a lot of people have already answered that. I, myself have answered that pages ago. The answer is 'realism', plain and simple.
Spoilers R rated content - what does it add?
- Thread starter Smoked Salmon
- Start date
"Realism"....in a sci-fi show with fantasy space aliens! lol
Exactly. It's the same reason Kirk drinks coffee on the bridge, Boyce offers a martini to Pike after a hard day, crew members hang out in the mess hall, play poker, go shopping, or hit the local watering holes while on shore leave. It helps ground the shows and the characters in something indentifiable, despite the black holes and time-travel and god-like aliens.
Last edited:
Tilly saying "fuck" didn't add any more to her realism than 3D made me feel like I was on Pandora when watching Avatar.
You can create realistic characters that never utter a "fuck" or "shit" (especially while on the job) because lots of people don't use those words. Lots do of course but Trek has cultivated a long and storied universe where for what ever reason people don't really talk like that. It's rating thus far has felt superfluous.
I'm curious: Why did you frame your OP as a question when it's obvious you've already made up your mind on the subject? Were you just looking for the "right" answer?
Cinema Geekly: Of course you can write realistic characters who don't say "fuck," just like you can write realistic characters who don't drink coffee or play poker. And they could have had Kirk drink hot cocoa or apple cider instead. There are always options when it comes to artistic choices.
But every little bit helps and "fuck" is just another a nice humanizing touch, like the coffee or Scotty admiring a belly dancer while on vacation. Or Sulu having hobbies, or Uhura singing.
There's no negative value to having the DISCO characters swear.
Last edited:
Of course they COULD choose to do it without those words, and perhaps you don't speak like that, but millions and millions of other people do. If we only do things the way they've always been done nothing ever changes, evolves, or moves forward. There are 700+ episodes across 6 series plus 13 movies where Trek characters don't speak like a lot of people, let's try one series where they do. Let's try something new and different and see where that takes us.
Millions of people swear on the job in a professional setting? I don't think that's accurate. They are on the job after after all and we never spend much time with them when they aren't on duty.
With that being said when they were the fact that they didn't say "fuck" every other word didn't seem "fake" to me. Millions of people don't really swear all the time. Personally I can't imagine that because Riker didn't say "holy fucking shit its the mother fucking Borg" that people were turned off.
I honestly don't think those words play a major role in in making a person feel real.
#1, yes. Millions of people do. My wife's accounting department curses like sailors. Sailors... curse like sailors. I have a friend who worked at a legal non-profit. Cursed all the time at work. Another friend was an insurance actuary, whenever I would visit her business, there was salty language. Where do you think the stereotype of the screaming, cursing boss comes from (ie, Artillary Arthur on How I Met Your Mother). If salty language were a barrier to entry, why are Game of Thrones, Quentin Tarantino, and George Carlin popular?
#2, it isn't the ONLY thing that makes someone feel real, but as Greg was saying it is one of many touches that can be used to help connect with a character. Language choice, music choices, food choices, relationships to parents, relationships to co-workers, ALL of these are writing devices to help people to relate to a character. Trek is just going to try this one now.
People now have three options open to them as I see it: a) learn to live with it and enjoy the show because I REALLY don't think the mature content is going anywhere, b) Stop watching if it offends them, c) Keep watching anyway and come here and complain about it each and every time it happens. Personally, c seems like an enormous waste of time and energy, yet I know some people will choose it anyway.
Trust me, get a bunch of STAR TREK writers together in a bar and you will hear plenty of colorful language.
And I hardly think two "fucks" in nine or so episodes equals saying say fuck "every other word."
are you sure? It wasn't: "That fucking was fucking cool.Trust me, get a bunch of STAR TREK writers together in a bar and you will hear plenty of colorful language.
And I hardly think two "fucks" in nine or so episodes equals saying say fuck "every other word."
"You're fucking right, fucking cadet. That fucking was fucking cool."
I'm really not. The fan/viewer reaction to the last few seasons of Doctor Who had nothing to do with content and everything to do with execution. The series hit the ground running by throwing a series of truly terrifying monsters at an audience that was accustomed to hokiness and camp. Alot of running, alot of one-liners, a lot of gadgetry and quick-escapes. Capaldi-Who replaced most of the running with "hold your breath and hide!" and most of the zippy one liners with angst, tears and apologies (literally in Bill's case). That took alot of the fun out of the show, which is where your disconnect with kids comes around.
It isn't "You can't watch this show, it's too violent and gruesome!" it's "You probably won't like this show, it's too depressing."
Between Discovery and Doctor Who, which of these two shows has ever depicted a person being shot to death with a realistic firearm? For that matter, which of them ever depicted a person being literally burned alive?
The only thing that might throw off Discovery's rating is the Klingon sex flashback at the end of "Into the Forest" which could easily be edited down for the squeamish among us. As for depictions of violence, however, Doctor Who makes Discovery look like Sesame Street: for every SINGLE act of violence in DISCO's first ten episodes, I can find at least 5 identical if not WORSE examples from Doctor Who's first 5 seasons.
The only thing Who hasn't shown us is partial nudity (of a woman, at least) which is pretty much all it takes to get conservatives up in arms. Of course, shirtless Matt Smith wouldn't as many British) raise eyebrows as Karen Gillam in a bikini...
This realism bit amuses me too. It's like 'hey it's soooo realistic' Tilly said fucken, because like that is how people talk!" Except people don't talk that way. If they swear then they will say fuck this and fuck that three or four times an hour. They do not speak like regular Star Trek characters did 99.9% of the time and then have one showcase moment to say 'fuck'.
One more time, regular STAR TREK characters never said it before simply because the Standards & Practices of the times would not allow it. Just like you never actually saw a couple in bed on TOS because the censors would never have allowed it on NBC in the 1960s. Doesn't that people sleeping together is not "canon" or whatever.
And, seriously, there is a sane middle ground between people swearing "three or four times an hour" and, say, an exuberant cadet blurting something out in a moment of excitement. The sky is not falling, folks.
Troi likes chocolate. Tilly swore once. Both nice little character touches, that's all.
Personally, I thought it was fucking cool.
The point is not whether Star Trek characters were allowed to use profanity before. The point is this group doesn't for the most part either and then Tilly and Stamets trot out fucken. How is that realistic? People who swear will do so more than once, it will roll off their tongues. Yet here we have no swearing and then this one awkward, terribly obvious moment for Tilly and Stamets to say fucken. Then back to no swearing. Gee that's realistic - not.
Whilst I agree with a fair chunk of your assessment of Capaldi Who here and in other comments, and even agree that it’s that sea change that is a big part of the problem, it’s something that isn’t as simply quantifiable as the stuff I am talking about, and the stuff various certification boards are gonna look at. A Dalek and it’s blaster is just not the same as a Klingon with a knife in realism terms. A kid can wave a plunger all it likes, it’s not actually gonna suck someone’s face off, but a kid gets ahold of a blade at a barbecue, the results would be catastrophic (of course, parents tend to stop them doing that in the first place, but I am talking about quantifiable things on a screen that are measured in metrics by people whose job it is to do so.)
There’s not much point arguing Capaldi Who is less suitable for kids than DSC, I don’t let my little one watch either, because yes, depressing, but also too violent, even in the ideas expressed (hot air baloon made of humans...captain georgiou for lunch..there’s a fag paper between those.) True anecdote, we gave Who another chance at family viewing earlier in the year...within five minutes, a little boy was dying in the Thames, and the Doctor didn’t save him. Was more worried about his Sonic. Off went the TV and I ended up relating the story later with a few necessary edits. Who forgot the bit where the Dragons are fought, the Battle won, and everything is OK in the end...and where children aren’t a shortcut for a narrative showing how terrible things are by having a few get offed. At least when Colin Baker’s era got grim it was usually nasty people on the receiving end and not kids.
But as I say, DSC is R rated no? It’s what we are discussing. It’s de facto not suitable for kids. DW is a 12 at worst.
Gotta disagree. Tilly has not been portrayed as somebody--like, say, Deb on DEXTER--who swears as easily as she breathes. Tilly blurted it out once . . .and may do so again at an appropriate moment. But it's not a binary thing where people either swear all the time or not at all. It depends on the person and the circumstances. And, at that particular moment, Stamets was just trying to put her at ease. It was sweet, really.
Look, in the real word, sometimes people swear and sometimes they don't, depending on the individual and the circumstances. If I'm speaking at a grade-school book fair, am I going to drop F-bombs all over the place? Of course not. If I'm on a midnight panel at a horror convention, sure, why the fuck not? If I'm trying to get a balky printer to work, I'm sure as hell going to be swearing a blue streak.
As Lorca says: context is king.
It's not as reductive as "If Star Trek people swear sometimes, they have to swear all the time, so they should never swear, period."
You can have social realism in a world without physical realism. They call it "Magical realism". Where the laws of physics work differently than in the real world, but people behave like real people would behave if placed in that world.
Although you can argue in Star Trek, you don't want people to act like real people, you want people to be principled and morally driven.
I don't think it's a problem to have R rated content when the story calls for it, but if you're adding it just because you can, it's just as bad as censorship, just the opposite.
I have no issue with characters swearing, but they should be professional enough not to do it on the job unless there are no superiors around and you're really comfortable with everyone in your company.
Similar threads
- Poll
