Is there any update on if they are doing After Trek or something similar for season 2? I’d read early on it was being reimagined or something similar, but then radio silence as far as I can tell. Did it get dropped?
It's one of those things which reads well on paper in an essay. Maybe even in book dialogue. But real human beings don't speak like that - not unless they have a prepared speech or something. People just aren't that naturally articulate to come up with flowery prose extemporaneously.
Which is why Shakespeare never made it? Sorry, the whole "real humans don't talk like that" falls flat for me in a franchise that is known for the Shatner overacting, the Picard speech, Klingons reciting Shakespeare, and on and on.
Film and TV grew out of theater, but have developed their own separate conventions, which over time have drifted closer and closer to a naturalistic style of dialogue. Part of this was a change in technology which film allowed for. When you view a play, you're typically at least 50-100 feet from the actors. In order for the emotional impact of a scene to translate, you need big expressive gestures and loud declaratives - not to mention often heavy stage makeup. But when you can put the camera a few feet from people's faces, things become more intimate. People stop looking at it as being a performance, and more like a window into a fictional world. Things like very small eye movements and curls to the lip become evident, allowing actors to have subtly to their performances. Shatner's acting style was a little antiquated by the time of Trek, but not by much considering his theatrical background. It's the butt of many jokes today. Of course, if you're the right kind of actor, with a certain gravitas, you can still get away with being a bit hammy. Berman Trek is replete with them, including Q, Gowron, Dukat, Kor, Shran, etc. The thing that all these characters share though is they are very theatrical in their range and expressiveness. In contrast, Burnham was played semi-Vulcan for most of the season. She's understated in her physical acting, and speaks in a relatively measured manner, though not true monotone. Basically they give her scenery-chewing lines, but she delivers the lines (not due to bad acting, but due to who her character is) in such a way that it's not properly engaging. In contrast, when they give her "normal person" dialogue, she shines.
Mileage will vary on this one. But, my speech is definitely not "natural" or "normal by modern conventions so I get why people are offput by Burnham. I'm just not one.
Less Burnham period would get my vote. That an more Tilly. And what you said about fun an adventure. More of Tilly having those.
Nonsense. The style of dialog has changed but has very little to do with technology as it has those who've influenced it. There is definitely a 'tone' and cadence to modern dialog, but it's a product of the combined effort of the Rhimeses and Sherman-Palladinos and Smiths and Sorkins and Tarantinos and Whedons of the world. And it has very little in common with the way people speak naturally in everyday conversation. Star Trek, too, has its own style of conversation, and the cadence and meter and infection has remained mostly true - with only slight variation - for fifty years. Burnham's speeches fall well within the box.
Is it too late to just not include Section 31? I thought that organization fit nicely on DS9, but didn't like how it felt shoe-horned into ENT, and I wasn't thrilled when it was revealed to be a part of DISCO S2. If it's a couple of episodes, fine, but the way they reveal some of these things it makes it seem like it's going to be a major part of the season, like every other episode or something. Also, I really want them to include on-screen episode names following the opening title sequence. It's not a huge thing, but it's been part of Trek shows since TOS and it was sorely missing from Season 1. I don't see why DISCO being a streaming show should change that.
Maybe there should be an episode in which a character simply ad-libs all of their dialogue, then we could compare it to the rest of the characters to see how much more realistic it sounds. Probably quite a bit. As for how I'd improve DSC: - TOS uniforms - Vaughn Armstrong (I don't care who he plays. Just get him on the show!) - An episode about the Farragut disaster - An appearance by Starfleet Marines (possibly the same episode!) - Kill off Empress Georgiou - REGULORCA!
I absolutely agree about episode titles appearing. It has been a part of every ST series until now. It would also help me keep track of what goes on in what episode. That was one issue I had with STARGATE UNIVERSE... so many things that happened to the characters blurred together because no titles appeared on screen. I had a similar issue with BSG, though not as severely. AGENTS OF S.H.I.E.L.D., I am completely lost due to this. I know what goes on with them, but I get the order and the season mixed up completely.
Totally agree. Burnham is not the character that they should be building the show around since, quite frankly, she's the least interesting of the characters on the Discovery that was featured in Season 1. They've done nothing to justify why she's suppose to be so special that she's the lynch pin of the show other than she's Spock's adopted sister. It's like Burnham is fetch as they say:
When we finally see the Enterprise bridge, there had better be a Spock Scope. It was noticably absent from the classic and modern movies.
The portrayal of Starfleet is the worst of any Trek series, sure we’ve always had rogue Captains, Admirals, and Starfleet officers-but the organization as a whole in this series stinks. They conduct faceless tribunals in the dark (is this Cardassia or what?), have a death penalty for mutiny (what if its’ justified?), give Captains authoritarian prerogatives; don’t favor diplomacy to end wars, support genocide against other sentient species (Klingons), etc. What happened to democracy, the rights of the accused, human rights, peace, etc.? How is this a hopeful future with organizations like this version of Starfleet? They need to fix their portrayal of Starfleet big time, though now they'll have to explain the change to a more humanitarian version if they do it.
No they don't. The very point of the show is to illustrate the very sinister and potentially nefarious nature of Trekian idealism. (And the culture built-up around it.) Disco is, if anything, Eddington's famous speech incarnate, which is think was the intent from the get-go. Given [when] his time on DS9, is a fair bet Fuller was probably in the room at the time and may have even helped write it. I thought this might have changed now with this soft reboot, but the main conceit of each of the Short Treks emphasize this idea - never mind the upcoming Science v. Faith thing. I can't help but wonder if maybe Kurtzman buys into the concept himself. I have no idea what his relationship with Orci is or ever was - if they were just working partners or good friends or what. But none the less, he was around to see Orci's "self-destruction" over his interactions with Trekkiedom, which, at the very least, also affect the trajectory of his own career.
I would like the ships in space to be a little lighter. When they were showing the Esophagus ship in season 1, it felt like I couldn’t see it clearly. Maybe it’s a scaling or something but it seems like the ship designs in Discovery are too dark. I also want to see more development for the minor characters like the back girl (I apologize I can never pronounce her name, let alone spell it), Detmer and who Airiem is. I talked to the actress in Las Vegas and while vague, she did say we would learn more about her. I hope this season brings in a little fun. One of my favorite episodes last season was Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad because it showed the crew with their hair down. Hopefully it’s a good season and I’m cautiously optimistic. Each Short Trek was better then the last so that’s a good sign.
I hope you didn't spend too much on the rose-colored glasses and Kool-Aid. There are countless examples of Starfleet being complete and utter assholes in nearly every Star Trek series. Including but not limited to: Admiral Alynna "You Should Have Committed Genocide Against the Borg" Nechayev. Admiral Lance "Let's Murder, Assasinate, Frame, Instigate War that Will Kill Billions and Conspire Just So My Job Description Stays the Same" Cartwright and his buddy Colonel "Scooby Doo Assassin of Heads of State" West The Federation Council and their weak corrupt lackey, Starfleet Admiral "We're Only Moving 600 People" Dougherty Admiral "Marshal Law" Leighton, and his pawn Captain "With Authoritarian Perogatives" Erika Benteen Captain Benjamin "It's A Faaaaake!" Sisko Captain Ronald "We Can Bargain For A Fleet Of Ships" Tracy Admiral (Head of Starfleet) "War Is Coming, and Who Is Going To Lead Us???" Marcus Give me a fucking break with it.... As I said earlier, apparently not liking DSC gives everyone a pass on consistency in criteria upon which we judge the franchise. Additionally: The trail was not a shadow trial, the filmed it in dark dramatic lighting for two reasons: 1. An actor on the tribunal panel was an actor who had appeared otherwise in the same episode, and the identity needed to be hidden to avoid confusion. 2. The producers figured that fans understand what dramatic license is and can be mature about it.