Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 91

Thread: Star Trek Discovery (potential spoilers)

  1. #61
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    1,860
    Voyager is the end of the Trek timeline right? Janeway shook things up at the end by destroying the Borg pipeline to the alpha quadrant, and she returned with advanced weapons and ship sheilding. A new series from there on should be interesting.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,478
    technically the end of the timeline was Spock trying to save Romulus. Plus there's an entire non-canon extension of Trek history in which the Alpha Quadrant is decimated by a massive Borg attack and the Federation, Ferengi, Cardassians, Klingons and "good" Romulans line up against a union of "bad" Romulans, Tzenkethi, Breen, Gorns, and Tholians.
    "Occam" is the name of the alien race that will enslave us all eventually. And they've got razors for hands. I don't know if that's true but it seems like the simplest answer."

    Stephen Colbert.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Spacedude View Post
    Voyager is the end of the Trek timeline right? Janeway shook things up at the end by destroying the Borg pipeline to the alpha quadrant, and she returned with advanced weapons and ship sheilding. A new series from there on should be interesting.
    Technically, the movie "Nemesis" is the end of the Trek timeline.

    I used TNG as shorthand because TNG/DS9/VOY (including the movies) are pretty much all at the same "time". TOS and "Enterprise" were in distinct timeframes.

    There's 14 years between the beginning of TNG and the end of Voyager, and (supposedly) only about 10 years between "Discovery" and TOS, so there is that...
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    4,397
    There is no "end" to the Trek timeline, because of the introduction of time travel. The "reboot" movies are all an alternate time-line, for example. You can be sure there are a multitude of alternate timelines due to the temporal cold war. Plus scriptwriters.

    CJSF
    "What does it mean? (What does it mean?)
    What does it mean? (What does it mean?)
    I'll put it in my thinking machine"
    -They Might Be Giants, "Thinking Machine"


    lonelybirder.org

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    4,397
    In fact, "Parallels", from TNG, explicitly introduces us to the notion that there are already a near *infinite* number of parallel "timelines" going on - so Trek can do about anything it wants. Very handy for a TV show.

    CJSF
    "What does it mean? (What does it mean?)
    What does it mean? (What does it mean?)
    I'll put it in my thinking machine"
    -They Might Be Giants, "Thinking Machine"


    lonelybirder.org

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    1,860
    Ok 10-4 on the timeline, I was just thinking of the tv franchise and not including the later TNG movies which I see overlapping in various ways.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,420
    ST: Discovery just started its second season. They've introduced Pike and the new uniforms. ("Very ... colorful.") Spock is in the offing, and apparently [SPOILER] he and Michael had a thing.

    They also explained that Enterprise missed the Klingon war because they were off on a "five year mission." Huh? The Federation's fighting for its life and you send a top-of-the-line ship off on a science mission?

    Oh, and they had an away mission on which the Red Shirt did NOT die despite being pointed out as a red shirt.
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They donít alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim View Post

    The Federation's fighting for its life and you send a top-of-the-line ship off on a science mission?

    Oh, and they had an away mission on which the Red Shirt did NOT die despite being pointed out as a red shirt.
    To be fair the Enterprise's 5 year mission was launched well before the war with the Klingon's began.

    Was really happy to see a Red Shirt survive an away mission for a change, particularly one that was interesting as she was.

  9. 2019-Jan-22, 02:44 PM

  10. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    I was impressed early in the second episode when Burnham used the word "momentarily" correctly, but then they ruined it a few minutes later when Saru misused "comprised".
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  11. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,420
    Hey, give Saru a break! He may speak 90 languages, but he doesn't claim to speak any of them fluently.

    So when does General Order One become the Prime Directive?
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They donít alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  12. #71
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    The Space Coast
    Posts
    4,397
    Quote Originally Posted by SeanF View Post
    I was impressed early in the second episode when Burnham used the word "momentarily" correctly, but then they ruined it a few minutes later when Saru misused "comprised".
    Just curious (as I haven't seen this series yet), but how was momentarily misused? Doesn't it have a fairly straightforward meaning? I guess throw in how comprised was used, too? I mean, it may come down to picking nits if I decide to watch this (as it becomes available outside of the CBS streaming service I can't justify paying for).

    CJSF
    "What does it mean? (What does it mean?)
    What does it mean? (What does it mean?)
    I'll put it in my thinking machine"
    -They Might Be Giants, "Thinking Machine"


    lonelybirder.org

  13. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,478
    The Prime Directive has always been General Order One. The Prime Directive is just its nickname.

    And speaking of meddling with other cultures, what the hell are these angels doing? If they have the tech to send a church 50,000 light years, why do they need to have us geocaching across the galaxy to clean up their messes?
    "Occam" is the name of the alien race that will enslave us all eventually. And they've got razors for hands. I don't know if that's true but it seems like the simplest answer."

    Stephen Colbert.

  14. #73
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    Quote Originally Posted by CJSF View Post
    Just curious (as I haven't seen this series yet), but how was momentarily misused? Doesn't it have a fairly straightforward meaning? I guess throw in how comprised was used, too? I mean, it may come down to picking nits if I decide to watch this (as it becomes available outside of the CBS streaming service I can't justify paying for).

    CJSF
    Comprised is the easy one - Saru said something along the lines of, "The planet's rings are comprised of particles..." That should be "are composed of" or simply "comprises". The parts compose the whole, the whole comprises the parts.

    "Momentarily" is more subtle, I think. There's a difference between "I'll be in my office in a moment" and "I'll be in my office for a moment", yes? "I'll be in my office momentarily" technically means the latter, but people often use it to mean the former. In the episode, Burnham said, "We could jump to warp momentarily..." and she meant it in the "for a moment" sense, not "in a moment".
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  15. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,245
    For those interested, the first episode of the second season is on Youtube (apparently for a limited time). Here's the link:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rvMqRrtmkY

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  16. #75
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,245
    Quote Originally Posted by parallaxicality View Post
    The Prime Directive has always been General Order One. The Prime Directive is just its nickname.
    I looked that up, since I don't remember it (and I know more Star Trek trivia than I like to admit). According to Memory Alpha, this came from the animated series, from the episode "The Magicks of Megas-Tu" and the wording was "No starship may interfere with the normal development of any alien life or society." I haven't seen this Discovery episode, but it sounds like this is about a human civilization?

    Was General Order One ever mentioned anywhere else in Star Trek? I am happy to see something from the animated series referenced, though that wasn't one of the better episodes (at least in my opinion). I felt the animated series was very hit or miss, there were some terrible ones, but there were others that were very good, so I do like to see it get some recognition.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  17. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Florida.
    Posts
    5,775
    I'm more surprised that English hasn't changed a lot more than just those words in 300 (or whatever) years.

  18. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    I felt the animated series was very hit or miss, there were some terrible ones, but there were others that were very good, so I do like to see it get some recognition.
    Trek blueprinter Aridas Sofia even did a TAS Enterprise drawing he calls the Defiant
    https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/458241330828767805

    Peter Elsons version is interesting...
    http://www.gavinrothery.com/my-blog/...ter-elson.html
    Last edited by publiusr; 2019-Feb-05 at 08:43 PM.

  19. #78
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    I made my wife watch "The Cage" with me before we watched this week's "Discovery", and then they went and recapped it at the begining of the episode, anyway.

    For what it's worth, there are very few shows that can open an episode with a "Previously, on..." that goes back 55 years and refers to an episode that was technically never even broadcast as part of the show's run.

    (I was going to post this in the "Trivial Things that Amuse You" thread, but figured it could be considered a spoiler, so I decided to put it here instead).
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  20. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,420
    I enjoyed the Talos IV call-back, though it did seem they retconned a few things.
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They donít alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  21. #80
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,269
    The Talos IV stuff was the best part. I did like the way they followed up on how the experience affected Pike. It, through its retcon, gives more motivation for Spock to seek out Talos IV as a solution for Pike in The Menagerie and for it to be something Pike would accept, but for the consequences to Spock and Kirk.

    Btw, I noticed the absence of a mention of the prohibition of Talos IV being punishable by death. It would seem incongruous today for the Federation to use capital punishment.

  22. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    I read somewhere that - and I'm not sure of the details - because of a company split, all the various copyrights involved in "Star Trek" are no longer consolidated under single ownership. That's why, for example, the design of the Enterprise and the TOS-era uniforms in "Discovery" are just a little bit different in appearance than the originals. The people producing "Discovery" had to get permission from whomever owns the actual TOS rights, and they won't allow them to exactly recreate the original series. They're not able to do it for essentially the same reasons that the producers of "Star Trek Continues" were no longer allowed to, well, continue.

    Not sure how true it is, though. But if it is true, it seems to mean that episodes like DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" or Enterprise's "In a Mirror, Darkly" just couldn't be made today.
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  23. #82
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,269
    Quote Originally Posted by SeanF View Post
    I read somewhere that - and I'm not sure of the details - because of a company split, all the various copyrights involved in "Star Trek" are no longer consolidated under single ownership. That's why, for example, the design of the Enterprise and the TOS-era uniforms in "Discovery" are just a little bit different in appearance than the originals. The people producing "Discovery" had to get permission from whomever owns the actual TOS rights, and they won't allow them to exactly recreate the original series. They're not able to do it for essentially the same reasons that the producers of "Star Trek Continues" were no longer allowed to, well, continue.

    Not sure how true it is, though. But if it is true, it seems to mean that episodes like DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" or Enterprise's "In a Mirror, Darkly" just couldn't be made today.
    This is contentious. MidnightsEdge have been propagating this, but then they have been hating on Discovery from the beginning. And I don't know why videos about studio gossip need Michael Mann music.

    Steve Shives rebuts this as a conspiracy theory based on the misunderstood words of a production artist.

  24. #83
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Glom View Post
    This is contentious. MidnightsEdge have been propagating this, but then they have been hating on Discovery from the beginning. And I don't know why videos about studio gossip need Michael Mann music.

    Steve Shives rebuts this as a conspiracy theory based on the misunderstood words of a production artist.
    Thanks. I have to admit, it didn't really make much sense to me.
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  25. #84
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,245
    Quote Originally Posted by SeanF View Post
    I read somewhere that - and I'm not sure of the details - because of a company split, all the various copyrights involved in "Star Trek" are no longer consolidated under single ownership.
    As far as I'm aware (but I don't claim to be an expert), the rights are mostly split between TV and movie rights, and I believe there are some restrictions on use of recent material (so Paramount probably can't make reference to anything presented in Discovery). That may have been why they went alt-timeline to make a bit of that easier.

    That's why, for example, the design of the Enterprise and the TOS-era uniforms in "Discovery" are just a little bit different in appearance than the originals. The people producing "Discovery" had to get permission from whomever owns the actual TOS rights, and they won't allow them to exactly recreate the original series.
    Again, not an expert, but I thought most of the Discovery stuff was because they were trying for a different and modernized look.

    They're not able to do it for essentially the same reasons that the producers of "Star Trek Continues" were no longer allowed to, well, continue.
    I will claim some expertise (or at least familiarity) regarding this, though, and that's simply wrong. The short version is that a person named Alec Peters blatantly attempted to commercialize Star Trek related property ("Axanar") and that led to both CBS and Viacom/Paramount suing him. Subsequently, CBS/Paramount jointly put up a set of rules for fan films, and essentially said, if you follow these rules, we won't go after you legally. The rules limited length and type of funding (among other things), so no more fan series, or episode or movie length fan productions.

    There were hints that CBS and Viacom/Paramount were already getting concerned with fan films prior to the Axanar fiasco, which were getting fairly expensive using crowdfunding, but Axanar pretty well blew it out of the water.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." ó Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  26. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,239
    I like some of the fan stuff better than Discovery

  27. #86
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Posts
    8,770
    Okay, this is just strange. (SPOILER ALERT, by the way!)

    There was a character on "Discovery" named Lt. Cmdr. Airiam. She was the ship's science officer, and was basically a cyborg. She was killed off last week, and was replaced on the bridge by a character named Lt. Nilsson, who appears to be just a "normal" human.

    Here's the strange part - Airiam was played by Sara Mitich back in the first season, but played by Hannah Cheesman in the second season. Her replacement, Lt. Nilsson, is played by Sara Mitich. She's replaced herself.
    Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn

  28. #87
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    80
    Season finale last night was really quite good IMO. I've always enjoyed series that use clever plotting to explain what at first glance appeared to be plot holes or continuity errors.

    All those "This isn't Star Trek! None of this stuff ever existed or happened in canon!" naysayers got a huge comeuppance with the way it wrapped up. I can hear the writers laughing smugly.

  29. #88
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,478
    I think they went a bit overboard actually. I'm perfectly fine with a bit of retconning; not everything that ever happened must be mentioned all the time. Still, Trekkies are a whiny lot at the best of times, and this generation, with their whining turbocharged by internet echo chambers, really needs to be kicked in the head to see sense.
    Last edited by parallaxicality; 2019-Apr-19 at 10:24 PM.
    "Occam" is the name of the alien race that will enslave us all eventually. And they've got razors for hands. I don't know if that's true but it seems like the simplest answer."

    Stephen Colbert.

  30. #89
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    10,907
    Just finished S2. Overall I enjoyed it, but much of it (series e.g.: Mirror Universe Georgiou becomes part of Starfleet that quickly?, finale e.g.: Saru's sister has so easily learned to fly a fighter?), bugged me.

    Quote Originally Posted by ronin View Post
    Season finale last night was really quite good IMO. I've always enjoyed series that use clever plotting to explain what at first glance appeared to be plot holes or continuity errors.
    I also usually enjoy that, but here it all seemed to me mostly muddled or jumbled; or otherwise obvious. The battle was a bit overwrought, and something I often found in this series was that the "emotional bits" felt a bit overlong, stretched out.

    Quote Originally Posted by ronin View Post
    All those "This isn't Star Trek! None of this stuff ever existed or happened in canon!" naysayers got a huge comeuppance with the way it wrapped up. I can hear the writers laughing smugly.
    Not that I really care much about canon and continuity (though the recent movie blowing up Vulcan did bother me), but, really? I didn't think it was much better than "and then I woke up, and it was all a dream".


    I'll watch season 3. (Apparently ordered. Curious to see if it's about Discovery in the future, or if they find their way back, or will it be more about Pike and Enterprise?)

    Also: Time Travel sucks.
    Measure once, cut twice. Practice makes perfect.
    Yeah, yeah, right, right. Okay.

  31. #90
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,420
    Quote Originally Posted by pzkpfw View Post
    Just finished S2. Overall I enjoyed it, but much of it (series e.g.: Mirror Universe Georgiou becomes part of Starfleet that quickly?, finale e.g.: Saru's sister has so easily learned to fly a fighter?), bugged me.
    Georgiou became part of Section 31 more than Starfleet. That would be an ideal fit for both parties.

    And you don't know how well she piloted the fighter. Maybe she's a natural?

    Quote Originally Posted by pzkpfw View Post
    I also usually enjoy that, but here it all seemed to me mostly muddled or jumbled; or otherwise obvious. The battle was a bit overwrought, and something I often found in this series was that the "emotional bits" felt a bit overlong, stretched out.
    I liked the battle. Using lots of small fighters made more sense than a few large ships slugging it out. Of course, then you wonder why those fighters weren't used in later stories.

    Yeah. "We're all gonna die unless we act fast, so let me look tenderly and longingly into your eyes and say those things I couldn't say before and remind you of the past and ... and ..." I get it, but the clock's literally ticking here.

    Quote Originally Posted by pzkpfw View Post
    Not that I really care much about canon and continuity (though the recent movie blowing up Vulcan did bother me), but, really? I didn't think it was much better than "and then I woke up, and it was all a dream".
    I do not recognize the "reboot." To me that's the dream. Or nightmare.

    I thought the retcon was handled fairly well. It explains why some things are never mentioned in STOS, et al. And why Starfleet uses those antiquated warp drives instead of the newest technology. Yeah, some soft spots, but that's what happens when you have a mixed chronology.

    Quote Originally Posted by pzkpfw View Post
    I'll watch season 3. (Apparently ordered. Curious to see if it's about Discovery in the future, or if they find their way back, or will it be more about Pike and Enterprise?)

    Also: Time Travel sucks.
    I'll be watching, too. And I'm confident it will be Discovery (kinda in the title) instead of Pike/Enterprise. Will they be in the future? In Beta Quadrant? Either of those would free them from stepping on canonical toes.

    I wouldn't mind seeing more of Pike-Spock-Number One, but they'd have to be very careful. Canon, y'know.
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They donít alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •