I have no idea what Atlantis is, beyond the lost city and space shuttle.
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x05 - "Saints of Imperfection"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
I have no idea what Atlantis is, beyond the lost city and space shuttle.
Stargate Atlantis, when they resurrected Dr Beckett due to fan outcry.
I find it equally plausible that they always planned to bring him back and that they got nervous about the push back on showing gay characters in a functional loving relationship and immediately killing one.
'I hope you had a crackin good time'
Not sure I see the problem.
I definitely don't think this will be a simple resolution. I have a feeling they are invested in this relationship and want some interesting / meaningful things to play out.
I'll be disappointed if I'm wrong, but I get the feeling there's going to be some meat to this we'll see as the season plays out.
WIlson Cruz was on the Briefing Room and indicated there are things ahead for Stamets and Culber and it wont be smooth ride.
Normally, I'd be skeptical too...but since Harberts himself is gay, I always assumed he would be instrumental in wanting to do something more significant with the characters (despite he and Berg being ousted), and wouldn't have fallen into the "bury your gays" trope everyone accused the death of being.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems a safer, saner assumption.
Yeah I keep forgetting to check that out! My wife watched it this weekend while I was doing chores. I forgot to get caught up myself. Thanks for the reminder!
And, I'm hopeful that's true. There was a lot of complaining that Cluber's character was bland (not an argument I subscribed to, btw...I really liked the character). This certainly adds flavor to both the character and the relationship dynamic.
Another interesting point:
I was opposed to Section 31 being in the show. I thought that it was moderately interesting on DS9, but hated when it turned into a fanwanky constant after that. I also thought it was kind of blah in STID.
But, I've changed my tune. I actually like that their simple presence causes debate amongst the fandom. It makes a lot of people mad or frustrated because "this is not the light I want to see the Federation painted in." And, while I agree wholeheartedly...I actually value the debate and the challenge that their existence brings to the table. It makes the universe feel a little more real and it gives us something meaty to feel conflicted about...which is always my favorite part about Star Trek. I really lost interest in Trek when it stopped challenging me.
I think the important thing, though, is for fans to remember that. Remember that part of the fun is having your expectations challenged and being able to argue these points. I like the risk-taking. I'd rather the show stumble in execution as they continue to take risks than it be completely clean and extremely well executed. Well-executed boredom doesn't do anything for me. I know we all have our own values etc...but that's something I've learned recently.
I was opposed to Section 31 being in the show. I thought that it was moderately interesting on DS9, but hated when it turned into a fanwanky constant after that. I also thought it was kind of blah in STID.
But, I've changed my tune. I actually like that their simple presence causes debate amongst the fandom. It makes a lot of people mad or frustrated because "this is not the light I want to see the Federation painted in." And, while I agree wholeheartedly...I actually value the debate and the challenge that their existence brings to the table. It makes the universe feel a little more real and it gives us something meaty to feel conflicted about...which is always my favorite part about Star Trek. I really lost interest in Trek when it stopped challenging me.
I think the important thing, though, is for fans to remember that. Remember that part of the fun is having your expectations challenged and being able to argue these points. I like the risk-taking. I'd rather the show stumble in execution as they continue to take risks than it be completely clean and extremely well executed. Well-executed boredom doesn't do anything for me. I know we all have our own values etc...but that's something I've learned recently.
Why do you think the Klingons have hair now then?
That's not a great example though, because there was no plan to bring back Spock until after TWOK.
That's a cosmetic change as opposed to a story change. If anything, that seems like something that would be studio-mandated rather than a knee-jerk reaction to fan-whinging. In fact, IIRC, the Klingons were one of the things that Bryan Fuller came to logger-heads with the studio over. And honestly, as glad as I was that Fuller had been given Star trek at the time of the announcement, I am now equally, retro-actively glad that he was given the boot. But, but the time he was gone, they were too far into production to change them, the Klingons were established, and they were therefore stuck with the look, at least for the first season. I don't deny that there was a certain amount of damage control there, but I doubt that the Doomcockers of the world had anything to do with it.
I fail to see the relevanace.
That's the same title that Gene Roddenberry had on movies 2-6, and was more of a contractual thing than any. I think it's due to his work on the pilot that he gets a credit moving forward.
Just like how Stan Lee has always gotten Executive Producer credit on all of the Marvel movies, despite his not being actively involved with any of the productions, other than cameos.
Not to mention the immensely welcome appearance of the “true” D-7 to replace those goofy-ass “house” ships.
Well, in fairness that's not a plot point, it's a detail. Fans lose sight of the difference (and importance) between the two. Often I might add.
I could care less if they're gravitating toward tri-colored uniforms, Klingons with hair, or sets that resemble TOS etc because none of that matters. If they start developing plot points from fan feedback, though, the end is nigh. The fans are the worst, most disjointed source for story direction feedback there is. One only needs to read the "what show would you make" threads on boards like this to see that.
Writers write, producers produce, fans watch or complain. That is the way things should be.
Like I've always said, if an NFL coach starts executing draft choices and designing offensive game plans based on what the crowd wants to see...he's fucked before he walks out to the sideline at the coin toss.
The discussion in this case isn't about Culber's resurrection being silly, it's about it not being planned ahead of time. Thus citing TSFS doesn't help your argument.
well, I certainly don't expect them to have had the script written when they killed them off. Like I said, they were probably planning ahead and broad strokes. The fact that it may not have played well in your eyes, doesn't mean this wasn't their plan. obviously, it was going to have something to do with the mycelial network. None of this came as a surprise to me, as I thought it was rather telegraphed well in advance.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
