Why the hate for Disco?

I might have a bad evening roll....

 

As far as I've been able to determine, no cancellation notice went out during the second season. The show was definitely "on the bubble," but nothing as dramatic as a network cancellation followed by a reversal. (Something that apparently happened to Gunsmoke during its 1966-67 season.)

 

As per the Sherwood Schwartz story re the death of Gilligan's Island.

 

Berman was the worst thing to ever happen to Trek.

 

In mkre c

Its not. Its a generic sci fi show. Nowhere near the greatness of TOS. TOS squeezed more actual story and drams into one hour then dsco has done in a full 10 eps. Something is off about this show. The writing seems to be amateur. When they go 900 years in the future the biggest advancement so far is they they have the transporter, tri corder and communicator in the badge. Something that amateur writers or just day dreaming fans have thought of before. Real advancements like warp drive without dilithium or as scotty once said engines the size of walnuts are nowhere to be found. They are still using nacelles for petes sake. The episide where Burnham is acting badass in front of the future humans about the spore drive and acting like watch this puppy we sre still relevant was laughable. The federation hasnt come close to a spore like technology in 900 years. Geordi was experimenting with soliton waves 800 years before. Laugably bad writing.

 

The spore drive is a substitute for the dilithium.

For the future Federation, that's an improvement. It's better than nothing

 

Sorry but I didn't understand any of this. If you're going to criticise discovery for bad writing, at least have the ability to structure a coherent argument and check your spelling.

 

Agreed!

 

Covfefe!

 

Someone criticizing a show for bad writing, who also uses bad writing?

IRONY!!!

 

IIRC, Pubert is from Finland. English may be his(?) second language.

Be gentle.

 

I've been around long enough to exactly how well pubert can express himself when he wants to.

 

Actually, Kirk said that.

The 900 year old tech that predates TOS by a decade. Cutting edge...

Meanwhile no slipstream, no soliton waves, no stable wormholes, no clear transwarp corridors, no Iconian style gateways (that even a pleasure planet from Voyager had)...

 

Maybe the Federation had gotten lazy, had taken dilithium for granted?

It might be a theme going forwards. It had never occurred to anyone that the Federation would have to function without dilithium someday. Their entire society had been built around it.

 

I actually think the Temporal war had a lot to do with Dilithium drying up. I also think the Temporal War was so devastating that it led to technological regression throughout the galaxy.

 

Then again, from the storytelling perspective, writers wanted at least partially to have "operating in the basics" adventure, not the hypertechnological reality that is, in many cases, nightmare of some sci-fi writers (ironically), so they could invest more of their cards into plots... Even after seeing season 3, I don´t know if I trust them or not.

 

Eh, I dunno. I've read lots of SF which does Clarketech and posthumanism pretty well. It arguably might be a little harder to transition to screen, but I don't think it's impossible.

I think the main issue really is "plausible SF" butted up against "familiar as Trek." Particularly after getting burned in Season 1, the writers didn't want to do anything which stretched the boundaries of Trek too much and raised the ire of fandom. But the end of Season 2 backed them into a corner where they had to go to the far future. So they tried to have it both ways, by having a far future setting where nothing much of consequence had really changed.

 

Yes, thats probably the most effective way of looking at it.

 

Did he say it was bad writing or poor grammar? I understood what he w

Would that really be bad writing, or poor grammar?

 

They tried having it both ways and ended up disappointing me greatly.
100 years for a post-industrial technologically advanced civilization (just 1 such as ours in real life) is mind-boggling amount of time.
930 years for a COMBINATION of technologically advanced civilizations that cooperate and exchange resources/knowledge freely without monetary obstructions would translate to even more absurdly ridiculous advancements (on a scale that we simply speaking couldn't even imagine).

What Discovery portrayed was more akin to several decades (perhaps 50 years) of technological/scientific advancement.... but nowhere near 930 years.

'Familiar as Trek' doesn't really ring here as the writers WANTED to try something 'new' with Trek.

On the other hand, they set up the future as a post cataclysm scenario (which to be fair was a bit weak in its overall cause), so its 'possible' we hadn't seen anything yet of Federation real technical abilities... although, it makes 0 sense that SF (even with only 38 planets) wouldn't continue to advance and would still ridiculously outpace the Emerald Chain in size and overall scope. Perhaps it wouldn't be the same as when it had 150 member or even at its peak of 300 members... but it would still be formidable.

What I'm actually disappointed with is the fact that they have a 'team' of writers who still couldn't extrapolate decent advancement for hypothetical 930 years of development amid all the scientific hypotheses that we came up with for Type III/IV civilizations, etc. and mix it in with Trek and previously discovered technologies.