Television Star Trek

Dante said:
Stop judging Discovery by the narrow frame of reference you want it to fit into.

Not only is it more than that, it doesn't give a shit what you expect it to be, simply because the nineties reboot provided a sanitised version of the future.

Vive la difference.
Click to expand...

The "frame of reference" is literally the opening monologue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_no_man_has_gone_before
That's all I ask.

> it doesn't give a shit what you expect it to be

Of course, we all know that. I can still have opinions about it.
 
Dante said:
Stop judging Discovery by the narrow frame of reference you want it to fit into.

Not only is it more than that, it doesn't give a shit what you expect it to be. And vive la difference.
Click to expand...
I prefer season 2 as it carries more of the qualities I like in Star Trek. It is more enjoyable to me. I like the first Abrams Star Trek movie lots although it doesn't really feel like Star Trek. Difference can be good. I did not find season 1 to be good and it felt like a different show using Trek branding to get interest. Season 2 feels like Star Trek. It may not have and I may have liked, or not liked it.

If a new series of Doctor Who came out and the Doctor was a gun weilding psycho it might be a good show. It wouldn't be much like Doctor Who though, even if he was cardying out his drive by shootings from a recognisable TARDIS.

I don't expect a non sentient TV show to care what I think. I'm fairly sure that my narrow frames of reference are not noticed by the programme. I'm also quite sure it is also not bewildered by your unexpected grumpiness.
 
Dante said:
If you enjoy simplistic storylines, more power to you. I agree that the older series were much better at that.

I can appreciate how, if Discovery presented species/"races" in a more a more anthropomorphic manner, it'd be easier to understand.
Click to expand...
Yes. It's the complex intellectual weight of series 1 of Discovery we morons struggled with.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
I prefer season 2 as it carries more of the qualities I like in Star Trek. It is more enjoyable to me. I like the first Abrams Star Trek movie lots although it doesn't really feel like Star Trek. Difference can be good. I did not find season 1 to be good and it felt like a different show using Trek branding to get interest. Season 2 feels like Star Trek. It may not have and I may have liked, or not liked it.

If a new series of Doctor Who came out and the Doctor was a gun weilding psycho it might be a good show. It wouldn't be much like Doctor Who though, even if he was cardying out his drive by shootings from a recognisable TARDIS.

I don't expect a non sentient TV show to care what I think. I'm fairly sure that my narrow frames of reference are not noticed by the programme. I'm also quite sure it is also not bewildered by your unexpected grumpiness.
Click to expand...
I love the show. You don't. Which one of us is being grumpy?
 
Dante said:
I love the show. You don't. Which one of us is being grumpy?
Click to expand...
You are Mr. Grumpy! I paraphrase but "The show doesn't give a shit what you think" is grumpy as is suggesting people who didn't like season 1 didn't because they like simple things and hate change.

As an aside, I really like series 2 as I've said several times. I guess that's 'cos it's simpler though, huh?
 
Fingeredmouse said:
You are Mr. Grumpy! I paraphrase but "The show doesn't give a shit what you think" is grumpy as is suggesting people who didn't like season 1 didn't because they like simple things and hate change.

As an aside, I really like series 2 as I've said several times. I guess that's 'cos it's simpler though, huh?
Click to expand...
I like season 1 and season 2.

You don't like season 1.

Simple (hopefully simple enough).
 
Dante said:
I like season 1 and season 2.

You don't like season 1.

Simple (hopefully simple enough).
Click to expand...
This is true. I'm sure I'd like season 1 too if I was only able to comprehend its labyrinthian plot lines about smashy space fighting and could accept its groundbreaking mirror Universe and time travel concepts.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
This is true. I'm sure I'd like season 1 too if I was only able to comprehend its labyrinthian plot lines about smashy space fighting and could accept its groundbreaking mirror Universe and time travel concepts.
Click to expand...
Well, obviously.

That's why I like it. I'd expect that to be self-evident to anyone with an ounce of intelligence.

Apologies, I don't mean to offend you for your shortcomings.

Season 1 is more complex than season 2, which is why I can see you prefer the latter.
 
Dante said:
And that's the rub.

You want Star Trek to be defined by a line from the sixties, rather than a world that already has iPhones and self-driving cars.

Humanity has moved on, but you want your sci-fi to be stuck in the Cold War paradigm of the sixties.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you've said Cold War many many times. TOS is certainly influenced by it, but it's not really a thing in subsequent series. So I have no idea why you keep bringing it up, and how "explore strange new worlds, seek out new life and new civilisations" is supposed to be "the cold war paradigm". It's baffling.

And I don't care about the technology changes in Discovery - the set design should move with the times.

It's the total abandonment of the core of Star Trek that is my problem. As I said, others can do dystopian sci-fi, and do it better than Discovery (Expanse and BSG for example).


Fingeredmouse said:
If a new series of Doctor Who came out and the Doctor was a gun weilding psycho it might be a good show. It wouldn't be much like Doctor Who though, even if he was cardying out his drive by shootings from a recognisable TARDIS.

I don't expect a non sentient TV show to care what I think. I'm fairly sure that my narrow frames of reference are not noticed by the programme. I'm also quite sure it is also not bewildered by your unexpected grumpiness.
Click to expand...

...


Fingeredmouse said:
Yes. It's the complex intellectual weight of series 1 of Discovery we morons struggled with.
Click to expand...

:lol:
But the lighting is dark and the characters are stoic so it's very deep.
 
berbatrick said:
I'm sorry but you've said Cold War many many times. TOS is certainly influenced by it, but it's not really a thing in subsequent series. So I have no idea why you keep bringing it up, and how "explore strange new worlds, seek out new life and new civilisations" is supposed to be "the cold war paradigm". It's baffling.

And I don't care about the technology changes in Discovery - the set design should move with the times.

It's the total abandonment of the core of Star Trek that is my problem. As I said, others can do dystopian sci-fi, and do it better than Discovery (Expanse and BSG for example).




...




:lol:
But the lighting is dark and the characters are stoic so it's very deep.
Click to expand...
I've watched and enjoyed every episode of Star Trek. But I don't care about any abdonment. Discovery stands on its own.

Try judging the show on its own merits rather than the narrow set of criteria you've set.

berbatrick said:
:lol:
But the lighting is dark and the characters are stoic so it's very deep.
Click to expand...
The lighting is dark, so accept that aesthetic. The characters are stoic and that's their personality.

Neither direction is laughable.

It's very telling how you're inable to watch the show without wanting it to be something more old-fashioned.
 
Dante said:
Well, obviously.

That's why i like it. I'd expect that to be self-evident to anyone with an ounce of intelligence.

Apologies, I don't mean to offend you for your shortcomings.

Season 1 is more complex than season 2, which is why I can see you prefer the latter.
Click to expand...
Does complex mean grim, dull and strangely nihilistic? I'm not sure Dante, but I reckon you can help me out.
 
Raoul said:
The Klingons were hardly the only problem with season 1.



Has any of this been resolved since ?
Click to expand...


bucky said:
SJW, lefty bullshit, third wave feminism, obsession with identity politics and other buzzwords within in the first 5 minutes. Okay.
Click to expand...

Yeah one of this guy's videos about Doctor Who popped up in my recommended and I had to click out after halfway through. Guy didn't even watch the last season and was spouting nonsense. Looked at the titles of his library of videos and yeah, it's a no from me. I prefer youtubers who use some modicum of objectivity in their negative statements about stuff.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Does complex mean grim, dull and strangely nihilistic? I'm not sure Dante, but I reckon you can help me out.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it can.

Sometimes it isn't.

Don't be so limited in your world view. Or universal view, as the case may be.

Your post perfectly illustrates how certain old-timers are incapable of appreciating anything different, even it packs much more modernism and science fiction merit.

If that's where the limits of your understanding lie, I can forgive you.
 
Dante said:
Sometimes it can.

Sometimes it isn't.

Don't be so limited in your world view. Or universal view, as the case may be.

Your post perfectly illustrates how certain old-timers are incapable of appreciating anything different, even it packs much more modernism and science fiction merit.

If that's where the limits of your understanding lie, I can forgive you.
Click to expand...
Thank you Dante. Armed with your forgiveness perhaps someday I can come to enjoy Star Trek: Depressing Space Wars too although clearly I will never be able to perceive its profound depths.

Years from now, when the academics produce their studies exploring the wealth of complex and groundbreaking sociopolitical messages layered into the portrayal of giant water bears, albino Klingons, confused people of Vulcan heritage struggling between emotions and logic and mirror universes where everyone is a baddy, and if I learn to read big words and turn up the brightness on my TV so I can actually see something, maybe, just maybe, I'll decipher the intricate plot and lietmotif of this intellectually demanding show exploring cutting edge innovative and modern sci-fi ideas such as time travel, parallel dimensions and space punchy battles never before explored in Star Trek or indeed any other sci-fi show.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Thank you Dante. Armed with your forgiveness perhaps someday I can come to enjoy Star Trek: Depressing Space Wars too although clearly I will never be able to perceive its profound depths.

Years from now, when the academics produce their studies exploring the wealth of complex and groundbreaking sociopolitical messages layered into the portrayal of giant water bears, albino Klingons, confused people of Vulcan heritage struggling between emotions and logic and mirror universes where everyone is a baddy, and if I learn to read big words and turn up the brightness on my TV so I can actually see something, maybe, just maybe, I'll decipher the intricate plot and lietmotif of this intellectually demanding show exploring cutting edge innovative and modern sci-fi ideas such as time travel, parallel dimensions and space punchy battles never before explored in Star Trek or indeed any other sci-fi show.
Click to expand...
So... you think:

Aliens species can't be giant?

Albinos don't exist nature?

Bi-species beings can't have conflicts within their psyches?

Dark environments don't exist?

As I say, you want you're science fiction to be simplistic and cartoonish. There's nothing wrong with that per se. But Discovery is on another level as you yourself have just admitted.

(For what it's worth, I've never like the Mirror Universe. That's one of the bits of fan service that I hate. The sops to TOS, DS9 and TNG are the worst things about the current show.)
 
I've never been a big Star Trek fan though i do enjoy Discovery and i really want to love the show as it has some great characters and potential and the visuals are amazing. But at times the story seems scatterbrained and jumps from a to b to c just because with little or no explanation. And it has to be said it has some dumb writing. An example of this was in the last Episode, i'll spoiler it for anyone who hasn't watched yet.

The crew hatch a plan to capture and trap future Michael who they believe is the Red Angel, but no one thinks oh wait if we tell present Michael all about our dastardly plan then future Michael will also know about it and just not turn up. As soon as that happened i knew the person in the Red Angel suit wasn't going to be Michael and so it turned out it was Michaels Mother.

So the writers obviously knew the Red Angels identity and so didn't see the need to have the characters think about excluding Present Michael from any plans to trap future Michael. But thats just sloppy writing in my opinion, in Universe it didn't make any sense unless the crew are all morons. The Mother twist also contradicted the DNA evidence they found earlier that lead them to believe Michael was the Red Angel in the first place.(Granted it might turn out that evidence was planted by the AI)

And thats without even getting into the idiocy of them settling on a plan of killing present Michael so that future Michael turns up to save her life. Wow. :wenger: :lol:
 
Dante said:
So... you think:

Aliens species can't be giant?

Albinos don't exist nature?

Bi-species beings can't have conflicts within their psyches?

Dark environments don't exist?

As I say, you want you're science fiction to be simplistic and cartoonish. There's nothing wrong with that per se. But Discovery is on another level as you yourself have just admitted.

(For what it's worth, I've never like the Mirror Universe. That's one of the bits of fan service that I hate. The sops to TOS, DS9 and TNG are the worst things about the current show.)
Click to expand...
I like my sci-fi in many forms. My favourite Trek is the motion picture, which is slow, dull and, as far as Trek goes, innovative and complex.
The point I'm making is that Discovery series 1 is not complex. It's pretty linear and straight forward.
I deemed it not very good. You liked it.
It is not, however, complex. Or innovative. That's fine. It doesn't need to be.
I'm glad you like it. What I'm taking issue with is the fact you seem to think others don't like it because it is incredibly complex. It isn't. That's not why. It's a touch condescending to suggest that people who don't rate series 1 feel that way because they can't handle anything challenging, especially when the show is pretty simple.
Now, I have been quite flippant in reaction to your tetchiness, but, honestly, if you think Discovery is complex and innovative I'm not sure you're preaching from a position of strength when you critiscise others for struggling with plot depth or challenging concepts.
However, given your usename you clearly do like genuinely complex art. So, I guess you are just being grumpy after all.
Live long and prosper Dante.
 
That was a weird episode, there was way too much going on. Felt like a setup for the next one.
 
I was at primary school when some of the original series of ST was on in the UK in the 1970s. Quite often watched through my fingers or peeking out from behind the settee - this was the same scenario when watching Dr Who on Saturday teatime - my Dad was also a fan, my Mum thought it was rubbish but I think my sister was too scared to watch most of the time, gave her nightmares.
Happy days :lol:
Not really a fan these days, not got any inclination to watch any of the new series - same goes for Dr Who - but I did like the Star Trek IV movie, genuinely funny in places and good fun.
 
Was flicking through the channels the other night at about 4am and stubled across Star Trek: Voyager on Syfy. I'm still a Star Trek noob having only watched TNG, but I gave this a go and really enjoyed it. I watched two episodes - the last ep of season 5 and the first of season 6. It was a two-parter and I thought it was really good. It was about the Equinox and its crew killing aliens in order to use their, well, bio-energy to fuel their ship if anyone remembers it. It was nice seeing Teddy Sheringham as well!

Now, I don't know whether to go back and watch Voyager from the beginning as them two eps were near the end of its run. How is Voyager ranked amongst the Trekkies? Is it worth watching?
 
Yagami said:
Was flicking through the channels the other night at about 4am and stubled across Star Trek: Voyager on Syfy. I'm still a Star Trek noob having only watched TNG, but I gave this a go and really enjoyed it. I watched two episodes - the last ep of season 5 and the first of season 6. It was a two-parter and I thought it was really good. It was about the Equinox and its crew killing aliens in order to use their, well, bio-energy to fuel their ship if anyone remembers it. It was nice seeing Teddy Sheringham as well!

Now, I don't know whether to go back and watch Voyager from the beginning as them two eps were near the end of its run. How is Voyager ranked amongst the Trekkies? Is it worth watching?
Click to expand...
I think it’s often considered the third best series, after TNG/DS9 (I personally think DS9 is the best). It’s a bit silly sometimes but generally enjoyable enough. Worth watching.
 
Yagami said:
Was flicking through the channels the other night at about 4am and stubled across Star Trek: Voyager on Syfy. I'm still a Star Trek noob having only watched TNG, but I gave this a go and really enjoyed it. I watched two episodes - the last ep of season 5 and the first of season 6. It was a two-parter and I thought it was really good. It was about the Equinox and its crew killing aliens in order to use their, well, bio-energy to fuel their ship if anyone remembers it. It was nice seeing Teddy Sheringham as well!

Now, I don't know whether to go back and watch Voyager from the beginning as them two eps were near the end of its run. How is Voyager ranked amongst the Trekkies? Is it worth watching?
Click to expand...
It's the fourth best after Discovery, DS9 and TNG.
 
Yagami said:
Was flicking through the channels the other night at about 4am and stubled across Star Trek: Voyager on Syfy. I'm still a Star Trek noob having only watched TNG, but I gave this a go and really enjoyed it. I watched two episodes - the last ep of season 5 and the first of season 6. It was a two-parter and I thought it was really good. It was about the Equinox and its crew killing aliens in order to use their, well, bio-energy to fuel their ship if anyone remembers it. It was nice seeing Teddy Sheringham as well!

Now, I don't know whether to go back and watch Voyager from the beginning as them two eps were near the end of its run. How is Voyager ranked amongst the Trekkies? Is it worth watching?
Click to expand...

If you have access to the entire series on a streaming service be sure to check a Voyager episode called Relativity (Season 5, Ep 23). Great stuff.
 
Raoul said:
We've already established that Discovery season 1 is crap so its literally impossible for Discovery to be the best Star Trek ever.
Click to expand...
Season 1 is not crap.

A bunch of 45 year old incels on the internet decided it wasn't the Star Trek they grew up with and so tried to bad mouth it to everyone in order to try and sink it. When they couldn't, they jumped on board season 2.
 
Dante said:
Season 1 is not crap.

A bunch of 45 year old incels on the internet decided it wasn't the Star Trek they grew up with and so tried to bad mouth it to everyone in order to try and sink it. When they couldn't, they jumped on board season 2.
Click to expand...

Its generally thought to be poor. People were fired, budgets were violated and a new team was brought in to save the series. Furthermore, no respectable person with any degree of Star Trek knowledge thinks it was the best. Its a bit like saying the first season of Enterprise is the greatest Star Trek ever. Once you say this sort of thing no one will take anything you say seriously anymore.
 
Raoul said:
Its generally thought to be poor. People were fired, budgets were violated and a new team was brought in to save the series. Furthermore, no respectable people with any degree of Star Trek knowledge think it was the best. Its a bit like saying the first season of Enterprise is the greatest Star Trek ever. Once you say this sort of thing no one will take anything you say seriously anymore.
Click to expand...
You've stated twice in this thread that you've "heard" Discovery was going to get cancelled, and yet it's been commisioned for a third season. You're clearly in an echo chamber that doesn't give you an accurate picture of what Discovery actually is.

Discovery is not like any other Star Trek series. So within that narrow definition, you could certainly say that it's a poor rendition of the original concept. But by any other metric, it's an excellent TV show. Maybe I can see that because I like older Star Trek series, but I'm not an obsessive over them. To each their own.
 
Dante said:
Season 1 is not crap.

A bunch of 45 year old incels on the internet decided it wasn't the Star Trek they grew up with and so tried to bad mouth it to everyone in order to try and sink it. When they couldn't, they jumped on board season 2.
Click to expand...

It is being bad mouthed because the plots are contrived, the characters unlikeable to the extreme, the acting terrible, the dialogues cringe worthy, very much style over substance in general and shows no regard to the canon. At best it is Star Trek light for teenagers. That and the pretentious attempts to force some form of social commentary down our throats which frankly is beneath Star Trek which was always on the forefront of this due to its subtlety. But if there is one thing you don't associate with Discovery it's subtlety.

I can't wrap my head around how someone who consider themselves a Star Trek fan cites Discovery as their favourite show.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.