Nature of the visual reboot

[EnderAKH]

Fair points. But... and I know I’m being *really* awkward here, did the DSC story *need* the Klingons? Did it require the 23rd century setting at all?

Boiling the story down we have an orphan whose parents were killed in an alien attack and that gives her PTSD and then those same aliens attack the federation.

The Tzenkethi, the Dominion, even the cardassians could have been options here. Or, invent a new alien threat to the alpha quadrant and have them be the aggressor.

But, no, people know Klingons are because they appear in that “star trekkin” song so we best use the Klingons.

Ok, fine - so have the relationship with the empire sour in a *century* or so since TNG. Have some kind of disaster (omega related) that destroyed parts of space that forced the Klingons back into their former Viking-like tendencies. Also that mutated their whole bodies because radiation so they look like monsters who have all gone bald and had armour playing evolve on their chests and stuff.

Sarek’s character has been rebooted in DSC so make him a whole new Vulcan. Same for Mudd - create a *new* psychotic murderer since he’s a whole new character in DSC rather than unfairly look back at TOS through a modern lens.

If the DSC producers really wanted to flex their creative muscles (which, let’s not forget, resulted in Lorca turning out to be a pantomime villain so maybe we shouldn’t wish for that) then they shouldn’t have been restrained by the prime timeline or canon or whatever. They could have invented all their own backstories and redefined the sociopolitical landscape of the alpha quadrant and taken us to strange new worlds, rather than referencing the worlds we saw in far superior episodes elsewhere in the franchise (I have a bee in my bonnet about the Mintaka III namedrop - that’s such a good TNG episode!)

Instead we’re left to ponder the age old question of “when is a reboot not a reboot”...!

(Sorry if this sounds like a rant, it’s not, honest!)

Discovery would have worked FAR better post-Dominion War, as you said, Burnham being an orphan of the Dominion War.
The reason TOS era was chosen was simply due to marketing an the ability to go "LOOK SPOCK, ALL YOU IDIOTS KNOW HIM!"

It’s the star track Enterprise!!! Haha!

But seriously I think you’re right. The thing is if they *had* gone post NEM, they could have come up with a reason for changing the communicators to hand held devices again - the omega radiation means that commbadges don’t work so good so they need an amplifier therefore handheld devices are the way forward. Then you could have had something that looked like Star Trek to muggles and a reason in-universe for the change to seemingly retrograde tech.

It just seems counter intuitive to say “1) we’re confining ourselves to established canon, but 2) we’re gonna make a squitload of changes”

1) seems to be to keep the fans happy by referencing “things we know and have seen in Star Trek” and 2) is to hook in people who think 60s Star Trek is analogous to 60s Batman so they can prove that new Star Trek is sexy and brooding and dark like the vampire shows the kids are watching.

Maybe season 2 will be amazing...

They set it in the era they did for one reason: .that's what Bryan Fuller wanted to do. The Klingons looked the way they do because that is what Bryan Fuller wanted. He pitched a show to CBS, they agreed. Fans for the longest time have been clamoring for a Bryan Fuller Star Trek show. Well, anyone who looks at American Gods, Hannibal, Mockingbird Lane, Pushing Daisies etc and did not expect everything to get redesigned was fooling themselves. The producers since his departure have been doing the best they could with the foundation laid by Fuller. He's the guy who decided the Klingons needed to be redesigned, the mock up of the sarcophagus ship and Shenzhou came out before he left so he had a hand in ship design, he picked the era because he wanted to do a story set there. Fans wanted him, fans got him.

 

[Dukhat]

I assume they set it in that era because it serves their story. For example they couldn't have done the Burnham/Sarek/Spock relation in a 25th century series, since Sarek would be dead by then and Spock too, technically. And if they had invented two new Vulcans to basically act as Sarek and Spock a shit ton of people would be complaining about how they just copied those characters. And then there's the aspect that a lot of the characters are deeply flawed and then a huge amount of people would be complaining that humanity is enlightend at this point and that this show doesn't make sense or whatever. And of course the Klingons are in a very different position at the end of the Berman/Braga era. In Discovery they an enemy that the Federation doesn't really understand at this point while the Federation has had lots and lots of experience with them after Nemesis. And since Burnham is like, thirty or something, I guess you'd have to set the show seriously far in the future for her backstory to include the Klingon terror attack thing.

Another thing they could have done was to set the show sometime during the time period between TUC and TNG. That's like 70 years worth of time in the Star Trek universe that we know very little about. They could have stayed with the whole 'prime' universe concept but also have the freedom to come up with any story they wanted. Burnham could have been a protege of Spock instead of Sarek, just like how Saavik and Valeris were his proteges. And as far as the Klingons are concerned, TUC and TNG showed that there will always be rival factions that want war instead of peace. They could have set the show at any point in time before 2344 when the actions of the Ent-C start the peace process between the Federation and the Klingons.

So I don't think the story they're trying to tell necessitates that it take place ten years before TOS.

 

[roneill]

So I don't think the story they're trying to tell necessitates that it take place ten years before TOS.

Whatever the plot point was that meant they chose to set it in the 2250s, I think it was jettisoned fairly early on when Bryan Fuller left (though I have no evidence of this). Unfortunately it was obviously too late for them to change the setting so you're left with this odd situation where we're told the setting is crucial to the story but as many people have pointed out it seems it would have been quite easily to fit it into another era.

 

[cultcross]

I think it was jettisoned fairly early on when Bryan Fuller left (though I have no evidence of this)

I think we can safely say we are missing something from the original plot - Fuller's 'unexplored event' from the original series doesn't really seem to have to fruition in the series as filmed. However, we know that many major elements, such as the MU, were in place from early on.

 

[Mudd]

The MU was not Fuller's explanation for Lorca. Lorca was just a fucked-up dude.

Which is not allowed in the Star Trek universe, at least not this week.

 

[Lord Garth]

It's entirely possible that Lorca wasn't intended to be from the Mirror Universe and that's something I would've preferred... but is there any specific evidence that Fuller didn't intend for Lorca to be from the Mirror Universe?

 

[Jadeb]

The use of the MU would have been a lot more thematically interesting if it had been contrasted against Lorca's gray behavior, rather than used as a cheap explanation for it.

 

[fireproof78]

Another thing they could have done was to set the show sometime during the time period between TUC and TNG. That's like 70 years worth of time in the Star Trek universe that we know very little about. They could have stayed with the whole 'prime' universe concept but also have the freedom to come up with any story they wanted. Burnham could have been a protege of Spock instead of Sarek, just like how Saavik and Valeris were his proteges. And as far as the Klingons are concerned, TUC and TNG showed that there will always be rival factions that want war instead of peace. They could have set the show at any point in time before 2344 when the actions of the Ent-C start the peace process between the Federation and the Klingons.

So I don't think the story they're trying to tell necessitates that it take place ten years before TOS.

No, but the same argument you made about unexplored era between TUC and TNG also kind of applies in the era Discovery is set in.

 

[Dukhat]

Whatever the plot point was that meant they chose to set it in the 2250s, I think it was jettisoned fairly early on when Bryan Fuller left (though I have no evidence of this). Unfortunately it was obviously too late for them to change the setting so you're left with this odd situation where we're told the setting is crucial to the story but as many people have pointed out it seems it would have been quite easily to fit it into another era.

I think we can safely say we are missing something from the original plot - Fuller's 'unexplored event' from the original series doesn't really seem to have to fruition in the series as filmed. However, we know that many major elements, such as the MU, were in place from early on.

The MU was not Fuller's explanation for Lorca. Lorca was just a fucked-up dude.

Which is not allowed in the Star Trek universe, at least not this week.

It's entirely possible that Lorca wasn't intended to be from the Mirror Universe and that's something I would've preferred... but is there any specific evidence that Fuller didn't intend for Lorca to be from the Mirror Universe?

The use of the MU would have been a lot more thematically interesting if it had been contrasted against Lorca's gray behavior, rather than used as a cheap explanation for it.

So I have not actually seen DSC past episode 6 or so, so I have no idea what's going on with the MU other than that Lorca is from there. So here's my question. Other than Lorca (in which I agree with Serveaux that he really should have been just fucked up Prime Lorca instead of "eeevilllllll" MU Lorca) what was the point in visiting the MU as far as the greater story goes? Because I don't quite understand the necessity for that. We start the series with a war with the Klingons, and then it segues into something completely different, all in the span of 15 episodes. It makes very little sense to me. (Of course, if there is a greater plot going on here, then great. I just don't see one yet.)

No, but the same argument you made about unexplored era between TUC and TNG also kind of applies in the era Discovery is set in.

I think that setting the show during a random time period during the 50 years between 2294 and 2344 instead of ten years before TOS would have given them better leeway in storytelling and the visual changes we've seen.

 

[F. King Daniel]

So I don't think the story they're trying to tell necessitates that it take place ten years before TOS.

I'm pretty sure that's down to brand recognition. 3 recent big movies based on TOS, TOS merch still selling.

Who outside of this board knows who the Dominion are? A lot less than know who Klingons are.

 

[Jadeb]

So I have not actually seen DSC past episode 6 or so, so I have no idea what's going on with the MU other than that Lorca is from there. So here's my question. Other than Lorca (in which I agree with Serveaux that he really should have been just fucked up Prime Lorca instead of "eeevilllllll" MU Lorca) what was the point in visiting the MU as far as the greater story goes? Because I don't quite understand the necessity for that.

'Cause fans like the MU, mostly :/

I suppose you could argue it lets Burnham confront the ghost of her dead mentor, but they don't really do much with that. And there's the big Lorca reveal, of course.

It also lets the costume and set designers go unbelievably camp. It's worth watching just to see that.

 

[Gepard]

what was the point in visiting the MU as far as the greater story goes? Because I don't quite understand the necessity for that. We start the series with a war with the Klingons, and then it segues into something completely different, all in the span of 15 episodes.

Michael got a bug up her butt for about five minutes that learning more about the MU Klingons could help end the war in the PU.

Then the resolution to the war in the season finale made exactly zero use of that information, so there really was no point.

 

[Lord Garth]

So I have not actually seen DSC past episode 6 or so, so I have no idea what's going on with the MU other than that Lorca is from there. So here's my question. Other than Lorca (in which I agree with Serveaux that he really should have been just fucked up Prime Lorca instead of "eeevilllllll" MU Lorca) what was the point in visiting the MU as far as the greater story goes? Because I don't quite understand the necessity for that. We start the series with a war with the Klingons, and then it segues into something completely different, all in the span of 15 episodes. It makes very little sense to me. (Of course, if there is a greater plot going on here, then great. I just don't see one yet.)

Why tell any story? They didn't need to. They wanted to. Because an idea popped into their heads and they wanted to expand upon it. They wanted variety. Star Trek's done variety before, they still want to do it now. It's never been about one thing.

Beyond that, since you haven't seen the episodes, we have no common frame of reference to discuss them. If I did go the "need to see the Mirror Universe" route instead of the "want to see the Mirror Universe" route, then let's be realistic about this: you'd either disagree with me about the "need to", no matter what I'd say, or you'd move the goal posts and it would go on forever and ever. Either way, neither of us would change our minds. It's a situation where you're either behind the idea of seeing the Mirror Universe again and you enjoy seeing those episodes or you're not behind it and you have no interest. Which is fine.

So I'd rather we just agree to disagree and leave it at that. I'd prefer that a lot of us just agree to disagree.

 

[Tuskin38]

but is there any specific evidence that Fuller didn't intend for Lorca to be from the Mirror Universe?

I don't think there is.

 

[BillJ]

So here's my question. Other than Lorca (in which I agree with Serveaux that he really should have been just fucked up Prime Lorca instead of "eeevilllllll" MU Lorca) what was the point in visiting the MU as far as the greater story goes?

Spoiler: Mirror Universe

Essentially, it sounds like they had Evil Georgiou come back to show Michael Burnham that bombing Klingons is evil.

 

[BillJ]

Why tell any story? They didn't need to. They wanted to. Because an idea popped into their heads and they wanted to expand upon it. They wanted variety. Star Trek's done variety before, they still want to do it now. It's never been about one thing.

They had the spore drive, that has to go away very soon. They could have went anywhere, done anything. The universe would've literally been their playground for the story, and we got a tired and uninspired revisit of the Mirror Universe.

Much like Voyager, they are simply pissing away a great idea to play it safe.

 

[Dukhat]

Beyond that, since you haven't seen the episodes, we have no common frame of reference to discuss them.

Everyone else seemed to be able to discuss it with me just fine. Perhaps you're taking this a bit too personal?

 

[Lord Garth]

Everyone else seemed to be able to discuss it with me just fine. Perhaps you're taking this a bit too personal?

No. I'm just a realist.

 

[Mudd]

No. I'm just a realist.

No.

 

[fireproof78]

Beyond that, since you haven't seen the episodes, we have no common frame of reference to discuss them

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies