The Burn doesn't bother me. At least it wasn't another Big Bad or more AI run amok. One reason I like DSC Seasons 3 and 4 so much more was because they largely got away from that kind of crap.
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
I didn't mind The Burn so much as I rolled my eyes at the cause of The Burn.
I don't follow all the Burn hate, especially in this day and age where rocks and crystals are practically given god status by some. All kinds of mystical abilities are heaped upon them today. Add hundreds of years of experimenting and anything is fictionally possible.
Now, I don't do the rock worshipping scene but I don't consider it a crazy sci-fi concept of if some sort of eventual mental or physic connection with them someday going south causing all of a kind within a given area going BOOM!
Now, I don't do the rock worshipping scene but I don't consider it a crazy sci-fi concept of if some sort of eventual mental or physic connection with them someday going south causing all of a kind within a given area going BOOM!
Same. The Burn and its cause are something that resonates quite deeply for me, and it feels quite in line with the space fantasy themes in TOS and TAS.
Like many, I had to stop and think about the Burn and it's cause. After some reflection I realized how perfectly aligned it is with both the Franchise and the main message of the season. I can't help but think how much fans are missing if they don't see these things. I think fandom reflecting is a lost art.
That's interesting because this is how you can connect Burnham to the overall plot and make it work. I liked the original theory of something of an accident happening on the Vulcan/Romulan world (Is that Ni'Var? I forget) that caused the burn in Unification III. Then to can explore Burnham's feelings about that, considering she was raised by Vulcans, and it seems like a practical plot point. To have a massive distruction of the Galaxy be because a kid was depressed just undermined the entire season up to that point.
Last edited:
Yep, Vulcan is called Ni'Var by the 32nd century.
I would've preferred if the cause of The Burn was just something as simple as a Space Phenomenon. One of the complaints some people had beforehand about Discovery going into the 32nd Century was that the technology would be too advanced. I think having a Space Phenomenon cause The Burn would be an immediate response: "As advanced as you think you are, you're not more advanced than Nature, you're not more advanced than God, you're not more advanced than the Universe."
Allegorically: as advanced as we think we are Today, if an asteroid hits, that's it. We're done.
Allegorically: as advanced as we think we are Today, if an asteroid hits, that's it. We're done.
Last edited:
Star Trek Picard put the old, white men back at the forefront of Star Trek, in front of and behind the camera!
Star Trek Picard gives us accurate LCARS and period-correct Starship designs!
Star Trek Picard names a space station for a racist designer of classic Star Trek spaceships!
Star Trek Picard this season reduces it's LGBT representation to practically zero!
...these are the things I cannot help but notice, and they bother me. Especially since Discovery's been cancelled and all the right wing Trekkies are citing it as some kind righteous victory against the woke left or whatever.
Sorry if this is too controversial for the controversial takes thread.
Star Trek Picard gives us accurate LCARS and period-correct Starship designs!
Star Trek Picard names a space station for a racist designer of classic Star Trek spaceships!
Star Trek Picard this season reduces it's LGBT representation to practically zero!
...these are the things I cannot help but notice, and they bother me. Especially since Discovery's been cancelled and all the right wing Trekkies are citing it as some kind righteous victory against the woke left or whatever.
Sorry if this is too controversial for the controversial takes thread.
Reducing it to a depressed child made the entire thing feel so small, where the Burn itself was presented as a HUGE overarching galaxy-spanning event that irrevocably changed entire planets. I think, in the end, the writers wanted to make the ending more intimate, but to reduce all of that down to a mentally damaged child just didn't have the heft of what had been built up before the reveal.
Can you imagine having to be the one giving that explanation to any of the people's that had been cut off from the Federation? "Like, for real? You're kidding. What's the real reason?"
I just found out that Janeway was 27 in the Voyager pilot.
She look's terrible (for 27).
She look's terrible (for 27).
Source?
Unless something says otherwise, I usually assume the characters are the same age or close to the same age as the actors.
Janeway's minimum about 40 in the first episode. No way is she 27 in-universe.
Per Memory Alpha:
According to the final draft of "Caretaker", Janeway was described as being in her "early 40s" in 2371, slightly older that the real age of actress Kate Mulgrew, who was thirty-nine when she took the role. Kate Mulgrew, herself, stated in her interview on The Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn (18 May 2001) that Admiral Janeway was seventy-six in "Endgame" (set in 2404), which put her year of birth as 2328; corresponding with the approximate age given in the pilot's script, with an age of forty-three.
The best approximate reference that could be taken from dialogue for determining her age was given in her statement from "Future's End", where she claimed to have played tennis since high school, nineteen years prior, placing her likely birth year of no earlier than 2336. However, according to the only real "hard date" given on screen, which appeared in an okudagram shown in "The Killing Game", Janeway was born in June 5, 2344.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Kathryn_Janeway#Early_life
2371 - 2344 = 27.
She lies about her age because she is vain.
Pretending to be over 40, is the only way that Kathryn can get some.
Last edited:
An Okudagram. That changes everything.
In other news: Data's the class of '78. He has the picture with the leisure suit to prove it.
If I remember rightly the novel Mosaic (not canon I know, but written by Jeri Taylor and intended as the character's definitive back story during the time Taylor was showrunner between seasons one and four) put Janeway's birth year as 2336, making her 35 in "Caretaker".
It has to happen SOME time, doesn't it?
Is this a typo? I don't bother with LCARS too much, but the ship designs are right out of the 2280's, right?
This is touchier (and I'm going to be more serious): I don't know the whole Probert thing. I understand that he's (to be charitable) become a bit eccentric. I'm not downplaying the allegation. I'm not.
Except that there are people making the show who ACTUALLY know the man. In real life. Not on the internet. And they think it's OK to put his name on the show. So I'm guessing they don't see him as racist. It's a word that is losing it's power because it gets used a LOT.
I would imagine what he has actually done in real life does not compare to what Gene Roddenberry ever did in terms of parting company. But Gene's been dead for 30 years and Probert hasn't. Also Probert is a big nerd artist and Roddenberry was a Hollywood producer.
Which has to do with writing all of its previous supporting cast out in favor of a cast that was founded 35 years ago. Maybe they'll bring 7 and Raffi back together.
They could have made the reprehensible captain of the Titan a lesbian. Or would that have been too Admiral Cain? (That's as far as I'll go with the Picard spoilers.)
Really? I doubt "they" have noticed. More to the point, I don't think in the more casual "We hate everything we call woke" circles that they see the distinction between Disco and the rest of Paramount+ Star Trek. I'm sure there are some virulent jerks that are counting coup over the demise of Disco. How much is the cancellation being lauded by "the right" and how much is it by the anti-JJ (by way of Kurtzman) fans? Or are those synonymous? There are dyed in the wool lefties that hate Disco as much as anyone.
But I can't help but smile at the acknowledgement of "right wing Trekkies". That was considered an oxymoron not long ago. Although what passes for "the right" isn't a universally agreed upon thing anymore either. Also: People are idiots. It's bipartisan.
Seems right on par.
In 2025, the Fandom Menace won't even remember Discovery. They'll have moved onto whatever the next object of their faux-hatred is.
Similar threads
- Locked
