Nah. Starships don't need duty shifts. They only work when the plot demands it 
Spoilers Nilsson to Ina switcheroo...
- Thread starter ITDUDE
- Start date
And how many times in Discovery have we seen these other shifts in the bridge?
The story hasn't required it.
Well... They still have to exist... After all, the people we see still have to eat and sleep...
Not in Star Trek. No bathrooms either.
TNG liked to switch out the bridge crew but only for landing parties. For some reason taking half of the alpha shift bridge crew for an away team was a thing .
Except we see both other shifts and bathrooms in the other series...
It's a joke...I do that.
Have already shown a Alpha, Beta, and Gamma Shift, and then a whole other relief crew for days off/leave, etc.
Plus probably other members of the crew that might have a vocation in say, astrometrics, or Botany, that is qualified as a bridge officer, maybe take a shift once or twice a week that is on call when a crew member is sick, or something happens like times on Tos or movies, like calling somebody to the bridge to replace someone who was killed, taken, or put on an away team.
I'd say the same for any core department like Engineering, Security, or Medical. A relief crew, and other crew members that are in say sciences or other lab that are trained and take shifts in the core departments, maybe in just an emergency/battle conditions for repair teams, and trauma conditions.
As to the theme of this thread, Maybe Nilsson was on a Beta shift or helping somewhere, and Ina was manning the station when the excrement hit the air mobilizer.. and Nilsson was shipped off the ship with the rest of the crew.
In real life, probably just an opportunity for the Ina Actress to do some work without the makeup, plenty of crew to portray!
Plus probably other members of the crew that might have a vocation in say, astrometrics, or Botany, that is qualified as a bridge officer, maybe take a shift once or twice a week that is on call when a crew member is sick, or something happens like times on Tos or movies, like calling somebody to the bridge to replace someone who was killed, taken, or put on an away team.
I'd say the same for any core department like Engineering, Security, or Medical. A relief crew, and other crew members that are in say sciences or other lab that are trained and take shifts in the core departments, maybe in just an emergency/battle conditions for repair teams, and trauma conditions.
As to the theme of this thread, Maybe Nilsson was on a Beta shift or helping somewhere, and Ina was manning the station when the excrement hit the air mobilizer.. and Nilsson was shipped off the ship with the rest of the crew.
In real life, probably just an opportunity for the Ina Actress to do some work without the makeup, plenty of crew to portray!
People want to be angry. It's easier.
It's not about being angry. It's more about
She would have been better off. It's not like the character is going to get a lot of screen time or lines
What does being critical get me? So far what is presented is a lot anger, misery and lack of enjoyment in a show that supposedly is about being entertaining. So I must be doing something wrong if my goal is to enjoy this show rather than find mistakes in it at every turn in the name of being critical.
What's it like having your infallible ability to predict the future then? Do tell us!
You can enjoy the show AND be critical. In fact I would say that should be a requirement for any serious fan.
-If you are a fanboy (giving a show a 10 before it starts... ahem... you know who you are)
OR
-If you are a hater (giving a show a 1 before it starts, there are a few here)
Well, you are not a serious fan in either of those cases. There, I said it. Fanboys are not serious fans.
Nice quote from this article:
https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/5/16/18618425/let-people-enjoy-things-criticism
"If we’re only allowed to be blissfully joyous about culture, the thinking goes, then none of our joy actually counts. We need to be able to call attention to the negative in order to recognize the positive. By noticing and then analyzing the negative, our entire understanding of a work of art becomes clearer and stronger"
It's fine if you are not critical and just enjoying yourself.. in a vacuum. As soon as you go to a public forum, be prepared to deal with people that have different opinion than yours.
Why should a fan be serious?
It's highly amusing to me that quote. See, I fully understand the negative of most of the works I partake in, including Discovery. What I won't do is dwell on those negatives because they are not helpful in terms of discussion. Learning what people like and don't like is the more interesting aspect for discussion of the work. But what I see is people who emphasize the negative and thus others feel the need to emphasize the positive. There is mocking of characters, trashing the writers, and bemoaning the state of the franchise. How is that helping to recognize the positive? How is that being a "serious fan?"
Ina is a spy on Discovery and a native to the 32nd century. Discovery's computer logs were altered to appear as if she had always been there since the 23rd century. Ina relied on the crew's sense of embarrassment at their non-recognition of her to obscure the fact that she doesn't belong on the ship.
I'm sure it will become a major story arc in Season 4.
I'm sure it will become a major story arc in Season 4.
I mean, that's a given. I just am wondering for people who focus on the negatives what do they get out of it? Because, again, I can only go by what I read, watching Discovery sounds like the worst experience for many that I see post here and elsewhere. You would think that Kurtzman had dragged the original film of TOS and TNG and burned it for the reaction.
Maybe I fan wrong or whatever but it is confusing to me.
Similar threads
