Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Star Trek
Byrne Robotics > Star Trek << Prev Page of 4 Next >>
Topic: Star Trek: Discovery ~ Season 2 Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Marten van Wier
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 August 2015
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 475
Posted: 29 January 2019 at 6:19pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

...Pike’s Enterprise spinoff...

•••

That I might watch.

* * * *

I probably speak for many here that that is the kind of prequel we would have wanted to see instead of Enterprise back in the day and Discovery now.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113958
Posted: 29 January 2019 at 8:27pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

I didn’t find their “updated” Enterprise utterly revolting, and I wouldn’t mind modern production values on the sets. Plus, there’s a whole crew we barely know. (Intriguing thought: in his pitch, Roddenberry described Number One as a “Nile Valley beauty”. Diversity!!)
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15508
Posted: 30 January 2019 at 2:10am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

I didn’t find their “updated” Enterprise utterly revolting,
++++++++

You’re fired!


Seriously, though, it is a step up from the Abramsprise. Not a big step, mind you, but the proportions are closer.

That being said, I am totally maxed-out on archaeological, cash-grab rehashes of old characters and properties. More often than not, it comes down to flash and dazzle which disguises horrible writing, and the trotting out and disgracing of beloved characters so as to prop up shallow new characters who are...well, horribly written. 

Is there potential for a Pike series? Sure. But, I have zero confidence that it could be done well in today’s filmmaking climate. Let the old characters rest. Don’t recast them. Don’t rewrite them. Create something new. No other STAR TREK series prior to the Abramsverse and STD went out of its way to strip-mine the original characters and concepts. There were just the occasional references and cameos. The focus was on new characters and new stories, rather than terrible writers skimming the Memory-Alpha wiki for TOS references so as to trick the fans into thinking they’re watching a show which respects the lore.

I’ve stated my opinion that rebooting TOS in 2009 was an ill-conceived desperation move designed to turn STAR TREK into a (hopefully more commercial) lowest-common-denominator product. STD has followed suit by falling back on Pike and Spock when they said they wouldn’t. To say nothing of the scorched-Earth approach to the lore they’re taking by rewriting Spock and his history. Ugh.

Personally, I think the character should have been laid to rest after Nimoy’s passing, as a gesture of respect. 

But, no, Spock gets trotted out so as to allow the thoroughly unlikable Burnham to leech off of him and get herself forced into the lore retroactively. Another case of The Next Big Thing being forced onto the fandom by making her integral to the story of a legacy character we actually do love. And, like a transplant gone bad, the body of the fandom is rejecting it. See also STAR WARS, DOCTOR WHO, and (likely) the upcoming CAPTAIN MARVEL.

I have a firm belief that, although these properties we love may whither and die, the lessons and the joy they’ve given us will continue on. The spreading consumer revolt of numerous longtime fandoms boils down to people no longer being willing to settle for lowest-common-denominator writing or politically-motivated writing. They want smart writing, relatable characters, and respect for what’s come before. Not flashy, shallow garbage with a familiar brand-name stamped on it. 

I find it all rather inspiring, actually. Maybe, down the road, we’ll get new and brilliant stories and characters which are driven more by love of the genre than commercial interests. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 7988
Posted: 30 January 2019 at 6:09am | IP Logged | 4 post reply

The Nile Valley reference was most likely Roddenberry priming the pump to cast his girlfriend in the role, based upon her long nose, high cheekbones, and resemblance to the bust of Nefertiti discovered in 1912.



Edited by Brian Hague on 30 January 2019 at 6:51am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 7988
Posted: 30 January 2019 at 6:37am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

I find almost all of the Berman era to be a bastion of horrible writing and the few episodes of Discovery that I've seen to be right in line with that. The much-decried differences in tone are non-existent, and Michael Burnham, while a Mary Sue by virtue of her having been shoe-horned into an existing character's history, is far more personable and likable than the whiners and man-babies would have us believe. 

The "body of fandom," bloated with pizza, nachos, and entitlement, is far, far smaller than the echo-chamber shouters would have it, and Discovery is recovering nicely from its poor creative choices of Season One. It's an ongoing idiocy to paint diverse casting with a single brush and the high-sounding prevarications from the right still boil down to "cast white male leads or we will bawl our heads off and do everything in our power to torpedo you commercially."  

The writing on Discovery may not be particularly smart, but it is not a shade off of Berman, the characters are perfectly relatable, and the level of respect for what came before is about the same as the post-Henson Muppets. What's triggering the losers is the skin color and genitalia, the same charge they level at the casting directors employing people who, gasp, don't all look like Seth McFarlane and Adrienne Palicki. "You will not replace us! You will not replace us!"

Remember casting directors, the roly-poly chime ball "body of fandom" dictates the only brown allowable in lead roles be the color of their shirts.


Edited by Brian Hague on 30 January 2019 at 6:57am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Richard Stevens
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1347
Posted: 30 January 2019 at 8:36am | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Some people just don't like the 21st century, I guess. Not sure why they think that entitles them to an opinion about the 22nd or 23rd...
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1049
Posted: 31 January 2019 at 8:30am | IP Logged | 7 post reply

SMG was on CBS' The Talk the other day, and the ladies of the Talk specifically brought up the rumors about a Michael/Spock romance angle. SMG very adamantly shot down the rumor.

Of course they are going to shoot down that kind of rumor... especially if it's their 'big bomb' surprise for the season.   SMG probably isn't authorized to spoil major plot turns, either.

Last season when Trek news sites were speculating about Javid Iqubal being a made up actor to hide the fact that Shazad Latif was playing two characters Latif also denied this in interviews.   I figure though, if you throw enough iterations of the plot points against the wall you are probably going to guess right at some point.   Same deal with a Michael/Spock hookup because that seems like the most logical "OMG, I can't believe they did THAT" type of attention-getting event modern TV writers seem to love.

I'll be pleasantly surprised if this M/S rumor turns out to be wrong but I won't be at all shocked if it does bear out.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113958
Posted: 31 January 2019 at 9:00am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

...SMG...

•••

My brain insists on reading this as Sarah Michelle Gellar...

Back to Top profile | search
 
Tyler Kloster
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2006
Posts: 134
Posted: 31 January 2019 at 10:25am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Another case of The Next Big Thing being forced onto the fandom by making her integral to the story of a legacy character we actually do love. And, like a transplant gone bad, the body of the fandom is rejecting it.
------------------------------
(EDITED to add: I misread Greg's comment. I took the last line I quoted to be about the show itself, but realize now he was specifically talking about the Michael/Spock element of Discovery. I'll leave the rest of my post as is, but wanted to acknowledge my mistake.)

Greg, I know you very badly want this to be true, but I think your opinions are clouding your observations. It is undeniably true that many Star Trek fans, and many TOS fans like yourself simply do not like Discovery, as is your right. But to claim that "the body of the fandom is rejecting it" is not necessarily borne out of reality.

CBS has reported that the debut of Season 2 led to an even higher number of new subscribers than the show's first season did, and it has thus far been met with heaping amounts of praise from both fans and critics alike....the writing, the direction of Jonathan Frakes in the second episode, the casting and performance of Anson Mount as Captain Pike.The fact that the series is already getting its own spinoff with Michelle Yeoh surely shows that CBS is thrilled with its reception, yes?

I don't begrudge anyone for not liking it---the first season had its rough spots for me as well, and not everything worked. But I've been a Star Trek fan for over 35 years now, grew up with and loved the original series and its movies, and I love Discovery and its characters. It's the first Star Trek series I've loved since DS9, and I eagerly await each new episode.


Edited by Tyler Kloster on 31 January 2019 at 10:34am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11276
Posted: 31 January 2019 at 12:16pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

I would still like the show to up its smarts, but it is an entertaining watch. I came back from my hols to quite a backlog of recordings on my DVR -- and I was quite happy to sit through back to back episodes of Discovery.

I'd echo other comments made here that I'd rather Spock was left out of it and that the success of Anson Mount as Pike has been a pleasant surprise. I appreciate that they haven't tried to make the role to the MAX in any direction; just a good, capable, likeable character.

Saroo continues to endear himself to me, as does Stamets. They have slowly built up a half-decent cast of characters. And I look forward to the next episode. And the reveal of Jean Grey as the season's big bad. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1049
Posted: 01 February 2019 at 9:48pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

"Point of Light"

Well, that was interesting.  

If last week felt like TOS, then this weeks Klingon intrigue and Sec. 31 shenanigans were very reminiscent of TNG and DS9.   

Notes:

*In just under 30 minutes we transition from the incongruent Klingon portrayal of the first season into something that actually has some visual and spiritual coherence with the rest of STAR TREK -- yet it doesn't retcon that first season away.  Well done.  This is what the first season should have been.

*I'm happy to report that Klingon blood has now turned back into a shade of Pepto-Bismol pink.   

*A nameless orphaned child who has no right of parentage is sent to Boreth to be raised as a monk... how subtle!  (Hint: this is the same monastary where Worf witnessed 'Kahless' return from the dead).  

*Oh yeah and then there's the (subtle) Story Of The Promise from TNG "Rightful Heir":   

"You are Klingons. You need no one but yourselves. I will go now to Sto-vo-kor. But I promise one day I will return." He pointed to a star in the sky, and instructed the people to look for him "on that point of light."  

*(edit) Not to mention the criminal Klingon known only as 'The Albino' who tussled with the family houses of some of the TOS Klingons.   In particular, The Albino's parents were murdered by Kor's family.   (DS9 "Blood Oath")

*I wonder what Dr. Boyce would have to say to Pike about violating the confindentiality of Spock's medical records  (Then again, Boyce doesn't seem like one to always follow the books either).  Michael has no problems rifling through Spock's quarters in on the Enterprise in the last episode but now balks at decrypting his medical records?

*I'm not so sure I can reconcile Spock being a murderer, even if it happened when he wasn't of sound mind or posessed by some other entity.   Wouldn't something like that follow you around for the rest of your Starfleet career?  In the very least the fact that Spock might be capable of such violence would mean that he was not in any way suited for a command position -- he's still tehcnically guilty of manslaughter.   This show likes to give free passes to this sort of 'not-my-fault-because-it-wasn't-me' behavior -- witness Ash/Voq murdering a Starfleet officer yet he's not in a Federation mental facility but allowed to free and live on a non-Federation world.   (edit: It's probably going to be handwaved later as Section 31 trying to frame Spock)

*Spock's existential crisis sounds like a retread of the spiritual brick wall he hit when he failed to complete the Kolinahr and sought out V*ger in TMP.

*Can we stop the slow-burn buildup now and just have Spock appear and say something?   The longer they draw this out the more I'm dreading that Ethan Peck isn't going pull this off.

*Again in the vein of ENTs Vulcans-really-are-assholes concept we now have Logical Extremist groups who would resort to murdering a child.   The philosophy of IDIC seems to be ringing hollow on Vulcan these days.  Kind of makes the Romulans look like peaceful saints, doesn't it?

*So what did Michael do to Spock that was so horrible? (yep, it's pointing to either kissyface or kinky mindmelds -- yuck)

*Michael was actually well-written in this episode.  She's much more watchable and SMG seems to be acting a little less wooden -- I think the better direction and editing are helping this a lot.   The scene where  Michael talks Tilly through her 'issue' was pretty much perfect.  

*The continuation of Tilly's thread in this episode feels a lot less annoying than last week.   Still, man... she should be in sickbay under guard.

*Err... was that... Prime Universe Lorca with a shaved head on the Section 31 ship?   edit:  It's not, apparently it's a character named Leland.


Edited by Rob Ocelot on 02 February 2019 at 7:10am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 32840
Posted: 02 February 2019 at 2:07am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

 Greg Kirkman wrote:
No other STAR TREK series prior to the Abramsverse and STD went out of its way to strip-mine the original characters and concepts.

This is patently untrue.  The first season of TNG was a rehash of TOS episodes. They then went on to bring back characters from TOS into their universe in an obvious bid to win over old fans like myself.  ENTERPRISE literally bent over backwards in an attempt to pay homage to/strip-mine the original depending on your particular bent. Every. Single. Series. Has evoked the concepts of TOS from TNG to DISCOVERY. Every. One. The only two series not to do that in such an obvious way were DS9 and Voyager and that's because they happened outside the Federation in small and large ways: one an outpost at the edge of space and the other in a different galaxy trying to get home.  

Your hatred for this content is obvious, Greg.  That you continue to follow threads about something you so obviously despise and yet haven't seen boarders on the pathological.  


 QUOTE:
But, no, Spock gets trotted out so as to allow the thoroughly unlikable Burnham to leech off of him and get herself forced into the lore retroactively. Another case of The Next Big Thing being forced onto the fandom by making her integral to the story of a legacy character we actually do love. And, like a transplant gone bad, the body of the fandom is rejecting it. See also STAR WARS, DOCTOR WHO, and (likely) the upcoming CAPTAIN MARVEL.

This says more about you than anything else.  To a fan (and I'm not talking disgusting masochistic Reddit threads) I don't know a Doctor Who fan who doesn't like the new female lead.  We've tussled on SW before, so I'll leave it be except your insistence on Rey being a Mary Sue (your go-to in these discussions) or added at the insistence of the SJW. Ridiculous.   And then the audacity to lump all of that into a film you haven't seen with a female lead who has been the character for decades in the comics? Carol Danvers has been Captain Marvel for longer than you've been alive.  She started as Ms. Marvel in 1977! Seriously. What fan boards are you following?  Wow.

Two Star Wars films made over $3 billion dollars and the current Doctor Who is a smashing success.  I only wish I could create something that is so "rejected" by "the body of the fandom". 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Richard Stevens
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1347
Posted: 02 February 2019 at 4:35pm | IP Logged | 13 post reply

Even DS9 did the delightful "Trials and Tribbleations".
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11276
Posted: 02 February 2019 at 10:58pm | IP Logged | 14 post reply

I found the latest episode a little strange. It felt very, very in tune with the first season, but out of tune with the previous episode which had gone down so well (judging by feedback here). I have no idea what is going on behind the scenes, but I was slightly concerned at one point watching the 'previously on Star Trek Discovery' recap that I had accidentally recorded a rerun of an episode from last season.

Anyway, it did surprise me in at least a couple of ways. I'm glad that Spock still hasn't re-appeared, Pike continued to work well and the Tilly parasite actually made me squirm quite nicely. Nothing brilliant in this episode, but it worked well enough. 


Edited by Peter Martin on 02 February 2019 at 10:58pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 11276
Posted: 02 February 2019 at 11:10pm | IP Logged | 15 post reply

Carol Danvers has been Captain Marvel for longer than you've been alive.  She started as Ms. Marvel in 1977.

------------------------------------------------------------ -----------
Matt, you make a bunch of sense nearly all the time, but I'm confused by what you wrote here.

Carol Danvers has been Ms Marvel for a long time. But being Ms Marvel is not the same as being Captain Marvel. She's been Captain Marvel since 2012 and Greg, youngster that he is, predates that I am sure.

I think it's only sensible and proper, though, that if someone is to be commenting regularly in this thread that they watch the show. Greg, you are an intelligent and articulate person, but you really do need to watch to the show to comment meaningfully!
Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4772
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 12:34am | IP Logged | 16 post reply

To be fair re Ms Marvel/Captain Marvel, there has been a female Captain Marvel since the mid ‘80’s.

That Marvel finally woke up & realised that a Female Captain Marvel should be Carol Danvers in 2012 reflects more on Marvel missing a trick back in the ‘80’s than anything else.

& Rey is not the issue with the new Star Wars films. For me, it was the portrayal of Luke in TLJ (together with the longest car chase in film history and the concept that freeing animals is better than freeing slaves). Rey I’m fine with & I really don’t get the whole Mary Sue thing. & I also liked the new Doctor, but then I didn’t really like Capaldi’s Doctor. So, you know, maybe I don’t fit the demographic mentality that has a problem with these things.

It’s a bit like belonging to a church with a female Pastor (my wife). You would not believe the things some male Pastors think are acceptable to say to her, purely because she is a female.

Why are some men so threatened by females in certain roles? Why do women in certain roles diminish some men so much?

Edit - I've debated with myself about asking this last question, but you know what? Sod it

How weak are you as a man, that you feel personally threatened by women in roles historically occupied by men? Why does a woman, over there, doing something that prevents you achieving not one jot, personally offend and threaten your sense of self?

This whole Mary Sue crap is a created concept by men that want to keep women down. That you cannot see that the action genre has been dominated by Joe Pete's (for want of a better term) is incredulous.

And if you are offended personally by any of these questions, then yes, you are the 'you' in those questions and need to rethink your view of women.


Edited by James Woodcock on 03 February 2019 at 1:00am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113958
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 6:02am | IP Logged | 17 post reply

It’s a bit like belonging to a church with a female Pastor (my wife). You would not believe the things some male Pastors think are acceptable to say to her, purely because she is a female.

Why are some men so threatened by females in certain roles? Why do women in certain roles diminish some men so much?

•••

In the case of female pastors, it might have something to do with what it says in the instruction manual.

Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4772
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 6:19am | IP Logged | 18 post reply

Only when people don’t look @ the context of what was written 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113958
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 6:49am | IP Logged | 19 post reply

1Corinthians:

34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

By all means, spin that for me.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1049
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 8:54am | IP Logged | 20 post reply

Aw c'mon man, we aren't even off page 2 yet...

Whoever said current politics makes STAR TREK better should be dragged out back and shot... :-)
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 25698
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 8:58am | IP Logged | 21 post reply

That being said, I am totally maxed-out on archaeological, cash-grab rehashes of old characters and properties.

*******

How can you say this with a straight face? You hold absolute disdain for Discovery (which you haven’t watched) for being guilty of this, yet you praise every detail of THE ORVILLE that takes anything from Star Trek. You love it. Why is it ok for one to lift from Trek and not the other?
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 113958
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 9:33am | IP Logged | 22 post reply

I think you may be misunderstanding what Greg means by “archeological”.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15508
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 11:52am | IP Logged | 23 post reply

Hey, remember in STAR TREK when the death of a crewman—any crewman, regardless of rank, race, or gender—was treated as a tragic event? When all of the characters, no matter how minor, were treated with dignity and respect? Huh.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 7988
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 1:09pm | IP Logged | 24 post reply

It should be noted that Greg's link is a commercial for a computing service in which the products and services of a company are explained at length before the content begins. The dreary p.o.s. narrator starts off with "men are being picked on" whining and "snowflake" charges. That was as far as I cared to go into Greg's precious little echo-chamber this time and officially the last shrill, crybaby link from Greg that I am ever going to follow.

Also, hey, remember in reality when an argument lost merited an acknowledgement from the losing party and didn't simply result in hand-waving and the obnoxious discharge of further, unsupportable charges from the loser? Huh.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4772
Posted: 03 February 2019 at 2:43pm | IP Logged | 25 post reply

My understanding is that 1 Corinthians was written to the church of Corinth where Paul was talking about a group of women that were trying to present teachings that were against the doctrine of the church.

Those were the women he was saying to be quiet.

In any event, many of the conversations I have had with church ministers that are against women in leadership get quite interesting when the dichotomy of those same ministers allowing women to teach the Junior Church classes.

But, my example was not really about the church, it was an illustration of how there are many men in power that are threatened by women & feel perfectly ok in treating them like crap to their face. & I feel the whole Mary Sue thing is an extension of that
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 

<< Prev Page of 4 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login