• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

News New season 3 teaser

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'.

Even though TOS,DS9,Voyager and Enterprise didn't lay it on as think as TNG with the bright super positive future they still stayed close enough that I think people didn't mind to much. The violence still wasn't graphic. You still had all the familiar aliens and colorful space uniforms and tech. Also importantly the shows happened in a time when the world was not so politically divided. Modern day politics does impact how people also feel. Some people don't want contemporary issues explore and prefer the most accessible approach of the Berman era were you explored themes or human nature stuff but did hold back on getting into specifics of the issues of the day. Also the people making the show never talked politics and neither did the fans that much either. The world just wasn't as divisive as it is today and it was easier for people to ignore things that they disagreed with. Most of the fights were over nerd stuff and now is about calling people racist or SJW and getting into really personal fights that go beyond the actual show. I think people miss how it felt like a simplier time back then.


Jason
 
Even though TOS,DS9,Voyager and Enterprise didn't lay it on as think as TNG with the bright super positive future they still stayed close enough that I think people didn't mind to much. The violence still wasn't graphic. You still had all the familiar aliens and colorful space uniforms and tech. Also importantly the shows happened in a time when the world was not so politically divided. Modern day politics does impact how people also feel. Some people don't want contemporary issues explore and prefer the most accessible approach of the Berman era were you explored themes or human nature stuff but did hold back on getting into specifics of the issues of the day. Also the people making the show never talked politics and neither did the fans that much either. The world just wasn't as divisive as it is today and it was easier for people to ignore things that they disagreed with. Most of the fights were over nerd stuff and now is about calling people racist or SJW and getting into really personal fights that go beyond the actual show. I think people miss how it felt like a simplier time back then.


Jason

The world wasn't as politically divided or divisive from 1966 to 1969 as it is today?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You can't be serious. And if you are you really need to go back and look at the history of the world in the 1960s.
 
Last edited:
We're on the way to things getting worse but we're still not there. Too many people are willing to fall in line, anyone who tries to drive change is subverted, and no one with the power to make things happen will do anything until it's too late.

And not enough has happened to effect everyday people's everyday lives. Until now. It's too early to know for sure, but I think we just hit a fault line.

Discovery Season 3 has the chance to show how things can become better after they became catastrophically worse. It could be a tale of "We didn't want this to happen but, now that it has, here's what we can do to make it better. We're not going to let this obstacle stop us from prevailing."

It's hard to say in the dark, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say I think DSC S3 will probably eventually be seen as ahead of its time.
 
Last edited:
Even though TOS,DS9,Voyager and Enterprise didn't lay it on as think as TNG with the bright super positive future they still stayed close enough that I think people didn't mind to much. The violence still wasn't graphic. You still had all the familiar aliens and colorful space uniforms and tech. Also importantly the shows happened in a time when the world was not so politically divided. Modern day politics does impact how people also feel. Some people don't want contemporary issues explore and prefer the most accessible approach of the Berman era were you explored themes or human nature stuff but did hold back on getting into specifics of the issues of the day. Also the people making the show never talked politics and neither did the fans that much either. The world just wasn't as divisive as it is today and it was easier for people to ignore things that they disagreed with. Most of the fights were over nerd stuff and now is about calling people racist or SJW and getting into really personal fights that go beyond the actual show. I think people miss how it felt like a simplier time back then.


Jason

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with my post.

DS9 marked a return to the more gritty and conflicted future that is presented in both TOS and Discovery, and internal conflict was baked into the very premise of Voyager and persisted throughout the entirety of the series even if it wasn't manifested to the degree that some people think it ought to have given how fundamental to the series' premise it was intended to be, and, of course, Enterprise was full of grit and conflict since it was markedly closer to our own timeline than any of the other series in the Trek franchise, making TNG's depiction of this super-bright, super-cheery utopian future where everything is always okay in the end an outlier viewpoint that never actually existed in-universe given the ways that the aforementioned DS9 and Voyager depicted the 24th Century and what was going on in it.
 
No, that's your "bitch eating crackers" syndrome in full swing. It's not her, the character or the actress, it's YOU.

My what? What's me? Her tedious over-acting and bland, annoying, badly written character is my fault?

The show is about her.

Burnham might be the lead character, the show can revolve around her, but that doesn't mean the universe has to. If the Red Angel storyline hadn't happened, then no one would be complaining, but the fact is, it did, she saved the entire galaxy from total destruction, a few short months after stopping a war. (And as if that terrible writing wasn't bad enough, we were also treated to an awkward 30 second clip of her screaming in slow motion as she did it. Great. :ack:)
 
We're on the way to things getting worse but we're still not there. Too many people are willing to fall in line, anyone who tries to drive change is subverted, and no one with the power to make things happen will do anything until it's too late.

And not enough has happened to effect everyday people's everyday lives. Until now. It's too early to see to know for sure, but I think we just hit a fault line.

Discovery Season 3 has the chance to show how things can become better after they became catastrophically worse. It could be a tale of "We didn't want this to happen but, now that it has, here's what we can do to make it better. We're not going to let this obstacle stop us from prevailing."

It's hard to say in the dark, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say I think DSC S3 will probably eventually be seen as ahead of its time.

Well said, Garth. I’ve had similar thoughts on the subject.
 
The world wasn't as politically divided or divisive from 1966 to 1969 as it is today?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You can't be serious. And if you are you really need to go back and look at the history of the world in the 1960s.

I'm not talking about the 60's. The vision of Trek people are on about comes from TNG and the Berman era which was late 80's to early 2000's.


Jason
 
Oh and I'm gay btw.

And? (It's certainly not proof against posting drivel.)

Tell us what exactly you found forced, obvious, and seeking in S3, now that you've seen it.

Meh. Don't really need that, do we? Comes along often enough unprompted.

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. :rolleyes:

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. :barf:




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 :rolleyes: 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.

Outstanding. Should be a sticky somewhere. :techman::techman::techman:

My what? What's me? Her tedious over-acting and bland, annoying, badly written character is my fault?



Burnham might be the lead character, the show can revolve around her, but that doesn't mean the universe has to. If the Red Angel storyline hadn't happened, then no one would be complaining, but the fact is, it did, she saved the entire galaxy from total destruction, a few short months after stopping a war. (And as if that terrible writing wasn't bad enough, we were also treated to an awkward 30 second clip of her screaming in slow motion as she did it. Great. :ack:)

So. Much. Yawn.
 
We're on the way to things getting worse but we're still not there. Too many people are willing to fall in line, anyone who tries to drive change is subverted, and no one with the power to make things happen will do anything until it's too late.

And not enough has happened to effect everyday people's everyday lives. Until now. It's too early to know for sure, but I think we just hit a fault line.

Discovery Season 3 has the chance to show how things can become better after they became catastrophically worse. It could be a tale of "We didn't want this to happen but, now that it has, here's what we can do to make it better. We're not going to let this obstacle stop us from prevailing."

It's hard to say in the dark, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say I think DSC S3 will probably eventually be seen as ahead of its time.

I think it's a fine premise that can make for a good show but I think many fans aren't looking at from a creative perspective. They like the idealistic future as a kind of dream setting in which it's a place they would like to live in as a kind of alternative to the hardships of our real world. They like social issues being little morality plays and they just love the imagination involved in both the tech and how the crews are basically families and just the overriding amount positivity that comes from the universe. It feels like a comfortable blanket that might make you think about important issues but it's never going to really offend you by attacking any of your own values because the show's other than TOS have had a kind of distance to the world in which they were being made.

It's one of the reasons why even though it's got a overall liberal perspective it's been able to get fans from all sorts of different political backgrounds. It's always sort of had this appeal that everyone could find something in it you love. You see people other than white people so it's got appeal for people wanting more diversity and the science stuff appeals to people who are into science and you always here about people in those fields talking about their love of Trek and it's stories and characters have been compelling enough to appeal to people who just like it as a good tv show or for people having difficulties a fantasy land to escape to and the social commentary has always been subtle enough that it doesn't offend people more conservative.

That is because they were created in a time when tv shows had to be made to be more accessible for ratings as opposed to now where you can amp up the political messaging because now shows can be successful by simply appealing to smaller but reliable fanbase. For most shows that isn't a problem. Nobody cares for example that something like Firefly that you basically got to be a nerd to like it. With these older franchises though that were created in a time when they had approach social issues in a different way than shows do today your always going to see some backlash. Especially with the big 3 in Trek,Star Wars, and Doctor Who because they gained a lot of their success on creating a lot of mainstream appeal. I think people have forgotten how tv was made back in the day before cable and streaming and you couldn't be picky about your viewers. Nobody making a show would insult fans any possible fans in the media or today it's social media because every viewer was needed for ratings.

Jason
 
Last edited:
I think it's a fine premise that can make for a good show but I think many fans aren't looking at from a creative perspective. They like the idealistic future as a kind of dream setting in which it's a place they would like to live in as a kind of alternative to the hardships of our real world. They like social issues being little morality plays and they just love the imagination involved in both the tech and how the crews are basically families and just the overriding amount positivity that comes from the universe. It feels like a comfortable blanket that might make you think about important issues but it's never going to really offend you by attacking any of your own values because the show's other than TOS have had a kind of distance to the world in which they were being made.

I understand this viewpoint, even though it's not one that I share. I think we all know this. But I'm saying what I personally would get out of DSC S3 if it goes the way I think it'll be going. Which isn't much to go on at this point. I'm basing it off the trailer from October and the teaser from last week. So the tethered Federation flag with only six planets and Saru's proclamation to make the future bright again.

I'm still in the middle of looking at everything Gene Roddenberry said about his views on the future (it's something I've been doing off-and-on for the past week-and-a-half, it is taking a while, and I have had other things going on, so it's been an effort and people have to sit tight). I won't post anything further on that until I'm done putting everything together. But I can say that he believed humanity had a durability. If society was knocked down, it would come back up again, maybe better.

Maybe that's not the "warm, comfy blanket" of the past, but that does speak to my outlook on the future. As it looks right now, the world is going to be even worse when we're old than it is right now. There's no question of it in my mind. Our generation is fucked. There's no two ways about it. The question is: "What do we do even as this is happening and afterwards?" I'm not particularly interested in distraction (even though posting here is itself a distraction, ironically) but ideas that can point to a solution ahead in the altered landscape we face. It doesn't need to be the solution, nor am I looking for it to be, but it can be something that gets people thinking or wondering. Discovery doesn't have to be an exact parallel. In fact I prefer that it doesn't look like it's going to be -- because there's a big difference between timely and something that will date what you're watching almost immediately (hello Star Trek VI) -- but I do appreciate something that's in tune with things that are along the line of what's on my mind.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking about the 60's. The vision of Trek people are on about comes from TNG and the Berman era which was late 80's to early 2000's.


Jason
Sorry you included TOS in your opening paragraph,; so if you weren't talking about the '60s why did you include it in your post?
 
I think it's a fine premise that can make for a good show but I think many fans aren't looking at from a creative perspective. They like the idealistic future as a kind of dream setting in which it's a place they would like to live in as a kind of alternative to the hardships of our real world. They like social issues being little morality plays and they just love the imagination involved in both the tech and how the crews are basically families and just the overriding amount positivity that comes from the universe. It feels like a comfortable blanket that might make you think about important issues but it's never going to really offend you by attacking any of your own values because the show's other than TOS have had a kind of distance to the world in which they were being made.

It's one of the reasons why even though it's got a overall liberal perspective it's been able to get fans from all sorts of different political backgrounds. It's always sort of had this appeal that everyone could find something in it you love. You see people other than white people so it's got appeal for people wanting more diversity and the science stuff appeals to people who are into science and you always here about people in those fields talking about their love of Trek and it's stories and characters have been compelling enough to appeal to people who just like it as a good tv show or for people having difficulties a fantasy land to escape to and the social commentary has always been subtle enough that it doesn't offend people more conservative.

That is because they were created in a time when tv shows had to be made to be more accessible for ratings as opposed to now where you can amp up the political messaging because now shows can be successful by simply appealing to smaller but reliable fanbase. For most shows that isn't a problem. Nobody cares for example that something like Firefly that you basically got to be a nerd to like it. With these older franchises though that were created in a time when they had approach social issues in a different way than shows do today your always going to see some backlash. Especially with the big 3 in Trek,Star Wars, and Doctor Who because they gained a lot of their success on creating a lot of mainstream appeal. I think people have forgotten how tv was made back in the day before cable and streaming and you couldn't be picky about your viewers. Nobody making a show would insult fans any possible fans in the media or today it's social media because every viewer was needed for ratings.

Jason

All of Star Trek presents an idealized future, but only TNG tries to argue that an idealized future also has to be or is going to be a sanitized one, which is why it holds up the least of all the post-TOS Trek series.

People have created this idea in their heads that all of Star Trek has to be sanitized like TNG in order to be "real" Star Trek, but simultaneously want TOS to be considered "real" Star Trek even though its tonal ideology is a complete 360° pivot away from TNG and is completely in line with the tonal ideologies of DS9, VGR, ENT, DSC, and PCRD.
 
Still trying to wrap my head around the idea that a storyline that's apparently going to be about relighting the flame of civilization and bringing back hope is not optimistic and positive. Yeah, I get it that the Federation's fall is bound to leave a bad taste in the mouths of lots of fans, but I'd personally find a future with a hyper-advanced Federation already having explored, discovered, developed and solved everything to be super boring. What would that leave us? Discovery would just leave for another unexplored galaxy that can tell the same stories that TNG or Voyager did, with the same setting, only phasers, photon torpedoes, shields and whatnot having different names and FX. So yes, I very much welcome the change of setting because it will allow Discovery to tell another kind of story it hasn't told before. People might derisively call it a mere rehash of Andromeda, even though it's a common type of story in speculative fiction, from Asimov's Foundation to the Fallout series of video games... I'm very much curious to see Star Trek's take on the topic.

But then again, we don't learn much from the teaser itself, we can only infer the series is going to be about Discovery taking on the mantle of rebuilding the Federation, told from Burnham's perspective, as she's the main character. To be honest, it's not that different than jaded washout Benjamin Sisko, freshly assigned to a graveyard backwater position, swiftly becoming the center of everything even tangentially related to Bajor to the point of the reveal that he was descended from their gods, not to mention the Dominion War and his direct involvement in multiple regime changes, etc, etc.
 
Last edited:
I understand this viewpoint, even though it's not one that I share. I think we all know this. But I'm saying what I personally would get out of DSC S3 if it goes the way I think it'll be going. Which isn't much to go on at this point. I'm basing it off the trailer from October and the teaser from last week. So the tethered Federation flag with only six planets and Saru's proclamation to make the future bright again.

I'm still in the middle of looking at everything Gene Roddenberry said about his views on the future (it's something I've been doing off-and-on for the past week-and-a-half, it is taking a while, and I have had other things going on, so it's been an effort and people have to sit tight). I won't post anything further on that until I'm done putting everything together. But I can say that he believed humanity had a durability. If society was knocked down, it would come back up again, maybe better.

Maybe that's not the "warm, comfy blanket" of the past, but that does speak to my outlook on the future. As it looks right now, the world is going to be even worse when we're old than it is right now. There's no question of it in my mind. Our generation is fucked. There's no two ways about it. The question is: "What do we do even as this is happening and afterwards?" I'm not particularly interested in distraction (even though posting here is itself a distraction, ironically) but ideas that can point to a solution ahead in the altered landscape we face. It doesn't need to be the solution, nor am I looking for it to be, but it can be something that gets people thinking or wondering. Discovery doesn't have to be an exact parallel. In fact I prefer that it doesn't look like it's going to be -- because there's a big difference between timely and something that will date what you're watching almost immediately (hello Star Trek VI) -- but I do appreciate something that's in tune with things that are along the line of what's on my mind.

I've always had mix feelings about the Roddenberry vision most noticeable in TNG. TNG is the show that made me a fan I know that kind of, warm comfy blanket as you said really made me a fan because I was really depressed at the time and it still does when I feel bad. Yet my favorite shows in terms of quality are DS9 and TOS. Both still feel like comfy escapism but also without being quite as naïve. So I kind of like both approaches but I do feel CBS Trek has moved even past the DS9 and TOS phase. They are more about exploring the idea that maybe we someday will get their where as the older stuff even TOS though the Roddenberry vision wasn't really created yet, simply show the dream already intact and the aspirational stuff comes more from example of how cool it would be if we grew as a species than trying to explore how to get their.

It would I also think be a easier sale if people liked the people making the show. People trusted and like Michael Piller and most of the writers on TNG except maybe some issues with Braga because he talked about not being a Trek fan. They also like Behr and those writers on DS9 as well. In fact the writers of those shows are almost as big as stars to the fans as the characters. People did hate Berman but their has always been a feeling that Piller and Behr were able to work around him.

The Discovery writing situation has been a one controversary issue after another and people seem to dislike Kurtzman much like Berman only you don't have that really talented person who people feels like they truly love Trek and have been able to prove it with writing some great stuff. Picard has it better off because people did seem to like Chabon so even though they had issues as well people rolled with the mistakes easier and also because the show was pretty good overall. If Fuller had stayed all of this would be mute. He had the vision. He might have gotten Rosario Dawson so he would also have the star fans would love. It would have changed everything and fans would have ignored the flaws much easier or any mistakes.


Jason
 
Sorry you included TOS in your opening paragraph,; so if you weren't talking about the '60s why did you include it in your post?

Probably out of habit. I am so use to thinking of TOS being connected with TNG and DS9 and the Berman stuff. I didn't become a fan until 94 so I never really experienced Trek back in the days when it was only TOS.


Jason
 
Still trying to wrap my head around the idea that a storyline that's apparently going to be about relighting the flame of civilization and bringing back hope is not optimistic and positive. Yeah, I get it that the Federation's fall is bound to leave a bad taste in the mouths of lots of fans, but I'd personally find a future with a hyper-advanced Federation already having explored, discovered, developed and solved everything to be super boring. What would that leave us? Discovery would just leave for another unexplored galaxy that can tell the same stories that TNG or Voyager did, with the same setting, only phasers, photon torpedoes, shields and whatnot having different names and FX. So yes, I very much welcome the change of setting because it will allow Discovery to tell another kind of story it hasn't told before. People might derisively call it a mere rehash of Andromeda, even though it's a common type of story in speculative fiction, from Asimov's Foundation to the Fallout series of video games... I'm very much curious to see Star Trek's take on the topic.

But then again, we don't learn much from the teaser itself, we can only infer the series is going to be about Discovery taking on the mantle of rebuilding the Federation, told from Burnham's perspective, as she's the main character. To be honest, it's not that different than jaded washout Benjamin Sisko, freshly assigned to a graveyard backwater position, swiftly becoming the center of everything even tangentially related to Bajor to the point of the reveal that he was descended from their gods, not to mention the Dominion War and his direct involvement in multiple regime changes, etc, etc.

I think one of the reasons it doesn't feel positive is one of the reasons why people were afraid of the Federation being the bad guys in Picard. The idea that everything that was accomplished in those shows and their legacies would basically be erased and forgotten. It means people in this future don't look back at Kirk and Picard as heroes. The name Enterprise means nothing. And the utopia on earth is gone and the people living in this time not to mention the several decades before the fall lived lives in basically a non-Trekian landscape. It's almost like your erasing canon by going to a place that doesn't remember it. More symbolic concerns about preserving the Trek legacy and also no trust in the writing staff so some seeing it as them giving old Trek the middle finger.

I think the only artistic issue I have seen is the fear they will once again have Burnham be a savior once again. I think people are simply tired of this idea that their is some destiny that only one person can solve in tv and movies in general yet Discovery will have still done it 3 seasons in a role if they do it again. Far cry from Picard who got fired, cussed out of Starfleet headquarters and had to join a band of rogues to go save this girl who was in trouble. I've noticed lots of shows are starting to go for the everyman hero right now. The Mandolorian is just another bounty hunter, Captain Mercer barely got a command , the Legends of Tomorrow are kind of a bunch of misfits. Meanwhile Burnham is Jesus every season. Especially confusing because the idea of making the lead a non-captain was actually to move away from this or at least that was the initial idea.

Jason
 
Last edited:
The vast majority of the hatred leveled at DSC is pedantic, hypocritical nonsense.

No way to tell. Heck even saying someone not liking the show is hatred is unknown. Hatred is pretty strong emotion for someone to have for even the worst tv show they might dislike.

Jason
 
Is there a premiere date for Season 3 yet? I need to know whether or not to keep my CBSAA subscription going!
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top