Star Trek Discovery ***Season 2*** [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

CramCycle

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj1MCjeFxrM

Sad Professor

There’s a lot more space devoted to crew quarters in Star Trek than on a real life aircraft carrier where most of the crew would be sleeping in bunk beds. This would be even more true in TNG which has families living onboard.

_Kaiser_

Deleted User wrote: »

I totally get it but it had the bloody reactor right there in the middle of it (as a set piece I know). It was all so similar to the bridge. There just needs to be a difference in look/feel.

Here is the "BUT"

But it was a show from the 1980s which I loved, while it aired (and still do). While it's aesthetic would not work in today's world, it was more than fine for the time. I am comparing it to how we would view things now, in a comparative way on where things have moved on.
I wouldn't change TNG for the world.

Barring a few things I liked the atmosphere of Kelvin sets. Far more wrong with the first 2 films of that franchise to be worrying about sets to be honest. Disclaimer: I preferred the 3rd film in the franchise. It is flawed and is again more Action-Trek but it has roots in what Trek is. Far more than the first 2 Space-Voyage films, which were JJ's audition tapes for Star Wars.

Discovery, to me anyway, has been a great intro for the show. Again flawed (which Trek wasn't in it's first year, excepting TOS).
It's flaws are, indeed, compounded by the serial nature of the show. One flaw in one idea now affects the entire season (show).
We are seeing one ship in a time of war with admirals holding smokey room meetings. We have no view (yet) as to how the wider Federation acts. There is a lot of precedence for this in TNG and DS9 to be honest.

Season 2 looks to be branching out into a more exploratory view. This is good but I don't want a remake (for all intent) of TOS or TNG.




TLDR: Discovery is flawed but I damn well enjoyed it and can not wait for Season 2

I have to disagree I'm afraid.

Discovery S2 is a response to fan backlash, supposed problems behind the scenes, and the success of the Orville - much the same issues Star Wars has faced in the last year.

As such we're getting toned down Klingons more in-line with the movie/TNG era, fan service such as the Enterprise, Spock and Pike, a whole new tone to the series, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if the notion of Burnham being the centerpiece of the show is drastically reduced as well.

A show that has apparently been retooled so heavily in a panic (if even some of the rumors are true) is going to be very uneven (as much of S1 was), but I do expect it to still be better than S1.

The JJ movie sets were atrocious.. from the ridiculously shiny lens-flared Apple store bridge to the industrial brewery that was engineering. It made no sense for such a jarring visual disconnect between the two and didn't feel like it was on the same ship at all.

What they'll do to Picard is the other concern. The current committee running the franchise just don't seem to get why the earlier series appealed, and why many fans take issue with "Wars Trek" since 2009.

AMKC

Evade wrote: »

You also need to factor in how ridiculously empty the ships in Star Trek seem. Those aircraft carries have crews (including the air wing) of up to 5,000 people. The Enterprise is about 430, D is around 1,100, and I think the E is around the same, so there must be a lot of space taken up by self sustaining machinery.

I think looking at the Original series Enterprise compared to the biggest aircraft carrier there its fairly understandable. Its not that big and only has just over 400 crew on it as well as the technology not really being that advanced on it. There would also be a bit of room taking up for the shuttles and other rooms like where they would grow some plants in the secondary hull. Also its only really the primary and secondary hull that would have crew. There would not be that much room in the neck section of it.

The Enterprise-D do does look huge at with the technology being far more advanced and smaller should surely have a lot more crew or maybe could. Maybe there is just a lot of scientific reserch rooms as well as all the holodecks, cargo bays, shuttle bays, crew rooms etc that take up all that room and make it the big ship it is.

Rawr

AMKC wrote: »

I think looking at the Original series Enterprise compared to the biggest aircraft carrier there its fairly understandable. Its not that big and only has just over 400 crew on it as well as the technology not really being that advanced on it. There would also be a bit of room taking up for the shuttles and other rooms like where they would grow some plants in the secondary hull. Also its only really the primary and secondary hull that would have crew. There would not be that much room in the neck section of it.

The Enterprise-D do does look huge at with the technology being far more advanced and smaller should surely have a lot more crew or maybe could. Maybe there is just a lot of scientific reserch rooms as well as all the holodecks, cargo bays, shuttle bays, crew rooms etc that take up all that room and make it the big ship it is.

I used to have the Enterprise D blueprints book (a huge thing with A1/A2 prints of nearly every deck. I'm not certain how canon they were, but they gave a decent impression of how the ship was laid out.



Beyond the crew quarters (which there were many) a lot of space in the saucer section appeared to be assigned to labs, sick-bays, schools, cargo bays, and even a gigantic series of water tanks (one of which was shown to have space for a whale). You also had the Main Shuttle Bay, which they never showed on the show (beyond opening the door that one time to push the Enterprise forward). The blueprints showed this as a huge 3-story space in the saucer with space for 20-30 shuttles and even a control "tower" in the middle.

In the secondary hull I remember a lot of deuterium tanks, especially on the decks below Engineering. A lot of forward areas were taken up with machinery connected to the Deflector Dish.

My memory could of course be failing me, but there did seem to be a-lot going on inside Enterprise D....if you take those blueprints as canon.

TheValeyard

It was mentioned on DS9 with 'Trials and Tribble-ations'

Think Dax mentioned the really 'packed them in' on the old vessels. Compared to 24th century ships which probably has much better and comfortable rooms, bigger cargo bays, bigger holodecks, automated factory rooms, massive rooms dedicated to generating power, etc.

corkie

STAR TREK SHORT TREKS The Escape Artist Trailer

Sorry to people who can't see or choose not to see these shorts.


Already available to watch if you know how.

Here is to Mudd in your eye!

pixelburp

2 weeks 'til it airs on Netflix, that's kind of exciting. Certainly hope the growing pains are sorted.

Goodshape

RedLetterMedia on season two (based on the trailers) and the first three Short Treks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d4iCa6h29c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d4iCa6h29c


They're not really enjoying this much at all . I'm holding out with a bit more optimism for season two myself, although it's difficult not to agree with the points they make based on the trailers we've seen so far. I agree with them on the "Short Treks" though. Pointless little things cynically released a month apart just to hang onto those CBS All Access subscribers. And Saru's little story just makes the entire character seem utterly ridicules. From seaweed harvesting slave to second in command of a starship in... no time? And we thought JJ's Kirk moved quickly.

pixelburp

It's interesting, because it's easy to forget that from an American perspective, the show is locked behind a paywall of a studios own, limited streaming service - as opposed to being available on a more commonplace,, global one like Netflix; I can understand why Trek fans Stateside might be a little more irritated with the show when it requires more ostensible effort to just watch it. At least here a lot of us have Netflix and it's just another show, so to speak.

I like RedLetterMedia, but suspect they're letting their cynical fandom get in the way. They're not totally wrong about the course correction towards more levity, but honestly it feels like they're yearning for a style of TV that simply doesn't exist anymore. Episodic TV is a thing of the past & it's entirely possible (though no knowing yet if it'll happen) to have stories of exploration while also involving a broader arc. The 'red angel' looks like a blatant Mystery Box, but I wouldn't be surprised if the meat of the season doesn't necessarily involve it.

Want a TNG remake, watch Orville.
Want a modern TV show based Trek then Discovery is it (although a bit less of the JJverse camera work would not go amiss)

You may or may not like Discovery but as I, and many many others have said before; if it were called Star Trek: Orville those same fans who laud it for being a true Trek would be ripping it to shreds for its stand alone storytelling, it's derivative nature, and blatant fan service.
And I love The Orville, but accept it for what it is... a phenomenally well made fan show of Trek

FutureGuy

Really enjoyed the final short trek.

Goodshape

Deleted User wrote: »

Want a TNG remake, watch Orville.
Want a modern TV show based Trek then Discovery is it (although a bit less of the JJverse camera work would not go amiss)

Ah yeah, don't get me wrong – I'm enjoying Discovery (and The Orville). The RLM guys are basically focusing on the negatives here, and it's difficult to deny those exist. While things are fine for the most part (imo), the whole apparent focus and tone of the show could be better.


Maybe my glasses have gone all rose tinted but anyone remember the trailers for other Trek you used to get on the TNG or DS9 VHS tapes? I seem to remember they were very wide eyed and optimistic and a bit of action but, mostly, wide-eyed wonder at the marvels of the galaxy that await in the latest episode/season/series of Trek!

Now we get Lenny Kravitz playing cheesy rock over a series of spaceplosions and zipping and zooming exciting times. Less wide-eyed marvelling, more Marvel Entertainment™.

*shrug*. Still looking forward to more

Evade

Goodshape wrote: »

From seaweed harvesting slave to second in command of a starship in... no time? And we thought JJ's Kirk moved quickly.

I didn't watch the short so the time taken could be a lot less but there is a (future) precedent for rapid promotion in Star Trek. Riker had a classmate who was a captain in the Arsenal of Freedom in TNG season 1. That would have meant he went from ensign to captain in six or seven years.

Goodshape

Evade wrote: »

I didn't watch the short so the time taken could be a lot less but there is a (future) precedent for rapid promotion in Star Trek. Riker had a classmate who was a captain in the Arsenal of Freedom in TNG season 1. That would have meant he went from ensign to captain in six or seven years.

All well and good but, according to the short trek, I don't think Saru had any knowledge of the existence of starships whatsoever before he was picked up.

It's like taking one of those Sentinelese lads off the island and fast tracking them to airforce commander on account of how well they made that paper airplane one time, or some nonsense.

Really disliked that one anyway. Maybe if they had more time to tell the story they could have done it justice. As is, it just didn't work at all imo.

pixelburp

Think of all of them just didn't work, beyond as tasters I guess to get people talking about Trek again but seems like they could have been more artful in the execution.

TheValeyard

Goodshape wrote: »

All well and good but, according to the short trek, I don't think Saru had any knowledge of the existence of starships whatsoever before he was picked up.

It's like taking one of those Sentinelese lads off the island and fast tracking them to airforce commander on account of how well they made that paper airplane one time, or some nonsense.

Really disliked that one anyway. Maybe if they had more time to tell the story they could have done it justice. As is, it just didn't work at all imo.

Yeah theu definitely ballsed that up. The Kelpian could have been a really interesting space faring race instead of primitives.

AtomicHorror

Some nice touches in the latest images released from S2 (https://trekmovie.com/2019/01/04/watch-anson-mount-introduces-his-captain-pike-for-star-trek-discovery-season-2/).



I hadn't noticed before (but sure others did), but the badges on Enterprise are different to Discovery (and the rest of Starfleet that we've seen). They're much closer to the shape of the TOS badges. This fits more nicely into the canon, though I'm sure the fundamentalists still won't be happy!



Pike's biog seems to have been adapted from Memory Alpha! Just tenses changed, gender removed.

pixelburp

So the below video seems to confirm what we suspected: that Captain Pike is taking over the captainship of the Discovery for Season 2 (presumably leaving the Enterprise & those classic uniforms with Number One). Poor Saru, he has done more than enough to deserve the chair.

The clip also contains some brief, humour focused snippets around Pike to give some further taste as to the tone of the upcoming season.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsW7zuecf1A

_Kaiser_

pixelburp wrote: »

So the below video seems to confirm what we suspected: that Captain Pike is taking over the captainship of the Discovery for Season 2 (presumably leaving the Enterprise & those classic uniforms with Number One). Poor Saru, he has done more than enough to deserve the chair.

The clip also contains some brief, humour focused snippets around Pike to give some further taste as to the tone of the upcoming season.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsW7zuecf1A

What I take from that...

- Very different tone to S1. A lot more relaxed and natural
- A realisation that there is a need to recognise what came before (the references to Jeffrey Hunter and TOS)
- An actor who seems to recognise what he's stepping into and the legacy/expectations thereof.

Could just be good marketing I suppose, but that video is the most positive thing yet I've seen about this entire series.

pixelburp

Looks like reviews for the first episode are beginning to trickle in, and while I've only read the one (denofgeek), it seems broadly praiseworthy of the shift in tone. Seems like Captain Pike himself is part of that change, and the primary focus of this first episode, noting that he is much more of the 'Starfleet ideal' mould that one would hope / want.

_Kaiser_

pixelburp wrote: »

Looks like reviews for the first episode are beginning to trickle in, and while I've only read the one (denofgeek), it seems broadly praiseworthy of the shift in tone. Seems like Captain Pike himself is part of that change, and the primary focus of this first episode, noting that he is much more of the 'Starfleet ideal' mould that one would hope / want.

Hopefully that means as well that they've given up this notion of Burnham being the centrepiece of the show. Awful character, awful actor IMO.

Kirby

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Hopefully that means as well that they've given up this notion of Burnham being the centrepiece of the show. Awful character, awful actor IMO.

Truer words were never spoken.

Inviere

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Hopefully that means as well that they've given up this notion of Burnham being the centrepiece of the show. Awful character, awful actor IMO.

I've just finished a rewatch in preparation for S2...it's mad, for me, she's the standout of the show. If anything, I think the writing/production failed by not exploring more of her outcast-redemption story.

I think they've a big issue, whether they know it or not, with Saru. He's clearly not Captain material in the eyes of production, and I'm not sure the global audience is ready to see a somewhat stern/cold'ish character as the Captain. Now with Burnham reinstated as a Commander...the bridge is getting full of heavy metal/pips. I can see Saru being killed off/transferred before long, to make way for Burnham as XO.

Goodshape

Yeah, I've no problem with Burnham really. Neither my favourite character nor my least. More of a focus on the ensemble would be welcome though, just for variety if nothing else.

Now with Burnham reinstated as a Commander...the bridge is getting full of heavy metal/pips. I can see Saru being killed off/transferred before long, to make way for Burnham as XO.

I'm sure Pike is temporary. Would be surprised if he's still in the chair at the end of this season.

Assuming Burnham has proven herself in the eyes of Starfleet, I think she'll get to captain the ship. She was ranked above Saru before, on the Shenzhou, and also wasn't harvesting seaweed for a living just a handful of years ago.

pixelburp

I neither liked nor disliked Burnham; main problem for me was that she suffered from Main Character disease, in that all the pain & melodrama had to go through her, so she ended up coming off like a saddlebag full of angst. She wasn't allowed to have any levity and written as over-earnest. Nearly every other character was more likeable and interesting because that weight didn't exist.

GSPfan

I didn’t like Sonequa Martin-Green as Sasha on The Walking Dead for the reason that her character was written to be an impulsive idiot who put everyone and herself at risk due to countless self-righteous decisions.

That must have gotten her the Burnham role because she singlehandedly started a war against direct orders in season 1.

I don’t think she is a good actor and certainly don’t think her character is likeable, but if they continue to write her character as they did in season 1 then I’ll never warm to her.

GSPfan

GSPfan wrote: »

I didn’t like Sonequa Martin-Green as Sasha on The Walking Dead for the reason that her character was written to be an impulsive idiot who put everyone and herself at risk due to countless self-righteous decisions.

That must have gotten her the Burnham role because she singlehandedly started a war against direct orders in season 1.

I don’t think she is a good actor and certainly don’t think her character is likeable, but if they continue to write her character as they did in season 1 then I’ll never warm to her.

Glimpse of character growth, in the correct manner, in the Mudd timeloop episode to be fair

GSPfan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Glimpse of character growth, in the correct manner, in the Mudd timeloop episode to be fair

Yeah there was, but I’m worried her relationship with her father and brother Spock along with her love for the Klingon/Human guy (can’t remember names) will put her in these situations where her “feelings” override her logical decision making and she fooks everything up again. She is a walking plot device.

That kind of character annoys me for various reasons.

1. If I was a Starfleet Captain I wouldn’t allow her to be in charge or even present at any time during any critical situation as she clearly cannot respect orders or the chain of command if it conflicts with her own beliefs or emotions at the time. The fact she got away with causing a war that killed countless people (millions was it?) and still gets to serve in Starfleet is laughable.

2. As a female character she looks pathetic. She has Daddy issues, Step brother issues no doubt, a forbidden love with a Klingon/Human (the bad boy), and she can’t control her emotions even though she literally grew up in a society trained to control their emotions. Ugh. She’s a feminists worst nightmare of a female lead.

GSPfan

GSPfan wrote: »

Yeah there was, but I’m worried her relationship with her father and brother Spock along with her love for the Klingon/Human guy (can’t remember names) will put her in these situations where her “feelings” override her logical decision making and she fooks everything up again. She is a walking plot device.

That kind of character annoys me for various reasons.

1. If I was a Starfleet Captain I wouldn’t allow her to be in charge or even present at any time during any critical situation as she clearly cannot respect orders or the chain of command if it conflicts with her own beliefs or emotions at the time. The fact she got away with causing a war that killed countless people (millions was it?) and still gets to serve in Starfleet is laughable.

2. As a female character she looks pathetic. She has Daddy issues, Step brother issues no doubt, a forbidden love with a Klingon/Human (the bad boy), and she can’t control her emotions even though she literally grew up in a society trained to control their emotions. Ugh. She’s a feminists worst nightmare of a female lead.

His name? He's Clem Fandango

CramCycle

Deleted User wrote: »

His name? He's Clem Fandango

Has to be done:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnBP_X4Zx-I

Language NSFW

AMKC

GSPfan wrote: »

I didn’t like Sonequa Martin-Green as Sasha on The Walking Dead for the reason that her character was written to be an impulsive idiot who put everyone and herself at risk due to countless self-righteous decisions.

That must have gotten her the Burnham role because she singlehandedly started a war against direct orders in season 1.

I don’t think she is a good actor and certainly don’t think her character is likeable, but if they continue to write her character as they did in season 1 then I’ll never warm to her.

she singlehandedly started a war against direct orders in season 1.

But she did not start the war. She wanted her Captain to fire on the Klingon ship so the would not start a war but the captain did not listen to her and that is what started the war. I agree she has no respect for authority and she could have gone about it a better way instead of knocking her Captain out and taking control. She did try convince her Captain do but she did not listen so you could say it was the Captain that started the war and is responsible for all them dead people not Burnham.

GSPfan

AMKC wrote: »

she singlehandedly started a war against direct orders in season 1.

But she did not start the war. She wanted her Captain to fire on the Klingon ship so the would not start a war but the captain did not listen to her and that is what started the war. I agree she has no respect for authority and she could have gone about it a better way instead of knocking her Captain out and taking control. She did try convince her Captain do but she did not listen so you could say it was the Captain that started the war and is responsible for all them dead people not Burnham.

You missed the bit where she killed the Torchbearer that started it all.

Also... she warns against killing T’Kuvma, making him a martyr, and guess what, she kills him.

I’m not saying she had much chance to do different in either situation but the writers could have wrote it so she wasn’t the one killing both Klingons.

Firing on the Klingons before Starfleet arrived would have only ensured her ship and crew would have died before reinforcements got there and the other klingons would have warped in moments later to join the fun.

Her plan to fire on the Klingons was worthless as the call for more Klingon ships was already sent out at that stage.

Inviere

GSPfan wrote: »

You missed the bit where she killed the Torchbearer that started it all.

She didn’t know where she was, who was attacking her, in zero-gravity, and was defending herself. The killing was accidental, and had it not happened, she would have likely been killed.

Also... she warns against killing T’Kuvma, making him a martyr, and guess what, she kills him.

That I grant, she lost control. Not excusing it, but she had just seen her Captain murdered, and the mission went to absolute pot. She shouldn’t have killed T’Kuvma, but she did.

Her plan to fire on the Klingons was worthless as the call for more Klingon ships was already sent out at that stage.

From her perspective, her plan was logical. It was Sarek who had advised her that the language of aggression, was what prevented a bloody war between the Klingons and Vulcans. The Vulcans began attacking Klingons at every encounter, and that gained the Klingons’ respect, leading to peace. This is what became known as the “Vulcan Hello”, and that’s what Burnham wanted for the Federation. It made sense, it worked for he Vulcans, and it may have worked for the Federation.

I dunno, for literally decades now, people complain about the people in Star Trek being “too perfect, with very few character flaws”, TNG being the worst offender. I feel Discovery and Burnham tackle that very well.

CramCycle

Inviere wrote: »

From her perspective, her plan was logical. It was Sarek who had advised her that the language of aggression, was what prevented a bloody war between the Klingons and Vulcans. The Vulcans began attacking Klingons at every encounter, and that gained the Klingons’ respect, leading to peace. This is what became known as the “Vulcan Hello”, and that’s what Burnham wanted for the Federation. It made sense, it worked for he Vulcans, and it may have worked for the Federation.

I dunno, for literally decades now, people complain about the people in Star Trek being “too perfect, with very few character flaws”, TNG being the worst offender. I feel Discovery and Burnham tackle that very well.

Her plan was not logical, in fact it was the perfect example of why she doesn't fit in with Vulcans or Humans.

A Vulcan would have called the captain to the side and repeated the story to her captain, job done. A human would have went in and said it out loud in front of everyone. She done neither and took the teenage way out, whihc actually shows how her raising issues have stunted her growth/development more than anyone would have realised.

I don't mind her at all as a character or how she is acted but to me she has never come across as anything more than a plot device tool that has functioned well for the first season.

On a separate note, I googled the short treks, thinking they would have to be found through backdoors but they were all quite freely available via youtube and dailymotion.

Seen 4 so far, not sure if there are others. I disagree with some of the comments here, and agree with others.

Runaway:

I don't see that happening or her not getting caught, preposterous at best. Also unclear why she couldn't get the person to explain how she done what she done. This one was the stupidest episode by far.

Calypso:

Fun episode but not sure of the point, other than we know one thing will never happen.

Escape Artist: Mildly entertaining short, pretty low brow but fun

Brightest Star:

Not sure why everyone thought he became 1st officer after this. He could have easily went through the motions and joined Star Fleet and come back to the Discovery. He was not First officer on the Shenzhou which is presumably who picked him up and earned the promotion the old fashioned way, he clearly showed aptitude for technology, although how he put it together implies either they knew more than they let on (like the crowd in Insurrection) or the story was using too much dramatic license.

Inviere

CramCycle wrote: »

Her plan was not logical, in fact it was the perfect example of why she doesn't fit in with Vulcans or Humans.

A Vulcan would have called the captain to the side and repeated the story to her captain, job done. A human would have went in and said it out loud in front of everyone. She done neither and took the teenage way out

Again though, from her own perspective, it was logical. The needs of the many, outweighed the needs of the one (or indeed the chain of command). She was trying to prevent a war, in a way that had worked for others. It wasn’t a typical Starfleet approach, granted, but she thought she was right. It was never going to end well for her though, at best, she’d be charged with mutiny, and at worst, she’d expedite the war anyway, and still be a mutineer. I see it as her just trying to do the right thing, but it not at all working out. She’s not perfect by any means, but after TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT, I’m kinda ok with that.

pixelburp

Honestly, I think people here are putting more thought in the motivations of the character than the writers did; I'm happy to mentally box off that opening double-parter because for me, Discovery didn't really properly start until the third episode - hell "Context is for Kings" even played out like a normal pilot.

The first two parts played out more like set-piece writing, a sequence of events happening because they had visceral impact, without the writers stopping to think if the actions ever made sense within the context of the characters performing them.

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

Honestly, I think people here are putting more thought in the motivations of the character than the writers did; I'm happy to mentally box off that opening double-parter because for me, Discovery didn't really properly start until the third episode - hell "Context is for Kings" even played out like a normal pilot.

The first two parts played out more like set-piece writing, a sequence of events happening because they had visceral impact, without the writers stopping to think if the actions ever made sense within the context of the characters performing them.

Trek fans over analyzing? Never Agreed though, I thought the way Discovery opened was proxy. I consider CifK the proper opener for it.

Sad Professor

Kurtzman is an idiot and I'm not just referring to the headline.

Star Trek TV Head Reveals What He's Learned from 'Voyager,' 'Deep Space Nine' Mistakes

There's no way a show being produced by this guy isn't a massive train-wreck waiting to happen. I'm feeling very pessimistic about the Picard show too.

Rawr

Sad Professor wrote: »

Kurtzman is an idiot and I'm not just referring to the headline.

Star Trek TV Head Reveals What He's Learned from 'Voyager,' 'Deep Space Nine' Mistakes

There's no way a show being produced by this guy isn't a massive train-wreck waiting to happen. I'm feeling very pessimistic about the Picard show too.

Kurtzman: “I think Deep Space Nine and Voyager got into a tricky spot where people were starting to feel they can’t tell the difference between the shows, even though they were very different, but ‘I can’t tell the difference so why would I pick one over the other?

People couldn't tell the difference between DS9 and Voyager?! Was Kurtzman even watching the same shows we had watched?`

pixelburp

To be fair - and this is not something I'd usually be / do with Kurtzman - I kinda get what he's saying, even if he's clearly coming from a point of ignorance re. DS9 and Voyager. And his comments match the proposed Trek shows in the pipeline, cos they've all felt very different from each other - I'm thinking in particular of that Starfleet Academy show, which is presumably going to be a beautiful-teenagers-are-angtsy, CW knock off.

Nobody says you can't tell different stories in the same narrative universe - look at the MCU after all - but key tones and messages do need to be ever present in some way, shape or form.

I also wonder how much of this is coming from CBS themselves, desperate to plug their All Access with as much Trek as they can, regardless of fit.

corkie

SciFi filler not related to STD, found on YT!



Sci-Fi Short Film "FTL" presented by DUST

BrookieD

New ST - Discovery season 2 intro/credits sequence... some changes to reflect the season ahead. Best res i can find

pixelburp

That link is broken BrookieD

Sad Professor

CramCycle

EDIT: Too slow

pixelburp

Looks like they only modified it a little; had forgotten how slick that intro was - I usually just speed past it on Netflix.

Goodshape

So.. this'll be out tomorrow morning on Netflix then? Friday 18th?

pixelburp

Yup, AFAIK it should appear tomorrow morning sometime; is this forum going to do individual episode threads again this year?

I guess this really displays what camp I am in.

I have let Orville build up a few episodes before I go to watch. I am hopping for tomorrow, there is no way I am going to be able to keep it in a backlog