Page 91 of 115 FirstFirst ...
41
81
89
90
91
92
93
101
... LastLast
  1. #1801
    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    Secondly, DS9 established way more Trill can be hosts then they officially let on because the symbiotes are scarce and they don't want them to be a commodity. Fuck this show, really. I hate being punished for being a fan.
    Yeah, the whole not having enough hosts thing was weird and pointless. I assume it was just a quick and easy way for the 'crew' (lol Burnham) to save the day and why Trill needs the federation.
    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)?

  2. #1802
    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. ^^

  3. #1803
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Epic Premium
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    45,579
    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    The whole trill thing was the final slap in the face for fans of continuity like me and was when I finally decided to quit the show. Firstly, Riker was the first human host of a Trill symbiote, didn't have any mental issues with it, just physical. Secondly, DS9 established way more Trill can be hosts then they officially let on because the symbiotes are scarce and they don't want them to be a commodity. Fuck this show, really. I hate being punished for being a fan.
    I don't think Riker was accorded as the first human host of a Trill symbiote because while he could carry one (Odan), he couldn't do so long-term as the human immune system appeared to reject the symbiote over time - eventually it would've killed them both. Adira is somehow able to host Tal long term, apparently. As for the whole host/symbiote deal, I thought it was supposed to be something of an ironic reversal. Originally as you said in DS9, there was the whole conspiracy with the Trill creating a kind of false scarcity of viable Trill hosts when in actually many hosts could be joined successfully, presumably to keep the status of joined host elite in some way. But now the situation is reversed with majority of joinable hosts having been devastated and the Trill seemingly on the verge of extinction.
    Last edited by Aucald; 2020-11-15 at 02:51 AM.
    "We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." ― Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead

  4. #1804
    So I am curious if anyone knows, are they planning to stay and integrate in this future timeline or is this all a passing oddysey as they 'find a way home' aka back to their timeline then zap 'Control'. As i always felt their response to control was treating the symptoms not the problem, that is to say, blowing it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    The whole trill thing was the final slap in the face for fans of continuity like me and was when I finally decided to quit the show. Firstly, Riker was the first human host of a Trill symbiote, didn't have any mental issues with it, just physical. Secondly, DS9 established way more Trill can be hosts then they officially let on because the symbiotes are scarce and they don't want them to be a commodity. Fuck this show, really. I hate being punished for being a fan.
    This is an alternate timeline though, hence the 'Burn' and such or am I wrong? Given your username surely you know

  5. #1805
    Quote Originally Posted by Factcheck View Post
    Secondly, DS9 established way more Trill can be hosts then they officially let on because the symbiotes are scarce and they don't want them to be a commodity. Fuck this show, really. I hate being punished for being a fan.
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorrowseer View Post
    So I am curious if anyone knows, are they planning to stay and integrate in this future timeline or is this all a passing oddysey as they 'find a way home' aka back to their timeline then zap 'Control'. As i always felt their response to control was treating the symptoms not the problem, that is to say, blowing it up.
    I'm not the type of person who likes to go digging into shows that are still running like this, so I have no idea if they've said something to this effect in interviews. But they've given no in-universe indication that they're looking for a way back to their time. It would defeat the purpose of the sacrifice in the first place...unless they found a way to do it without the ship.

    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
    It's not an alternate timeline. It's hundreds of years in the future (beyond Picard/Sisko/Janeway/etc).
    Last edited by s_bushido; 2020-11-15 at 02:58 AM.

  6. #1806
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Saru is the highest ranking officer aboard the Discovery. Starfleet protocol makes him Captain.
    No it doesnt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    Science Officer Michael Burnham
    sje lost that rank when she went to prison and has since then NOT be reinstated!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    she is the lead character of Discovery just as Captain James Kirk was the lead character of the Original Series. Why is this so difficult to grasp? Again its now refreshing to see Discovery as a proper Star Trek series
    Watch TOS, TNG, DS9 and Enterprise and you see what PROPER Star Trek looks like

  7. #1807
    Quote Originally Posted by tmamass View Post
    No it doesnt.
    By naval tradition, anyone in command of a vessel is referred to as captain, regardless of rank; and command usually falls to the highest-ranked and/or most senior crew member present if the one duly appointed to command is no longer present.

    Quote Originally Posted by tmamass View Post
    sje lost that rank when she went to prison and has since then NOT be reinstated!
    "Science officer" is not a rank, it's a position, like e.g. "helmsman" or "chief engineer".

  8. #1808
    Saru wears 4 pips on his badge now:


    I don't think that follows any sort of protocol...but seeing as they were all officially pronounced dead hundreds of years ago, and he's been commanding the ship off and on since Lorca was outed as a Terran, I don't really think it's a big deal. There wasn't any ceremony or anything when Riker was elevated to Captain for a day (pips and all) in Best of Both Worlds. And Data even took the time to put on a red uniform when he was made first officer in Chain of Command (though his rank stayed the same).
    Last edited by s_bushido; 2020-11-15 at 04:20 AM.

  9. #1809
    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.

  10. #1810
    The Unstoppable Force Elim Garak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DS9
    Posts
    20,295
    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, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, 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 still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side

  11. #1811
    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.

  12. #1812
    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.

  13. #1813
    The Unstoppable Force Elim Garak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DS9
    Posts
    20,295
    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, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, 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 still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side

  14. #1814
    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.

  15. #1815
    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?!?!!

  16. #1816
    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!

  17. #1817
    I am Murloc! Mister K's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Under your desk
    Posts
    5,628
    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

  18. #1818
    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.

  19. #1819
    Scarab Lord Frontenac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Québec, Québec
    Posts
    4,154
    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!"

  20. #1820
    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.

Posting Permissions

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