Spoilers Hopes for the Third Season??

[HaventGotALife]

With Canon potentially a problem for later shows, if we revisit the Klingons or the Federation, I would like season 3 to be a bottle season about the consequences of jumping to the future.

Burnham has lost Sarek, her sounding board in times of loss and needing introspection. She lost Tyler, who has healed here and helped her come center. She should face danger and rely on her own merits, a struggle that lasts the season. There should be some mourning. Homesick should be overt in Tilly, like last season's psychotic theme. She has just lost a promising career, the potential Captain. Saru did this when he left his people, he should be a guide, for the crew. The entire crew is down the rabbit hole, again.

There are logistical concerns like sources of power and food, deciding whether to stay on Discovery, or find a new home. While doing this, they should face an arc through the season, a bad, that reflects these emotions of sadness and loss, and in all their missions, big and small.

So, how does one cope with loss?

--shutting down emotionally.
--escape through drugs and temporary fixes, become out of balance. I think the most potential for a theme lies here.
--by neglecting the present for the past.
--by seeking emotional comfort by using someone, a love interest that is shallow.

They chose this, but the decision should resonate throughout the season.

 

[Lord Garth]

I have no hopes or expectations other than they're in Alice In Wonderland.

I'd like to see the Discovery crew being like Taylor on Planet of the Apes, the 1968 version, but not a big deal if the situation isn't like that.

Okay, I lied. There's one thing I hope for. Star Trek has a second chance to explore what it's like for a crew to be permanently removed from everything it knew. So I hope Discovery delves into that a little bit more than Voyager did.

 

[BillJ]

Solidly entertaining sci-fi. That’s all I need.

 

[Tosk]

I'll be happy if they manage to stick the landing for a change.

 

[HaventGotALife]

I have no hopes or expectations other than they're in Alice In Wonderland.

I'd like to see the Discovery crew being like Taylor on Planet of the Apes, the 1968 version, but not a big deal if the situation isn't like that.

Okay, I lied. There's one thing I hope for. Star Trek has a second chance to explore what it's like for a crew to be permanently removed from everything it knew. So I hope Discovery delves into that a little bit more than Voyager did.

I feel the same way. This could be great storytelling and exploring, or it will resonate like the Vidiaans did. They have a blank canvas, and the canonists are a constituency that will not go away, soon. I believe that they hijacked this show already, at least three times. One, I have no proof, but it seems the Klingon plotline was abandoned in the second half for the mirror universe because fans rejected the Klingons. They did tremendous work with it, but I will think, until proven otherwise, that their show format changed with fans' reactions.

Secondly, the jump to the future. It solves the complaints about not aligning with TOS, in technology, or in Burnham's backstory and ties to TOS characters. Sarek is gone now, Spock has said "mum's the word."

Third, a Short Trek around the Pike-era Enterprise.

So far, with exception to the short Trek, since it hasn't been aired or even confirmed, they have done their themes and characters in tremendous ways (the lone exception being an earned peace with the Klingons, the only bone in that direction is L'Rell's role in the final battle.) given the constraints.

However, they will be there to complain about the new, no matter what, and these professional writers need to stop listening to nerds.
There are some who will never want Trek to change, and they will unwittingly kill good stories to keep it the same. For Trek writers to be led by them will tank this show, over the long term. And, the result will be more whining from canonists, with voices of derision joining them about this hodgepodge of ideas that will not bake well as they contort to keep an audience happy. Then, the canonists will say "See! These writers didn't love Trek or know it like we did! I told you it was a bad show!"

And the only thing that will true of that is that they were terrible for listening to canonists. Unknowingly or knowingly, they are killing creativity. Let the show happen, watch if you like it, don't and leave it for the rest of us. DS9 was the same way. Now, look at the fanbase for it. It wasn't Trek, either. Neither was Star Trek II. Star Trek gained traction, as a franchise, in re-runs. They will get used to it, or not. But, a bad show contorting to be successful in its original run, is going to make for bad art.

Just let it unfold and judge it later. But, like I am ruler of the Galaxy, or even listened to here.

 

[Lord Garth]

And the only thing that will true of that is that they were terrible for listening to canonists. Unknowingly or knowingly, they are killing creativity. Let the show happen, watch if you like it, don't and leave it for the rest of us. DS9 was the same way. Now, look at the fanbase for it. It wasn't Trek, either. Neither was Star Trek II. Star Trek gained traction, as a franchise, in re-runs. They will get used to it, or not. But, a bad show contorting to be successful in its original run, is going to make for bad art.

I couldn't agree with this more.

Since there's going to be a Short Trek with Spock and Number One, and Section 31 is supposed to take place in the 23rd Century, they're not leaving the TOS Era behind.

I think there were sufficient enough problems with the Spore Drive to convince Starfleet to abandon developing it. Stamets being augmented with Tardigrade DNA being the chief reason since augmenting is a huge no-no in Star Trek (that they only let pass because Stamets did it without letting anyone know and it was wartime, so they turned a blind eye and basically all-but-said "we'll let it go this time, but don't do it again!") as is enslaving sentient life, such as with the Tartigrade. If those two things weren't enough, then so is Discovery damaging the ecosystem of the Mycellial Network. Though maybe it can be explained away, for future use, as Culber permanently residing in there was causing the problem rather than simply passing through. Either way, I see them not wanting to have a Spore Drive around by the time the other series roll around because that does change the equation for TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY. "But the information of its existence is out there!" The Klingons were the only one of the Federation's enemies to see the Spore Drive in action, they can't duplicate it, don't have the information to duplicate it, and all knowledge was suppressed, so they took care of the Spore Drive in the 23rd Century by removing it from that time permanently.

I like that Discovery is now in the 33rd Century only because I don't want the series ending with the ship being a failure. If the Spore Drive is the ship's defining trait, then it would have to be a failure if it stayed in the 23rd Century. Now the possibilities for what happens to Discovery are wide open.

The problem with prequels in general is that they have to end up at "the beginning". The end leads to what you already knew, you just have a better sense of how it got there. In a non-prequel, the end is something you didn't know at all.

But I only think they took Discovery out of the 23rd Century because of the Spore Drive. If they were really that concerned with not wanting to have anything in the TOS Era because of other contradictions, more minor ones that only people like us would notice, they wouldn't be doing Pike stories or setting Section 31 in that time frame.

 

[Vger23]

1. Have a complete plan mapped out for the beginning, middle, and end of the story arc before a single script is written.

2. Focus on pacing and scope of the story. It should flow.

3. Lets slow down and smell the roses every now and then. This is a phenomenal cast. Let's spend more time with them and allow for some characterization.

4. Please don't save all of everything in existence again. We are headed toward ridiculousness on this one.

5. Simplify. You don't need 47 different story threads running simultaneously that you can't tie together effectively when the rubber hits the road.

6. Use a unique science fiction premise as the basis for the story. I thought this is where they were going with the Red Angel, until it became a person in a suit.

That's my wish, Ray Kinsella....that's my wish.

 

[Awesome Possum]

More Tilly.

 

[SJGardner]

Most importantly, I hope that they make a definite effort at fleshing the new setting out. I'm dreading the future will be just like the other timeframes (past, present and future) we've seen in Star Trek before, regurgitating the same old setting, only with different visuals and slightly different names for well-known techs. Enterprise didn't have shields to show how low-tech they were, but they still polarized the hull every single time Voyager would've raised its shields. Braxton's future era basically only differed from the 24th century in the ability to travel through time, otherwise all differences were merely cosmetic.

Ok, that's the word I was looking for. I want Season 3 (and hopefully beyond) to avoid the future being only cosmetically different from what we've already seen. I don't want a Federation that's functionally the same as Kirk's or Picard's Federation, only with a different aesthetics, Starfleet uniforms with three division colors and arrowheads on the left breast, ablative bio-armor generators instead of shields or chroniton torpedoes instead of photon torpedoes.

On the other end of the spectrum, I'm hoping at the same time that the crew finds themselves in a setting that they can integrate themselves into. Running from godlike aliens or human descendants that can accidentally short out their computers with their sensors and are generally impossible to understand can have a novelty value, but only for a short while. I hope that Discovery finds a safe haven, somebody they can relate to, help out and maybe build friendships and alliances with.

And as for characters, I really only have definite thoughts about Tilly (how surprising) and Burnham:

• I hope that Burnham gets a character arc that's not defined by her family history and past. It's about damn time she started carving out her own path based on her own goals and interests. She can't keep looking for her mom forever.
  
• For Tilly, I hope the show has her have a crisis of faith regarding her role and future. She always wanted to become a Captain, but with the Discovery being the only 23rd century Starfleet ship around, that may never come to pass. She'll have to find a new niche for herself. A scientist, an engineering mentorship by Reno (she could teach Tilly a thing or two about being yourself and not caring about how others react), or even becoming a part of a future group rebuilding hope from ashes of the Federation of old, anything goes. I'm just hoping the series doesn't sideline her as Stamets' assistant and forget she exists whenever there's nothing spore drive-related for her to do.

 

[Awesome Possum]

It would be interesting to find Saru’s species and learn that they’re doing the same thing that was done to them to another species.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Burnham Family Drama with Michael and Momma.

Sarek's Katric Echo popping up for conversation at important moments, and at some point Michael finds a box of recordings Spock made for her.

Kelpiens having turned into the evil overlords of our galaxy, and it wouldn't have happened if not for Saru 900 years before.

They run into a new incarnation of Dax, who's Seen it All™.

The Romulans and Vulcans have reunified.

I can't decide if I want a dark Federation which Michael has to overthrow and turn good, or if the Federation has long since fallen and she has to found UFP 2.0. Either should be great fun, seeing how all our favourite Trek races have ended up.

 

[Cake]

One, I have no proof, but it seems the Klingon plotline was abandoned in the second half for the mirror universe because fans rejected the Klingons. They did tremendous work with it, but I will think, until proven otherwise, that their show format changed with fans' reactions.

Their Klingons are horrible and a lot of viewers hated them, but I don't think it was the reason for their focus on the mirror universe. They wrapped production of the first season on October 12, 2017.

https://trekmovie.com/2017/10/12/production-wraps-on-first-season-of-star-trek-discovery/

The pilot aired on September 24, 2017. So they finished the season a measly 3 weeks after the first episode aired. Scripts are written a lot of weeks in advance though. Also Lorca and and to a lesser degree MU Georgiou are a clear sign that they always planned to go to the mirror universe. Also Jonathan Frakes spoiled on September 16, 2017 that the Discovery will go to the mirror universe.

https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/16/jonathan-frakes-reveals-big-star-trek-discovery-spoiler/

Personally I always think it is stupid to blame viewers and fans for things producers/writers do. It is not like they put a gun to their heads and force them to follow their will. It is the responsibility of TPTB to judge what critique is useful and what not. What they disregard and what they might apply. If they can't do that well, then they have the wrong job and it is soley their incompetence if something isn't working.

Though in this case it really didn't matter how the fans reacted at all, because their reactions came too late to influence the writing of any of the season 1 scripts. So blame TPTB that they started a war between the Federation and the Klingons, let the Klingons even overrun the Federation and nearly reaching Earth, but then decided to show nothing of it on screen.

 

[HaventGotALife]

Two words: focus groups.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

It would be interesting to find Saru’s species and learn that they’re doing the same thing that was done to them to another species.

What, the Kelpians become the next Changelings?

 

[Tosk]

It would be quite fitting if the Kelpiens became a big problem for the Federation at some point, considering it was a big violation of the Prime Directive that put them on that path.

 

[Awesome Possum]

It would be more interesting for Saru since he basically made that decision for his whole species.

 

[guyute03]

My only hopes are that this new future is surprising and clever. Something new. Different from the Trek universe we already know.

 

[SJGardner]

I'm also hoping we'll get to revisit Kaminar and that we hear how the story of Saru liberating them is told after a thousand years. It would be very interesting to explore how the actions of our main characters transcend to myth and legend, and this would be the most obvious example for it.

Any other examples are very much vain hope, but I'd love it if we saw storylines from other Trek series being distorted into legends, or maybe we could meet some 32nd century archeologists making wildly inaccurate guesses about the 23rd and 24th centuries like Quarren did in Living Witness. It would be the perfect way for the writers to insure themselves against claims of continuity violations: it wouldn't be the first time historians were wrong about something.

 

[Delta Vega]

Season 3 is a blank canvas
There's no need to mess with canon, there's no excuse to tie themselves in knots
Let's see Discovery accepting it's lot, it's stuck in a distant future time, let's see it trying to find ways to survive in an alien universe.
I agree with Garth re the Spore Drive, moving Discovery to the future took away a canon headache for the franchises that followed, because the Spore Drive is gone, it's not a thing anymore.
I would like to see the writers flesh out the main Bridge Crew people and give them some story arcs, to make them more interesting.
Season 3 shouldn't all be about Burnham.
Mom, Spock, Sarek and Tyler are dead to her now, it's time to move on.

 

[Vger23]

Oh I forgot...most importantly:

No "future of the Federation" story. Please, PLEASE don't do this.