1. #2001
    Elemental Lord Kithelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    8,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    Haven't watched the last 2 episodes, but decided to read a review/synopsis hoping that it will motivate me to do so.

    Found out they made Burnham captain.

    I'm 100% not watching that shit.
    Makes the person who he recently deemed unfit to be first officer, captain...isn't it so logical?

    Then again these are the same morons who said the burn was caused by a kid throwing a tantrum in a nebula

    Expect more stupidity! They're experts at it!
    #WithoutRespectWeReject

  2. #2002
    Quote Originally Posted by Kithelle View Post
    Then again these are the same morons who said the burn was caused by a kid throwing a tantrum in a nebula
    It's like you people have never watched Star Trek.

    Remember when a child flew a planet to intercept the Enterprise? And all because mommy and daddy couldn't be bothered to keep an eye on him?
    Shut your goddamn mouth, Gene!

  3. #2003
    Scarab Lord Frontenac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Québec, Québec
    Posts
    4,019
    Quote Originally Posted by Spike` View Post
    Season 4 will probably more political

    1. Extracting the Dillitium from that planet
    2. Using it to reunite the planets
    3. Taking care of some local war in these away planets
    and
    4. Drama around Stamets with Burnham

    and yes, no point in Stamets now. Adira and Jett? both do the same and better than him, sorry Stamets but Burnham boyfriend has to be important/big like her
    Stamets is more relevent than ever. Now that we know a whole race who can commune with the mycellial network, Starfleet could deploy several other ships equipped with a sporedrive. Stamets is the only specialist able to train a whole new team of engineers and "sporedrivers".
    "Je vous répondrai par la bouche de mes canons!"

  4. #2004
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    I'm 99% fine with the ending of S3. My only issue is probably that they made her captain. Even then, its pretty much a "whatever" thing. I continue to enjoy Discovery.

    Apparently, S4 is going to be a bit more episodic, like the Star Trek of old, based on a random article I read the other day. Can't say I'm overly concerned with what format they take, I just want to watch something I'll enjoy. If I wanted old Star Trek, I'd watch old Star Trek /shrug
    I feel the same way too. I'd be surprised if they can keep up the quality of the first 3 seasons. But then they have noticed unsatisfactory ratings. Maybe that's the motivation.

  5. #2005
    I am Murloc! Mister K's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Under your desk
    Posts
    5,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Ara Myrr View Post
    snip
    Quite frankly, I agree with him. Not that Discovery is amazing as its trying to use the standard romance arc which are boring AF but the pacing of the originals is a bit slow. The movies where decent though (pre 2009) although I do love the new movies too. To each their own tho I guess...
    -K

  6. #2006
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister K View Post
    Quite frankly, I agree with him. Not that Discovery is amazing as its trying to use the standard romance arc which are boring AF but the pacing of the originals is a bit slow. The movies where decent though (pre 2009) although I do love the new movies too. To each their own tho I guess...
    I'm confused, what did you reply to?

  7. #2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Frontenac View Post
    Stamets is more relevent than ever. Now that we know a whole race who can commune with the mycellial network, Starfleet could deploy several other ships equipped with a sporedrive. Stamets is the only specialist able to train a whole new team of engineers and "sporedrivers".
    There are a few problems. Strong empaths like Book can use the spore drive. I imagine the Betazoids alone would do well.

    Replicating the drive might also be problematic. Even if its not, Stamets would have to be at the forefront of this.

    Lastly, the denizens of the Mycellial network might not like their realm being disrupted by widespread use of the drive. Mirror Stamets would hardly be the only unscrupulous user of subspace.

  8. #2008
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Lastly, the denizens of the Mycellial network might not like their realm being disrupted by widespread use of the drive.
    It would be interesting to see the JahSepp (canon name? idk) more involved in future disco episodes if sporedrives become more commonplace.

  9. #2009
    I am Murloc! Mister K's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Under your desk
    Posts
    5,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Ara Myrr View Post
    I'm confused, what did you reply to?
    Your image post but mods here get a bit touchy about quoting images
    -K

  10. #2010
    Quote Originally Posted by Beloren View Post
    I don't get you and people like you.. it's ALL fantasy, why do you think science fiction is often in the fantasy section? I mean, star trek has always been super unrealistic, and the science reaching at best, always, what does it matter if it is more scientific in one show or less in another, it's very far off. If you want something more realistic, you should be watching the Expanse, which lest you forget, is also FICTIONAL.

    This has pretty much always been star trek, and to most ofi t's audience, Discovery is just as fictional as TNG or Voyager
    I prefer things that have some plausibility to them, some grain of scientific truth to them - at least somewhat based on science. Take the energy source used for the warp engines, for example. It is, distilled down, a matter/anti-matter reaction which is something based on science. The only purpose dilithium crystals serve in warp engines is a way to focus the reaction. Now suddenly, somehow, they are rooted in subspace? Where the hell did that come from?

  11. #2011
    Quote Originally Posted by Ara Myrr View Post
    It would be interesting to see the JahSepp (canon name? idk) more involved in future disco episodes if sporedrives become more commonplace.
    It's Canon.

  12. #2012
    Quote Originally Posted by Spaceboytg View Post
    It's like you people have never watched Star Trek.

    Remember when a child flew a planet to intercept the Enterprise? And all because mommy and daddy couldn't be bothered to keep an eye on him?
    There's no reason to take the bad parts of previous Trek and double down on. Remember all the GREAT parts? Why not more of THOSE?

  13. #2013
    Quote Originally Posted by neocount View Post
    I prefer things that have some plausibility to them, some grain of scientific truth to them - at least somewhat based on science. Take the energy source used for the warp engines, for example. It is, distilled down, a matter/anti-matter reaction which is something based on science. The only purpose dilithium crystals serve in warp engines is a way to focus the reaction. Now suddenly, somehow, they are rooted in subspace? Where the hell did that come from?
    Dilithium has been a multidimensional crystal since the 90s if not earlier. Its part of the Hypersonic Series. Subspace is an intrinsic part of Star Trek.

    None of this is rooted in actual science.

    If you're going to talk Star Trek you should probably start with two things:
    https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/ (Canon from the shows and movies)
    https://memory-beta.fandom.com/ (Canon from other licensed material)

    Odds a bigger Trekkie has already done all the work for you.

  14. #2014
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Dilithium has been a multidimensional crystal since the 90s if not earlier. Its part of the Hypersonic Series. Subspace is an intrinsic part of Star Trek.

    None of this is rooted in actual science.

    If you're going to talk Star Trek you should probably start with two things:
    https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/ (Canon from the shows and movies)
    https://memory-beta.fandom.com/ (Canon from other licensed material)

    Odds a bigger Trekkie has already done all the work for you.
    This doesn't invalidate anything I said, lol

  15. #2015
    Season 4 predictions:

    1. Most the filler will be "rebuild the Federation" stuff that probably feel very typical Trek. I look forward to it.
    2. Michael and Saru will have a big team up moment when she is in trouble. Might be awkward too.
    3. Book and Michael get closer and it probably makes Michael do something stupid.
    4. Some new seasonal villain arises. Probably isn't happy about the Federation coming back.
    5. The seasonal villain will be cool as shit but will be vanquished in some really odd / funny / confusing way at the end.

  16. #2016
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    There's no reason to take the bad parts of previous Trek and double down on. Remember all the GREAT parts? Why not more of THOSE?
    Bad is a relative term. Even if its bad, it still happened. Failing to acknowledge that is just stupid. I remember the good parts. I can still re-watch them if I chose. Making new shows is hard especially without accidentally stealing from the 100s of previous Trek episodes. I see in DSC a show that continues to improve itself.

    My only real issue with DSC is that the staff still contains Star Wars people. I don't have an issue with a quality action-adventure show that's set in space but I would prefer that a Star Trek show not lean in that direction. I don't think I'm asking too much to not kill the bad guys.

  17. #2017
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Bad is a relative term. Even if its bad, it still happened. Failing to acknowledge that is just stupid.
    Nobody is saying the bad parts didn't happen; but bad parts in the past don't justify bad parts now, either. Yes, Star Trek had its silly moments. But that's not what ST is about, and it's not what people remember fondly about ST from the past. To take the bad moments and go "look, this used to be ST, too!" when they do derpy shit now is counterproductive, if not disingenuous.

  18. #2018
    Quote Originally Posted by neocount View Post
    This doesn't invalidate anything I said, lol
    You failed to understand how things worked and complained about it. I showed you how you can look up something. Now go do your homework.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    Nobody is saying the bad parts didn't happen; but bad parts in the past don't justify bad parts now, either. Yes, Star Trek had its silly moments. But that's not what ST is about, and it's not what people remember fondly about ST from the past. To take the bad moments and go "look, this used to be ST, too!" when they do derpy shit now is counterproductive, if not disingenuous.
    Multiple people have complained how Su'Kal blew up everything.

    Kevin Uxbridge wiped out an entire alien species in his grief.

    I consider both to be pretty good episodes of ST. So why is one "bad" and the other "good"? Even if you consider the latter to be a "bad" episode, why aren't you complaining about it with the same vigour?

  19. #2019
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Kevin Uxbridge wiped out an entire alien species in his grief.

    I consider both to be pretty good episodes of ST. So why is one "bad" and the other "good"? Even if you consider the latter to be a "bad" episode, why aren't you complaining about it with the same vigour?
    I enjoyed that TNG episode as well. The thing is, it was about people you’d never heard of, and never hear of again. It’s episodic storytelling where there are rarely if ever consequences, not connected universe and ongoing storytelling. If he had, say, wiped out the Klingons or Romulans, then we’d have a comparable scenario. It’s why the supernova that wiped out Romulus gets flack, because it’s a big issue that is poorly thought out. You want to destroy Romulus as a plot point? Fine, just do it well. You want to disable warp drive so that a ship centuries out of date is relevant? Fine, just do it well. I don’t think that is too much to ask for.

    I liken this to golden age comic storytelling, like when Superman sneezes and destroys a solar system. We can look back and have a laugh at it, even enjoy the simpler times, but we just should expect better in the storytelling now.

    Keep in mind that I generally like discovery. I can roll with a lot of things, but I personally just feel I have to roll a bit too much with Discovery.

  20. #2020
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    I consider both to be pretty good episodes of ST. So why is one "bad" and the other "good"? Even if you consider the latter to be a "bad" episode, why aren't you complaining about it with the same vigour?
    I am, personally. There's a bunch of ST episodes from the past where people did horrible things that make no sense when you think about it for two seconds. One would think they should have learned from that, rather than repeating the same mistakes in a new series. But apparently not everyone cares about it to the same extent. Fair enough, I suppose.

Posting Permissions

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