Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x14 - "Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2"

[Noname Given]

I like DSC, and I've enjoyed the hell out if the last 2 seasons (perhaps more than any other post -TOS show), but this ending all but confirms my worst suspicions (and nightmares): the creative team really DOES listen to online crazies bitching and takes cues from that in their creative decisions.

I guess I should listen to the parents screaming from the stands about what plays we should run next fall.

I'm in a similar boat as TOS and the 23rd century ARE my favorite Star Trek era. That said after 39 episodes navigating the TOS continuity and hearing a lot of crap from some of the more vocal and "want it my way" TOS fans (Hell, as I've said, I don't care for the 'split/swept back' nacelles struts on Pike's 1701 - but for example LOVE their new take on the 1701 interior Bridge set); I can see the Writers Room and the Executive Producers having a desire to do 'their version' with zero canon constraints imposed.

Yes, I'm a bit deflated that they moved STT: D forward 930 years <--- That was Burnham's line in the episode, although in the interview Alix Kurtzman states it'll be 950 years. But that said, it's far enough forward from TNG's and ANY other future time/era mentioned (including the 31st century era of Daniels from ENT) that it'll be interesting to give them a chance and see what they do here. (I just hope it's not so Utopian that we have Humans with the powers of Gary Micthell benignly shaping the Galaxy.

I am hoping they do a "Fall of the Federation" storyline; or at the very least do a "Utopia wasn't all it was cracked up to be..." storyline and they have (and work for money/credits again) in the post-TNG era.

- TOS fans like me will still have the 'Section 31' series that Kurtzman has said will be set in the 23rd century era.

- TNG fans will have the Picard show, where they can enjoy hearing the old man be as self righteous, hypocritical, and as preachy as ever about why Federation society in the pinnacle of sentient existence; and if you don't think like him, you're unenlightened; and hell dress yiou down until you feel ashamed (like Worf) or just give in and become part of the insidious cult that is the late 24th/early 25th century Federation.

Time will tell.

 

[Arpy]

I like technobabble too, but only when it’s used in a “realistic” way. Future scientists and engineers will speak about futuristic science and engineering, but there’s a difference between that and story McGuffins used to excuse lazy writing.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm in a similar boat as TOS and the 23rd century ARE my favorite Star Trek era. That said after 39 episodes navigating the TOS continuity and hearing a lot of crap from some of the more vocal and "want it my way" TOS fans (Hell, as I've said, I don't care for the 'split/swept back' nacelles struts on Pike's 1701 - but for example LOVE their new take on the 1701 interior Bridge set); I can see the Writers Room and the Executive Producers having a desire to do 'their version' with zero canon constraints imposed.

Yeah, I can't imagine being on the receiving end of all of that.

 

[Lord Garth]

I won't miss the debates about how DSC fits into TOS and the other series. Not one bit.

No way would I have lasted four seasons of ENT, arguing about that constantly. And their seasons were twice as long. Eeesh. Goodbye Prequel Canon Debates. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[Tim Thomason]

And Colt was never addressed by name in either this or the previous episode, yet was there in the credits. I tried spotting the actress who plays her (presumably on the bridge somewhere), but I couldn't see her.

Dark-haired redshirt sitting to Lt. Nicola's left, pretty much where Uhura is supposed to be right by the turbolift. If that's not Colt, then it's nobody.

Somebody has to confirm if Nicole Dickinson was playing that redshirt in the back or the red-faced alien in blue.

 

[Kor]

Dark-haired redshirt sitting to Lt. Nicola's left, pretty much where Uhura is supposed to be right by the turbolift. If that's not Colt, then it's nobody.

Somebody has to confirm if Nicole Dickinson was playing that redshirt in the back or the red-faced alien in blue.

I can't remember what the dark-haired redshirt looked like. But here's Nicole Dickinson's IMDB page with a portrait: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7423288/
So which character was she?

Kor

 

[Noname Given]

Battle was too busy. Since when do fighters in Star Trek exist as viable tactic.

^^^
See DS9 S6 - "Sacrifice Of Angels"

 

[oberth]

i'm so proud of me - i not only managed to not watch the first part but i also did not look in any pertinent thread so that i could watch both parts back to back

the big question now is will i read those threads or not?

 

[oberth]

^^^
See DS9 S6 - "Sacrifice Of Angels"

space battles in trek always sucked - the bad guys forming a ring around discovery and enterprise was just darn stOOpid

 

[Noname Given]

No way is Shatner doing a Trek appearance without billing and a fat paycheck. If he ever does it, it will be clear it's him.

Not to mention a canister of Oxygen (But hey, maybe he and Patrick Stewart can share one. ) [Oh, and 56 here, so yeah, I CAN make 'old age' jokes and laugh at them too. ]

 

[oberth]

Yes, I'm a bit deflated that they moved STT: D forward 930 years <--- That was Burnham's line in the episode, although in the interview Alix Kurtzman states it'll be 950 years. But that said, it's far enough forward from TNG's and ANY other future time/era mentioned (including the 31st century era of Daniels from ENT) that it'll be interesting to give them a chance and see what they do here. (I just hope it's not so Utopian that we have Humans with the powers of Gary Micthell benignly shaping the Galaxy.

no way. they'd blow discovery out of space in a nanosecond - i bet that future will be a bit 'neobarb' compared to daniels' time

i wonder how they'll bring back the empress time-wise for her own show

 

[Arpy]

They said earlier that the plan was to give DSC three seasons. Two tied into the lore, it seems, and a third that is free range to do whatever they want...they think lol. They’ve got four other shows in the works and want to do one at a time? Each one different tonally.

This could actually work quite spectacularly. It’s a drop the mic on a few good years. (Well, so-so years.)

But I rather loathe 31 and will not be onboard for that nonsense. The animated series could be disasters or not — I’m not a big fan of TAS and contemporary animation can be crass and forgettable.

Picard I’m excited for but wonder if it’ll be as frenetic and stylized as DSC is — problematic, if you want people to ponder broader themes. And I wonder now disillusioned or dystopian it might go.

A Pike series might be fun, but I’m not holding my breath.

I think my biggest concern is what the 33rd century will look like. Will it be an after-the-fall rebuilding of civilization (dystopian) or something spectacular that Discovery finds itself amongst? I hope for the latter but expect the former.

 

[Noname Given]

I find this quite funny

TOS was the VASTLY superior show to discovery and yes, fans of that show don't like it's continuity trampled on.

It's akin to say, The Lord Of The Rings, another classic genre property, if they released a 6/10 TV show based on that which rewrote Gandalf as a drunk and that really Frodo didn't take the ring to mordor but a new character did, and Aragon had a best friend called Fred who was never seen before but was secretly always there and saved middle earth.

Like yeah, they wouldn't like it.

Discovery needed to stand on its own merit.

It's not that "continuity fanboy nerds" are angry that it's changed things

They are angry that a MIDDLING quality show is changing things, Discovery isn't a good enough show to have the right to rewrite the lore of an all time classic show.

Discovery needs to stop trying to reinvent the wheel and concentrate on just being a decent TV show

This TOS fan (who started with TOS S3 on NBC at age 6) pretty much disagrees with your characterization of how 'good' ST: D is in relation to TOS. Yes, I STILL find TOS overall superior to ST: D; but I also rate ST: D over all previous TV incarnations of STAR TREK from TNG on (yes, INCLUDING DS9 which turned into a real pedantic soap opera with too many religious overtones for me at times).

I do have my issues with ST: D - but no, it was anything but "Middling Quality" compared to the Utopian crap Berman and Co. shoveled out from 1987 on.

 

[oberth]

(...) which turned into a real pedantic soap opera with too many religious overtones for me at times).

at times?

 

[Hatter76]

Finally a Klingon that looks Klingon

 

[Nerys Myk]

The only sour notes for me were making the first rule of DISCO Club is you don't talk about DISCO and the DISCO being tossed into the future.

Oh and Michael's advice to Spock was a little on the nose.

 

[SolarisOne]

Picard I’m excited for but wonder if it’ll be as frenetic and stylized as DSC is — problematic, if you want people to ponder broader themes. And I wonder now disillusioned or dystopian it might go.

For what its worth, Kurtzman has said explicitly, more than once, that Picard will be vastly different in tone.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Finally a Klingon that looks Klingon

He's also Gene Simmons in a KISS cover band.

 

[Longinus]

They had already committed themselves to taking the ship to the future early on. Why change their strategy when they are actually able to to act on it? Because some in the audience don't want them to? Weird.

Yes, it was certainly obvious that the writers were committed to it. It never made much sense why the characters were too, but they didn't let details like that bother them.

 

[Alan Roi]

He's also Gene Simmons in a KISS cover band.

You haven't lived until you've been to a KISS concert performed in the original Klingon.