• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x01 - "The Vulcan Hello"

Rate the episode...


  • Total voters
    400
I'm not particularly one way or another in the reboot camp. If it is, great, I'm still watching. If it's not, then fanfic writers and canonistas have a lot of fun fanwankery and justifications ahead of them :p

That said, this is a bad example in particular. We already have a canonical "lost" member of Spock's family that nobody knew about for years. Another is stretching it a bit but not necessarily a clear sign that it's a reboot.

Can't comment on the Turnabout Intruder angle as I've never heard any justification for actually watching that episode :p
Exactly, we know very little about Spock's family right up to the time each one is introduced. So I don't understand why people think Sarek having a ward is so unusual.
WNMHGB- Spock mentions a human ancestor. Not a parent, an ancestor
CM-Spock mentions Balok reminds him of his father.
AT- Spock gets married yet there is no mention of his parents.
JTB-We find out the Vulcan ambassador is Spock's dad. A fact that Spock has never bothered to mention, not even in Amok Time a few missions earlier. I guess not even the name came up since Kirk didn't recognize it.
TFF- An unknown brother pops up.
 
I just don't think it is much of an issue. Gen Order #1 was pretty flexible back then (see "The Apple", or "A Taste of Armageddon"). The writers probably looked at it and said "they kept to a bare minimum of contact with the natives, that is sufficient". I think this is just an unimportant point in the script and probably doesn't have anything to do with the overall production hurdles.

Not to presume I know what you are thinking, but I think this level of criticism of minor plot points is inherent to Discovery being a new show, with only these two episodes under its belt. If this were an established show, say in its 5th season, I don't think we would be seeing the same concern - unless the point of the episode were something to do with General Order #1, or the crew being overconfident or something (like Malcolm Reed and the communicator in "The Communicator"), or was focused on the mission to save these aliens. These kind of nitpicks feel to me like they come from a place of looking too hard to find something to criticize. Again, I can't pretend to know what you are feeling about it. Maybe I am more happy with or optimistic about the show and thus I am more willing to consider this a non-issue.

Cause I am curious, what are the "so many other instances" of other issues you have in mind?
I have watched all of the series of Star Trek so far barring some of the original series as it was before my time, I have never concerned myself with inconsistencies or timeline issues and for the most part haven't even noticed them when watching the shows and the new films unless they were pointed out to me and even then I wasn't fussed at all, mainly because I was enjoying them so I didn't have the opportunity to notice.

This is the first time I have ever had the immersion broken by such issues in any scifi show I can remember, that speaks volumes to me and if I have noticed them I can only imagine the effect it has had on those who consider themselves purists/superfans (not intended as an insult).

I get the impression that CBS threw a lot of money at the two part pilot but the thought behind it was lacking somewhat if even I notice the discrepancies and I went in to watch the show with no preconceived ideas or expectations whatsoever.

I will stick with the series as I don't get hung up about these things, I expect the show to improve once we finally get to the Discovery and Lorca may be the shows saving grace, I like the Burnham character but I don't think she has the presence to carry a show like this alone.
 
...I will stick with the series as I don't get hung up about these things, I expect the show to improve once we finally get to the Discovery and Lorca may be the shows saving grace, I like the Burnham character but I don't think she has the presence to carry a show like this alone.

Cool.
I personally think SMG and Doug Jones were both great, and I am looking forward to continuing with them both. I think SMG could carry the show by herself, once she gets comfortable in the role. Her charisma outside of the show is amazing, and I think it will translate as we see more of Burnham. I think back to Patrick Stewart at the start of TNG, great actor, can carry anything, but it wasn't the best role at the start. So we just need a little time.
 
Honestly? I could have watched a pilot centered around Michael Burnham and Philippa Georgiou, with Burnham getting transferred to the Discovery towards the end of the pilot, and I would have been fine with it. What I got was such a mishmash of things all vying for my attention. For a brief, sweet moment, though, we had two powerful women of color, commanding, being friends, passing the Bechdel-Wallace test effortlessly, and then it just went south from there for me.

Remain Klingon. Remain Klingon. Remain Klingon. All in Klingon. *sigh*
 
Cool.
I personally think SMG and Doug Jones were both great, and I am looking forward to continuing with them both. I think SMG could carry the show by herself, once she gets comfortable in the role. Her charisma outside of the show is amazing, and I think it will translate as we see more of Burnham. I think back to Patrick Stewart at the start of TNG, great actor, can carry anything, but it wasn't the best role at the start. So we just need a little time.
Absolutely, I don't consider the actress the problem at all, more the script writers who seem to have been in a bit of a rush with all of the delays and issues in development.

All roles do evolve over time and they are never comfortable in the role at first but then again they are not normally having to fight the script at the same time, some of the dialogue was really clunky and that's just on the federation side, the Klingons were on another level with excellent actors like Chris Obis wooden delivery due to the unnecessarily excessive facial prosthetics, Klingons are not meant to be wooden and they showed less emotion than Sarek did.

Be in no doubt the actors and actresses are not the issue here, the script is just making it harder than it needs to be, adding the issues with the technology and timeline discrepancies that have been discussed extensively by others on this and the 1x02 thread just means the pilot could have been so much more and I wonder how it will affect the viewing figures which are so important in the US, I am in the UK.

Once the characters are all on the Discovery and everything settles down the issues will hopefully disappear and be forgotten, its just a shame that such an important pilot was found wanting even by me, which is really saying something.
 
I became a "Trekker" in the Summer of 1992 when I'd stay up late watching TV, I came across an episode of "The Next Generation" that pulled me into it. I believe this episode was "Disaster" but it may have been some other 5th Season episode. Before then, I'd only seen fragments of episodes of both TNG and TOS here and there but never a complete episode.

Before that night, in my mind, all Sci-Fi was "the same" and about space ships doing space battles with funny looking aliens and little more than that, it didn't appeal to me. But watching that episode of TNG and then watching other episodes the following nights and still others in syndication I learned what Star Trek was about:

The evolution and achievements of the human spirit. Humans exploring, working together and working together with aliens in a community. It was a positive look at the future for human achievement not a grim one as is often the case in Sci-Fi.

That's what appealed to the most in Star Trek and why I became a fan. It's also why I wasn't that big a fan of Deep Space Nine (it times its style was too "dark" and "grim" and then when the war arc started, forget about it.)

I just finished watching Discovery's first episode on my DVR and it left me unimpressed and unmoved. I can quibble all day long about the different look of the show vs. the time-line it's in and all of that but even ignoring the geek-heavy stuff... Nothing grabbed me here. I don't have a feel for any of these characters, we're not on the titular ship, and do we even have a full grasp of this show's direction and focus? It was an hour of dutch angles, lens flares and angsty actions.

I liked that in Trek's concept of the time humanity had grown the fuck up and decided to get along, work together, and do better. I liked the idea that Starfleet was mostly only "military" in ceremony than it was in any action or capacity. But here, we just get a very "military" feel. Humans aren't working together, in the other series performing a mutiny like "Michael" does here was unthinkable. Think of all of the other mutinies that've occurred in the various series and they usually happen after great hand wringing, debate, and usually in circumstances where the Captain is corrupted in some manner as to make mutiny inevitable. Here? The first officer disagrees with her captain's decision.

Why does our main character have to be a ward of Sarek, making her a defacto adopted sister of Spock? Couldn't her father have literally just been *any* Vulcan?

Why the radical and, frankly, disgusting in appearance change to the Klingons? TOS didn't use makeup on the Klingons not because of the idea that "Klingons look like humans" but because it was just impossible for the make up to be done on the budget they had. With "The Motion Picture" Klingons are fully realized and have been that way for 40 years. Why the fucking change to this heavy make-up, disgusting-looking, creatures? Shit. why do every fucking scene with them speaking Klingon? More "realistic"? Sure, but some dramatic and emotional connection is lost when your actors are speaking gibberish and you have to read what they're saying.

Why all the fucking dutch angles?!

Who are any of these characters?! You get something from the captain and first officer and fraidy-cat second officer but for all of them little beyond the roles they're filling in this segment of the story.

The other guys are seat fillers spouting off out dialogue. Then the show "tries too hard" with the present-day references. Does it make any sense for a man operating a lift to an exterior hatch on a spaceship dozens of light years away, 250 years in the future to imitate the announcement of a 21st century airline flight attendant as her plane approaches the arrival gate?

I just.... Ugh. This didn't work for me. I've zero interest to see the second part of this pilot because so little happened in the first part that made me curious on what's going to happen next. Nothing interesting happened for me. Ooohh! Tensions and potential space battle with Klingons! Yawn. Mutinies! Drama! Dim lighting! Lens Flares! Dutch Fucking Angles! What's there to be interested in here?

If people like this show, fine. Whatever. If you want to pay for another streaming service to view it, fine. Your money.

But, for me, there's nothing here to like. Nothing here to pull me in and latch me on and remind me of why I'm a Star Trek fan. I got pulled into the series by watching an episode with a ship going through an frickin' "Earthquake/Disaster Strike" television trope. I got sustained as a fan by watching characters working together, getting along, and exploring. Being a team and a family.

There's a lot that could have been done for a new Trek show to make it feel more realistic, dramatic and.... "Ground based." I think it be great if a series felt like, looked like, and behaved like a TV series set in a hospital or a business. Where the interactions, interplay and overall look of things just feels realistic and life-like, it's just an unfamiliar setting. It doesn't need to have the episodic camp, cheap or just corniness feel that could be argued all of the previous series had on some level or another, but what happens here is too far in another direction. It doesn't feel "real", it doesn't feel different, fresh or new, it feels like... Well, generic Sci-Fi TV.

I don't see or feel Star Trek in this. Sorry.

Maybe somewhere down the road I'll see/watch more of it but I'm not paying for another streaming service to be able to watch it and this first episode did nothing to sway me.
 
I became a "Trekker" in the Summer of 1992 when I'd stay up late watching TV, I came across an episode of "The Next Generation" that pulled me into it. I believe this episode was "Disaster" but it may have been some other 5th Season episode. Before then, I'd only seen fragments of episodes of both TNG and TOS here and there but never a complete episode.

Before that night, in my mind, all Sci-Fi was "the same" and about space ships doing space battles with funny looking aliens and little more than that, it didn't appeal to me. But watching that episode of TNG and then watching other episodes the following nights and still others in syndication I learned what Star Trek was about:

The evolution and achievements of the human spirit. Humans exploring, working together and working together with aliens in a community. It was a positive look at the future for human achievement not a grim one as is often the case in Sci-Fi.

That's what appealed to the most in Star Trek and why I became a fan. It's also why I wasn't that big a fan of Deep Space Nine (it times its style was too "dark" and "grim" and then when the war arc started, forget about it.)

I just finished watching Discovery's first episode on my DVR and it left me unimpressed and unmoved. I can quibble all day long about the different look of the show vs. the time-line it's in and all of that but even ignoring the geek-heavy stuff... Nothing grabbed me here. I don't have a feel for any of these characters, we're not on the titular ship, and do we even have a full grasp of this show's direction and focus? It was an hour of dutch angles, lens flares and angsty actions.

I liked that in Trek's concept of the time humanity had grown the fuck up and decided to get along, work together, and do better. I liked the idea that Starfleet was mostly only "military" in ceremony than it was in any action or capacity. But here, we just get a very "military" feel. Humans aren't working together, in the other series performing a mutiny like "Michael" does here was unthinkable. Think of all of the other mutinies that've occurred in the various series and they usually happen after great hand wringing, debate, and usually in circumstances where the Captain is corrupted in some manner as to make mutiny inevitable. Here? The first officer disagrees with her captain's decision.

Why does our main character have to be a ward of Sarek, making her a defacto adopted sister of Spock? Couldn't her father have literally just been *any* Vulcan?

Why the radical and, frankly, disgusting in appearance change to the Klingons? TOS didn't use makeup on the Klingons not because of the idea that "Klingons look like humans" but because it was just impossible for the make up to be done on the budget they had. With "The Motion Picture" Klingons are fully realized and have been that way for 40 years. Why the fucking change to this heavy make-up, disgusting-looking, creatures? Shit. why do every fucking scene with them speaking Klingon? More "realistic"? Sure, but some dramatic and emotional connection is lost when your actors are speaking gibberish and you have to read what they're saying.

Why all the fucking dutch angles?!

Who are any of these characters?! You get something from the captain and first officer and fraidy-cat second officer but for all of them little beyond the roles they're filling in this segment of the story.

The other guys are seat fillers spouting off out dialogue. Then the show "tries too hard" with the present-day references. Does it make any sense for a man operating a lift to an exterior hatch on a spaceship dozens of light years away, 250 years in the future to imitate the announcement of a 21st century airline flight attendant as her plane approaches the arrival gate?

I just.... Ugh. This didn't work for me. I've zero interest to see the second part of this pilot because so little happened in the first part that made me curious on what's going to happen next. Nothing interesting happened for me. Ooohh! Tensions and potential space battle with Klingons! Yawn. Mutinies! Drama! Dim lighting! Lens Flares! Dutch Fucking Angles! What's there to be interested in here?

If people like this show, fine. Whatever. If you want to pay for another streaming service to view it, fine. Your money.

But, for me, there's nothing here to like. Nothing here to pull me in and latch me on and remind me of why I'm a Star Trek fan. I got pulled into the series by watching an episode with a ship going through an frickin' "Earthquake/Disaster Strike" television trope. I got sustained as a fan by watching characters working together, getting along, and exploring. Being a team and a family.

There's a lot that could have been done for a new Trek show to make it feel more realistic, dramatic and.... "Ground based." I think it be great if a series felt like, looked like, and behaved like a TV series set in a hospital or a business. Where the interactions, interplay and overall look of things just feels realistic and life-like, it's just an unfamiliar setting. It doesn't need to have the episodic camp, cheap or just corniness feel that could be argued all of the previous series had on some level or another, but what happens here is too far in another direction. It doesn't feel "real", it doesn't feel different, fresh or new, it feels like... Well, generic Sci-Fi TV.

I don't see or feel Star Trek in this. Sorry.

Maybe somewhere down the road I'll see/watch more of it but I'm not paying for another streaming service to be able to watch it and this first episode did nothing to sway me.
That's fair enough, as I said in my previous post inconsistencies have never really affected me when watching shows like Star Trek yet the pilot caught me cold at a few points so I can only imagine how it must have seemed to those who are truly invested like yourself. :techman:
 
Was it in some dialogue I missed, or in part 2, that Michael Burnham is confirmed as Sarek's ward, or adopted daughter, or whatever? Couldn't it just be a remarkably close student-teacher relationship that survived past graduation? Mentor/Mentee? Even friends? Or is this legal guardian or ward thing carved in stone somewhere?
I see no particular reason why Spock would be or should be made aware of her, given where he is. I don't see any hypocrisy or inconsistency in Sarek having a good relationship with a former student in Starfleet.

What am I missing?
 
Was it in some dialogue I missed, or in part 2, that Michael Burnham is confirmed as Sarek's ward, or adopted daughter, or whatever? Couldn't it just be a remarkably close student-teacher relationship that survived past graduation? Mentor/Mentee? Even friends? Or is this legal guardian or ward things carved in stone somewhere?

Part 2.

Sarek introduces Burnham as his ward when meeting Yeoh.
 
Ah. part 2. Ward, eh? Well, even then, what is the legal definition of that? Isn't a ward a minor? Former ward, perhaps then, yes? And for how long? I'm just not sure why Spock should be informed of this since those two aren't talking. It doesn't seem a mystery or inconsistent, but then I've not seen much of this. Just part 1.
 
If she's been on the Shenzhou for seven years, then her and Spock probably joined Starfleet at roughly the same time.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top