I liked it. Science officer Saru is easily one of the best new ST characters since Chakotay. The guy who played Sarek is pretty weak. They went with the stupid lens flare shit and that made it hard to watch. Fuck you JJ. The new Klingons have potential. Ep 2 left me going "where do they go from here?"
How long is each ep? I couldn't figure it out.
And, wow, it's been a while since I watched a TV show with commercials that I couldn't pause.
In Canada it's being run on the Space channel, Sunday 8 pm or 9 pm. One of those. Anyway, a great time slot. I'm really not sure how many people in the USA are going to sign up for yet another streaming service. Hopefully CBS will quickly see there's a big audience and release it as a legit CBS series.To be fair, SciFi started in the tubes with mostly cheap direct to video monster movies and reruns of second rate direct to syndication series like Friday the 13th, the series. It previously had a number of good and even great shows then went back down the tubes.
Space is like the USA's SyFy. It's also gone down the fucking tubes like SyFy, given (like so many other channels) to cheap reality TV shows (ghost hunting shows). I haven't watched Space since the BSG days.
also, I surprisingly didn't hate the Orville pilot.
It wasn't great or anything, but I was surprised that it seems they are going for more a straightforward sci-fi than a total parody. Tone wise (not quality, just tone!) it felt closer to firefly than spaceballs.
also, I surprisingly didn't hate the Orville pilot.
It wasn't great or anything, but I was surprised that it seems they are going for more a straightforward sci-fi than a total parody. Tone wise (not quality, just tone!) it felt closer to firefly than spaceballs.
Check out the 3rd episode. It's way better in every regard (including the humor) and is a quintessential Trek style episode.
also, I surprisingly didn't hate the Orville pilot.
It wasn't great or anything, but I was surprised that it seems they are going for more a straightforward sci-fi than a total parody. Tone wise (not quality, just tone!) it felt closer to firefly than spaceballs.
Check out the 3rd episode. It's way better in every regard (including the humor) and is a quintessential Trek style episode.
Except when it wasn't. I think the analogy that rings true for me is; imagine a meal. Some dishes are stuff you can get anywhere and are cooked by a 6yo. Other dishes are ones you love, that yoy havnt had in ages, and prepared by a good chef.
You have to eat all of it and do it blindfolded. That for me is what its like to watch episode 3 of The Orville. One moment its pretty competent Sci Fi, next Seth snuck some shit in the mix.
I didn't like the Klingon's slurred speech and immobile head.
I agree that episode 3 was better and tighter. I was quite happy with it until it started up with the theories of Paul Stamets, the mushroom guy. He's really knowledgeable about fungus and it's potential uses, but.... I went to a health food convention (don't ask) several years ago and Stamets was the keynote speaker. Most of his talk was interesting, he's smart with creative ideas about the uses of mushrooms... but the last 10 minutes of the talk he went off on some weird tangent about the nature of reality and theoretical physics. He sounded like a stoned teenager saying "Whoooah, dude. What if, you know, the universe is a cosmic mushroom, and like the structure of space-time is connected like a giant fungus, man."
And I cried a little.
Star Trek has always had an uneasy fascination with sketchy pop science. I hope they drop this plot thread soon.
I agree that episode 3 was better and tighter. I was quite happy with it until it started up with the theories of Paul Stamets, the mushroom guy. He's really knowledgeable about fungus and it's potential uses, but.... I went to a health food convention (don't ask) several years ago and Stamets was the keynote speaker. Most of his talk was interesting, he's smart with creative ideas about the uses of mushrooms... but the last 10 minutes of the talk he went off on some weird tangent about the nature of reality and theoretical physics. He sounded like a stoned teenager saying "Whoooah, dude. What if, you know, the universe is a cosmic mushroom, and like the structure of space-time is connected like a giant fungus, man."
And I cried a little.
Star Trek has always had an uneasy fascination with sketchy pop science. I hope they drop this plot thread soon.
@Belgarath
Well, no. But the science officer/astomycologist is named Lt. Paul Stamets
Michael Burnham makes me wonder about the name choice. A male name, a female character. They touched on this in Ep 3. No clue seems to indicate why the male name. One of my coworkers worked on this series and I asked her. She either did not know or wasn't saying.In the US anyway, its not uncommon for traditional male names to become more common female names; Tracy, Lesley, Vivian, Madison(son of Mad), etc. So, maybe in the future, Michael will be a female name? Misha already is and its just Russian for Mikey.
Michael Burnham makes me wonder about the name choice. A male name, a female character. They touched on this in Ep 3. No clue seems to indicate why the male name. One of my coworkers worked on this series and I asked her. She either did not know or wasn't saying.
@Belgarath
Well, no. But the science officer/astomycologist is named Lt. Paul Stamets
Boy, they weren't playing coy with that name. I felt the character was a bit too openly insubordinate. I think they were going a bit with the reaction of the scientists to Star Fleet using the Genesis device as a weapon.
Michael Burnham makes me wonder about the name choice. A male name, a female character. They touched on this in Ep 3. No clue seems to indicate why the male name. One of my coworkers worked on this series and I asked her. She either did not know or wasn't saying.
"To have a woman with a male name, speaking of … how we see men and women in the future.”
Huh, so it's interesting and exciting and futuristic for a woman to have a man's name. Yet I doubt if we'll see a man named Roxanne or Cassandra.
I guess I'd argue that a woman with a traditionally male name is almost so common that it goes practically unnoticed (see the names in earlier posts). Funny how a woman with a man's name is a mild curiosity, yet man with a woman's name is so controversial that it could offend the audience.
If they really wanted to make a social commentary, there it is. A woman with a male characteristic is good, a man with a female characteristic is bad.
Michael Burnham makes me wonder about the name choice. A male name, a female character. They touched on this in Ep 3. No clue seems to indicate why the male name. One of my coworkers worked on this series and I asked her. She either did not know or wasn't saying.In the US anyway, its not uncommon for traditional male names to become more common female names; Tracy, Lesley, Vivian, Madison(son of Mad), etc. So, maybe in the future, Michael will be a female name? Misha already is and its just Russian for Mikey.
* The acting - it's occasionally good - I like Doug Jones and Jason Isaacs (Hello!) are always top notch - but almost everyone else has seemed to be seriously struggling to deliver their lines, and that's probably because of...
Hmm, I see there is another member of the Church in the forum to hang out in the Sceptical Receptacle.
Ok, apparently I'm having a way, way, way worse reaction to this show than most, but I'm loathing it. I can only name a couple of shows or films that I have found myself involuntarily laughing derisively at; one of them was Star Trek Discovery and it's happened in all 3 episodes so far; the other was the theatrical cut of Batman Vs Superman.
I really did want to like this series, I feel like we are well over due a good old dose of the Star Trek optimism, but that's nowhere to be found here.
So here are the main things that have annoyed me - in no order:
* The acting - it's occasionally good - I like Doug Jones and Jason Isaacs (Hello!) are always top notch - but almost everyone else has seemed to be seriously struggling to deliver their lines, and that's probably because of...
* The script - the dialogue is seriously turgid, and character and motivation seem often confused and inconsistent - seemingly to hit certain predetermined plot points.
* In the future people will be petty and squabblesome - this really kicked in in episode 3. It reminded me of the petty infighting in BSG, but at least there they had the excuse that half the crew were supposed to be Cylons.
* The tone - I have come away from the first 3 episodes with the strong impression that not only are they not interested in the tone of the previous Star Trek iterations but that they are actively opposed to it. They seem to have drawn from almost every SciFi genre from the last 20 years other than Star Trek.
* The Klingons - Oh... Dear... what on Earth were they thinking? I can only think that so much of the talent that went into decades of practical make-up on shows like Star Trek and Babylon 5 has drained away. For some reason I couldn't stop thinking of the "poo monster" at the end of altered states.
* The Science - science in Star Trek always took somewhat of a back seat to plot, but they at least knew when they needed to apply some handwavium to cover over the cracks - here they neither know the science or care about it. My favourites so far:
For episodes 2 and 3:(click to show/hide)
OMG i am totally in love with Cadet Sylvia Tilly. I would not kick her out of bed for eating cookies. Sure she talked a lot but man, has she got it.
If anyone needs me I'll be on holodeck 3.
science in star trek was never very good but it usually followed some sort of internal logic.
https://www.themarysue.com/cadet-sylvia-tilly-star-trek-discovery/
Interesting take on the cadet.
I found the cadet a bit too whedonesque but I like the show way more than expected.
Im usually more a fan of trek in principle than practice.
Lol! No! But good catch!I found the cadet a bit too whedonesque but I like the show way more than expected.
Im usually more a fan of trek in principle than practice.
Did you mean Wheatonesque?
And the thing about context being everything and directives being nothing felt like a huge middle finger to the prime directive and to Star Trek in general.
Picard explains the Prime Directive after Durken asks why the Federation would not offer their superior technology to his people. Picard says that it would be irresponsible and destructive
.....
Picard explains that when Starfleet met with the Klingons, contact was "disastrous" and decades of war resulted. After that, the Federation decided that surveillance of this nature was necessary. He assures Durken that in time, full disclosure of the surveillance would have been made.
And the thing about context being everything and directives being nothing felt like a huge middle finger to the prime directive and to Star Trek in general.
AFAIK, there is no Prime Directive right now (http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/First_Contact_(episode)). If you notice Captain Georgou mentions the precursor to it in the first episode. One of the things I think they are going to deal with in this series is how did the Prime Directive come about and why.Quote from: memory-alphaPicard explains the Prime Directive after Durken asks why the Federation would not offer their superior technology to his people. Picard says that it would be irresponsible and destructive
.....
Picard explains that when Starfleet met with the Klingons, contact was "disastrous" and decades of war resulted. After that, the Federation decided that surveillance of this nature was necessary. He assures Durken that in time, full disclosure of the surveillance would have been made.
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)
Can I (should I) quote a spoiler? Isn't there some mention in one of the many series that talks of some techno-genetic difference in appearance of the TOS Klingons and the TNG era (and movie era?) Klingons?
In DS9, when they went back to TOS episode 'Trouble With Tribbles' the crew ask Worf about it, and he responds with a, "it's not something we talk about'; but then in Enterprise we discover that it's due to a virus that was spread during an eugenics attempt. I'm not spoilering it cause those episodes are 12 years old!
@mindme
I'm curious, where does that come from?
IIRC, the kirk-era Klingons were mutants, having tried to enhance themselves with human DNA (or maybe it was enhancements from Khan-like metahumans?) and accidentally created a plague that made them more human and also weaker, both causing infertility and whatnot. The TNG Klingons were the product of genetic therapy to try re-Klingify the Klingons using stored samples of dead tissue. Disco (or STD if you prefer) Klingons would then be pre-Kirk and pre-infection. The difference in motif is explained by the 24 houses not yet having merged into a more unified empire after the more-or-less end of hostilities with the federation.@mindme
I'm curious, where does that come from?
I can't quite remember. I think I heard a guy explaining it at a gaming convention back when Star Trek: Wrath of Khan came out. We were musing about the Klingons and that was his brilliant retcon.
I much more liked the retcon that the Klingon empire is basically a collection of races (two or more). The TOS era saw a more human like minority come to power. But by Star Trek: the Movie the majority race had retaken power.Best retcon I've heard, except for, "We had a bigger budget and better make up in 1980 than in 1960"
I did enjoy noticing the tribble on the Captain's desk.
Ham fisted villains became a standard Star Trek trope long ago for the convenience of lazy storytelling. Maybe this villain will become morally ambiguous. At least that is more interesting. And as for the tribble, maaaaybe we are seeing the birth of the TOS era tribble ;), the result of some top secret fertility experiment gone awry.WHAT IF THE TRIBBLES ARE A SECRET BIOWEAPON THAT MAKES THE KLINGONS LOOL LIKE TOS KLINGONS
That pissed me off. Tribbles are THE dumbest thing EVAH. Plus, Kirk and the TOS Enterprise seemed to have first encounter with them so it should not be in this trek.
You could come up with dozens of reasonable explanations for that Tribble being there and not causing a problem with the time line, but what got me about the Tribble is that it is way too dangerous to keep as a pet. You shouldn't be seeing just one, they should be filling the ship up.
Captain Lorca also kept the giant Targ. Final shot kinda made me think he was collecting for a zoo. Clearly he is a very dangerous man.
You could come up with dozens of reasonable explanations for that Tribble being there and not causing a problem with the time line, but what got me about the Tribble is that it is way too dangerous to keep as a pet. You shouldn't be seeing just one, they should be filling the ship up.
Is it alive?
For better or worse, they were on Enterprise.
That pissed me off. Tribbles are THE dumbest thing EVAH. Plus, Kirk and the TOS Enterprise seemed to have first encounter with them so it should not be in this trek.
Captain Lorca also kept the giant Targ. Final shot kinda made me think he was collecting for a zoo. Clearly he is a very dangerous man.
Here's an interesting theory on Discovery's Spore Drive. Actually is kinda neat if he's right about his guess:
Here's an interesting theory on Discovery's Spore Drive. Actually is kinda neat if he's right about his guess:
No. No it's not. It's Hammer of the Gods meets what every hippy who's ever taken magic mushrooms has "discovered" in a field at 2 am in the morning. And the Quantum crap is Deepak Chopra grade nonsense.
I'm not sure how. This isn't saying that we're all connected via quantum energy and then we can harness that energy via shrooms.
Here's an interesting theory on Discovery's Spore Drive. Actually is kinda neat if he's right about his guess:
No. No it's not. It's Hammer of the Gods meets what every hippy who's ever taken magic mushrooms has "discovered" in a field at 2 am in the morning. And the Quantum crap is Deepak Chopra grade nonsense.
..., but it's not like Trek hasn't made some pretty questionable sci-fi decisions before where they reference some real-world science in the vaguest terms then says the magic techno babble words and poof, we have the technology that makes no sense, but sounds cool. The Genesis Device springs to mind for instance.
I would love to watch an optimistic, anti-war space, soft philosophical, well-meaning sci-fi adventure show, and I believe it would be more beneficial in these weird times than yet another tv series about grim people shooting stuff in the face.
looking away from my wok
Absolutelylooking away from my wok
Is that a euphemism?
Absolutelylooking away from my wok
Is that a euphemism?
:roflolmao:Absolutelylooking away from my wok
Is that a euphemism?
I thought you misspelled Ewok.
I think, ala DS9, Trek has a tradition of not just showing humanity at its best, but also how it can be its best during its worst moments. DS9 had some very, very grim story arcs during the war and I think they produced some of the best TV Trek has ever put out there. While I would have preferred a return to a more typical Trek show, I don't see any reason why this darker storyline can't achieve those things you mention.
I think, ala DS9, Trek has a tradition of not just showing humanity at its best, but also how it can be its best during its worst moments. DS9 had some very, very grim story arcs during the war and I think they produced some of the best TV Trek has ever put out there. While I would have preferred a return to a more typical Trek show, I don't see any reason why this darker storyline can't achieve those things you mention.
Yeh, but is it? I've already given up on the series, pending reports of a major turnaround, but have noted that the last episode was called "The Butcher´s Knife Cares Not For The Lamb´s Cry". It's not sounding much like they'reteachingreaching for the light, more like they think they're making a slasher movie.
the last episode was called "The Butcher´s Knife Cares Not For The Lamb´s Cry". It's not sounding much like they'reteachingreaching for the light, more like they think they're making a slasher movie.
I think, ala DS9, Trek has a tradition of not just showing humanity at its best, but also how it can be its best during its worst moments. DS9 had some very, very grim story arcs during the war and I think they produced some of the best TV Trek has ever put out there. While I would have preferred a return to a more typical Trek show, I don't see any reason why this darker storyline can't achieve those things you mention.
Yeh, but is it? I've already given up on the series, pending reports of a major turnaround, but have noted that the last episode was called "The Butcher´s Knife Cares Not For The Lamb´s Cry". It's not sounding much like they'reteachingreaching for the light, more like they think they're making a slasher movie.
The main character and those not in Section 31 (assuming that's what Lorca and his cronies turn out to be) are definitely Starfleet officers in the time-honored tradition. Sure, Burnham did mutiny and what not, but her approach to the science that is happening on Discovery, especially with regard to the Tardigrade monster, is decidedly Roddenberryesque. It remains to be seen if the show is trying to show the difference between her and more modern sensibilities, but I'm interested enough to keep watching. It sounds like you'd probably be best served just waiting for the show to be over and binging if the reviews are good enough though.
what? how the fuck do you get slasher flick from that? they literally ended on the moral plight of the human military's success relying on the torturing of a sacrificial lamb
it's like they're acting out one of the most famous works of sci-fi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas
this is 'hostel is just gore porn' all over again.
the fact we're having a conversation about "Hostel" in a conversation about a Star Trek series seems crazy to me.
but you've now explained you were speaking in complete ignorance of the episode of which you were speaking.
but you've now explained you were speaking in complete ignorance of the episode of which you were speaking.
Please be nice.
facts are neither naughty nor nice, they're just facts. you can dispute them or admit them.
the fact that anyone would compare such a pro-animal rights episode to a cheap slasher flick seemed crazy to me. that's how we go here. but you've now re-explained you were speakingin complete ignorancewithout knowledge of the episode about the title of which you were speaking.
facts are neither naughty nor nice, they're just facts. you can dispute them or admit them.
Oh OK. I've fixed it for you so it's fact aligned.the fact that anyone would compare such a pro-animal rights episode to a cheap slasher flick seemed crazy to me. that's how we go here. but you've now re-explained you were speakingin complete ignorancewithout knowledge of the episode about the title of which you were speaking.
(edit) sorry some quick editing to fix mistakes.
why do you prefer the definition of the word ignorance to the word ignorance itself?
You can't just change someone elses words to suit you. GS is allowed to feel how he is as much as you are.
Please do not judge a book by its cover. Open it up and explore what is inside. THEN you can form YOUR opinion, which may differ from others and that is ok.
"in complete ignorance of the episode" - meaning "you have absolutely no knowledge that can relate to the episode"
You can't just change someone elses words to suit you. GS is allowed to feel how he is as much as you are.
I'd somewhat hoped that I might trigger a little self reflection in him as to how he could have perhaps have been a little nicer. Sorry if I hurt his feelings.
I kinda thought I was judging a book's cover by it's cover
why do you prefer the definition of the word ignorance to the word ignorance itself?
"in complete ignorance of the episode" - meaning "you have absolutely no knowledge that can relate to the episode" with an implication that the person is generally ignorant as the can't bring any meaningful knowledge to bear.
"without knowledge of the episode" - meaning "you lack knowledge of the episode", with an implication that it is the knowledge of the specific content of the episode that is lacking.
Now unless you have a personality problem I'm pretty sure you should be perfectly aware that you we're being at least a little bit douchey.
/me glances at name and avatar
Oh... Ok. Well I guess I'll leave you to that then...
I kinda thought I was judging a book's cover by it's cover, and it's not like I hadn't read the 3 previous books. Seriously though if my option is to keep watching this show or never think about Star Trek again, I guess I'm going to have to reluctantly go with the latter... Hope you guys enjoy it.
But he is kinda right here. Just his post goes about addressing it in an extremely dickish way.
Do Klingons traditionally eat their victims? I loved they sort of dropped the new leader ate the captain. Now, it might be a function of the ship is low on food versus a custom or Klingons generally like to dine on human flesh.
will jihadis trapped in a cave eat fellow jihadis to survive?
Really Harry Mudd?? making his entry into his third Star Trek series after TOS and the film 'Into Darkness'... you'd think they'd be some original characters in the quadrant really...
Really Harry Mudd?? making his entry into his third Star Trek series after TOS and the film 'Into Darkness'... you'd think they'd be some original characters in the quadrant really...
*pushes glasses up and snorts*
You forgot the Animated Series.
After this episode it is pretty much confirmed, that the show is ballooney. I don't get it: why to mangle science in order to tell an other fairytale.
I don't like to be disappointed about this show. But I am so.
If nothing else it brought tardigrades to the attention of a casual audience and showed that science is not a deliberate "invent a thing" process but that curiosity pays dividends in ways we may not expect and so scientists should be just left to do science.
The short sighted view of the creature as a weapon vs the much more amazing possibilities that came about from examining it was an arc that made me happy.
I just don't see what is so atrocious about the spore drive compared with tons of other Trek tech we've seen throughout the franchise. The only difference I can think of is that this time, the tech is central to the storyline of the whole series as opposed to just a single movie or episode. IDK, it's definitely something odd, but I don't see why Trek can't explore odd things. I just feel like Trek fans are being reactively more critical of the Spore Drive because less because it's bad sci-fi and more because it was totally unexpected for the first Trek show in over a decade.
If I had to pick one thing about it that I don't like however, it'd have to be that we are exploring this technology before TOS so we all know it doesn't last. I think I'd be much more invested if it were happening post Voyager.
Really Harry Mudd?? making his entry into his third Star Trek series after TOS and the film 'Into Darkness'...
Trek fans are being reactively more critical of the Spore Drive because less because it's bad sci-fi and more because it was totally unexpected for the first Trek show in over a decade.
Really Harry Mudd?? making his entry into his third Star Trek series after TOS and the film 'Into Darkness'...
Into Darkness? Whaaaat? When was he in that?
I just don't see what is so atrocious about the spore drive compared with tons of other Trek tech we've seen throughout the franchise. The only difference I can think of is that this time, the tech is central to the storyline of the whole series as opposed to just a single movie or episode. IDK, it's definitely something odd, but I don't see why Trek can't explore odd things. I just feel like Trek fans are being reactively more critical of the Spore Drive because less because it's bad sci-fi and more because it was totally unexpected for the first Trek show in over a decade.
If I had to pick one thing about it that I don't like however, it'd have to be that we are exploring this technology before TOS so we all know it doesn't last. I think I'd be much more invested if it were happening post Voyager.
Because ultimately the technobabble of Trek tends to revolve around physics, not biology. My suspension of disbelief failed to engage re: the mycelial network crap. I think it might have been different if this wasn't Star Trek, but it is. Trek = warp drive. It's especially jarring as a prequel show, because why the fuck haven't we heard of this nonsense before.
I really want to like this show, but so far, I admit, I do not. Nothing Star Trek like has happened yet. Maybe this is a good sci-fi show, but so far it isn't a good Star Trek series.
I'm not finding anything terribly egregious about his outlook on mushrooms. Maybe a bit overzealous and bordering on some woo, but nothing approaching anything related to the Spore Drive that I can find.
I don't think I would have had any problem with the spore drive if it had formed the basis of a single episode of the show; as you said, lots of Trek episodes are "ALIENS ARE CRAZY"-esque, but IMO the means/method of space travel are a key part of the Trek mythos, and it is being fucked with.
I'm also calling it right now:(click to show/hide)
OK, I'm calling it now I think that:(click to show/hide)
Also 'Logic Extremists' seems kinda like a stupid name. I can wrap my head around terrorist Vulcans, but don't call them 'logic extremists' that's just silly.
Also 'Logic Extremists' seems kinda like a stupid name. I can wrap my head around terrorist Vulcans, but don't call them 'logic extremists' that's just silly.
IDK, taken to the "logical" extreme, the notion that Vulcan are superior to all other life forms because of their dedication to logic and their abandonment of emotion means that Vulcan must remain "pure" at all costs to remain superior.
Also 'Logic Extremists' seems kinda like a stupid name. I can wrap my head around terrorist Vulcans, but don't call them 'logic extremists' that's just silly.
IDK, taken to the "logical" extreme, the notion that Vulcan are superior to all other life forms because of their dedication to logic and their abandonment of emotion means that Vulcan must remain "pure" at all costs to remain superior.
I guess that I'm approaching it from the standpoint that people who are good at logic would actually question those premises. The name just rubs me wrong. They're really Vulcan Supremacists more than anything else.
I'm also calling it right now:(click to show/hide)
The Call of Duty holodeck thing rang very hollow and untrek like to me.
Weird that they have a space for the Captain and his bros to practice CQB but anyone who wants to take a jog has to do it in the corridors?
No treadmills in the future?
The Call of Duty holodeck thing rang very hollow and untrek like to me.
Weird that they have a space for the Captain and his bros to practice CQB but anyone who wants to take a jog has to do it in the corridors?
No treadmills in the future?
Because maybe they tried running on a ship once in their lives and realised how much it sucks.The Call of Duty holodeck thing rang very hollow and untrek like to me.
Weird that they have a space for the Captain and his bros to practice CQB but anyone who wants to take a jog has to do it in the corridors?
No treadmills in the future?
Why would someone want to run on a treadmill if they had any other option?
Was the Disco thing on their sweatshirts an attempt to get people to stop calling it STD? And ST:Disco?
Was the Disco thing on their sweatshirts an attempt to get people to stop calling it STD? And ST:Disco?
You sure they just don't like old music?
Was the Disco thing on their sweatshirts an attempt to get people to stop calling it STD? And ST:Disco?
You sure they just don't like old music?
I actually have seen several discussions over this being an attempt to get rid of ST:D as a shorthand for the show.
suuuper boring episode.
also, lol @ the replicator's 'excellent source of antioxidants' comment.
suuuper boring episode.
also, lol @ the replicator's 'excellent source of antioxidants' comment.
Yeah I would disable that feature pretty fast.
I bow to the superior recollection of all you people. I'm sure I haven't seen every ST mirror universe episodes, so I don't know what is considered canon. My question is this: Has the ST mirror universe ever before involved mirrors? I only recall episodes that involve transporter malfunctions and such. I don't remember ever seeing any suggestion that flat reflective surface could allow a glimpse into, you know, an alternate universe.
Yeah - that part is a little on the nose.
It's interesting Star Trek has long been predicated on physics woo and handwaving. No one really much notices. But when it switches to biology, oh boy.
I'd say that this was another episode well done. Even the Klingons managed to be a bit more interesting this time around even if L'rell's plan seemed all over the place and a bit confusing.
I'd say that this was another episode well done. Even the Klingons managed to be a bit more interesting this time around even if L'rell's plan seemed all over the place and a bit confusing.
Frankly at this point, I don't even know what her plan is.
. I was not overly impressed with TNG the first season.
Now THAT was a good goddamn episode. Definitely the best they've put out yet and at the risk of speaking from a place where I'm still taking it all in and thus less objective, one of the better episodes of Trek as well. Not top 10 or anything, but really engaging, exciting, emotional, and just all around well written, well acted, and well produced. Also, I think we can call our Ash theory confirmed at this point, though clearly it's more complex than I'd given credit. house of deceivers indeed :). Now I'm just mainly curious if the remainder of the season will actually be about the Klingon war or if that is more or less going to go onto the backburner if not off the stove completely. I doubt it will all be about where we left the ship specifically, but it seems like with the success of the mission there's not much more to focus on in terms of winning the war.
Yeah, if they'd just made the incoming Klingon threat feel a little more urgent, it would have been better. My main nitpick however was the super stealthy beacons they placed on the ship that yelled at top volume "CONNECTED TO USS DISCOVERY!!!" Then proceeded to beep very loudly while pulsing a bright light. Like, who the fuck came up with that?!
Yeah, if they'd just made the incoming Klingon threat feel a little more urgent, it would have been better. My main nitpick however was the super stealthy beacons they placed on the ship that yelled at top volume "CONNECTED TO USS DISCOVERY!!!" Then proceeded to beep very loudly while pulsing a bright light. Like, who the fuck came up with that?!
So see, I came up with an explanation for that that made sense. They were pre-fab beacons that they didn't have time to make more 'stealthy'.
Yeah, if they'd just made the incoming Klingon threat feel a little more urgent, it would have been better. My main nitpick however was the super stealthy beacons they placed on the ship that yelled at top volume "CONNECTED TO USS DISCOVERY!!!" Then proceeded to beep very loudly while pulsing a bright light. Like, who the fuck came up with that?!
So see, I came up with an explanation for that that made sense. They were pre-fab beacons that they didn't have time to make more 'stealthy'. Remember they had very little time to come up with this plan, so I just assumed that they used some beacons that were for some sort of normal scientific survey and were repurposed for the use.
They could have solved it with a throw away line or two 'Hey these things are stupid big and stupid bright and stupid loud!' 'Sorry Lt. We didn't have time to redesign them before the Klingon ship arrived!'
Has anyone figured out why they changed the Klingons? The new look isn't any better than the film and next gen look.
I trust them still. It remains to be seen if this is actually a Bury Your Gays moment.
Yes. But we are dealing with multiple universes here.I trust them still. It remains to be seen if this is actually a Bury Your Gays moment.
Did you watch it yet?
I really didn't like the episode. I hoped for something interesting, not a regular 'darkest timeline'. This is still not Star Trek, and it's not getting any closer to it.
I mean it's completely obvious to me at this point that Lorca is the Lorca from the Mirror Universe and he went to this universe to get Burnham so that he could get close to the emperor and overthrow him. Which in my mind is a kick-ass storyline I'm really kind of enjoying it. I mean when he says things like maybe it's not a bad thing that you and I are ghost or and my crew are they all dead it's major tip-off.
Also, could we also travel to the universe where there is nothing but shrimp?
Now the only question is how long they are going to keep this plotline going for? I'm guessing 3-4 max.
What was the fate of Mirror Universe Saru? Was that the one Michael ate? If not, I was surprised there wasn't an story arc to save him. Maybe they will return to save him? Assuming he wasn't eaten?
What was the fate of Mirror Universe Saru? Was that the one Michael ate? If not, I was surprised there wasn't an story arc to save him. Maybe they will return to save him? Assuming he wasn't eaten?
I assume that when the Emperor asked Michael to pick a Kelpian, it was for dinner.
Wait. The nets claim it wasn't MU Saru:
https://trekmovie.com/2018/01/22/after-trek-gives-details-on-georgious-meal-mirror-stamets-terran-empire-history-and-more/
Ha. That was Clint Howard there.
So many easter eggs. Not sure if.(click to show/hide)
I am also not sure I buy that resolution.
I've been thinking about Ash and Voq, it took me a while to understand what had happened, but now that I understand it I don't like what happened.(click to show/hide)
Of course I thought that AngelFromRent/Erique/Dr. Hugh Culber would be back and get better treatment over the long term, soooooo.
OK, now episode 2 was just fantastic. Honestly the first Discovery episode I can remember feeling that way about. Really, really well done and very classic Trek.
... and now the suggestion that there is some life force energy bs at work in there is a bit much to swallow.
... and now the suggestion that there is some life force energy bs at work in there is a bit much to swallow.
I'm on the same page, though I think that's been recurring in Star Trek since TOS though with people swapping bodies, inhabiting computers, and so on. I can't really fault Disco for doing the same thing.
... and now the suggestion that there is some life force energy bs at work in there is a bit much to swallow.
I'm on the same page, though I think that's been recurring in Star Trek since TOS though with people swapping bodies, inhabiting computers, and so on. I can't really fault Disco for doing the same thing.
Well said. The spore thing seems a little dumb but, hey, Star Trek does dumb things.
Set your phasers to fun! Prepare to be beamed up for an unforgettable night with William Shatner, live on stage. In this unique evening you’ll enjoy a screening of the classic film “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” on the big screen. Following the movie, one of Hollywood’s most recognizable figures, William Shatner, will take to the stage to share fascinating and humorous behind the scenes stories from portraying the original “Captain James T. Kirk” in the Star Trek television series and movies as well as his career spanning over 50 years as an award winning actor, producer, director and writer. Fans will also have a chance to ask William their question during the audience led Q&A
Welp, they've finally shown us Spock and now have taken us back to(click to show/hide)
What did everyone think? Personally, I'm tired of revisiting old people and places and want to just go somewhere new, but ignoring that I guess this was fine. Didn't thrill me, and I'm really tired of Spock being treated like the most important Star Trek character to have ever existed, but given the context of the show it went about as well as could be expected.
I will say this though, at least this season the people and places we are revisiting are, for the most part, fairly untouched in Trek lore. Pike, the place we visited last week, and even this part of Spock's life (you know, bridging the gap between smiling at flowers in The Cage and his typical stoic, emotionless self in Where No Man Has Gone Before) are largely left unexplored and unknown. Still wouldn't be my preference as I think the more we are doing this, the more Discovery gets robbed of its own identity, but it could be way, way worse.