Discussion in 'Star Trek: Discovery' started by HaventGotALife, Jun 29, 2019.
Woah. That's like tomorrow.
I'm presuming it's going to be released the same day as the new Picard trailer - which means Saturday.
We'll finally have something new to rips to shreds in 30 new threads and have a whole new slew of toxic video's I won't watch.
We might as well rank them on a scale. I propose the following:
+5... Good point, I agree.
+4... You've almost got me, but not quite.
+3... I agree with you here but not there.
+2... I can see that, even if I don't agree with it.
+1... I can kind of see that, but not really.
0... I don't agree.
-1... You're reaching.
-2... You're really reaching.
-3... What the Hell are you talking about?!
-4... I have no idea what you're smoking, but give me some!
-5... Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra! Shaka when the walls fell!
This is where Discovery's true colours will be on display. Were they wrapping themselves in Roddenbery's vision nostalgic clothing? Will this be a story set in dark times, a broken Federation (even if its the story of Discovery bringing it back together)?
Or will it be beyond war, back to exploring? A story about the future generations learning from the past, and the "present day humans" learning to be MORE optimistic, more diverse and progressive?
I think it will be both. A Federation that isn't what it used to be that the crew of Discovery will try to improve.
I'd like to see them stop making Discovery an extremely important and famous ship in history, and Michael Burnham the most important person in the history of humanity. Lets have the crew start to act more professionally, work together to solve problems and have more contained episodes. Season 2 had some of this before they decided to go mental with all the S31, Red Angel and Control shit that ruined the season.
You think changing the setting means the people in charge are suddenly going to get good at this shit?
This is the trick right here. In TOS, the Enterprise was one of twelve very important ships, sent out to do a dangerous job. Not every mission was the end of the universe as we know it.
I think the show would be much better if they shrink the stakes.
The bigger the characters are, the smaller the universe feels.
I don't know? Kirk and Spock were BIG characters, yet TOS seemed to be able to make the universe feel big. I think a huge part of that was keeping the stakes manageable. I have no issue with Michael Burnham being a BIG character in her own rite, but the truly Earth shattering moments would feel more important if she wasn't trying to save the universe every week.
To be clear, I'm not talking about "big characters" in terms of personality. I'm talking about in terms of their role in the fictional world.
I mean, TOS worked as well as it did because Kirk was not presented as the most important person in the Trek universe. We never got to see Earth during the 23rd century. When up against the Klingons and Romulans, he was up against other captains and commanders, not the friggin head of the Klingon Empire. The Enterprise was one of twelve Constellation-Class ships. In the average season, most crises were "save the crew of the ship" and occasionally saving a minor colony or solar system.
That the stakes were relatively low - and that Kirk mostly dealt with lower-level antagonists - meant that the universe had this big open feeling of possibility to it. This lessened with all of the following shows, because they couldn't help but "epic" up the story (though Voyager, for all its faults, mostly kept the stories appropriately scaled).
I have been rewatching TOS and I got to "Court Martial" and the complete "disrespect" Kirk gets from many people over the incident is weird, but then you realise its because he is just another Starfleet Captain, nothing particularly exceptional or legendary at that moment in time. I still go back to DS9 and the Dominion War, it took 4-5 years for that to get going and Sisko was just another Starfleet officer up until season 6.
Except that's not what happened. No one considered Discovery the most important ship in-universe. They missed 9 months of the Klingon war because they were in the Mirror universe. Discovery only became a MacGuffin due to the Sphere data, and even then it was the Enterprise that saved the day, not Discovery. Burnham and Discovery were officially classified with no discussion on penalty of treason, hardly a sign of being the most important ship or person in humanity.
Every Trek series has hyped their ship as the most important ship in the fleet. How many times was the Enterprise the only ship in the quadrant or wherever? Spock was touted as the finest officer in the fleet even in TOS. The Borg specifically chose Picard to assimilate and Q thinks of all ships Picard's is the one to tangle with. etc
The series explicitly says that Discovery was the only ship in Starfleet which was effective against the Klingon cloaking technology, with all Federation victories attributable to it. And as soon as they vanish, the Federation starts losing the war.
No. As I said, there is no evidence in TOS that Kirk and the Enterprise are all that special. That's just fanon added due to the later "epicness" that the began to attain in the movies and the in-universe references to them in later treks.
Amok Time (of Spock): You've been called the best first officer in the fleet.
Literally the second pilot made it clear the Enterprise was the first to go through the galactic barrier since the SS Valiant hundreds of years ago: "Did another Earth ship once probe out of the galaxy as we intend to do? What happened to it out there? Is this some warning they've left behind? ". Sounds pretty special to me.
Not necessarily, though certainly they were built up over time. Some episodes allude to the Enterprise and its crew being unique, though:
From "Charlie X"
RAMART: Like a whole city in space, Charlie. Over four hundred in the crew of a starship, aren't there, Captain?
From "Bread and Circuses (TOS):
MERIK: He commands not just a spaceship, Proconsul, but a starship. A very special vessel and crew. I tried for such a command.
Plus the "only a dozen like her," as well as Kirk's comment to Spock regarding how much Starfleet has invested in Spock's training.
That's a line Kirk says to Spock when he's trying to pry out what he can do to help him. It's a completely...logical...approach too, because Spock would not be motivated by Kirk saying that he personally needs Spock and doesn't want to lose him. He's making an appeal as to Spock's utility as a first officer.
The Enterprise wasn't the first ship though, it was the second...as far as they know anyway. Also, the OOC reasoning must be considered - since The Cage was rejected, they needed to come up with a much more dramatic concept for the second pilot to get it greenlit.
Hey how old is Spock because Spock in The Cage is older then Spock in season 2 isn't he?
Because they used that wonderful intro from The Cage to the episode where we meet Vina again, and that was a fantastic episode regardless.
Spock was born in 2230. "The Cage" takes place in 2254. DSC S2 takes place in 2257. So Disco Spock is older.
IRL: Leonard Nimoy was born in 1931 and was 33 when "The Cage" was shot. Ethan Peck was born in 1986 and was 32 when DSC S2 was shot.
Separate names with a comma.