Oh, it definitely did. And it's based upon bullshit reasons that it bothers a person then as now.
News New season 3 teaser
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
I think that's what it will be like but you still have the issue that lots of people simply don't like the characters or specially Burnham and also this idea that the Federation dying in the first place I know will bug people. I think a lot of comes down to the fact that the people running Trek haven't proven they can be trusted to do something that epic with the continuity. I think fans always complain about people who run the shows until they prove to them in some way they deserve their support. Nick Meyer didn't like Trek so people are weary but then he Makes Wrath of Khan and all of sudden he is a trusted and his opinions all of sudden count.
Jason
As much as some people want this to be "nineteen twelvety", it's twenty twenty.
Ah, as others have suggested then, that could explain the lack of a premiere date.
Tell us what exactly you found forced, obvious, and seeking in S3, now that you've seen it.
I hope you're joking?
Edit: Wow you're not. OF COURSE Star Trek Discovery introduces a "non binary" character into the show. Of course it does.
Yes, of course a Star Trek series offers representation. This is a thing that Star Trek does.
My original comment still stands
I was replying to this...
It was better when it was only one of each
No, that's your "bitch eating crackers" syndrome in full swing. It's not her, the character or the actress, it's YOU.
The show is about her. Don't like it? Change the channel.
Burnham didn't start the war, it was coming anyway. How some people keep missing that is just fucking astounding. She stopped a war with the Klingons like Kirk stopped a war with the Klingons in a two hour movie.
And keeping Star Trek in it's own bubble, Kirk is conveniently at the focal point of war between the Feds and Klingons. Stops a scientist who's about to have androids infiltrate society and take over. Stops more androids from taking over later. Discovers time travel. Discovers a second way to time travel. Discovers an alternate dimension. Is able to stop a planet destroying device because apparently a seasoned commander and crew never thought to fire weapons into the maw of the thing (where they might have noticed temperature changes), and kept using only one weapon against the part of the thing that could repel it. Discovered the ship of a major 20th century historical figure. Met the guy who invented warp drive. Easily stole the Romulans most strategic piece of equipment. Stopped a computer that could destroy entire worlds. Cured Miri's planet. Stopped an invasion of parasites. Stopped an invasion of plant parasites. First captain to journey past the Galactic Barrier with ship intact, and conveniently *his* best friend is the one that gets godlike powers and goes crazy. Stopped a massive computer entity who's cloud cover was measured in AU's and saved Earth. Stopped a centuries old war. Stopped the forward scouts of an extragalactic invasion. Stopped the forward scouts of another extra galactic invasion. Saved all life on Earth from a probe. Had a former enemy escape and easily get his hands on a weapon of immense destructive power that was (amazingly enough) invented by his ex-girlfriend and son, luckily he was the only ship in the quadrant. Had the never before heard of brother of his science officer hijack his ship, which was the first to travel to the center of the galaxy where he met a creature that I guess was the basis of God. Is in a courtroom drama where another former old friend tries to frame him and he's (amazingly enough) prosecuted by an old girl friend. Ran into a mass murderer who he was on a colony with, while having a crewman from that same planet in his past also serving under him. Ran into Jack The Ripper. Stopped a centuries old war in 45 minutes. Ran into the creatures that Greek mythology was founded on. Ran into some other ancient beings who may have created the human race, ran into Leonardo DaVinci. Is the first ship to encounter the Romulans after a century or so. Discovers the Shore Leave planet where every thought can be made reality. Upends a computer dependent society, then does it again later. Helps a guy battle his anti-matter double to save the universe. Discovers a time portal planet and saves history. Recovers his first officers brain because (amazingly enough) it's the only one that could run a computer on that one world. Free's another society from obsessive gambling brains. Stops a giant space amoeba before it can destroy the galaxy.
But yeah....Michael Burnham "started" (she didn't) and ended the Klingon War and was the Red Angel who saved the galaxy. Wow. Two whole stories.
And all of the Star Trek episodes pretty much required Kirk and Spock, sometimes McCoy to solve these dilemmas. Like, these specific characters, without which, another crew would've been fucked and in some cases were. See USS Constellation, Defiant, Intrepid, Exeter
Trek has always featured characters who are in the right (or wrong) place at the right time. Who are at the focal point of big events that affect worlds, the Federation, a quarter of the galaxy or the universe. A certain amount of these stories feature old friends, and family members as prominent players in big scale stories. Spock's half brother, Worfs brother and half brother, Data's "brother", "mother", his biological "brother". Carol Marcus, David Marcus and Khan all in one big wacky adventure together with a weapon that can wipe out worlds. And I'm sure fans of later shows can mention other examples. It's a tv show, not a documentary. I'm watching to be entertained for an hour and I have been.
Yep. Dude has a serious problem that he's trying to project onto the character and actress.
They weren't "evil", they just weren't the rainbows and unicorn version of early TNG. The fictional world of 24th century Trek started getting darker as it went.
Again...your opinion, not fact. I haven't found DSC or Picard to be "dark and grim". What some people want is the Season 1 Wesley Crusher of futures. A clean cut, white bread, golly jeepers, root beer drinking future where, gee willikers, people are perfectly perfect.
Uh....yeah. As I've been saying on this board for literally years, one of the reasons they've done prequels is not because they're being trendy. But because when the tech of 24th century Trek is your starting point, moving up from that your characters become unrecognizable and unidentifiable to a modern audience. That is the reason B&B created ENT. They said as much. Otherwise you're looking at something like nanotech that allows for organic integration of technology. The characters wouldn't need to carry phasers because they could emit beams from their bodies,, as well as personal force fields. Wouldn't need communicators or tricorders because that tech would be integrated into them at the microscopic level. Would be able to heal themselves, emit hard light constructs and so on and so on. Your characters essentially become gods. And fanboys would whine because they don't have a new phaser, communicator and tricorder toy to buy.
No, it doesn't. That's you projecting. The image is her bringing hope back. Which is relevant to our society right now, even without the Coronavirus.
No, "we" don't know that and your opinion isn't fact. I just finished watching DSC S2 and am about to start the last episode of Picard. I loved DSC and like Picard, but have found it almost a slog to get through.
See above about Kirk and crew. Star Trek is my favorite show, but let's stop pretending that DSC is doing something different than it or the spin-off shows by putting their five cast members at the forefront of galactic events or having them be the one starship captain and crew who could stop big threats, solve the problem, and save Earth and the entire Federation....multiple times. And in most cases they did it in 45 minutes.
Burnham happened to be in the right (or wrong) place at the right (or wrong) time in the pilot. The rest of the show was about the Discovery crew's adventures during the war and in the Mirror Universe, and season two was about the Discovery crew's adventures with the red angel signals. The Discovery's crew, with extra emphasis on Burnham since she is the main character and that's how it usually goes. Star Trek had Kirk, Spock and McCoy save the day almost exclusively, with extra emphasis on Kirk....because he was the lead.
I like the type of story telling they've been doing on DSC, and no, it doesn't have to be on the epic scale, but I am enjoying it regardless because I've always wanted truly epic Trek. Now, don't get me wrong....DSC has it's flaws and the biggest ones for me in season 2 (or at least stands out to me as I type this) is the photon torpedo detonation scene. Because all the drama was built up, and it apparently took out a chunk of the saucer, but Pike just closes the door, and watches it go off, then walks away. Like....the ship didn't even shake or anything. Also Amanda and Sarek showing up out of nowhere before the big battle, then not letting us not get to see their (or Amanda's anyway) interaction with Spock.
I also prefer the serialized nature of the new shows because I cannot stand "planet of the week" type stories any longer after having seen five tv shows of it (if we're just sticking to Trek). If we get a Pike show, I hope they can figure out something new to do or some new approach to take.
There aren't enough of these
for that comment.Nope. That's YOU. I've yet to be taken out of a single instance of Discovery for the shit you're talking about. Not once. You seem to be part of the "of course I want some inclusion and diversity....as long as the people being included know their place" segment of fandom.
This is 2020 and modern tv / Trek is going to start reflecting the world we live in.
Last edited:
The difference being that most Star Trek TOS episodes weren’t about the end of everything. Yeah, they faced big problems but every story wasn’t about the fall of the Federation. Those smaller more intimate stories made the big stories feel big.
When every season is an arc about the fall of everything, it simply loses its impact for me. Much like what happened with the Abrams films, by the time of Beyond, they had simply lost their impact when a bajillion lives are at stake every time.
Of course, YMMV.
All large long-lasting political entities have periods of decline and renewal. More often they just have decline. It would be stranger if the UFP stayed static. By the time of Calypso they might even be antagonistic.
No, no, I do agree that we could do with less "end of everything" type stories. It's one of the reasons I don't miss comics. It's like the guys our age, who grew up with the biggest of the big stories of the 80's are constantly trying to do that every month. I swear, from the descriptions I read of DC books, it's like how can we put even more in danger? The universe...the multiverse...the omniverse...the multi-multiverse.
So yeah, when everything's an event, nothing is an event. We remember Crisis, Great Darkness Saga and Dark Phoenix saga decades later because it wasn't trying to be done every month as it seems to be now.
With the JJ films.....well they were only coming out every couple of years, and it wasn't so much the "end of everything" aspect so much as the "bad guy out for revenge" angle that annoyed me. Still enjoyed them, just not as much. I don't watch a lot of tv and am not as OCD about Trek as I used to be.
DSC's a fun ride, is cinematic, enjoyable crew, looks great and entertains me for an hour or so. But I don't really analyze it or get hung up on stuff as I did with past Treks. Usually I just go "that was weird" and move on.
For the most part, Picard is the same, though I did have some issues with how the character was written.
I think they have a stellar cast, and if they ever come up with the right story could have something really special. I’m hoping that happens in season three.
I know. That's a realistic way to explore the Trek franchise but I think many fans prefer the optimistic but not realistic idea that the world can be better than that and humans can move past our negative aspects even though you will still have a few people who fall through the crack like the racist guy on TOS towards Spock when he see's Romulans look like Vulcans and of course aliens who can still have our flaws. It might be naïve but it's still a hopeful and pleasant feeling and also it's a world you want to live in. I don't think people would really want to live in the Discovery and Picard world. But who wouldn't like to live on the Enterprise-D and see all this cool basically magical tech and the people you encounter are nice and friends and you don't have bullies or racist or mean people like you meet in real life.
It's fundamentally no different from something like how "The Brady Bunch" became popular because it's the perfect family. Everyone loves each other and you get small not that serious problems. It like TNG was all about being a place to sort of escape the real world for awhile and sort of just watch nice pleasant people and forget bad things happing in your life. Trek can basically ignore that and still make good shows because I do think despite some flaws Picard was a good show but it just doesn't really offer that same feeling of escape people use to get from Trek.
Jason
This idea of the future never actually existed within the universe of Star Trek, as proven by every other iteration of Star Trek besides The Next Generation, including the two series that were contemporaneously set with it in-universe, so it's really baffling to me that this has somehow become the 'gold standard for what Star Trek is supposed to be'.
Similar threads
- Poll
