• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers General Disco Chat Thread

The utopia Federation works just like the good guys with the good values always win in movies as opposed to reality. Its an ideal based on principles with the premise that principles will always prevail, no matter what if you just stick to them. And it works in Fiction. But realistically, this cannot always work.
 
The utopia Federation works just like the good guys with the good values always win in movies as opposed to reality. Its an ideal based on principles with the premise that principles will always prevail, no matter what if you just stick to them. And it works in Fiction. But realistically, this cannot always work.

The most interesting thing Trek can do is test those principles, and let the decision to stick to them have consequences. But what Discovery has done so far is much more juvenile: It has the "good guys" win and spout traditional Trek values (values it clearly wants us to cheer), even as the show hypocritically indulges in ugliness that it fails to examine, like arming a lunatic terrorist with a doomsday weapon.

I don't really object to the show exploring darker corners of the Trek universe so much as to the thoughtless and silly ways it's doing it.
 
Last edited:
You know, it's funny. Even though I've enjoyed Season 2 more than Season 1 in general - and I liked last week's episode - I realize that I'm not really feeling any yearning desire to watch Discovery any longer.

I mean, I will watch it on Thursday night. But the combination of a lack of heavy serialization this season, along with the languid pacing of the season arc to date means I'm not really chomping at the bit.

It's just going to be another hour of Trek, you know?
 
The most interesting thing Trek can do is test those principles, and let the decision to stick to them have consequences. But what Discovery has done so far is much more juvenile: It has the "good guys" win and spout traditional Trek values (values it clearly wants us to cheer), even as the show hypocritically indulges in ugliness that it fails to examine, like arming a lunatic terrorist with a doomsday weapon.

I don't really object to the show exploring darker corners of the Trek universe so much as to the thoughtless and silly ways it's doing it.

It's not failing to examine anything. What it is not doing is the constant 4th grade level lectures on "this is right" and "this is wrong" that the franchise used to indulge in whether such lectures turned out to be incredibly messed up or not. I was perfectly aware in the last ep that they had jumped the gun on uplifting the Kelpiens and that it might very well lead to unintended negative consequences. I didn't need, however, to be lectured on the topic as though I'm an eight year old. This isn't Trek for the little ones and therefore it isn't required to be the audience's parent.
 
The utopia Federation works just like the good guys with the good values always win in movies as opposed to reality. Its an ideal based on principles with the premise that principles will always prevail, no matter what if you just stick to them. And it works in Fiction. But realistically, this cannot always work.
And this is why I appreciate S31 and the debates that follow. As someone else stated contemporary audiences expect more, and this includes in the depth of material, moving past idealism and in to the hard questions.

More interesting to me is it showcases how individuals define utopia and their reaction when a show doesn't hit that standard.

It's not failing to examine anything. What it is not doing is the constant 4th grade level lectures on "this is right" and "this is wrong" that the franchise used to indulge in whether such lectures turned out to be incredibly messed up or not. I was perfectly aware in the last ep that they had jumped the gun on uplifting the Kelpiens and that it might very well lead to unintended negative consequences. I didn't need, however, to be lectured on the topic as though I'm an eight year old. This isn't Trek for the little ones and therefore it isn't required to be the audience's parent.
And yet, given the reaction to S31 and Georgiou I sometimes feel that there is a desire for a lecture...
 
It's not failing to examine anything. What it is not doing is the constant 4th grade level lectures on "this is right" and "this is wrong" that the franchise used to indulge in whether such lectures turned out to be incredibly messed up or not. I was perfectly aware in the last ep that they had jumped the gun on uplifting the Kelpiens and that it might very well lead to unintended negative consequences. I didn't need, however, to be lectured on the topic as though I'm an eight year old. This isn't Trek for the little ones and therefore it isn't required to be the audience's parent.

The first season literally ends with a medal ceremony and a Burnham lecture on Federation values. In the very same episode that they install a lunatic terrorist as dictator of the Klingon empire.
 
The first season literally ends with a medal ceremony and a Burnham lecture on Federation values. In the very same episode that they install a lunatic terrorist as dictator of the Klingon empire.

Good times:beer:.

By Federation standards all Klingon leadership is made up of one lunatic terrorist or another. The trick is picking one that is the least threatening to the Federation specifically and galactic peace in general.
 
Last edited:
This. Understanding Star Trek must be done from the POV of TOS and the conceits of that vision. It was not as utopian as later visions.

This is my thinking only up to a point. For Discovery, yes. The Federation and its point of view, and the Klingons their point of view, should be based off TOS.

For the Picard Series, I think the Federation's, the Klingons', and everyone else's points of view should be based off TNG and how everything after TNG effected it. Mainly DS9 and the Destruction of Romulus. That would make the most sense.

Philosophically, I think TUC really is the end of an era and the Dividing Point of in-universe Star Trek History.
 
While I really love DIS thus far, I do think it lacks one of the things the older 60s and late 80s-early 2000s shows had. With them, they felt very detached form each other episode wise, but it could be a very microscopic exploration of a character or several characters. My mind goes to the DS9 episode where Odo was fooled into thinking the female changeling was Kira. It had a slight over arcing comment about how the changelings see Odo, but that was incidental at the end of the episode. The entire show was about exploring how Odo felt about Kira, completely aside from everything else that was happening in the rest of the series.

I get the modern fashion of TV shows is exclusively serialised (unless it's a comedy series), but I want them to go back to the old style syndicated shows eventually.
 
This is my thinking only up to a point. For Discovery, yes. The Federation and its point of view, and the Klingons their point of view, should be based off TOS.

For the Picard Series, I think the Federation's, the Klingons', and everyone else's points of view should be based off TNG and how everything after TNG effected it. Mainly DS9 and the Destruction of Romulus. That would make the most sense.

Philosophically, I think TUC really is the end of an era and the Dividing Point of in-universe Star Trek History.
I'd actually really love to see a Star Trek series explore the era right after TUC. That's fertile ground for some potentially really good Trek storytelling, and a completely unexplored era.

Looking at the "connective tissue" between eras would be really fascinating.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top