Yeah. To me, there is a big difference in filling in blanks (Where is Chekov in season one?) and making excuses for bad writing.
I’m not that much into the head canon stuff, anyway. Either it’s on screen and it makes sense or it doesn’t.
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x14 - "Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Yeah. To me, there is a big difference in filling in blanks (Where is Chekov in season one?) and making excuses for bad writing.
I’m not that much into the head canon stuff, anyway. Either it’s on screen and it makes sense or it doesn’t.
Lol. Turbolifts move sideways too. An emergency protocol for power loss situations makes complete sense. Sometimes people have to climb the shafts.objection! badgering the witness
The missile thing is a minor issue. Stupid, sure, but not ultimately a huge deal in itself. Still, it is a part of the pattern where the writers want to deliver a certain scene, and they're willing to throw all reason and logic aside and just have it to happen. There are way bigger issues repeating that same pattern though. I said this already earlier.
I am not being 'ornery'.
Might have to wait another millennium, give or take
And there is A LOT to nitpick in Discovery.
Won’t you stop with your unreasonable expectation that the show make sense.
Yes, apparently the extreme cold managed to do some damage.
Yeah this. I will happily explain away things where they have later improved or expanded the story (like the aforementioned Chekov, or the introduction of sisko's dead father) because you don't get everything right first time, and I'd rather they tell a great story now than worry about how it fits with the first season weirdness or the fact they couldn't do something then they can do now. I will happily breeze on by this stuff.
But the internal logic of a specific story they are telling should not require fans to headcanon a whole array of convuluted explanations in order to patch over the holes. That's not an issue with Discovery, Trek or science fiction/fantasy. It's an issue with storytelling. They need a good script editor.
And there is A LOT to nitpick in Discovery.
She's full of nanites, not nits.
G
Gonzo
Guest
They could just be keeping his character or actor a secret until the S31 show airs, he could be another Control but I doubt it, I would expect them to have stringent methods of identification after recent events.
I could not see any rank insignia on him so he could be S31 top brass or alternatively just a bureaucrat.
We did cover this in an earlier post in the thread a few pages back.
Not among the main cast at any rate.
Where does one find chamomile lotion in the 32nd century?
All we can say at this point is that it's someone with a blad spot on the top of his head... Who do we know that has that kind of hair pattern... Hmmm....
Yeah. I can get on board with them modernising the visuals up to a point but the fictional limits on the technology were pretty well established (if not wholly consistent). They could have hand-waved a lot away by mentioning retro -fitting technology found on Dr Korby's last dig or some such as long as the other characters don't act like it's established Federation science.
I don't understand the logic of making the Enterprise bigger though. Why was it necessary, why do they think it's 'cooler', how can they possibly explain it away?
The Enterprise is an exploratory space submarine. The more whistles and bells they give it, the more they detract from that. It wasn't broke so stop trying to fix it.
I don't understand the logic of making the Enterprise bigger though. Why was it necessary, why do they think it's 'cooler', how can they possibly explain it away?
The Enterprise is an exploratory space submarine. The more whistles and bells they give it, the more they detract from that. It wasn't broke so stop trying to fix it.
maybe somebody actually figured out how much hull is needed to pack 400+ people
Don't fat shame, dude.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
