Never stated on screen. But the Okudas did state that they generally created them in chronological order.
Discovery saucer ring spins?
- Thread starter MarsWeeps
- Start date
Never stated on screen. But the Okudas did state that they generally created them in chronological order.
Don’t forget all the plot holes. And things that are unexplained in the show, that the fans have to figure out for themselves.
Like Georgius telescope that survived the battle. Or the amazing Tardigrade Cuddles, that can shroom jump ONTO a Federation ship, but for some inexplicable reason can’t shroom jump OFF IT again to escape its captivity.
A well written show doesn’t have these inconsistencies. You don’t sit after an episode of The Expanse and wonder why Miller was dragging around a nuclear bomb.
The whole Starfleet technical hygiene or whatever Burnham called it was non-sense. And the idea that Starfleet went back to the Shenzhou and collected the telescope but left a key piece of tech and then didn't even investigate T'Whothehellcares ship is a real head scratcher.
If it was the only useless “hey isn’t this kewl?!?” Idea on the show I’d give it a pass, but sadly it isn’t.
Almost every episode has some flashy gimmick that should have been junked before it ever made it into a script. Like the breath-lock or to a lesser extent the “Black alert.”
Good writers don’t need to rely on flashy gimmicks to distract from less successful parts of the show.
The spinning saucer should have died when a writer asked: “Does this give the ship any advantages that it can’t have otherwise? And do those advantages outweigh the increased engineering and maintenance costs?”
Just like the breath-lock should have been killed off by someone asking: “Does the Federation really need a new security measure that hasn’t been used previously? And does it make sense and isn’t easily bypassed?”
I think the biggest factor impacting the writing is how the writers seem more focused on ticking fanwank boxes than crafting a rich story.
Maybe that's what is needed now that audiences have fractured so much? But, it has been a very unsatisfying experience for me thus far.
One problem is that they aren't going the right way about that. You can see where they're trying to do that, but those checked boxes open up more questions, as opposed to checking the obvious ones.
G
Gonzo
Guest
That's how I have always seen it, a continuous line of registry numbers in sequence with some exceptions here and there.
Since the space scenes are all CG, it's probably cheaper to spin the saucer than it was to make Voyager's engines pop up.
Spin the saucer? Is that another euphemism that the kids use today?
I'm sort of frightened how low the lowest common denominator in the audience really is... What sort of a brain can come of with this sort of convoluted nonsense and then blame the writers?
I mean, yeah, sorry about the insult and all that. But you started it, by insulting the intelligences of pretty much everybody involved. And it's not as if standing up in defense of the writers could be done without insulting you back.
Timo Saloniemi
Wouldn’t offering an explanation be more productive to the discussion rather than resorting to insults?
Actually, you'll find it can be, quite easily. You could, for example, offer an alternative interpretation with an explanation.
Given that you are quite open in your insulting of another poster in contravention of the rules, I have little choice but to issue an infraction for Flaming. Comments to PM.
I'm curious as to what is my post was insulting to anyone? I have busted the writers chops, because I think what we've gotten so far is under par, and I did make a mistake by missing some dialogue about Starfleet defending Corvan II. But, overall, the story is a mess. Maybe you can tell me why it is smart writing to retrieve a telescope yet leave the exact piece of equipment that the Klingons need to restore power to their ship? Why it was smart writing for the Klingons to just float there for six months? Why it was smart writing for Starfleet not to investigate the ship that can appear and disappear that is laying a few thousand kilometers from the Shenzhou and in their territory? Why it left the Shenzhou floating when they are supposed to have impeccable technical hygiene?
He can’t. Nobody can, which is why most replies to questions like this is either hand waving them away, or elaborate, convoluted nonsense ala: “It’s ANOTHER old telescope, that just happens to look like
the telescope on the Shenzhou, and has the same damage!”
The things you bring up, and similar examples that seem to pop up in every episode, are of course examples of poor writing and ideas that weren’t thought out and creatively tested in the writers room.
(Most shows have a plot hole here or there, but not to the extent of STD.)
It’s indicative of a show where the focus was on kewl stuff, whizzbang and checking fanwank boxes like “diverse cast” and “Popular TOS characters” rather than making a great show and a tight story.
It’s also somewhat emberassing for some of the true believers, which can cause them to lash out with personal attacks. IMHO anyways.
For the most part, I just think it is an honest disagreement on what Star Trek is. I've had my doubts ever since they added Kirsten Beyer (and other old guard Trek writers like Menosky and Meyer) to the writers room. She is a talented writer, but she also primarily focused on the 24th century in her writings. And Trek Lit has become ponderously insular to the point I finally gave up. Discovery is also ponderously insular. Maybe that is what is needed now to compete?
I have no doubt that the folks that say they can see this truly fitting in with what came before, can actually see it fitting in. I can't, the world has simply changed too much for two shows fifty years apart to fit together.
I won't speak for other TV series like The Expanse (which I like a great deal), but I do know that in terms of Star Trek series and movies, there's is not a single one of them that is not chock full of little technical or continuity errors like this regardless of the quality of the writing. My main issues with the writing on DSC don't extend to minor quibbles like the telescope. I'll point them out in a review of the episode or in a forum discussion, but it plays little part in the overall grading of the episode. Dialogue, plotting, and characterization are far more important than little technical issues.
And making the crew space sick!
