Compare and Contrast: DISCO vs the Other Treks (and Non-Treks)

[paigow]

Was the animal aboard the Glenn always like that? Or did the spores trigger a mutation in a pet dog / cat?

[starri]

2 hours ago, paigow said:

Was the animal aboard the Glenn always like that? Or did the spores trigger a mutation in a pet dog / cat?

I thought it may have crossed over from another planet/dimension. 

[starri]

I believe that was the first mention of Robert April outside of TAS.  And apparently, of all of Starfleet's greatest captains, 3/5ths were captains of an Enterprise.

Lorca captained the USS Buran at the beginning of the war, named for the Soviet version of the Space Shuttle program, which didn't fly a manned mission before the Soviet Union collapsed.  Also, if you look at pictures, there's about a 99% chance most of it was built from plans they stole from NASA.

[ottoDbusdriver]

1 hour ago, starri said:

I believe that was the first mention of Robert April outside of TAS.  And apparently, of all of Starfleet's greatest captains, 3/5ths were captains of an Enterprise.

Lorca captained the USS Buran at the beginning of the war, named for the Soviet version of the Space Shuttle program, which didn't fly a manned mission before the Soviet Union collapsed.  Also, if you look at pictures, there's about a 99% chance most of it was built from plans they stole from NASA.

So I guess that means that Lorca has only been captain of Discovery for 5 months.

[paigow]

If TNG is also canon, Humans, Klingons & Romulans share common DNA because they all came from quasi-Founder species that seeded the galaxy. Therefore, any humanoid species could channel fungus drive... 

[marinw]

At this very moment I am watching “The Trouble With Tribbles.” Now those were Klingons who knew how to insult humans. And the fight scene is delightfully choreographed.

[starri]

So, since the only senior officers we've actually gotten to know well are Paul, Lorca, and Saru, perhaps a rundown of the rest of them.

Helm: Keyla Detmer.  She of course, followed Saru from the Shenzhou.  She's apparently from Germany.

Ops:  Joann Owosekun.

Communications:  Milton Richter.  First, his name is Milton.  Secondly, he's got the squarest jaw known to man.

Tactical: Rhys.  The strikingly handsome Asian gentleman we met in the last episode.

It's kind of funny, because if this show ever does a Lower Decks episode, it would actually be about the upper decks.

[paigow]

Anybody know how Lorca killed his crew? He set auto destruct but left in an escape pod during the countdown? How was he not captured?

[LadyDot]

I have the feeling I won't be sticking with ST:Discovery very much longer.  I am already sick of Klingons.  They remind me of orcs:  all angry emotions and ugly.

[starri]

It looks like they're cordoning off the big TOS cameos into the STEU novels.  The first one Desperate Hours, was just published and is set a year before the Battle at the Binary Stars, where Georgiou has given her tactical officer Michael Burnham a try-out as her new first officer, much to the chagrin of Saru.  They have to deal with a crisis, the Enterprise shows up as well, Pike and Georgiou disagree on how to handle it, and we discover that Spock and Michael aren't really close.

The second one, Drastic Measures, is set even further back, will be published in February.  It will detail what a Lieutenant Commander Lorca and Commander Georgiou did during the famine on Tarsus IV.  Since we know Kirk survived it himself...

[paigow]

7 hours ago, starri said:

It will detail what a Lieutenant Commander Lorca and Commander Georgiou did during the famine on Tarsus IV. 

They performed Hamlet???? Thereby giving Governor Kodos his "Witness Protection"???

ETA:

• Lorca surprised everyone with his PERFECT British accent...
• From Memory Alpha site: Supply ships from Earth arrived earlier than expected, and Earth Forces found a burned body. Kodos was presumed dead, and the matter was closed.

Suffice to say Lorciou did:

(A) Crappy CSI [either by negligence or intent]

(B) The most incompetent attempt at whistle-blowing ever

Edited October 22, 2017 by paigow
Why revisit this event???

[legaleagle53]

2 hours ago, paigow said:

• Lorca surprised everyone with his PERFECT British accent...

Which would be amazing, since Jason Issac's native British accent isn't anywhere nearly as posh-sounding as Patrick Stewart's.  Jason is from Liverpool, while Patrick is from West Yorkshire, and I can immediately tell the difference between the two.  Patrick comes from working-class roots but doesn't sound like it, whereas Jason sounds every bit like the working-class Liverpudlian.

Edited October 22, 2017 by legaleagle53

[paigow]

16 hours ago, marinw said:

So it was more possible for Klingons to pass as Human... 

There was also an episode where Kirk went undercover as a Romulan...

Troi = undercover Romulan...Sisko = undercover Klingon

[marinw]

24 minutes ago, paigow said:

Troi = undercover Romulan...Sisko = undercover Klingon

Sisko was an uncover Klingon? I missed a few DS9 episodes!

[paigow]

9 hours ago, marinw said:

Sisko was an uncover Klingon? I missed a few DS9 episodes!

Apocalypse Rising - Quote from Memory Alpha recap

 Dukat stares in shock at Kira as they enter a turbolift to go to the Promenade. The two go into the station's infirmary and find O'Brien, Odo, and Sisko surgically altered to look like Klingons.

[legaleagle53]

I'm surprised they even bothered with Odo. Shapeshifters by definition can alter themselves without surgical procedures.

[Maverick]

Except this was right after the Founders locked Odo in human form. 

[paulvdb]

I remember some discussion from the episode 10 thread that speculated that the Terran Empire started with the Nazis. But in episode 12 Georgiou said: "Equality. Freedom. Cooperation. Delusions that Terrans shed millennia ago." And she also has additional Latin names, one of them Augustus which is a title used by Roman emperors. This would indicate that the Terran Empire is a continuation of a Roman Empire that never fell in the mirror universe. Or at least that history in the mirror universe started diverging from ours during that time and that the Terran Empire drew some inspiration from the Romans.

[paigow]

In the Mirror Universe, Edith Keeler was saved by McCoy. Her descendants continued to preach pacifism and the Empire easily expanded over the centuries...

[Bongo Fury]

6 hours ago, paigow said:

In the Mirror Universe, Edith Keeler was saved by McCoy. Her descendants continued to preach pacifism and the Empire easily expanded over the centuries...

While I've been a fan of ST since it originally aired in the 60s I haven't followed the minutiae as closely as a lot of the folks here. So please indulge a clarification question:

Is it: "in THE Mirror Universe ..." or "in A Mirror Universe ..."?

[paigow]

1 minute ago, Bongo Fury said:

While I've been a fan of ST since it originally aired in the 60s I haven't followed the minutiae as closely as a lot of the folks here. So please indulge a clarification question:

Is it: "in THE Mirror Universe ..." or "in A Mirror Universe ..."?

Technically, A Mirror Universe is correct, but canon keeps bringing us to THE same one every time. So it is THE only known Mirror Universe....

[BruceAE]

So the current ‘Klingons have basically won and we have awesome fungus drive’ plot still seems to tread on the canon a fair amount - although the war with the Klingons would explain how hostile the old guard is with each other in Star Trek VI.

 

I dunno - I still wonder if Timey-Wimey shenanigans will be the tool used to correct canon and the timeline.  After all, the spire drive pushed them forward in time - no reason it can’t go back.

[starri]

7 hours ago, BruceAE said:

So the current ‘Klingons have basically won and we have awesome fungus drive’ plot still seems to tread on the canon a fair amount - although the war with the Klingons would explain how hostile the old guard is with each other in Star Trek VI.

Some of the material being used is backstory that was created for TUC.  I actually think it puts the conspirators' attitude into a lot of context, since Cartwright and Chang both would have been young soldiers during the war.

[paigow]

6 hours ago, starri said:

Some of the material being used is backstory that was created for TUC.  I actually think it puts the conspirators' attitude into a lot of context, since Cartwright and Chang both would have been young soldiers during the war.

For the movies to make any sense, Prime!Kirk must impregnate Carol Marcus. If David Marcus is never born, Kirk would not hate Klingons with the same intensity. So, the timeline must be reset so Carol Marcus meets Jim Kirk at the Enchantment Under The Sea dance.....[She might have been killed and eaten at Starbase 1 in this timeline]

[Pindrop]

This show suffers from the same issue as the new Star Trek films, the new Star Wars films, the new Ghostbusters, and many other modern remakes: - 

Essentially they think that nostalgia is enough alone; that naming things people recognise from their youth somehow exempts them from actually understanding what made the original versions so compelling.  

Edited February 21, 2018 by Pindrop

[Unusual Suspect]

So, had a strange thought, but it seems to me that we see less of Discovery's crew during their down-time. Obviously, we've had things like the party in Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad, Burnham and Tilly's morning run ...

But when I compare Discovery to TNG, where we had Ten-Forward, Data's poetry. Various episodes of crew members on vacation. Heck, all the holodeck episodes across TNG, DS9 and VOY.

I guess that leads to the question: Is Discovery the hardest working ship in all the Trek series?

[starri]

It may just be a function of not having the need for filler episodes.  You need to pack the story tighter when you only have 13 episodes.

That's a good or a bad thing, I suppose.  You don't get "Lower Decks," but you don't get "Spirit Folk" either.

[marinw]

I like the Anson Mount Pike once I hand-wave away the massive Retconning. The Jeffery Hunter Pike was portrayed in The Cage as overwhelmed by the burden of command and a little angsty. Chris Pike was a tragic figure once you factor in the accident trying to save those cadets. STD’d Pike is relaxed and confident.

[Unusual Suspect]

17 hours ago, marinw said:

I like the Anson Mount Pike once I hand-wave away the massive Retconning. The Jeffery Hunter Pike was portrayed in The Cage as overwhelmed by the burden of command and a little angsty. Chris Pike was a tragic figure once you factor in the accident trying to save those cadets. STD’d Pike is relaxed and confident.

Discovery takes place after "The Cage", and while it's been awhile since I've watched it, I thought Pike came out of that adventure revitalized.

[starri]

Just now, Unusual Suspect said:

Discovery takes place after "The Cage", and while it's been awhile since I've watched it, I thought Pike came out of that adventure revitalized.

Yeah, that was "How Pike Got His Groove Back."

[marinw]

1 hour ago, starri said:

1 hour ago, Unusual Suspect said:

Discovery takes place after "The Cage", and while it's been awhile since I've watched it, I thought Pike came out of that adventure revitalized.

Yeah, that was "How Pike Got His Groove Back."

I stand corrected! Spock was a little more Emo is "The Cage" IIRC.

I'm looking forward to meeting Number One.

[marinw]

I think the late Majel Barrett-Roddenberry would have enjoyed  Rebecca Romijn's new interpretation of the iconic Number One  In 1964, a female First Officer was too much for the Networks to handle.

Edited February 10, 2019 by marinw

[starri]

I do too.

[TV Anonymous]

On 6/24/2017 at 12:56 AM, legaleagle53 said:

That sound you hear is Gene Roddenberry spinning in his grave.

Sorry for the very late reply but Roddenberry can not be spinning. He was cremated and some of his ashes were sent to space.

[legaleagle53]

33 minutes ago, TV Anonymous said:

Sorry for the very late reply but Roddenberry can not be spinning. He was cremated and some of his ashes were sent to space.

Which, of course, entirely misses the point of my post. My point is that he'd be horrified as to what has become of his vision.  I do think, however, that he'd be a huge fan of The Orville as being much closer in spirit to what he had in mind for "Wagon Train to the Stars," as he once called Star Trek.

[mattromano]

And why ,oh why are not any ships from Disco to Voyager using a spore drive?? No one has ever said, "boy, that spore drive would come in handy now", "too bad it blew up a galaxy a long time ago". I read somewhere that Pike, being a fleet Admiral chose to downgrade all communications (which is why Kirk doesnt speak with holograms). Seems the security was lacking so fleet Admiral Pike made this and other changes. I dont think he had the power to outlaw the spore drive. That would be the equivalent of outlawing warp drive. As I have said before, Discovery and everything about it will be erased from existence. So just enjoy!!

[meatball77]

You would have thought that Voyager would be looking for some mushrooms or working on a spore drive when they were stuck out in the Gamma Quadrant.  Better than helping out the Borg. . . .   

[LJones41]

I didn't like "Star Trek" when I first saw the reruns as a kid.  It took the 1980s movies for me to appreciate them.  Somewhat.  But even after all of these years, I don't have a high opinion of them in compare to the other shows.  And after years of watching the Trek franchise, I really wish that Gene Roddenberry had never created this rule that Humans have evolved in a space of 200 to 300 years.  I find that illogical and in the end, I suspect that it proved to be a hamper to all future Trek shows.  Also, I was not impressed by the series' third season.  I'm still not.  The writing for "The Original Series" seemed to spiral into a decline by this last season.

It was easier for me to watch "Star Trek: Next Generation" . . . at least for several seasons.  I don't really like Season One that much.  Otherwise, I enjoyed the show.  But I found Jean-Luc Picard and his crew a little hard to swallow at times.  like "The Original Series", I believe that "Next Generation" went a bit overboard in presenting Humanity as evolved.  And I found it difficult to keep up with the last two seasons of the series.  Like the first season, I was not that impressed by it.  And I think some of the episodes, like "Chain of Command", were vastly overrated.

I had started watching "Star Trek Deep Space Nine" on a regular basis . . . at least during its first two seasons.  Then I stopped and became bored with the show.  It took me several years to watch it on a daily basis.  I thought the series had the potential to be the best.  But I noticed a few things.  One, it reminded me too much of "Babylon 5".  When I heard of the accusations that it had plagiarized the latter show, I was inclined to believe those accusations.  I still do.  More importantly, I think "Babylon 5" was able to take its ambiguity a lot further than "Deep Space Nine" was willing to.  And once the series went into the Dominion War . . . I found it increasingly difficult to stay with the series.  There were aspects of that arc that I enjoyed.  There were other aspects that I found frustrating . . . especially the early Season Six arc about the Dominion's occupation of the station.  I was also frustrated by the transformation of Gul Dukat from a multi-complex villain to a one-dimensional antagonist by late Season Six.  I don't think "Deep Space Nine" really lived up to its potential.

I had avoided "Star Trek Voyager" like the plague for several years.  I heard that it was awful and considering my struggles to keep up with "Next Generation" and "Deep Space Nine", I simply did not want to bother.  But during the beginning of the series' early Season Five, my sister convinced me to watch the show . . . and I became hooked.  In fact, while watching Season Five, I began watching the show's earlier seasons on Syndication.  And I became even more of a fan.  "Voyager", like the other shows, had its flaws.  I'm not a fan of Season One, aside from a few episodes.  It seemed too much like "Next Generation".  But once the series stopped trying to portray its characters like ideal Starfleet officers (aside from a few), and it delved into its own brand of craziness and ambiguity, I really enjoyed the show.  Aside from Season One, I'm not a fan of Season Six.  There were a few really good episodes, but it seemed like it was going through the motions.  It least to me.  On the other hand, I really enjoyed Season Seven and especially the series finale.

I tried to enjoy "Enterprise".  I really tried to embrace this show.  I did not mind that it was set right before the creation of the Federation . . . in the mid 22nd century.  I enjoyed the relationship between T'Pol and Trip Tucker.  I also liked the Dr. Phlox character.  There were a handful of episodes that I enjoyed.  I really enjoyed the Xindi story arc of Season Three, but I hated how it ended with the ship being thrown back into Earth's past.  I loathed Season Four, but loved the Mirror Universe two-part episode, "In a Mirror, Darkly".  To this day, I think it's one of the best Trek episodes I have seen.  But overall, I'm not a fan of this show.

I had heard so much negative aspects of "Star Trek Discovery" that I was inclined not to bother watching it.  But I bought a television that allowed me streaming . . . and I watched it.  And loved it.  It was in serialized form from Day One.  Most of the characters were very ambiguous.  I also loved how it set up the antagonism between the Federation and the Klingon Empire.  I do wish that Michael Burnham had served as Discovery's commanding officer.  On the other hand, if that had happened, I would have never been able to enjoy her tale regarding the Federation-Klingon War or the Mirror Universe arc.  Unfortunately, too many fans seemed put off by the fact that Sonequa Martin-Green was the show's leading actress and started making demands for more "traditional Trek".  And there were fans demanding that the show connect to the other Trek shows when it was UNNECESSARY to do so, when it was in its early season.  Worse, the show runners listened to these idiot fans and gave us Season Two.  I didn't hate it.  But there were aspects of it that I disliked - mainly the presence of a very dull Christopher Pike (who practically reeked of a traditional Trek leading man), which I felt was so unnecessary and the Season Two finale which drastically pushed the series into another direction . . . when it was unnecessary to do so.  I have no final feelings about "Discovery".  So . . . I don't know.

My two favorite shows so far are "Deep Space Nine" and "Voyager".  I'm not claiming that they are the best of the franchise.  There is no best, as far as I'm concerned.  But they are simply my two favorites.

Edited April 23, 2019 by LJones41

[chaifan]

Somewhat late to the game here.  I signed up for a free month of cbs all access to watch Picard, and then decided to give Discovery a try while it's still free.  I hadn't heard great things about it when it premiered, so never thought I was missing much.  After watching Season 1, here's my overall review: 

Discovery makes for a really good sci fi outerspace show, but it doesn't make for good Star Trek.  I wish they had just decided to make it an entire new show, wholly unrelated to Trek.  This would have given them full freedom to have a high tech ship, bald spine-headed cannibalistic slow speaking bad guy aliens, spore drive, female Captains, etc., without having to either pretend we aren't noticing these weird things that never existed in the Trek-verse before, or somehow (badly) explaining them.  There are great ideas here, and they're trying (unsuccessfully, in my opinion) to shoehorn it into Trek canon.

I found the more I ignored that this was Trek the more I enjoyed the show.  If I started thinking about Trek stuff, it annoyed me and took me out of the show.  I really like Burnham, Saru and Tilly.  And Stamets, too.  (It took me a while to figure out who he reminded me of, but then it hit me - Alan Tudyk.)  I love that a sci fi show based on a starship doesn't really revolve around the Captain.   But none of this had to be Trek.  I think this could have succeeded just as much, if not more, if they had made it a whole new show.  And they wouldn't be stuck with 40 years of canon. 

So, I'd rate it a solid 8.5 to 9 for sci fi.  But probably a 6 to 7 for Trek. 

[KimberStormer]

On 11/27/2020 at 8:01 AM, Kromm said:

Kirk was the end all be all focus of most TOS plot lines, the one the show bent itself into a pretzel to align with everything. So there's a history from the beginning. 

I simply do not agree with this at all.  How often was the episode about Kirk because he was Kirk specifically?  Almost never.  I can think of "The Conscience of the King", which was about Kirk being able to maybe identify the architect of a genocide he survived; "Obsession", which was about him re-encountering an alien which killed his previous crew; "Court Martial", which was him getting framed for an old grudge, and that's about all I can think of.  There were plenty of episodes about Spock-qua-Spock!  Spock's Brain, Amok Time, Journey to Babel...  And the movies were a sort of ping-pong between being plots based on Kirk and based on Spock: Wrath of Khan is about Kirk, Search for Spock is about Spock, Final Frontier is about Spock, Undiscovered Country is about Kirk.  But the episodes of the show were almost always about some external plot, which then Kirk, Spock, and the rest act to resolve.  For example, in A Taste of Armageddon, the planet has a simulated war, that then the citizens are required to submit to die for.  This has nothing to do with Kirk.  They didn't set this up because of him.  The people of the planet don't base their actions on Kirk.  There's no weird revelatory moment where he gets a sign from an angel because he's Kirk, or the president of the planet turns out to have created the planet's system from a desire to please him.  He blows up their computer and forces them to stop simulating war not because someone tells him "this is all about you, Jim!  Only you can fix it!"  He does it because of his character and his ideals; that's not the show bending itself into a pretzel for him, it's him being a proactive character in a drama.

Whereas with Michael it's rarely what she does but who she is that counts -- and the "who she is" that counts is rarely based on anything except "she's the protagonist".  Like Lorca goes and grabs her and puts her on Discovery in the first place because he's in love with Mirror Michael.  Empress Georgiou joins the team because she loves Mirror Michael.  Michael Prime had nothing to do with either of these things, it's based entirely on Who She Is.  And it only gets worse in the second season, with everything revolving around Michael because of her mom, not because of any action she's taken, and because of Spock being her brother, not because of any action she's taken.  Just for who she is and not what she does.  Which makes it twice as unlike the original series, when the scenario was based neither on Who Kirk Is or What Kirk Does but is, as I say, external.  And it's the same kind of thing with nonsense like "Michael, only you can help Adira understand her Trill nature" or "Michael, only you can make this guy from Nhan's species understand his family is dead."  The old show and movies often went to the "Only the Enterprise can save the day" but not because it was the Enterprise, but because it was the only ship in the quadrant or whatever.  Michael is patently not the only Starfleet officer in the quadrant, she's literally right there with other people better qualified than her to do these things, but she must do them Because Michael.

Nobody objects to the show having a hero.  It's the weird bending lens where no matter which direction you look Michael is always there, like she's the only person in the entire universe.  It doesn't have anything to do with Mary Sue, just amateur writing of the Dipshit Chosen One variety where stuff happens and the hero is just the hero because he's the hero, not because he takes any actions or makes any choices but because the author writes it around him.

[ADRz]

On 4/23/2019 at 1:52 PM, LJones41 said:

I had heard so much negative aspects of "Star Trek Discovery" that I was inclined not to bother watching it.  But I bought a television that allowed me streaming . . . and I watched it.  And loved it.  It was in serialized form from Day One.  Most of the characters were very ambiguous.  I also loved how it set up the antagonism between the Federation and the Klingon Empire.  I do wish that Michael Burnham had served as Discovery's commanding officer.  On the other hand, if that had happened, I would have never been able to enjoy her tale regarding the Federation-Klingon War or the Mirror Universe arc.  Unfortunately, too many fans seemed put off by the fact that Sonequa Martin-Green was the show's leading actress and started making demands for more "traditional Trek".  And there were fans demanding that the show connect to the other Trek shows when it was UNNECESSARY to do so, when it was in its early season.  Worse, the show runners listened to these idiot fans and gave us Season Two.  I didn't hate it.  But there were aspects of it that I disliked - mainly the presence of a very dull Christopher Pike (who practically reeked of a traditional Trek leading man), which I felt was so unnecessary and the Season Two finale which drastically pushed the series into another direction . . . when it was unnecessary to do so.  I have no final feelings about "Discovery".  So . . . I don't know.

 

I dislike "Star Trek Discovery".  Not intensely, but I do.  It is an exceedingly badly written show.  Season 3 was totally bad.  I was not certain if I were watching a sci-fi show or something out of the romance channel.  The show leans heavily of "wokeness".  It would have been OK if the stories were excellently written, but most were soporific.  The show writers do not know a good story even if it hits them over the head.  This thing is bad, really bad!!

[ADRz]

On 11/25/2020 at 1:51 PM, chaifan said:

Somewhat late to the game here.  I signed up for a free month of cbs all access to watch Picard, and then decided to give Discovery a try while it's still free.  I hadn't heard great things about it when it premiered, so never thought I was missing much.  After watching Season 1, here's my overall review: 

Discovery makes for a really good sci fi outerspace show, but it doesn't make for good Star Trek.  I wish they had just decided to make it an entire new show, wholly unrelated to Trek.  This would have given them full freedom to have a high tech ship, bald spine-headed cannibalistic slow speaking bad guy aliens, spore drive, female Captains, etc., without having to either pretend we aren't noticing these weird things that never existed in the Trek-verse before, or somehow (badly) explaining them.  There are great ideas here, and they're trying (unsuccessfully, in my opinion) to shoehorn it into Trek canon.

I found the more I ignored that this was Trek the more I enjoyed the show.  If I started thinking about Trek stuff, it annoyed me and took me out of the show.  I really like Burnham, Saru and Tilly.  And Stamets, too.  (It took me a while to figure out who he reminded me of, but then it hit me - Alan Tudyk.)  I love that a sci fi show based on a starship doesn't really revolve around the Captain.   But none of this had to be Trek.  I think this could have succeeded just as much, if not more, if they had made it a whole new show.  And they wouldn't be stuck with 40 years of canon. 

So, I'd rate it a solid 8.5 to 9 for sci fi.  But probably a 6 to 7 for Trek. 

Unfortunately, I do not agree.  I think that this show has been dreadful, from beginning to end.  Never mind the outrageous wokeness, one expects this of Hollywood nowadays.  It is their new creed.  The stuff that makes a sci-fi story compelling were all missing.  it was all about feeling and relationships.  I was not sure if I were watching something out of the Romance network or a Trek series.  There is the sanctimonious Burham (who is the center of everything), the "wet" Saru (who gets to be a baby sitter at the end), the silly Tilly which, in a full wokeness story is elevated to 2nd in command, and many other characters who are, if not outright ridiculous, they are poorly outlined.  I would call the show "Romance in the Universe" and leave it at that. 

[chaifan]

On 2/26/2021 at 8:19 PM, ADRz said:

Unfortunately, I do not agree.  I think that this show has been dreadful, from beginning to end.  Never mind the outrageous wokeness, one expects this of Hollywood nowadays.  It is their new creed.  The stuff that makes a sci-fi story compelling were all missing.  it was all about feeling and relationships.  I was not sure if I were watching something out of the Romance network or a Trek series.  There is the sanctimonious Burham (who is the center of everything), the "wet" Saru (who gets to be a baby sitter at the end), the silly Tilly which, in a full wokeness story is elevated to 2nd in command, and many other characters who are, if not outright ridiculous, they are poorly outlined.  I would call the show "Romance in the Universe" and leave it at that. 

I think it's unfair to criticize Star Trek for "outrageous wokeness".  Consider that the original Star Trek, which aired over 50 years ago, purposely had a bridge crew representing all major races, had various episodes dealing with racial or sexual equity issues, and dared to show an interracial kiss (Uhura and Kirk) in an era where many networks (mostly in the southern US) refused to even air that episode.  Roddenberry did this quite purposely, as commentary on social issues of the day.  Fast forward 20 years to TNG, and they added in multiple plot lines dealing with gay/bi/asexual characters.  Again, this is in the 80's, when shows like LA Law were being boycotted fro having a lesbian character kiss her girlfriend.  Star Trek, like many sci fi shows, aim to show a world with true equality of races, sexes, genders, etc. 

[ADRz]

On 2/28/2021 at 10:14 AM, chaifan said:

I think it's unfair to criticize Star Trek for "outrageous wokeness".  Consider that the original Star Trek, which aired over 50 years ago, purposely had a bridge crew representing all major races, had various episodes dealing with racial or sexual equity issues, and dared to show an interracial kiss (Uhura and Kirk) in an era where many networks (mostly in the southern US) refused to even air that episode.  Roddenberry did this quite purposely, as commentary on social issues of the day.  Fast forward 20 years to TNG, and they added in multiple plot lines dealing with gay/bi/asexual characters.  Again, this is in the 80's, when shows like LA Law were being boycotted fro having a lesbian character kiss her girlfriend.  Star Trek, like many sci fi shows, aim to show a world with true equality of races, sexes, genders, etc. 

I did not criticize the whole of Star Trek for "outrageous wokeness".  I criticized "Star Trek: Discovery" specifically for it.  In fact, the wokeness of this show has undermined so badly, as to be barely watchable...and I love Trek.  It is OK to include wokeness as part of a story line.  Yes, many Star Trek episodes were morality plays.  But various elements supported a story line that made sense.  Not so with "Star Trek: Discovery".  The wokeness is palpable.  Virtually all baddies are men, the main character (around who the whole story revolves) is a black woman, the crew is mostly women and homosexual men or weird sexual persons/hermaphrodites and their exploits/interest take over the story line instead of just being an element in the story line.  It is OK to have such elements as part of an involved story line, but when they are the center of the show, I am not sure that I am watching something straight of the Romance Channel or a "Star Trek" show.  It is so busy trying to make a comment on the current situation that forgets what it is all about.

Overall, I think that the wokeness pendulum has swung all the way to the "incredible" side.  Now, all super-heroines must be women and all plots should include gay couples or gay persons.  It is getting out of hand.  It is so loud, it defeats the message.  Just my opinion.  I like a good story line; if that includes some woke elements, well fine.  But when the whole story is to promote the woke elements, I draw the line!

[starri]

Hey Guys--

Just a few comments.  It's absolutely okay to discuss Star Trek's approach to social issues, but this is a sensitive area for a lot of people, and so I request that you keep the Be Civil Prime Directive in mind.

On a related note, given Disco's introduction of Star Trek's first transgender and non-binary characters, I would ask that you familiarize yourselves with the GLAAD Media Reference Guide, which is the tool Primetimer uses when talking about issue of gender identity and sexual orientation.

Please PM me if you have any questions.

[loriedaisy]

When Ssrek and Picard mind melded, didn't Picard learn of the USS Discovery?