Page 93 of 110 FirstFirst ...
43
83
91
92
93
94
95
103
... LastLast
  1. #1841
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post

    It's not an alternate timeline. It's hundreds of years in the future (beyond Picard/Sisko/Janeway/etc).
    I dunno fam, when those series wnent into the future there was no Burn and no missing Dilithium fam.

  2. #1842
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorrowseer View Post
    I dunno fam, when those series went into the future there was no Burn and no missing Dilithium fam.
    The only time they traveled past the 29th century was in ENT, it was the 31st century and Earth was in ruins due to a messed up timeline, but Discovery takes place in the 32nd century
    All right, gentlemen, let's review. The year is 2020 - that's two-zero-two-zero, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of masked sissies.

  3. #1843
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorrowseer View Post
    I dunno fam, when those series wnent into the future there was no Burn and no missing Dilithium fam.
    None of them have gone this far into the future, as far as I remember.

  4. #1844
    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    The only time they traveled past the 29th century was in ENT, it was the 31st century and Earth was in ruins due to a messed up timeline, but Discovery takes place in the 32nd century
    While true the 'Burn' happened long before that time.

  5. #1845
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorrowseer View Post
    While true the 'Burn' happened long before that time.
    The burn happened in 3069. Temporal war obviously preceded it, maybe even caused it.
    Do you really think the producers of the show are that stupid to add an event that doesn't fit into the Star Trek timeline?

    Go pick something else to pick on. There's plenty to chose from. But the Burn is not it.

    Even though it was Michael who Burnt the ham.
    All right, gentlemen, let's review. The year is 2020 - that's two-zero-two-zero, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of masked sissies.

  6. #1846
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorrowseer View Post
    This is an alternate timeline though, hence the 'Burn' and such or am I wrong? Given your username surely you know
    The show is now in the future of previously established continuity with no competing continuity so therefore there are no other timelines to be alternate to, this is the timeline as far as canon goes. That's before I even get into how alternate timelines and timetravel are lazy as fuck excuses to stamp over continuity because you can't be arsed to check.

    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    So what's the assertion here? That there's no possible way something could have happened to their culture and/or physiology in the 800 years since the events in DS9 and that episode of Discovery? Was the change to the hosts' appearance between TNG and DS9 equally a slap in the face?
    I think Roddenberry himself said something along the lines of "They always looked that way, you just couldn't see it yet" when explaining the Klingon change. So makeup changes aren't continuity gaffes, especially when the actor has such sensitive skin she couldn't be in the original makeup anyway. So basically, visual changes don't matter, especially when it has no effect on the story.

  7. #1847
    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    I think Roddenberry himself said something along the lines of "They always looked that way, you just couldn't see it yet" when explaining the Klingon change. So makeup changes aren't continuity gaffes, especially when the actor has such sensitive skin she couldn't be in the original makeup anyway. So basically, visual changes don't matter, especially when it has no effect on the story.
    TOS Klingons and TNG Klingons are basically the same. TNG Trill and DS9 Trill are not. For DS9 they took the opportunity to greatly flesh out the Trill and their symbionts including make them much more widespread than "The Host" episode initially implied.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by tmamass View Post
    sje lost that rank when she went to prison and has since then NOT be reinstated!
    Burnham's rank of Commander was reinstated at the end of the Season 1. Like Spock she serves as Science Officer and Executive Officer (ie First Officer).

    Quote Originally Posted by tmamass View Post
    Watch TOS, TNG, DS9 and Enterprise and you see what PROPER Star Trek looks like
    Why you no like Voyager?!?!!

  8. #1848
    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    The show is now in the future of previously established continuity with no competing continuity so therefore there are no other timelines to be alternate to, this is the timeline as far as canon goes. That's before I even get into how alternate timelines and timetravel are lazy as fuck excuses to stamp over continuity because you can't be arsed to check.

    I guess the other ting is, natural actions, as in, will you remember a case from few centuries ago? nah.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Elim Garak View Post
    The burn happened in 3069. Temporal war obviously preceded it, maybe even caused it.
    Do you really think the producers of the show are that stupid to add an event that doesn't fit into the Star Trek timeline?

    Go pick something else to pick on. There's plenty to chose from. But the Burn is not it.

    Even though it was Michael who Burnt the ham.
    If it was an alterate timeline then no they would not be stupid, calm your pants, I did say in my very first post 'or am i wrong', i didn't truly know I just thought that was the case, I am happy to know now, as it not being an alternate future means the chances of them actually go back to their original timeline is greatly reduced!

  9. #1849
    I am Murloc! Mister K's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Under your desk
    Posts
    5,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Swnem View Post
    This series gets better with each season.

    If you are wondering give it a go, don't listen to the haters.

    It's been sweet to watch great star trek and great star wars in the same day. ^^
    I like it a lot too. Sure you can say its the "Burnham" show but do I care? Not really, still like the exploration and some topics they cover (the whole consciousness merge was super interesting).
    -K

  10. #1850
    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    I think Roddenberry himself said something along the lines of "They always looked that way, you just couldn't see it yet" when explaining the Klingon change. So makeup changes aren't continuity gaffes, especially when the actor has such sensitive skin she couldn't be in the original makeup anyway. So basically, visual changes don't matter, especially when it has no effect on the story.


    They literally bring up the Klingon's difference in appearance in DS9...and have an entire story arc dedicated to it in ENT. I don't know how you're possibly going to just handwave away appearance changes like this while also pretending that what amounts to a retcon at worst (seeing as it could just as easily be explained by...you know...the passage of time) is this huge deal.

  11. #1851
    Scarab Lord Frontenac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Québec, Québec
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    TOS Klingons and TNG Klingons are basically the same. TNG Trill and DS9 Trill are not. For DS9 they took the opportunity to greatly flesh out the Trill and their symbionts including make them much more widespread than "The Host" episode initially implied.
    TMP Klingons and TNG Klingons are basically the same. TOS and TNG Klingons are quite different, both in appearance and behaviour. Personally, I wish Enterprise's writers followed Roddenberry's opinion and did not try to explain the differences between the two.
    "Je vous répondrai par la bouche de mes canons!"

  12. #1852
    Quote Originally Posted by Frontenac View Post
    Personally, I wish Enterprise's writers followed Roddenberry's opinion and did not try to explain the differences between the two.
    Well, yeah. They should have just left it at the tongue-in-cheek "we don't talk about that." But then again, the Matrix should have left it with "I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end, I came here to tell you how it's going to begin" thing after the first movie...and yet here we are, with another sequel on the way. Studios just can't help themselves.

  13. #1853
    The Lightbringer Shakadam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    3,200
    My main gripe about this show is that they either need to give some serious backstory and story arcs to the rest of the bridge crew, or they need to ignore them completely. As it is now they get some lines and camera time here and there but it all comes across really cringe worthy because you don't give a shit about them, because you have no idea who they are. Seriously I've watched all episodes this far and apart from the main characters and the pilot, Detmer, I have no idea what the rest are even named.

  14. #1854
    Quote Originally Posted by Shakadam View Post
    My main gripe about this show is that they either need to give some serious backstory and story arcs to the rest of the bridge crew, or they need to ignore them completely.
    It is a problem. We're supposed to care when people like Nhan leave the ship, or when Airiam gets spaced, but we don't...because the rest of the crew (aside from Tilly and Stamets) are just props at the moment. That's why I have such a big problem with Burnham being the center of everything. Because they don't bother fleshing anyone else out.

  15. #1855
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post


    They literally bring up the Klingon's difference in appearance in DS9...and have an entire story arc dedicated to it in ENT. I don't know how you're possibly going to just handwave away appearance changes like this while also pretending that what amounts to a retcon at worst (seeing as it could just as easily be explained by...you know...the passage of time) is this huge deal.
    They made a joke about it in a comedy episode. And bringing up ENT in a continuity debate is pretty funny, ngl. Visual changes as a result of advancing visual and practical effects can be forgiven, I mean if Discovery used TOS control panels and such it'd be pretty funny and kind of goofy, I can see why they wouldn't. But referencing canon and then ignoring canon when it suits you is just insulting. It's like if they said "Hey, remember Kirk?" and then "No human has ever met a Gorn, let alone fought one!"

  16. #1856
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    It is a problem. We're supposed to care when people like Nhan leave the ship, or when Airiam gets spaced, but we don't...because the rest of the crew (aside from Tilly and Stamets) are just props at the moment. That's why I have such a big problem with Burnham being the center of everything. Because they don't bother fleshing anyone else out.
    It's not their fault they didn't have color differentiation in their uniforms back then, all those people we don't care about are literally red shirts
    All right, gentlemen, let's review. The year is 2020 - that's two-zero-two-zero, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of masked sissies.

  17. #1857
    Quote Originally Posted by Shakadam View Post
    My main gripe about this show is that they either need to give some serious backstory and story arcs to the rest of the bridge crew, or they need to ignore them completely. As it is now they get some lines and camera time here and there but it all comes across really cringe worthy because you don't give a shit about them, because you have no idea who they are. Seriously I've watched all episodes this far and apart from the main characters and the pilot, Detmer, I have no idea what the rest are even named.
    The pilot's having some sort of implant brain malfunction which apparently just makes her an asshole (although I don't blame anyone for not noticing seeing is how it's literally the only character trait of everyone not name Saru). That's a development. They also have names now that people actually use in the show, so yeah...
    Tonight for me is a special day. I want to go outside of the house of the girl I like with a gasoline barrel and write her name on the road and set it on fire and tell her to get out too see it (is this illegal)?

  18. #1858
    At this point Burnham being part of any hierarchical command structure is just a bad joke...

    "Sir, I promise i'll do better in the future"

    Next episode: "Fuck it, YOLO."

  19. #1859
    Scarab Lord Frontenac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Québec, Québec
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Ara Myrr View Post
    At this point Burnham being part of any hierarchical command structure is just a bad joke...

    "Sir, I promise i'll do better in the future"

    Next episode: "Fuck it, YOLO."
    Well, there's a hint at the end of the last episode that she might resign.
    "Je vous répondrai par la bouche de mes canons!"

  20. #1860
    Quote Originally Posted by Frontenac View Post
    Well, there's a hint at the end of the last episode that she might resign.
    hm, possibly, didn't get that impression though.

    If she did though, how would the show proceed? She's at the center of nearly every episode.

    They could theoretically have Burnham, Booker & Phillipa crew up and turn that into the section 31 spinoff.

    Saru and the crew of Discovery could then follow are more traditional 'trek' setting of rebuilding Starfleet in this future.

    Won't happen but i'd be on board for that tbh.

Posting Permissions

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