get everyone to agree so week after week after week.
This is the first post TOS Star Trek series I've been able to watch in its entirety for its first two seasons. And maybe it wouldn't make the top ten of the 100 shows I'm watching currently every year (probably a top twenty series though). But the idea of if you can't make a Star Trek show in everyone's top 10 list of what's on TV every year you shouldn't would mean that there would have been no Star Trek after 1967, IMHO. And that smacks me as a rather extreme and unproductive POV, especially since you yourself say you'd not rewatch the first 26 eps of any Berman series.
I don't sling the word stupid around very often, but in this rare occasion I will say that the idea that art better be on everyone's top 10% list or it shouldn't be made sounds perfectly stupid.
Last edited:
I wouldn't go that far. I have every expectation that with Michael Chabon and Patrick Stewart involved, the Picard series that's in development will more than justify its existence.
But DSC? That's another story. I certainly didn't say a show had to be serious to be good, and many of the ones I mentioned can vary in tone quite a bit! When DSC is at its best I have fun with it (as kind of a sentimental guilty pleasure), but it's seldom at its best. And when it tries to be serious, it often gets even worse, and the contrast with genuinely well-written shows gets even more glaring.
More than anything else, the problem is that it's just wildly erratic. Until a couple of weeks ago I was pretty consistently enjoying S2, but then things took a really abrupt nosedive.
Stewart had a big hand in what Insurrection and Nemesis turned out to be. I think the value of his personal involvement in assuring his show will be a top 10% out of the gate could be considered in some quarters (mine for one) wishful thinking.
Yes, this is why despite my trying to be positive about the Picard Series, I have this persistent feeling in the back of my mind that I won't like it as much as Discovery. And for more reasons than just my default opinion of, "I like the 23rd Century better than the 24th."
Well, if it set in 2399 it may very well be ushering in a new century that might be as fundamentally different from the 24th as the 24th was from the 23rd for one thing. I'll be willing to give it a chance to surprise me and give me a new way to look at the franchise, just like Disco has. If it does that, I think it will be worth the watch, even if it only ends up squeaking into my top 50 for 2019.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
