Well, I Finally Watched the First Episode of Discovery, Season 2

[unixknight]

I actually liked it.  It felt more like Star Trek than any of the first season episodes.  

Except for one thing... 

Oh, and spoilers.

There's implied to be some kind of dark secret between Burnham and Spock.  What could that be?  A falling out?  A...

And then I saw the previews for the upcoming episodes.  If I saw what I think I saw, I'm done with Discovery.  

Are they hinting that Burnham and Spock hooked up at some point?  Because if they are, that takes a massive, fruity dump all over the character of Spock.  Yes, I know they're adopted siblings so it's technically not incest or whatever poppycock nonsensical argument might be used to defend it.  Yes, I know that sort of thing happens.  Yes, I'm sure it's a great source of drama.  Yes, in another context it might even make for a poignant story.  

But it would make absolutely no sense whatsoever to have Spock doing it.  The character of Spock has achieved an almost mythical status in pop culture.  Part of the reason for that is how consistently he's been built.  He's a likeable character.  He's a strangely relatable character, even though he eschews human emotion.  One of the reasons people started to dislike Zachary Quinto's Spock is how inconsistently the character was portrayed in Star Trek: Into Darkness.  Spock is just one of those characters you really have to be careful with when adding to his backstory.  You can change the look of the Enterprise.  You can mess with continuity.  You can even destroy planets, but do not mess with Spock.  

Now, full disclosure, Spock isn't my favorite character.  He isn't even in my top 5.  My favorites are Kirk, Worf, Garak, Quark, and Picard (in that order).  Nevertheless, I understand Spock and what his character is.  He's one of those foundation elements in Star Trek that kinda cement everything together.  Giving him a quasi-incest backstory goes against the foundation of the type of character he is and why.  Discovery is going to mess around with that just to be edgy and "mature."  Well, I see it as less "mature" and more "Look! I found the keys to my dad's liquor cabinet!" 

Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe that isn't what happens.  Maybe it's a dream or something.  I'll wait and see.

[anatess2]

I love Michelle Yeoh.  But man, I cant stand Discovery.  And, of course, now they have to make another Spock background story.  Hated it when they did that time warp thingee in the movies... hate this Discovery Spock story too.

[Midwest LDS]

3 hours ago, unixknight said:

I actually liked it.  It felt more like Star Trek than any of the first season episodes.  

Except for one thing... 

Oh, and spoilers.

There's implied to be some kind of dark secret between Burnham and Spock.  What could that be?  A falling out?  A...

And then I saw the previews for the upcoming episodes.  If I saw what I think I saw, I'm done with Discovery.  

Are they hinting that Burnham and Spock hooked up at some point?  Because if they are, that takes a massive, fruity dump all over the character of Spock.  Yes, I know they're adopted siblings so it's technically not incest or whatever poppycock nonsensical argument might be used to defend it.  Yes, I know that sort of thing happens.  Yes, I'm sure it's a great source of drama.  Yes, in another context it might even make for a poignant story.  

But it would make absolutely no sense whatsoever to have Spock doing it.  The character of Spock has achieved an almost mythical status in pop culture.  Part of the reason for that is how consistently he's been built.  He's a likeable character.  He's a strangely relatable character, even though he eschews human emotion.  One of the reasons people started to dislike Zachary Quinto's Spock is how inconsistently the character was portrayed in Star Trek: Into Darkness.  Spock is just one of those characters you really have to be careful with when adding to his backstory.  You can change the look of the Enterprise.  You can mess with continuity.  You can even destroy planets, but do not mess with Spock.  

Now, full disclosure, Spock isn't my favorite character.  He isn't even in my top 5.  My favorites are Kirk, Worf, Garak, Quark, and Picard (in that order).  Nevertheless, I understand Spock and what his character is.  He's one of those foundation elements in Star Trek that kinda cement everything together.  Giving him a quasi-incest backstory goes against the foundation of the type of character he is and why.  Discovery is going to mess around with that just to be edgy and "mature."  Well, I see it as less "mature" and more "Look! I found the keys to my dad's liquor cabinet!" 

Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe that isn't what happens.  Maybe it's a dream or something.  I'll wait and see.

I don't know, I just cant figure out why we keep going backwards in time in the Trek Universe. I want Star Trek to go forward in time again. Show us the Federation in the 25th century. I'm tired of going back to TOS times and before, it's just overdone and I already know the the broad strokes of what's going to happen. There may be some hope for the new Picard show coming out, but we will see.

[unixknight]

1 minute ago, Midwest LDS said:

I don't know, I just cant figure out why we keep going backwards in time in the Trek Universe. I want Star Trek to go forward in time again. Show us the Federation in the 25th century. I'm tired of going back to TOS times and before, it's just overdone and I already know the the broad strokes of what's going to happen. There may be some hope for the new Picard show coming out, but we will see.

I think part of the reason was that the TNG era went a little too far in terms of the capabilities of the technology, to the point where most of the problems the crew faced were so easily solvable, that the writers had to constantly contrive plot devices to prevent its use.  (This was also  true of the original Trek, but things are way worse in the latter shows.)  They had to gradually throttle back the capabilities of 24th Century technology so they could get stories told.  Proceeding into th3 5th Century would only  make this problem worse, so the result would be basically the exact same kinds of stories told in TNG but with even MORE plot devices to handicap the tech.

"Hey! We have this new device that allows us to use the transporter to go through time!  Yay!"

"Cool!  Some super hostile alien being just invaded Omicron  Persei VIII.  We can beam back in time and stop it!"

"Ahhhhhh but no, there's a nutrino particle wavefront that's inhibiting the operation of the temporal transporter.  I guess we'll just have to deal with it the old fashioned way!"

I think that's why they have been going back in time.  Less expectations of the capabilities of the tech means less burden on the writers to build a plausible threat. 

Archer: "Let's get out of here!  Warp 9!"

Travis: "Uh, sir?  We can't go that fast."

Archer: "Ok then... Use the cargo transporter to..."

Trip: "Not invented yet, Cap'n."

Archer: "Ok, maybe we can focus the tractor beam to..."

T'Pol: "Tractor beams won't be invented for several decades yet."

Archer: "Wow... we're toast..."

[Midwest LDS]

40 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I think part of the reason was that the TNG era went a little too far in terms of the capabilities of the technology, to the point where most of the problems the crew faced were so easily solvable, that the writers had to constantly contrive plot devices to prevent its use.  (This was also  true of the original Trek, but things are way worse in the latter shows.)  They had to gradually throttle back the capabilities of 24th Century technology so they could get stories told.  Proceeding into th3 5th Century would only  make this problem worse, so the result would be basically the exact same kinds of stories told in TNG but with even MORE plot devices to handicap the tech.

"Hey! We have this new device that allows us to use the transporter to go through time!  Yay!"

"Cool!  Some super hostile alien being just invaded Omicron  Persei VIII.  We can beam back in time and stop it!"

"Ahhhhhh but no, there's a nutrino particle wavefront that's inhibiting the operation of the temporal transporter.  I guess we'll just have to deal with it the old fashioned way!"

I think that's why they have been going back in time.  Less expectations of the capabilities of the tech means less burden on the writers to build a plausible threat. 

Archer: "Let's get out of here!  Warp 9!"

Travis: "Uh, sir?  We can't go that fast."

Archer: "Ok then... Use the cargo transporter to..."

Trip: "Not invented yet, Cap'n."

Archer: "Ok, maybe we can focus the tractor beam to..."

T'Pol: "Tractor beams won't be invented for several decades yet."

Archer: "Wow... we're toast..."

Makes sense, I hadn't considered that. Although considering how good computer graphics look these days, I bet they could do it. Also it doesn't have to be 25th century they could just do post Voyager/DS9/TNG or something. In addition, while I have no problem with some darker storylines, in fact that's one reason I like DS9 so much, we meed some more optimism in Trek again. Is everything really so horrible in the future? But that's just my two cents.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Midwest LDS

[unixknight]

30 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Makes sense, I hadn't considered that. Although considering how good computer graphics look these days, I bet they could do it. Also it doesn't have to be 25th century they could just do post Voyager/DS9/TNG or something. In addition, while I have no problem with some darker storylines, in fact that's one reason I like DS9 so much, we meed some more optimism in Trek again. Is everything really so horrible in the future? But that's just my two cents.

I'd have liked to see the Captain Sulu or Captain Worf adventures get some traction.

[Midwest LDS]

31 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I'd have liked to see the Captain Sulu or Captain Worf adventures get some traction.

I agree! Worf was always one of my favorite characters, I love the stoic, honorable warrior types. Sulu was awesome too.

[NeuroTypical]

I also finally knuckled down and watched Discovery.  And now you can too, for free.

 

[unixknight]

24 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I also finally knuckled down and watched Discovery.  And now you can too, for free.

All of it?

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

49 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I also finally knuckled down and watched Discovery.  And now you can too, for free.

 

Dear Goodness. I may have to throw every star trek toy and nick nack in the trash now. Thanks alot.

 

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

23 minutes ago, unixknight said:

All of it?

How? All I see is a CBS attempt to take more of my money.

[unixknight]

9 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

How? All I see is a CBS attempt to take more of my money.

You can watch the first episode of season 2 for free on YouTube (Legit, CBS uploaded it to generate interest) but as far as I know that's all.  Would be nice if there was more.

[NeuroTypical]

Just to be clear - the only thing I watched was that musical bit about nerds.  Totally free, and worth every penny.  I don't know of any way to legitimately get around CBS AllTaxes paywall.

Edited February 7, 2019 by NeuroTypical