I count colony rescue and holodeck stories as exploration. DS9 fell well below 50%, ENT had a season that was almost 10% but overall Star Trek is above 50%
Poll How positive are you about Discovery now?
- Thread starter Mage
- Start date
I count colony rescue and holodeck stories as exploration. DS9 fell well below 50%, ENT had a season that was almost 10% but overall Star Trek is above 50%
Never had any interest in watching the Sopranos
It gets better every time new info comes out. Right now my anticipation level rivals that of STNG in 1986-87.
An absolutely massive amount of info is going to come out of STLV this week for DSC, from merchandising to production info, so I'm sure this will increase anticipation levels.
An absolutely massive amount of info is going to come out of STLV this week for DSC, from merchandising to production info, so I'm sure this will increase anticipation levels.
Not trying to engage in a pointless debate that I'm quite certain I have no chance of "winning," but how do you count colony/rescue and holodecks episodes as "exploration?"
Seems like that would be like me calling candy bars and cheeseburgers "salad" because it serves my purposes. Just curious.
And, will you be taking similar strange liberties with defining DSC episodes as exploration and non exploration?
Anticipation or anxiety...depending on which segment of the fan base you are talking about.
Interestingly, the holodeck often had exploration involved...you could say some very basic exploration happened in episodes like "The Big Goodbye" which delved into the existence of the forms that inhabit the holodeck programs..even with the Bynars later on. Even the brain-numbingly awful "Emergence" explored the ship's AI using the holodeck.
Other episodes were more direct. In "Nth Degree" Barclay couldn't have brought the crew to the Cytherians without the holodeck. An episode about pure exploration, both with the mind and in space.
Any publicity is good publicity. Whether the buzz is good or bad, DSC is on the radar.Anticipation or anxiety...depending on which segment of the fan base you are talking about.
I am fascinated by the concept that anything not exploration is relegated to the boring category.
More positive than I was at first. I think I'm just going to try to enjoy it on it's own, though. The aesthetic doesn't fit in with the TOS-era at all, which is okay. I never liked the TOS aesthetic, anyway. It hasn't aged well at all.
For the Original Series era, I greatly prefer the post-TWOK aesthetic. For example, I wish the 1701 had looked like the 1701-A (not the refit, either), and that they had worn the TWOK jackets from the beginning. Whenever I read a story set during the "five year mission", I imagine them like that.
But that's just me.
For the Original Series era, I greatly prefer the post-TWOK aesthetic. For example, I wish the 1701 had looked like the 1701-A (not the refit, either), and that they had worn the TWOK jackets from the beginning. Whenever I read a story set during the "five year mission", I imagine them like that.
But that's just me.
story arcs ≠ single episodes stretched across a whole season
Imagine, if you will, a tv show based on "stuff Cmdr Riker is doing" - just remember any episode where Riker was leading an away team. Remember how he spent those episodes constantly calling Picard and asking for instructions? No? Exactly.
Nothing improves boredom like tracking it on excel.
"We are creating a new way to track data"
Stargate Universe would be a counter example. They took away all the fun and humour of SG1 and Atlantis and made a depressive, joyless mess with a lot of interpersonal drama and very unlikeable characters. I just hope the same is not happening with Star Trek now, although all the "gritty" talk give me flashbacks to the promotion of SGU.
The notion that a smart science fiction show needs to be about some military commander or other authority figure in order to be any good as science fiction or storytelling is just...okay, look, that has absolutely nothing to do with fiction, drama, science, rationality, "quality" or any of the other words that people like to wrap their prejudices up in.
It's entirely a complaint about the new thing not being exactly like the old thing.
It's entirely a complaint about the new thing not being exactly like the old thing.
Riker didn't even consider getting promoted without asking Picard first.
I know it's kind of your thing to prematurely and hyperbolically declare everything and everyone you don't like to be "the worst ever!", and the writers, directors, stars, and producers of ST: Discovery of course understand that they are open to being critiqued (sometimes harshly), but there's a difference between constructive criticism and insults.
Disagreeing with writer Kirsten Beyer's on-set directives to an actor is entirely your prerogative, but calling her a "nutjob" is completely out of line and adds nothing to the conversation. You don't know the motive or context for her decision in the moment or how it relates to the episode, show, or the character, so you're jumping to conclusions and being incredibly rude by insulting her like that. You can say it's wrong or a bad idea based on your limited perspective of the situation, but you can't say she's a nutjob.
Also, you should be mindful that Kirsten Beyer is a current member of TrekBBS, which I think you probably were aware of since you've visited the TrekLit forum (albeit rarely and not in a while) during the time she's been occasionally posting there, and it's been mentioned that she's a member here several times in the thread discussing this situation, so insults of that nature can result in an infraction in the future.
