• 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!

Why the hate for Disco?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I quite liked Jellico. He was a man on a time-sensitive mission and wasn't particularly concerned with everyones' feelings - nor should he have been. After all, wouldn't you expect one hell of a disciplined and responsive crew on the Federation flagship?

Instead he got a bunch of whingers upset he'd disrupted their luxury liner MO. Riker was a complete prick in that scene. :lol:

And Deanna looked far better in a proper uniform.
So I agree with that last, re Deanna's uniform. :bolian:

The rest of it... I've heard this a lot over the last 15 years and I'm just not onboard with it. Jellico is really kind of an $SShole.

What's refreshing is he gets the job done. They don't wind up having to take him down, nor can anybody argue with his results. For Star Trek that's unusual.

But he's the kind of boss I can't stand the most, based on personal experience. He does what he does for two reasons that I can figure.

First, he's NOT confident; Troi is right in pointing this out. He psychologically needs to establish control of everyone around him just to feel like he's got the situation in hand.

He also needs to determine right away, as if filing a shitlist for future reference, who's got his back and who doesn't. And he does this by seeing how people REACT to him before they've had time to compose themselves.

Those two things are what instantly wiping Enterprise's SOPs is all about. To establish control with no flexibility, and to instantly decide who's got his back. Not to study the SOPs before taking charge of a new post. Not to ask "What do YOU need to get this to work for me?" (What Picard or Riker would have done).

I can't stand people who do that to you.

Riker apparently "should" have read in jellico's face that trying to reason with him wasn't possible, that his instructions were indeed final. But there was no reason within the established SOPs to assume that. He relayed to the crew, and encountered pushback because the SOPs Jellico needed weren't in place.

He recognized when NOT to get Picard involved, which is the fatal stammering mistake *I* would have made once Geordi suggested him.

Leadership. You gotta trust your people. Can't just avoid them and lean on your middle man when that didn't work.

I flunked at leadership, and got increasingly bad evaluations until I was finally laid off due to automation (gotta love Corporate America). And a LOT of it was my fault. I couldn't motivate people Riker style. Far easier to just get in and do it myself. But the whole situation also felt like gaslighting. I had a middle manager come in, almost Jellico-style, expecting results immediately after communicating them, when it was beyond my experience to provide (or assume he should realistically expect) delivery that fast. And the coaching lessons from him, it was always too little too late in my being allowed to demonstrate having taken them to heart.
 
Traditional Trek, particularly of the Berman era... has taken... baby steps towards being inclusive/progressive. White male. White male. Black (male). (White) female. White male. "PS somebody pls remind Brooks to shave his face and grow some hair; maybe we'll let it slide later on if we get too busy." I wouldn't even be surprised if several early DS9 treatments had "Remember he's 'commander' not captain" red-inked into the margins.

It's entirely possible for a supposedly bigoted individual to have never had problems with Trek until the current wave of programs. (Although I also remember letters-to-the-editor from fans reacting badly to 'Rejoined' on DS9. Now it would take at least another full paragraph to explain why I didn't like that one).

It's also possible to be disgusted or aggravated by STD's (STP's, CBS/Kurtzman Trek's) particular bluntly shallow brand of "wokeness" (god I hate that word!) in ways that have nothing to do with being "offended" by content, or with the question of Should They or Shouldn't They, or even with simply not liking a character (though the latter probably already plays a huge part). And this is something I've avoided bringing up until now.

STD is Kurtzman Trek's worst offender. I think mostly because it's broken right out of the box. The only showrunner who knew what to do with "michaelburhnam" (I already know I'm going to get shit for pronouncing it like that, and I don't even know where I've heard it) is fired. She's everywhere, she's intimately attached to every plot development (no matter what the season or story arc), and there's never any variance to the whispered urgency of her emotions (Does no one remember Meyer telling Montalban to never let an audience see your top?) I was with her and her story arc throughout the first season, minus the finale. I lost her.

I could go on, I won't. Kurtzman Trek (in general) has its execution priorities skewed. It's running Woke Checklist Committee on a front burner. In between trying not to boil that, it's got Fanservice, Reparations and Fan Appeasement constantly switching out fresh pots and pans on the other front burner (Don't forget to always handwave wink-wink within the dialogue whenever you've fixed something fans didn't like).

So where does that leave Story, Outline, Theme and Subtext, Political/Social/Literary Influences, Life Experiences, and In General What To Take Out Of This Thing? All that stuff's not only simmering on a back burner, occasionally getting a stir until "Oh shit, why didn't we notice this was burning??", but it's allocated to the one defective burner that shocks you. Meanwhile Subtlety and Nuance is assigned to the burner not in use because no one wants to move the neglected saucepan with thirty-four years of dust caked into it.

Trekmovie just posted an article about making Gray Tal "truly seen". I had already forgotten that was even a thing... within the sci-fi premise of the show that is, in which Culber explicitly promised as much. What does that even mean? (Would Dax be able to explain it?) It doesn't matter; that's what STD wants to make the magic mushrooms do next. Now, why is this even as issue?

Sure, I at first thought they were being "cute/clever" with Adira's preferred pronouns (I "get" it, they're a Trill... er, joined individual... Hell I don't even know what a Trill is! Human female with a Trill symbiont who's her only link to a deceased lover). Well, she's non-binary... OK I "get" it (Well actually I don't... It's OK to start throwing stones at me right about now). She's (they're) non-binary because... Why?

She's (physically) female, and her only relationship in evidence has been a heterosexual one. (No, you don't need to remind me that a person's present or past relationship isn't his whole story. You just need to make be believe. I think you (Kurtzman Trek) want inexperienced, tone-deaf flat-footed me to believe it, you just aren't willing to do the work instead of checking off boxes.)

It's NOT whether Adira is non-binary, or whether Seven is gay (she's still enough of a blank slate after four years "development" on VOY, that I can more easily accept "pro-tip" lady as a potential partner over bland Chakotay -- Hell I guessed THEY had only been an item for a handful of eps prior to 'Endgame', and it seems to me at least a couple fans confirmed my suspicion; now how would I be able to guess on something like that with such cynical accuracy?) It's not whether you do it, it's... "Why?" Why Adira Tal? And why Seven? You could choose anybody; I wouldn't care. I can't tell you how to make me believe it, YOU have to believe it. You have to do the work.

Why is Picard SO clueless about the people around him that he doesn't even realize he just bamboozled "pro-tip" lady into burning the last of her bridges for him? Why is Boimler so emasculated that it's supposed to be funny when Mariner injures him? Is it because they're stupid white men? Why does michaelburnham seem to clash with white male authority figures (now that someone's mentioned it) when it always turns out later they should be listening to her? You can do interesting stuff with this; I just want to know if that's the only reason. Maybe the figures who underestimate her don't have to be both male and white.

Stamets and Culber... perfect. Completely naturalistic, you blew self-conscious Berman Trek to shame. Then you ruined it with your mycelial network wish-me-back-in-Kansas resurrection mumbo jumbo. (Is Culber even a real person now? Can he behave in ways Stamets wouldn't anticipate? I'm letting my sci-fi get in the way of their fantasy.) Should you just not have killed him? If you couldn't live with the consequences, perhaps not.

Ultimately though what we want is a solid, meaningful story. With hopefully some real science fiction involved. All the supposed "wokeness" issues (god, I hate that word!) would immediately evaporate, at least credibly speaking (If the criticism is not credible you shouldn't gave a damn). The backpedaling fan appeasement would still be as issue. But why after four seasons of STD/STP we still can't get a story that's about something (STP comes the closest) is truly baffling.

I disagree with a lot of what you say here - or at least how you say it - but a great counterpoint is the Magicians. That show was very "woke" in some respects. The main cast was quite diverse, with half of the cast women, a good deal of racial diversity, and lots of the characters (including, ultimately, the protagonist of the entire series, in a lowkey way) being queer. There was also a recurring character who was deaf. I can't remember any trans/enby characters, although the third season featured a trans actress.

The show however was hands-down awesome, because...it's an amazing show with great writing. Particularly after you get past the first season. Some of the best written characters I have seen in over a decade, with some episodes literally bringing me to tears. So nothing really felt forced whatsoever.
 
I disagree with a lot of what you say here - or at least how you say it - but a great counterpoint is the Magicians. That show was very "woke" in some respects. The main cast was quite diverse, with half of the cast women, a good deal of racial diversity, and lots of the characters (including, ultimately, the protagonist of the entire series, in a lowkey way) being queer. There was also a recurring character who was deaf. I can't remember any trans/enby characters, although the third season featured a trans actress.

The show however was hands-down awesome, because...it's an amazing show with great writing. Particularly after you get past the first season. Some of the best written characters I have seen in over a decade, with some episodes literally bringing me to tears. So nothing really felt forced whatsoever.
It sounds like Star Trek (and now especially Kurtzman Trek) should be watching this show then. As should I.

INSERT EDIT: Oooh, Netflix! How easy is that

I'm skeptical given the people and committee mentality involved in Trek whether it would help them though.

I spent too many hours typing the above. Too long on it not to post, even trimmed as much as possible; I'm sure I could do better, given even more time.
 
Last edited:
It sounds like Star Trek (and now especially Kurtzman Trek) should be watching this show then. As should I.

INSERT EDIT: Oooh, Netflix! How easy is that

I'm skeptical given the people and committee mentality involved in Trek whether it would help them though.

I spent too many hours typing the above. Too long on it not to post, even trimmed as much as possible; I'm sure I could do better, given even more time.

The show dragged me in right away, although some of the first season's elements are a bit distracting. It was adapted from a book series where the characters start out as college freshmen at a "school for magic" - with the book series following them through to their mid 30s. The showrunners made the decision to initially age up the characters to their early 20s and have it be magic grad school instead of magic college, which makes some sense given where they end the series. But it also results in some oddly immature behavior from some of the characters in the first season given they are supposed to be 23 or so.

I should note the guy who ran the writer's room on The Magicians is doing the same on Strange New Worlds - which is tremendously good news for that show.
 
The show dragged me in right away, although some of the first season's elements are a bit distracting. It was adapted from a book series where the characters start out as college freshmen at a "school for magic" - with the book series following them through to their mid 30s. The showrunners made the decision to initially age up the characters to their early 20s and have it be magic grad school instead of magic college, which makes some sense given where they end the series. But it also results in some oddly immature behavior from some of the characters in the first season given they are supposed to be 23 or so.

I should note the guy who ran the writer's room on The Magicians is doing the same on Strange New Worlds - which is tremendously good news for that show.
I gotcha. I'm not finding any production names in common, who is this dude? Do we suppose he can avoid having his ideas and input steamrolled by the CBS/Kurtzman/Goldsman machine (or whatever happened to Nick Meyer, Michael Chabon and Walter Mosley?)

Doubt I'd get to it today due to graveyard shift jetlag, but I got Magicians cued up on Netflix.
 
I like Discovery but the whole red angel thing was a mess. I still can't tell you what exactly happened there.

Also having Spock, a proponent of Federation advancement, cover up the biggest interstellar propulsion advancement in galactic history just feels wrong. The Control business was not enough. I have no idea why they had mycelial network beings show up, and then not have those mycelial network beings complain about the spore drive. That would've been the perfect excuse to shut the drive down, and maybe by the 32nd century things would've been different and they can use the spore drive again.
 
I have no idea why they had mycelial network beings show up, and then not have those mycelial network beings complain about the spore drive. That would've been the perfect excuse to shut the drive down, and maybe by the 32nd century things would've been different and they can use the spore drive again.
If I have one complaint against Discovery it is this. The spore beings would be way more interesting to explore than Control or the Emerald Chain.
 
I like Discovery but the whole red angel thing was a mess. I still can't tell you what exactly happened there.

Also having Spock, a proponent of Federation advancement, cover up the biggest interstellar propulsion advancement in galactic history just feels wrong. The Control business was not enough. I have no idea why they had mycelial network beings show up, and then not have those mycelial network beings complain about the spore drive. That would've been the perfect excuse to shut the drive down, and maybe by the 32nd century things would've been different and they can use the spore drive again.
I hadn't even thought of that; think I'd forgotten all about them. That would be a better, smarter more stylishly sci-fi way to wrap it up and "sync up with canon" as they insisted on doing.

But I don't know what really happened with the overall story arc either, or I don't think anything happened. To quote one of the ShuttlePodcasters (I want to say Brian Drew) "It's about nothing." That to me was S2. A plot diagram would look like that of a snake swallowing not just its tail, but its whole body. I think you could literally pick any point within the temporal causality loop and just start unraveling (My sister's new kitten could probably do it with more finesse).
 
The Control AI was just an incredible waste of time. Easily the dumbest thing the series has done in three seasons.
You know Spock was just seething with Vulcan restrained frustration once he finally met James Kirk, and realized he sent his sister into the future and covered up the spore drive for nothing. "Jim would have just talked that Control computer to death/self destruction in five minutes! Why didn't I think of that back then???" :eek:
 
At least in this case they went forward almost a thousand years and plan to stay there. I'll take that over being trapped in the past for several episodes and trying to find a way back without altering history, at least given how these writers tend to tackle the subject.
 
You know Spock was just seething with Vulcan restrained frustration once he finally met James Kirk, and realized he sent his sister into the future and covered up the spore drive for nothing. "Jim would have just talked that Control computer to death/self destruction in five minutes! Why didn't I think of that back then???" :eek:

While Archer could just have bored the computer to death with one of his gazelle speeches.

Archer: "I once saw a gazelle give birth...blah...blah...blah..."

Computer: "Enough! enough!! ENOUGH!!!!"
 
At least in this case they went forward almost a thousand years and plan to stay there. I'll take that over being trapped in the past for several episodes and trying to find a way back without altering history, at least given how these writers tend to tackle the subject.
Space mileage will vary. The future 1000 years forward isn't any more interesting than the 23rd century.

I get that the writers haven't exactly earned a lot of leeway but I'll still think time travel is a cheat card of the worst kind.
 
No, time travel was. Control I could make sense of. Time travel was stupid BS plot device overused in Star Trek and best left, well, in the past.
I think both of them together. It would have been nice if the 2009 movie was the last word on time travel in ST. (Although Kelvin/Abrams haters might not think it so).
 
I think both of them together. It would have been nice if the 2009 movie was the last word on time travel in ST. (Although Kelvin/Abrams haters might not think it so).
Well, the Kelvin films did it in a way that felt extremely consistent with past Trek. Discovery, for all my enjoyment of it, lives in constant fear of the fan hammer.
 
It would have been nice if the 2009 movie was the last word on time travel in ST.
It would be odd if Trek got out of the time travel business just when the Marvel movies had their massive movies centered around it, and that other Star franchise also got into the time travel business after a 40 year aversion to it (which even the most bizarre EU/Legends stories never dealt with directly outside of an occasional obscure comic with unreliable character narration involved)
 
Well, the Kelvin films did it in a way that felt extremely consistent with past Trek. Discovery, for all my enjoyment of it, lives in constant fear of the fan hammer.
YES!! On both counts.

It would be odd if Trek got out of the time travel business just when the Marvel movies had their massive movies centered around it, and that other Star franchise also got into the time travel business after a 40 year aversion to it
I missed when Wars did it. And I think you just specifically implied it wasn't EU...

Clone Wars? Rebels? There have been a couple other animated shows, right?
 
It would be the best choice Star Trek could finally make and stop relying upon other franchises to set their own tone. That's stupid, asinine and backwards.
 
YES!! On both counts.

I missed when Wars did it. And I think you just specifically implied it wasn't EU...

Clone Wars? Rebels? There have been a couple other animated shows, right?
(spoilers for Star Wars)
It's not EU, it's canon and it happened in Rebels. Ahsoka Tano was saved from death by a time traveling Ezra Bridger in Rebels. Really.

Maybe even this could be swept in the rug under the endless pile of Star Wars stories, but with a new Ahsoka Tano tv show announced and rumors that Aladdin star Mena Massoud has been cast as Ezra Bridger, it seems this time travel business is probably going to feature in a huge way in that show (I mean, they'll probably mention how Ezra saved Ahsoka by time traveling back a few years in the new Ahsoka show)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top