• 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: Strange New Worlds 2x01 - "The Broken Circle"

Hit it!

  • Total voters
    240
Nyotarules said:
TOS M'Benga, knew Vulcan physiology, was second to McCoy. What else did we no about him? Nothing, because he wasn't a main character. But in SNW he is, so what characterisation changed that you knew before?
Click to expand...
Yes, please? What did we know so well about M'Benga and Chapel that somehow has radically changed?

And, not being able to imagine them becoming their TOS selves is not sufficient. People changed.

I do not believe this is a controversial opinion. Otherwise TMP and TWOK must have sucked for Trek fans.
 
fireproof78 said:
Yes, please? What did we know so well about M'Benga and Chapel that somehow has radically changed?

And, not being able to imagine them becoming their TOS selves is not sufficient. People changed.

I do not believe this is a controversial opinion. Otherwise TMP and TWOK must have sucked for Trek fans.
Click to expand...
And Picard....well the less said about him and his latent mummy issues, the better!
 
fireproof78 said:
Because people are static beings who never change?
Click to expand...
Never said that. But if you want to use legacy characters in order to name drop, my opinion is that the writing has to be believable that Strange New Worlds Chapel will become TOS Chapel. And I don't buy that based on this. I don't buy that for Strange New Worlds Spock and TOS Spock either.

I have no problem with the actress or her performance. She's great and she and Peck have great chemistry. But there's no reason why the character had to have been named Chapel and be consistent.
 
Citiprime said:
Because this isn't expanding someone's backstory. This is completely changing someone's characterization with new backstory.
Click to expand...
How does one "completely change" a characterization when there was little to no backstory to begin with.

It seems that much of what you're objecting to, is 50+ years of what you imagined the character to be in your own head canon.
 
Citiprime said:
Never said that. But if you want to use legacy characters in order to name drop, my opinion is that the writing has to be believable that Strange New Worlds Chapel will become TOS Chapel. And I don't buy that based on this. I don't buy that for Strange New Worlds Spock and TOS Spock either.
Click to expand...
What would make you buy it?

Because I've seen way more dynamic changes in real life with people. So I don't see why this is unbelievable. :shrug:
 
M'Benga: Ok, so I have to confess the secret.

Pike: Spit it out Joseph. Another kid in the transporter?

M'Benga: No. Those steroids I carry around and pump myself and people with to fight Klingons? It's a placebo. Just some green coloring in a vial. I wanted to experiment to see if people could find an inner physical strength if they believed in something, even if that something was fake. The humans I injected always had the capability to fight Klingons hand to hand, their weaknesses were psychological, not physical.

Pike: :wtf:
 
Citiprime said:
Because this isn't expanding someone's backstory. This is completely changing someone's characterization with new backstory.

Just like when they say they just wanted to expand on the Gorn concept ... Well completely changing is not expanding.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Who cares?

I'm glad to see the characters who got short shrift in TOS - Uhura and Chapel particularly - given interesting, dimensional portrayals and characters in this show. Just as I'm thrilled to see Spock so adroitly reframed in a more modern and less simple psychological context. These actors and these writers are an absolute gift to the earliest legacy of Star Trek and they're doing exciting stuff, emotionally moving storytelling with characters who are worth the investment of time.

I don't care whether Spock and Chapel ever become like the TOS versions of the characters. In fact, I dread it. They and all the original Star Trek characters deserve better half a century later than the endless dreary repetition of old tropes and bits of business that "identify them" the way brand names and trademarks identify merchandise.
 
Jedi Marso said:
Two reasons.

1. Because that is how the character was originally portrayed and developed. So what if she was pathetic? A lot of people are- that's life.
Click to expand...

I imagine "pathetic" people would prefer not to be seen that way. Or maybe have rich inner lives we are not privy to because no one bothers to ask them about themselves. (Also adding my objection to your use of the world "developed" since there wasn't any character development with Chapel in TOS.)

2. Using old characters in a prequel restricts what can be done with them.
Click to expand...

That's bullshit. I'm a writer. I can figure out a lot of ways to squeeze in between the lines when necessary. That's part of the joy.

Someone else nailed the point: if you don't want the internal consistency with these characters to start with, why use them at all?
Click to expand...
I argue that your conceit of "internal consistency" is highly subjective.
 
Last edited:
DaveyNY said:
How does one "completely change" a characterization when there was little to no backstory to begin with.

It seems that much of what you're objecting to, is 50+ years of what you imagined the character to be in your own head canon.
Click to expand...

Exactly. So much of the criticism of new Trek (really all trek) I see here is “this violates my head canon and is therefore very bad.”
 
Nothing M'Benga or Chapel are doing right now violates TOS continuity because there's almost no TOS continuity to violate. Dr. Roger Korby, pining for Spock, interning in a Vulcan medical ward and being a black human of African heritage. That's all we have to go on.

SNW is doing things just fine.
 
Nyotarules said:
TOS Pike was a sexist captain who had a fantasy to be an Orion slave trader in animal woman. And this dude was considered the boy scout captain in SNW? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!
Click to expand...
That's actually... surprisingly realistic unfortunately (that someone who secretly has bigoted beliefs can be widely acclaimed by people around them as a "boy scout")
 
I honestly cannot stand Pelia's voice.

Also, have we seen Starfleet members use combat drugs before like that?
 
DaveyNY said:
How does one "completely change" a characterization when there was little to no backstory to begin with.

It seems that much of what you're objecting to, is 50+ years of what you imagined the character to be in your own head canon.
Click to expand...
So when we eventually get to the TNG prequel show that shows Mot the Barber as a Bolian supersoldier before he started cutting hair that'll completely make sense?
 
ichab said:
The super serum scene had me rolling my eyes. Even with a boost those two scrawny humans shouldnt be able to take out dozens of Klingons with their bare hands
Click to expand...
Babs is scrawny? He’s also a two times Pan-American Jujitsu champion. M’Benga might be as well.
Voodoowoman2 said:
A woman cannot punch like that without breaking her hands. Even though it is my fave Chapel it is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Bit late to be worried about such things in a TV/Movie fight scene. Do women have different hands than men?
eschaton said:
I honestly don't give one whit whether the characterization of any of the folks we see in TOS are consistent with that portrayal. The series is now close to 60 years old; I expect a more modern spin on the characters. I do want the characters to be consistent within the show though, which is why this episode was in part a failure for me. The whole M'Benga/Chapel fight sequence with the Klingons was not only nonsensical, it was in no way rooted in what has been established regarding their characters.
Click to expand...
We know little about CHapen and M’Benga. All information is new information and is establishing who they are and who they were.
 
eschaton said:
I honestly don't give one whit whether the characterization of any of the folks we see in TOS are consistent with that portrayal. The series is now close to 60 years old; I expect a more modern spin on the characters. I do want the characters to be consistent within the show though, which is why this episode was in part a failure for me. The whole M'Benga/Chapel fight sequence with the Klingons was not only nonsensical, it was in no way rooted in what has been established regarding their characters.
Click to expand...

While I was not crazy about the OTT fight, I quite liked how it was set up. With a single line of dialogue, they explain why M'Benga has the Popeye juice and enrich his backstory with Chapel to establish they have been through some terrible things together. He's so scarred that he's always prepared for the next terrible thing, even though the war has ended. It was efficient and made the characters live beyond the series we are seeing them in, I thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top