Spoilers Alan Van Sprang officially joins Season 2 as...

[Amaris]

Section 31.
Why did it have to be Section 31?

*long sigh*

Also, I watched the bonus clip, and just... *long sigh*

 

[Tuskin38]

Section 31.
Why did it have to be Section 31?

*long sigh*

Also, I watched the bonus clip, and just... *long sigh*

What's wrong?

 

[Rahul]

I was told that because the Genesis device was mentioned in STIII it therefore doesn't count as forgotten tech.

So now you know

One single starship having the power to wipe out the surface of an entire planet (if it doesn't have shields) was something that was "normal" on TOS (much like being able to fly outside the galaxy, or into it's center, and casual time travel). The Genesis device's "new" thing was 1) that it only took one shot and 2) that it created life.

2) Became obsolete wit STIII - life was not sustainable. And 1) makes it a badass weapon, but not a game changer - It's like announing Russia has an even BIGGER nuke than the U.S. ever had. I mean - congratulations? - but it doesn't really change the power dynamics of the whole situation.

All of that changed tough through the major retcons TNG (and all subsequent shows) made - inventing the "Alpha Quadrant" and ships suddenly needing more time to travel through the galaxy (Voyager) and not being able to wipe out planets in one strike anymore (DS9). That's hardly the fault of the TOS movies though - just part of a bigger retcon long ago people didn't really notice at the time.

 

[fireproof78]

What's wrong?

He didn't expect Section 31.

Which is ok. Nobody expects Section 31.

 

[The Wormhole]

Where? Explain it all then, using, not shitty novels or comics, but the actual films. If I'm a audience member watching the films, how does the Disney Wars setting make any sense whatsoever?

You do realize the OT relied just as heavily on ancillary material too, right? When ANH came out, if you wanted to know the name of Luke's homeworld, you had to turn to the novelization or other material. The name Tatooine was not spoken on screen, and would not be until ESB's final scene. Even then, it is not made clear that Tatooine is the name of Luke's homeworld on screen until ROTJ.

 

[fireproof78]

You do realize the OT relied just as heavily on ancillary material too, right? When ANH came out, if you wanted to know the name of Luke's homeworld, you had to turn to the novelization or other material. The name Tatooine was not spoken on screen, and would not be until ESB's final scene. Even then, it is not made clear that Tatooine is the name of Luke's homeworld on screen until ROTJ.

you don't understand. Ancillary material is now bad.

 

[The Wormhole]

Oh, right, I forgot. Ancillary material is of course the tool of the Corporate Man as he ensnares the Free and Thinking People in chains of mediocrity and forces onto them diluted versions of the entertainment masterpieces they grew up with.

 

[fireproof78]

Oh, right, I forgot. Ancillary material is of course the tool of the Corporate Man as he ensnares the Free and Thinking People in chains of mediocrity and forces onto them diluted versions of the entertainment masterpieces they grew up with.

As well as just a shameless cash grab that is designed to imppoverish the viewing audience of both their mental ability as well as their wallets.

How dare you try to insinuate that Star Wars was not perfect from the moment it hit the screen, and required outside reading to know details about it? That's just so inaccurate as to be insulting.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I'm curious as to how he doesn't "talk like a Trill"...especially to someone who has never met a Trill from our universe. I'd assume they come in as many personality varieties as Terrans do.

She's probably pointing out his accent, or lack thereof. The Trill probably aren't part of the Federation at this point, hence Leland using it as a disguise.

As for his walk, I'm assuming it refers to the fact that male trill have no testicles and walk with their legs slightly closer together where as Leland leaves some space for his danglies. I feel like Mirror Georgiou is the kind of person who would notice that sort of thing...

 

[lawman]

You do realize the OT relied just as heavily on ancillary material too, right? When ANH came out, if you wanted to know the name of Luke's homeworld, you had to turn to the novelization or other material. The name Tatooine was not spoken on screen, and would not be until ESB's final scene. Even then, it is not made clear that Tatooine is the name of Luke's homeworld on screen until ROTJ.

That's one of the things that bothered me about Star Wars from the very beginning, actually: it did a crappy job of worldbuilding. It was George Lucas's style of storytelling... just throw a lot of characters and places and concepts at you, without explanation or even names sometimes, and expect you to take it all at face value.

The new Disney SW material is just continuing that style, except it's even worse in some ways because the new stuff seems to be in conflict with stuff we thought we understood as of the end of the original trilogy.

In a lot of ways SW was a precursor to some of modern Hollywood's worst "blockbuster" storytelling tropes, which basically use the minimum necessary narrative thread to stitch together big action set-pieces. That never did much for me. Obviously it satisfies a lot of people, though, so de gustibus...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You do realize the OT relied just as heavily on ancillary material too, right? When ANH came out, if you wanted to know the name of Luke's homeworld, you had to turn to the novelization or other material. The name Tatooine was not spoken on screen, and would not be until ESB's final scene. Even then, it is not made clear that Tatooine is the name of Luke's homeworld on screen until ROTJ.

And nobody knew who the hell Boba Fett was without reading the novels that bridged ESB and ROTJ. Those who didn't read those books spent a considerable amount of time scratching their collective heads at the Sarlac Pit Fight.

Hell, it was fifteen years before I figured what Han was saying. Rolladeck? Robodeck? Bolladek? What are you saying?!

 

[lawman]

I never had the slightest friggin' clue who Boba Fett was, nor why anybody cared, much less cared enough to buy toys of him. He was introduced along with a slew of other bounty hunters in a throwaway scene in ESB, dispensed with in another throwaway scene in ROTJ, and did absolutely nothing interesting in-between.

Really, the narrative coherence of the Star Wars films does not stand up to close examination. Hell, it didn't stand up the level of examination I gave it as a kid, when the films first came out.

 

[fireproof78]

I never had the slightest friggin' clue who Boba Fett was, nor why anybody cared, much less cared enough to buy toys of him. He was introduced along with a slew of other bounty hunters in a throwaway scene in ESB, dispensed with in another throwaway scene in ROTJ, and did absolutely nothing interesting in-between.

Really, the narrative coherence of the Star Wars films does not stand up to close examination. Hell, it didn't stand up the level of examination I gave it as a kid, when the films first came out.

It really doesn't. That's why the outcry OVER TLJ is so baffling to me

 

[Rahul]

That's one of the things that bothered me about Star Wars from the very beginning, actually: it did a crappy job of worldbuilding. It was George Lucas's style of storytelling... just throw a lot of characters and places and concepts at you, without explanation or even names sometimes, and expect you to take it all at face value.

The new Disney SW material is just continuing that style, except it's even worse in some ways because the new stuff seems to be in conflict with stuff we thought we understood as of the end of the original trilogy.

In a lot of ways SW was a precursor to some of modern Hollywood's worst "blockbuster" storytelling tropes, which basically use the minimum necessary narrative thread to stitch together big action set-pieces. That never did much for me. Obviously it satisfies a lot of people, though, so de gustibus...

Funny thing is: George Lucas actually did that on purpose.
He was a big fan of foreign films - specifically Japanese (Kurosawa's Samurai movies being chief among them), but also French, Italian, classic German ones....
Here's the thing: All these movies depended a LOT on cultural context of each country - which Lucas simply didn't knew. He was bombarded with references to things and backstories that were never explained - German fables, Japanese history he knew nothing about - and liked it. For him, he felt, it enriched the films, gave them better "worldbuilding" than if everything would have been explained by dialoge, and basically made the experience better, as long as he was still able to follow the main narrative.

Believe it or not: George Lucas wanted Star Wars to emulate the feeling of watching foreign movies.

Especially, he wanted to create a foreign movie from another galaxy, not an "American" movie about another galaxy. That's why he threw concepts and backstories at the audience without ever explaining it - the "clone wars", the sudden Obi-Wan-gives-Luke-a-lightsaber scene out of nowhere (reminiscent of old Samurai movies). He just expected audiences to pick up what everything means or if it's important by how the characters react and treat those things. And IMO he 100% succeeded. It's a way better way to create a world than explain every single detail. YMMV of course.

(J.J. Abrams not explaining shit in Force Awakens - like what happened to the old Republic - was just lazy though. That's not "backstory". That was vital information important for the plot of the movie, that was just plain left out on the cutting floor to have a faster pace. Thing is, you don't neeeed to know what "the Clone War" was to appreciate "Star Wars". But you sure as hell need to know what happened to the New Republic - It was the main contribution of our old heroes to the universe! And it just... disappeared?)

 

[rhllot]

...ugh.

I'm sure he's a nice guy, and his acting in the bonus clip was pretty good.
but for gods sake, can someone PLEASE stop the producers from going full fanboy?
Like, I'm usually a big fan of little nods, Easter-eggs and references for the fans to catch. But those should be a bonus. The icing on the cake. NOT the central motive.

The entirety of this show seems to stand on self-references to previous, better materials of Trek. That's NOT how to run a good show! Goddammit show, find your OWN neat concepts and ideas to explore!

I prefer star trek fanboys than a star wars fanboy creating transwarp wristwatches

 

[lawman]

Funny thing is: George Lucas actually did that on purpose.
He was a big fan of foreign films ... That's why he threw concepts and backstories at the audience without ever explaining it ... He just expected audiences to pick up what everything means or if it's important by how the characters react and treat those things. And IMO he 100% succeeded.
...
(J.J. Abrams not explaining shit in Force Awakens - like what happened to the old Republic - was just lazy though. That's not "backstory". That was vital information important for the plot of the movie...

That's interesting. I've never read that about Lucas before, but if that was his perspective it would explain a lot.

I don't think it worked, IMHO. But obviously the distinction between "background information" and "vital information important to understand the plot" is a subjective one. (E.g., the Boba Fett thing.)

This is, I suppose, one of the reasons I'm not a big fan of foreign films unless I understand at least the basics of the cultural context, or the narrative supplies them. I just recently saw the critically acclaimed In Between, for instance, and it left me fairly cold... with a head full of unanswered questions, many of which were critical to making sense of events in the plot. (I had no reason to think that life in modern Tel Aviv was anywhere near as traditionalist and patriarchal as the film depicted, and it's not the sort of thing I'll infer and take at face value just because the characters acted in ways that were otherwise irrational.)

 

[fireproof78]

J. Abrams not explaining shit in Force Awakens - like what happened to the old Republic - was just lazy though. That's not "backstory". That was vital information important for the plot of the movie, that was just plain left out on the cutting floor to have a faster pace. Thing is, you don't neeeed to know what "the Clone War" was to appreciate "Star Wars". But you sure as hell need to know what happened to the New Republic - It was the main contribution of our old heroes to the universe! And it just... disappeared?)

I followed it ok...

 

[Amaris]

What's wrong?

I despise Section 31.

 

[cultcross]

Especially, he wanted to create a foreign movie from another galaxy, not an "American" movie about another galaxy. That's why he threw concepts and backstories at the audience without ever explaining it - the "clone wars", the sudden Obi-Wan-gives-Luke-a-lightsaber scene out of nowhere (reminiscent of old Samurai movies). He just expected audiences to pick up what everything means or if it's important by how the characters react and treat those things. And IMO he 100% succeeded. It's a way better way to create a world than explain every single detail. YMMV of course.

On that we are in complete agreement. Star Wars' lack of a need to explain every detail, especially in the OT, is a big advantage it has over other sci-fi which gets bogged down in worldbuilding-for-nerds and forgets to plot.

(J.J. Abrams not explaining shit in Force Awakens - like what happened to the old Republic - was just lazy though. That's not "backstory". That was vital information important for the plot of the movie, that was just plain left out on the cutting floor to have a faster pace. Thing is, you don't neeeed to know what "the Clone War" was to appreciate "Star Wars". But you sure as hell need to know what happened to the New Republic - It was the main contribution of our old heroes to the universe! And it just... disappeared?)

However, this I disagree with - I think it's the same phenomenon. It doesn't matter how the First Order rose any more than it mattered in ANH how the Empire came to be. It just did. That's not what the story is about. Plus there's plenty in TFA to string together a filler narrative if you want to. Essentially, it is the answer to ROTJ's biggest plot hole - we destroyed a part built death star and killed the emperor so... the war is over, apparently? Well, TFA says apparently not.

 

[Rahul]

However, this I disagree with - I think it's the same phenomenon. It doesn't matter how the First Order rose any more than it mattered in ANH how the Empire came to be. It just did. That's not what the story is about. Plus there's plenty in TFA to string together a filler narrative if you want to. Essentially, it is the answer to ROTJ's biggest plot hole - we destroyed a part built death star and killed the emperor so... the war is over, apparently? Well, TFA says apparently not.

I think, the true answer is: It depends.
For "Force Awakens" as a stand-alone movie, the New Republic REALLY doesn't matter. In fact so little, that her being mentioned in the opening credits is even detrimental (they take no place in the plot, except being the victims of "random evil act #3", so why mention them so prominently and prop them up as a major player in the first place?)
For the whole franchise: It does. It's not a classic "plot hole" per se. It's just a middle finger to the audience. They have esentially reset the entire worldbuilding - everything is back to the 1977. Only to tell the very exact story again, but not calling itself "reboot". Basically everything that was achieved in the OT is now invalidated. So much so, the fact how the New Republic and our old heroes and Luke's school fell is basically EVEN MORE tragic than Vaders story and the fall of the old Republic. Yet it is treated as if it doesn't matter. Because for the new writers it didn't. They wanted to do a reboot. But also wanted to have the old actors in it. So they basically reset everything - destroying everything they ever achieved, destroying their children, marriages, goals, EVERYTHING - and not even treating that as a big thing, just something to gloss over. Only to tell EXACTLY by-the-numbers the same story these old heroes experienced before.
It's not exactly a plot hole. But enough to be upset about.
Thank GOD Discovery leaves the Star Trek universe narratively in a better shape!