Or Star Trek has room for lots of different ideas. Including brains running computers, self-aware nanites, the Nexus, the Q Continuum, and Greek gods.
But spores? That's going to far.
The Spore Drive Technology. What Do You Think About It?
- Thread starter Kane_Steel
- Start date
But spores? That's going to far.
I've been Trekking for 50 years. I've seen shiny ribbons that jump start Espers. Aliens with the power of gods. Gods who are actually aliens. Talking holes in walls that can transport you through time. Beings that live in wormholes. Space amoebas. Space jellyfish. Ships that travel at the speed of plot. And warp ten salamanders. So extra-dimensional fungi and tardigards don't phase me.
Well...yeah. Obviously. I’m referring to the progression.
Not even when the fungi is part of the biological structure of the universe? The muscles/vein/blood/etc. Soon we’ll find out our universe is part of the zit of a super being.
Makes me think of Beast Wars Transformers merging organic and technology.
I think most of prior trek was based on world folklore. The hint of our past being part of a greater reality.
I see where you are coming from though as spores being an extension of the star trek mythos. Still weird for us old timers and limited thinkers.
Hahaha! Great post.
It's like "THIS is Star Trek kids...not sure what you all have been watching!"
Not a problem for me.
Better hope Q doesn't use Clearasil
I don't do Transformers.
As stated. I'm a pretty old timer.
I too have been trekking for 50 years, and I will agree there have been episodes IN ALL the series that I didn't like. The problem is that this entire arc 7 episodes and counting just will not go away fast enough for me.
If voyager would have focused 7 plus hours of salamander warp + 10 story line. I hope you would be capable of expressing your views of how bad that story was.
Is your argument hey look they did it that bad, so why can't disco do it this bad also and get away with it. My answer would be why are they stooping for such absurdity.
Look so far it's pretty obvious that this whole story must conclude and never rear it's ugly head EVER again. Just get it over quickly and move on to a better story.
My argument isn't that those things are bad, just that they are Star Trek. Star Trek is full of wonderful absurdities. One hour. Seven hours. Twenty four hours. It doesn't really matter to me. So far it's interesting. It doesn't need to be grounded in science. The best Star Trek stories aren't about science anyway.
I AGREE that's your view.
I AGREE that's your view.
I'm sure by now you also will also agree that that's not my view.
I'm glad that we have this medium to express our agreed views. No matter how different they are.
Of course.
Because the events depicted in STD take place before many of the other shows.
Yeah and?
Again it's fiction. The events are made up. This show is being written today. The other shows were written decades ago. So barring time travel it would be difficult.
Further more, those shows are not the complete "history" of that fictional universe. There is always room for more "historical" information.
Let's be fair-I just read an article about the lost civilization of Atlantis building the pyramids.
"Nothing new under the sun" and the like.
Last edited:
C
Captain pl1ngpl0ng
Guest
This nullify every agreeable points in what you just said. If you want to be taken seriously, thats not the way to go.
I'm referring to the timeline of the events, not when they they were produced for TV or the movies. Time travel. LOL.
Given the significance of such a technology (instantaneous travel?!) or even the idea of spores, etc., these should have at least been hinted at in any of the other shows. The same probably goes for Vulcan Jedi magic.
The argument that it's merely fiction is questionable as even fictional stories contain some logic in terms of the narrative.
Lot of holes in that timeline. Plus a few billion people we haven't seen yet.
Where is the illogic? They've set the series in a time that isn't really covered by the other shows.
Why? The handful of people we've met won't know everything or feel compelled to mention thing that aren't relevant to the plot at hand. Real life isn't like that. So fiction doesn't have to be.
Right, and this new one adds to it.
Whenever you write a prequel, you try to work with the shows that came after it. That's because when you reach the end of that prequel, you move on to the next one. In this case, STD is set around a decade before TOS appears. And from TOS onward, we did not see anything about Vulcan Jedi moves, spores, etc.
That's what I mean by logic in terms of fiction writing. Now, this doesn't mean that one cannot add anything to a prequel that doesn't appear in subsequent works. It just needs to be explained. For example, the spore technology is buried because it turns out to be dangerous, Vulcans stopped doing the Jedi thing for a similar reason, and Spock never talks about his foster-sister because of something that takes place later in STD.
Actually, real life can work that way. LOL.
The point is that a technology that allows for instantaneous travel, and one that according to STD allowed them to counter the Klingons effectively, is barely mentioned in any of the shows, where the Fed engages in various conflicts (including major wars?) and even crises involving the inability to make it to a certain destination in time.
And how much professional writing have you done? More than the people writing Star Trek?
You just answered your final paragraph.
No it can't. Because you don't know what's happening to everyone on the planet. The number of people, events and things you know nothing about is enormous.
I think this poster answered that
Only if it's convenient and the writers want to sell the idea of a prequel to attract a connection with a later show in the timeline but they don't really want to make it fit
Sporedrive.. oh dear something must have gone wrong.. who would've thought?
Similar threads
