Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 3x07 - "Unification III"

[ananta]

Make Star Trek Emotionless Again!

 

[DaveyNY]

Make Star Trek Emotionless Again!

STAR TREK: THE EMOTIONLESS PICTURE

 

[137th Gebirg]

 

[Hawku]

Both Zachary Quinto and Ethan Peck grow up to be Leonard Nemoy.

 

[Discofan]

Both Zachary Quinto and Ethan Peck grow up to be Leonard Nemoy.

Don't forget the five or six who played Spock (however briefly) in TSFS!


Plus the baby in TFF!!!! Whatever happened to him?

 

[Court_Vince]

View attachment 19278

Read that in Sisko's voice

 

[Discofan]

Read that in Sisko's voice

Sisko cried... at least a couple of times, plus as Benny Russel.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

So much disrespect for the glowing orb that played Spock in Return to Tomorrow..

 

[Discofan]

So much disrespect for the glowing orb that played Spock in Return to Tomorrow..

Wasn't he a computer in Spock's Brain?


That episode had the greatest line of all time:

"Brain, brain, what is brain?"

 

[Court_Vince]

Sisko cried... at least a couple of times, plus as Benny Russel.

I meant it as read(past tense)

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Wasn't he a computer in Spock's Brain?


That episode had the greatest line of all time:

"Brain, brain, what is brain?"

That too! So many inanimate Spocks.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Lol! Oh yeah sure Shatners Kirk is not a household name it never ever has been Pine made Kirk who he is today. Ah ha ha ha ah haha ha. Sorry but you TOS haters have no idea how popular Kirk has been and contributes to be. Shatner is known everywhere. Not even sure where you are getting your information.

Who says I hate TOS? I actually quite like TOS. My point is that Shatner and his Kirk don't have much relevance to and are not revered by the general public who don't watch Star Trek and view the show distastefully. To use myself as an example, I vaguely know all of the people who played the Doctor in Doctor Who, but I don't watch the show so those actors have little relevance to me.

 

[NCC-73515]

You've posted on here pretty much every day defending the "crying" for what must be coming close to 2 weeks now. Great use of your time buddy.

Never seen someone get so emotional over nothing. I guess you and Burnham have something in common and that's why you have such a soft spot for the her.

Most people keep defending their position when people keep challenging it - I once did it until I was told to "take a hint" and that "no one wants to discuss this anymore" (which ignored the challengers who obviously wanted to), and so I stopped when a mod threatened to close the thread. So I do understand the need to keep defending when you keep getting opposition that doesn't make sense in your opinion. Everyone should be free to respond to counterarguments as long as they come.

Fun to watch your Burnhamesque reaction to criticism though, so keep up your great posts. I'm sure a Nobel prize is waiting for you with all the time you're putting in into them.

For peace, or for literature? Or both?

I'm far more sick of people crying about Burnham crying than I am about Burnham crying, and they cry far more than Burnham cries.

We need a separate, dedicated thread so people can dump their crying over crying there and keep it out of other threads - guess I'll start one XD

"He's an asshole. I don't care what Tannen says! I don't care what anybody else says either!"

No more chicken, Mr. Eastwood? Such a great scene, him earning his ancestor's respect and avoiding the car crash in 1985 because of the lesson he learned in 1885

 

[Midquest]

give me evidence that Shatners Kirk is not a household name and largely unknown. One of the greatest sci fi series in the last 60 years and you’re trying to claim it’s not well known to the general masses? Sorry but so funny. Post a link showing TOS is largely unknown.

Your post distorts what I said and continues this strangely laughing tone that is unfriendly and unproductive. I'm not going to respond again.

 

[Char Kais]

*insert "There's No Crying in Star Trek meme here*

From the TOS show bible for Star Trek writers:

Must the starship crew be perfect humans?

No, you can project too optimistically. We want characters with a reasonable mixture of strength, weaknesses, and foibles. Again, believability is the key here. What kind of men would logically and believably man a vessel of this type? Obviously, they'd be better selected and trained than the wild enlisted shore leave group in "Mister Roberts".

From the TNG show bible:

Especially, the people must be believable. The crew of the Enterprise are intelligent , witty, thoughtful, compassionate, caring human beings -- but they have human faults and weaknesses too -- although not as many or as severe as in our time. They have been selected for this mission because of their ability to transcend their human failings. We should see in them the kind of people we aspire to be ourselves.
Star Trek is not melodrama.

 

[fireproof78]

From the TOS show bible for Star Trek writers:


From the TNG show bible:

Cool. "Believability is key." Whelp, I find Burnham perfectly believable.

Mileage varies.

 

[Char Kais]

We are going to conduct a logic-tribunal by engaging in the most common logical fallacy of all time:
The ad hominem attack.
Totally logical.

The biggest mystery in Star Trek Discovery is the Burn and of course, only Michael Burnham can solve it.
But instead of talking about the data, work the problem, we are going to talk about Mikey B's fee-fees and state of mind.

From: https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/episodes/dis3.htm#unificationiii

Just like back in the days of Star Trek: Voyager, the writers of Discovery don't seem to understand the difference between power generation and propulsion. Dilithium is used in the warp core, and as such a part of the power generation. The propulsion takes place in the nacelles, and the plasma flowing through it is nothing more than some form of electric current that powers the warp coils. It is impossible to build a transwarp or slipstream drive by just making some adjustments to the warp core. Vice versa, exploring new kinds of propulsion such as the Vulcans did with SB-19 would be of no help, unless they also find a new power source that doesn't require dilithium. That being said, we already know of alternative power sources on starships, such as the quantum singularity. It almost definitely doesn't need dilithium because it doesn't operate on antimatter and its existence sort of refutes the whole premise of season 3. Hinting at this Romulan technology and at possible reasons why it can't be used would have made a lot more sense in the story of "Unification III".

 

[fireproof78]

The biggest mystery in Star Trek Discovery is the Burn and of course, only Michael Burnham can solve it.

Yes, she can. And probably the Federation could too if they were not feeling so in crisis all the time. Being in crisis mode all the time limits critical thinking skills.

The ad hominem attack.

Who was attacked?

 

[Char Kais]

Who was attacked?

President T'Rina: "ruthlessly assail the credibility of the challenger"
Instead of discussing the facts, she flat out says that they will attack the challenger, aka an ad hominem attack.

 

[fireproof78]

President T'Rina: "ruthlessly assail the credibility of the challenger"
Instead of discussing the facts, she flat out says that they will attack the challenger, aka an ad hominem attack.

Ah. That makes more sense. Sorry, I misunderstood.