Lmao no it isn’t.Doing that would destroy the foundation of STD. The entire point of STD IS about showing how small and contrived the Star Trek universe is because everyone knows Michael Burnham
Lmao no it isn’t.Doing that would destroy the foundation of STD. The entire point of STD IS about showing how small and contrived the Star Trek universe is because everyone knows Michael Burnham
Dude just went through a bereavement and divorce...i mean he does have the puffiness of a modern day william shatner.
![]()
Doing that would destroy the foundation of STD. The entire point of STD IS about showing how small and contrived the Star Trek universe is because everyone knows Michael Burnham
So you're saying Discovery is like Cheers.
Kirk isn't unremarkable. At any age. But I do agree that showing how Kirk became a Captain is beyond the scope of Discovery.
Elevate yourself above stupidity. Somebody in Starfleet 6 months after the Battle at the Binary Stars not knowing Michael Burnham would be the same as somebody in the current US army not knowing who Bowe Bergdahl is. The majority do, for obvious reasons.Doing that would destroy the foundation of STD. The entire point of STD IS about showing how small and contrived the Star Trek universe is because everyone knows Michael Burnham
Eeehm, I think we are supposed to attack the post, not the poster.Elevate yourself above stupidity.
(How well known is Kirk at this point in time?)
She began and ended the Klingon war. First Starfleet mutineer. That's quite a reputation.
Where else would a story about a relative of Spock be placed? When we discovered he had a fiancee, it was in the TOS time frame. When we found out who his parent are it was in the TOS time frame. When we found out he had a brother it was in the TOS time frame. Why would a sister require a new version of Trek?I've got zero problem with Spock having a sister (famous or otherwise), but squishing it into the TOS backstory rather than their own version of Trek is silly
No, that would be an insult to all the actually talented and creative people who worked on Cheers.So you're saying Discovery is like Cheers.
They say Gavrilo Princip started WWI, but it was inevitable at that point anyway. It's not Burnham's fault that the war started, but she helped set off the powder keg and gave people someone to blame. People really like having someone to blame.It seems clear that the Klingons were gunning for a war anyway, and would have got one regardless of Burnham's involvement. She did NOT start the war. The Klingons did - because that's just what they do.Everything that happened up to and including the war was the result of manipulation by the Klingons. (Why else leave that damn beacon right out in the open where anyone could find it? The Klingons were waiting for somebody to fire on...)
As for Kirk: Jimmy Bennett looks like a good choice. Not sure how good of an actor he is but he definitely looks like a Kirk.
Anthony Montgomery?Complete unknown would be my preference
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.