Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 4x04 - "All Is Possible"

[SJGardner]

In addition, the camera treated them like characters, often lingering on their faces for "reaction shots" after a main cast member said something. These cues made people read them not as props, but people, and left people wanting to know more about them.

This actually reminds me of how Damar was introduced as a minor exposition-reading character, but the director specifically instructed the camera operator to shoot him as a main character complete with lingering reaction shots to prepare the audience for his increased role in the future. I think I understand why camera work like that can give these kinds of expectations to the viewers.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't think we necessarily need to know more about the bridge crew.

We don't. The camera angles were exactly like ST 09 and we still learned nothing about the extras. Sorry, fan expectations or camera angles doesn't change the purpose of the characters.

 

[Lonemagpie]

Belatedly, my review of last week's #StarTrekDiscovery is up now. https://warpfactortrek.com/discoverys-all-is-possible-in-review/

 

[ToddCam]

With all the other factors being equal, I like it when there's fleshing out of the supporting cast. It makes the world feel more real in some ways. It adds to the verisimilitude. In real life, sure, most human beings are just extras in my day-to-day existence, but I appreciate that every person who I pass on the street has a history and a personality and desires.

 

[nic3636]

We don't. The camera angles were exactly like ST 09 and we still learned nothing about the extras. Sorry, fan expectations or camera angles doesn't change the purpose of the characters.

Yeah but that's not what he's saying. He's saying that how the characters look and the related camera work created a disconnect between fan expectations of these characters and their intended purpose in the script.

And it's a fair point. If you draw attention to these characters and give them attention in a way that makes them seem interesting, it's only natural that people are going to be (shocker) interested in them. And when you couple this with the expectation (created from prior Trek series) that most bridge characters have larger roles, you get all the complaining you have been seeing.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah but that's not what he's saying. He's saying that how the characters look and the related camera work created a disconnect between fan expectations of these characters and their intended purpose in the script.

And it's a fair point. If you draw attention to these characters and give them attention in a way that makes them seem interesting, it's only natural that people are going to be (shocker) interested in them. And when you couple this with the expectation (created from prior Trek series) that most bridge characters have larger roles, you get all the complaining you have been seeing.

I understand his point very well. I am saying that some times those expectations are largely unreasonable, especially with camera work. With streaming services there has been the trend towards far more cinematic camera work, which reminds me far more of Star Trek 2009 than prior Star Trek shows. For instance, in ST 09 when the Enterprise fails to go to warp the camera focuses on two crewmembers in their reaction to Sulu's struggle, with no lines, and no other real presence in the film. So, I think the camera is doing more along those lines than past Trek.

Not saying that people can't complain, as I largely think the complaint come out of a dissatisfaction with the main character(s) than actual past Trek experience. But, I think there is a variety of factors as to why the camera is doing what it is doing, and it isn't to say "These people are important!"

Not that it much matters. The characters I like the most in Trek are one shots.

 

[Noname Given]

A 5.

Sorry - this one just misfired for me on all fronts:

- The President DIDN'T tell Michael what she knew before going into the diplomatic meetings; yet somehow just expected Burham and Saru to pick up on the situation and naturally come to a solution that would work?

- As for the whole Shuttle accident -- this type of situation was done MUCH BETTER on TOS s1 - "The Galileo Seven" (which the scriptwriters probably should have watched to get a better idea of how to do am decent story) - because while I thought teh characterizations were good; please - another completely Phaser resistant/immune lifeform; and I'm sorry but the whole "If we run to the top of that ridge our communicators will work and the Federation ship will be able to nearly instantaneously beam us all back up over a HUGE distance (okay 32nd century Transporters; but if they have interstellar ranges WHY use shuttles at all?)

I swear, it came across like a 'run to a spot and click' mission in Star Trek Online.

In really have to wonder how long it's been since these writers have bothered to watch a Trek episode. What happened to the science fiction aspect? I'm getting annoyed at 'Star Trek 90210' myself. With what? Only 10 to 13 episodes a season, they should do better with crafting a decent story that's not a big soap opera.

 

[XCV330]

As I've said in the past, I think the scenario with people wanting "more" of the bridge crew dates back to a disconnect between the scriptwriters and the visuals team and the direction in Season 1.

Basically, it was very, very clear given the way the show was scripted the bridge crew were meant to be unimportant - just there to spout off a couple lines of exposition, nothing less, and nothing more. But the designers had fun with a few of them, giving Detmer the prosthetic and undercut, Owo a nice distinctive haircut, and Airiam very detailed makeup. This was really different from how Berman Trek treated the extras - where they were meant to look as boring as possible, so as even when they got a line or two, we never noticed they were in 50+ episodes. In addition, the camera treated them like characters, often lingering on their faces for "reaction shots" after a main cast member said something. These cues made people read them not as props, but people, and left people wanting to know more about them. And frankly, they started catering to this fan desire as early as Season 2, giving Owo a backstory and Airiam an entire episode, and continued in Season 3 with Detmer getting an entire PTSD arc.

I don't think we necessarily need to know more about the bridge crew. But I think the writers to some extent continue to struggle because the main cast doesn't align with the bridge crew, which means that traditional Trek stories can't be told without finding some way to shoehorn everyone in each week. I also do think it would be a nice change of pace to have a "Lower Decks" style episode where we followed the bridge crew and got to see the mains from their frame of reference instead, but that's a like to, not a need to.

They continue to add little bits and pieces to the bridge crew back story too. As little as they've been seen this season (and with the newly installed flamethrowers, I wouldn't want to be on that set, either), we know Bryce surfs, for instance. I think they handle it very well. its just not in people's expectations. People crush on certain seat-fillers and want to know more about them. It's natural.

 

[fireproof78]

What happened to the science fiction aspect?

Been gone a while in Trek, and only occasionally visited, like that annoying uncle at Christmas time.

its just not in people's expectations.

Exactly. Adjusting expectations may be helpful.

 

[eschaton]

I understand his point very well. I am saying that some times those expectations are largely unreasonable, especially with camera work. With streaming services there has been the trend towards far more cinematic camera work, which reminds me far more of Star Trek 2009 than prior Star Trek shows. For instance, in ST 09 when the Enterprise fails to go to warp the camera focuses on two crewmembers in their reaction to Sulu's struggle, with no lines, and no other real presence in the film. So, I think the camera is doing more along those lines than past Trek.

Not saying that people can't complain, as I largely think the complaint come out of a dissatisfaction with the main character(s) than actual past Trek experience. But, I think there is a variety of factors as to why the camera is doing what it is doing, and it isn't to say "These people are important!"

Not that it much matters. The characters I like the most in Trek are one shots.

There's a difference between exploring a minor character in a two-hour movie and a 10+ hour series though. If you're doing modern serialized television as if it's just a movie, you're doing it wrong. The added time gives you the space to worldbuild and develop supporting characters in a way that can't be done in cinema (except maybe something like the MCU, where there's oodles of movies with shared continuity/recurring characters).

 

[fireproof78]

There's a difference between exploring a minor character in a two-hour movie and a 10+ hour series though. If you're doing modern serialized television as if it's just a movie, you're doing it wrong. The added time gives you the space to worldbuild and develop supporting characters in a way that can't be done in cinema (except maybe something like the MCU, where there's oodles of movies with shared continuity/recurring characters).

Perhaps, but I don't necessarily agree. Regardless I don't think the camera work is an automatically a short hand in the same way, which is why I refer to a film. Which is a trend I see in a lot of streaming shows is to take small moments with characters who otherwise do not get developed further.

While I don't think Discovery has done this perfectly well, I think that there has been sufficient world building because it is drawing the audience in to ask more questions. To me that shows more engagement.

 

[jackoverfull]

The President DIDN'T tell Michael what she knew before going into the diplomatic meetings; yet somehow just expected Burham and Saru to pick up on the situation and naturally come to a solution that would work?

very true, and Michael was very crossed about this, basically telling her to never do it again at the end.

which the scriptwriters probably should have watched to get a better idea of how to do am decent story

it’s pretty obvious that the writers had in fact watched Galileo 7.

 

[nic3636]

very true, and Michael was very crossed about this, basically telling her to never do it again at the end.

Yeah, I'm curious about this as it's clear they are foreshadowing something, just not sure what. Is the president not entirely on the level? Will there be a conflict between Burnham and the president later on?

 

[jackoverfull]

I don’t know and this is one of the best things discovery season 4 is doing!

 

[cooleddie74]

Heads of Federation and Earth governments are sometimes textured with layers of complexity we don't learn about until later. In ENT Prime Minister Nathan Samuels of the United Earth government hid his former sympathies with the Terra Prime movement until they were uncovered and he had to convince the NX-01 crew that his previous beliefs would not impede his judgment when it came to how to deal with Terra Prime. I could see the President in Season 4 being influenced by old notions of what she feels is best for the Federation and those might be anathema to the more idealistic beliefs system Burnham brought with her from the 23rd century.

 

[Nerys Myk]

What happened to the science fiction aspect?

Depends on what you mean. It's a TV show set on a space ship and features aliens. It has cool futuristic tech. That's usually the biggest "SF aspect" in most Trek episodes. Some of the best Trek shows aren't about some "tech the tech" babble but about people. Sometimes the people are impacted by the
tech the tech". Sometimes it's more mundane like having your parents visit Or getting into fight with your brother. Other times a character may suspect a passenger of being a mass murderer.

 

[Noname Given]

Depends on what you mean. It's a TV show set on a space ship and features aliens. It has cool futuristic tech. That's usually the biggest "SF aspect" in most Trek episodes. Some of the best Trek shows aren't about some "tech the tech" babble but about people. Sometimes the people are impacted by the
tech the tech". Sometimes it's more mundane like having your parents visit Or getting into fight with your brother. Other times a character may suspect a passenger of being a mass murderer.

Go rewatch some of TOS. It had a nice mix of Science Fiction storylines that were more than just a ship in space; plus some very nice character moments and no real technobabble needed either.

That's something I haven't really seen much of in Discovery since Discovery Season 2.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Go rewatch some of TOS. It had a nice mix of Science Fiction storylines that were more than just a ship in space; plus some very nice character moments and no real technobabble needed either.

That's something I haven't really seen much of in Discovery since Discovery Season 2.

I've watch TOS numerous times. Trust me, I'm familiar. The "SF storylines" are usually just there to support the actual stories about people and ideas.

 

[cooleddie74]

As Rod Serling himself said in 1970 and I paraphrase: "Star Trek was at times brimming with pure science fiction and inventiveness and at others it had an almost circus-like atmosphere." It could be both smart science fiction with a message to tell and pretty brilliantly and at other times it was just heroes on a spaceship punching evil aliens and doing things that would make young viewers happy and please the sponsors.

 

[IMC Headquarters]

TRAVIS: Captain! We're dead in the water. All forward motion has stopped. Thrusters are inoperative.
ARCHER: What? T'Pol?
T'POL: Confirmed. Our warp field has turned fluidic. And we are being supported by a column of transparent polyresin. There seems to be a sphere of glass surrounding the liquid. We are, effectively, trapped.
TRIP: Bridge! I don't know what's going on outside, but we're taking in water through the launch bay doors!
ARCHER: Polarize the hull plating! Trip! Seal all doors and docking ports! Malcolm? Can we launch a torpedo to disperse the field?
MALCOLM: Negative. Targeting sensors are registering severe distortion. Unable to compensate.
TRIP: Captain, if we somehow manage to break through this, we're looking at a real bumpy crash to the floor of wherever the hell this is. It'll take three minutes to reinitialize thruster control. And our extended warranty just expired.
ARCHER: Mister Reed. Prepare the grappler. And launch all torpedoes on my mark. Hoshi? Address intercraft.
HOSHI: Ready.
ARCHER: All hands brace for impact. We're going to attempt to free ourselves from this anomaly. I won't lie to you--I don't know how we got here or what strange new world lies outside waiting for our discovery, but we're going to make some history today because of you...all is possible.