Discovery 2x09 'Project Daedalus' [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

Johnny Storm

Rawr wrote: »

Hmmm....maybe they are not all the same person? Just thinking about that now....

I'm thinking Spock's depiction of the Red Angel is not female in an attempt to throw us off the scent.
My money is on Tilly for the Red Angel
My thinking is that it would be just too bleedin' obvious for it to be Burnham.... :pac:

TheValeyard

Rawr wrote: »

Hmmm....maybe they are not all the same person? Just thinking about that now....

I think there is 3 Red Angels. But they might all be the same person from different realites.

Evade

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Holograms generated by advanced AI vs. dumb computer holograms? I think the Control incident is going to result in both AI and holo technology taking a step back for a few decades, at least until Soong-type androids show up.

That'd be a good point if not for the perfect hologram mirror and the Klingon battle simulation with Lorca and Tyler in season one.

uncleoswald

Could be two Red Angels, one for each of Burham's parents. Would explain why one seemed female and the other didn't. Also Michael didn't actually see them die and Section 31 seem to be involved in their death in some way so there is more to be resolved there. It would be dumb but then I fully expect a dumb conclusion to the mystery anyway.

Also, I must have missed the explanation, but how do they know the Red Angle is a single time travelling entity and not just a member or members of an advance race from the present day?

Spear

uncleoswald wrote: »

Also, I must have missed the explanation, but how do they know the Red Angle is a single time travelling entity and not just a member or members of an advance race from the present day?

There was chroniton particles associated with the sightings, although they did specify that this could have other explanations.

OldMrBrennan83

uncleoswald wrote: »

Could be two Red Angels, one for each of Burham's parents. Would explain why one seemed female and the other didn't. Also Michael didn't actually see them die and Section 31 seem to be involved in their death in some way so there is more to be resolved there. It would be dumb but then I fully expect a dumb conclusion to the mystery anyway.

Also, I must have missed the explanation, but how do they know the Red Angle is a single time travelling entity and not just a member or members of an advance race from the present day?

Spock said there were memories that hadn't happened yet when he mind melded.

bilbot79

I'd say the red angel is future Airiam

Rawr

bilbot79 wrote: »

I'd say the red angel is future Airiam

What if the Red Angel(s) are The Traveller & Wesley Crusher? (With a few other Traveller-buddies thrown in)

Wesley did go off and explore "other plains of existence" with him, so maybe time-travel / universe bending wouldn't be beyond their abilites. I know that for some reason he came back to Star Fleet before ST:Nemesis, but maybe he held onto his abilities and is now trying to save the Federation by stopping Control.

I know they probably won't do this, but since Wil Wheaton won't be doing any more work on The Big Bang Theory, maybe he was free to take on this role

pixelburp

What about Pike? There has been a small flavour of his faith threaded into his contribution, maybe the climax of that will be that he becomes the personification of something visually divine?

FreudianSlippers

pixelburp wrote: »

Tilly's manner seems to vacillate from episode to episode, to the point where I think the fundamental issue is not the character, but the writing. Her small scene with Admiral Cornwall was terrible, but it jarred because it felt more like the 'idea' of Tilly - hyperactive, starry eyed cadet with poor social skills - than the more robust versions of the character we've got in other episodes. I think the fault was the writer, who couldn't pitch her behaviour as deftly as others, so you get this constantly shifting scale of 'Tilly'ness

This.

Tilly the character is fine; Tilly the actress plays it out of the park almost every episode. Tilly is written for the original show which was penned to be more about the interactions of non-bridge crew working on a starship and they don't seem to have re-transitioned her well when interacting with superior officers.

I really don't get all the Michael hate though, her character is exactly how you'd expect a human raised on Vulcan by Sarek and Amanda to act. Spock is the character that I have the biggest problem with if this is really prime universe.

AtomicHorror

Evade wrote: »

That'd be a good point if not for the perfect hologram mirror and the Klingon battle simulation with Lorca and Tyler in season one.

You might need to remind me about the mirror?

Simulation of random Klingons doesn't negate the point- they're not supposed to look like anyone in particular so there's no standard to assess against.

Anyway I agree it needs some canon crow-barring to make sense.

Goodshape

AtomicHorror wrote: »

You might need to remind me about the mirror?

Tilly used a holographic mirror of herself to try on her Capt. Killy outfit.




Think it might have been used in another scene too. Can't quite remember.

As season two seems to be taking more care with the canon, I doubt we're going to see it again tbh.

Evade

AtomicHorror wrote: »

You might need to remind me about the mirror?

In episode four Burnham was putting on her uniform and used a perfect hologram of herself as a mirror. It starts at about 2:35 into the episode.

Stark

Still don't see the issue that's only moderately more advanced than 21st century technology. Still nowhere close to TNG era holograms that people can touch/taste/smell.

AtomicHorror

Stark wrote: »

Still don't see the issue that's only moderately more advanced than 21st century technology. Still nowhere close to TNG era holograms that people can touch/taste/smell.

For sure, I don't buy the holo-communicator/holodeck canon issues at all. TNG-era tech is something far beyond DSC-era. Though the inconsistency under discussion is why Sulu's hologram sucked when it seems like photo-perfect holograms are already in place by the 2250s.

I get the point re the mirrors, but I did suggest the key difference is AI and AI-generated holograms combined- that both will be set back significantly. TOS-era computers don't seem as smart as the standard shipboard computers on DSC, so the tech used for Sulu's hologram some decades later would presumably have limitations.

If they carry through with Control setting back AI, this stuff can be explained away. It's not neat and tidy, but probably the best they can do.

Goodshape

I continue to be happy enough with "it was made 30 / 50 years ago" as an 'excuse' for the differences.

Imagine it was a television or movie series depicting an ancient civilisation. The series made in the 60s or 90s wouldn't be as detailed or as well informed as the series made today, despite depicting the same time period. We're just getting that in reverse. Our ability to depict the "future" has improved. If TOS was made today, this is what it would look like.

AtomicHorror

Goodshape wrote: »

I continue to be happy enough with "it was made 30 / 50 years ago" as an 'excuse' for the differences.

Imagine it was a television or movie series depicting an ancient civilisation. The series made in the 60s or 90s wouldn't be as detailed or as well informed as the series made today, despite depicting the same time period. We're just getting that in reverse. Our ability to depict the "future" has improved. If TOS was made today, this is what it would look like.

Yeah I often think about this one as well, it implies a platonic "historical" version of Star Trek that various TV shows and films are trying to represent, like period dramas depicting the 18th century which operate within the same "canon" but often have wildly varying quality and production design. The facts of historical events and characterization of key people being more important than what color jacket someone is wearing. By comparison, the various iterations of Star Trek are remarkable for their attention to historical accuracy.

I think it'll work fine for some fans, but sadly most of them won't wrap their heads around that, nor accept it if they do.

Evade

There's a difference between improving the quality of the production and throwing in things that shouldn't be there. If the holograms were really glitchy, all looked more distorted like the communication holograms do, and were less ubiquitous it would make way more sense to have them on Discovery, it being a tech tester and all.



I have to wonder why control needed the false images to be holograms anyway.

AtomicHorror

Evade wrote: »

There's a difference between improving the quality of the production and throwing in things that shouldn't be there. If the holograms were really glitchy, all looked more distorted like the communication holograms do, and were less ubiquitous it would make way more sense to have them on Discovery, it being a tech tester and all.

It's analogous to anachronisms in period dramas- most viewers (and historians) will tend to be more concerned with the accuracy of larger historical events and consistency of the characters with other historical accounts.

It depends on the story impact too of course. If the captain of the Titanic uses a telephone to call for help, that breaks the story. Radios in the early 1900's didn't have the capabilities of a telephone and that fact contributed to those historical events. However in the Star Trek universe, holo-transmissions don't seem to have a material functional difference when compared with communication via viewscreen. The underlying technology is the same (subspace), so range, speed of contact etc are not an issue, the rest is just aesthetic.

Goodshape

AtomicHorror wrote: »

If the captain of the Titanic uses a telephone to call for help, that breaks the story. Radios in the early 1900's didn't have the capabilities of a telephone and that fact contributed to those historical events.

Exactly this.

And sure there's reason to be a bit annoyed at things like the spore drive, or the prevalence of Section 31, but there's plenty of room for head-canon as to why those aren't still around and it might even be explained on-screen before the end.

When people start complaining, as they do, about a hologram, a window on the bridge, that species X "doesn't look like that", or the design of the hull plating on the spaceships... it's all a bit tiresome. If TOS had those things, it wouldn't have changed any of the stories. If Disco didn't have those things it wouldn't look like the future anymore.

Evade

AtomicHorror wrote: »

It's analogous to anachronisms in period dramas- most viewers (and historians) will tend to be more concerned with the accuracy of larger historical events and consistency of the characters with other historical accounts.

That's mostly down to having to make do with what you have. This castle is't exactly the way it was in the 15th century but it'll have to do, or technically this type of plate wasn't common until half a century later but it's whats available, or there aren't enough of this type of gun for this battle scene so we'll give all the background guys the newer version and it'll be good enough, or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations. It doesn't really apply when you're making everything from scratch.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

It depends on the story impact too of course. If the captain of the Titanic uses a telephone to call for help, that breaks the story. Radios in the early 1900's didn't have the capabilities of a telephone and that fact contributed to those historical events. However in the Star Trek universe, holo-transmissions don't seem to have a material functional difference when compared with communication via viewscreen. The underlying technology is the same (subspace), so range, speed of contact etc are not an issue, the rest is just aesthetic.

I'm pretty sure the use of holograms is pretty significant plot point this season.

AtomicHorror

Evade wrote: »

That's mostly down to having to make do with what you have. This castle is't exactly the way it was in the 15th century but it'll have to do, or technically this type of plate wasn't common until half a century later but it's whats available, or there aren't enough of this type of gun for this battle scene so we'll give all the background guys the newer version and it'll be good enough, or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations. It doesn't really apply when you're making everything from scratch.

But the models and alien makeup in TOS were exactly that- what they could achieve at the time. If you take Goodshape's line that this is a representation of something more fundamental (in reality, Roddenberry's more complex imaginings, in headcanon an historical "real" Star Trek), then it makes perfect sense to do things better when we revisit the era.

In a way, TNG era producers compounded this issue by slavishly recreating the look of the TOS era a couple of times.

Evade wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the use of holograms is pretty significant plot point this season.

They might be made so in a future episode, but that's an effort to appease the canon purists (if that's even possible). However, to date I have not seen hologram communications do anything that could not be achieved by a viewscreen. For example, the faked admirals could easily have appeared in 2D, orchestrated via image manipulation by Control. No impact on that part of the story.

Evade

AtomicHorror wrote: »

But the models and alien makeup in TOS were exactly that- what they could achieve at the time. If you take Goodshape's line that this is a representation of something more fundamental (in reality, Roddenberry's more complex imaginings, in headcanon an historical "real" Star Trek), then it makes perfect sense to do things better when we revisit the era.

This is a bit apples to oranges. I don't think I've seen anyone advocate it has to look like exactly TOS, anywhere, it's the in-universe technologies that stick out.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

In a way, TNG era producers compounded this issue by slavishly recreating the look of the TOS era a couple of times.

It's Ronald D. Moore's fault. He did Relics and Trials and Tribble-ations. There was really no way around Trials and Tribble-ations but they already had the movie era bridge as a set on TNG it would have been easy to stick the movie era okudagrams into it and use that.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

They might be made so in a future episode, but that's an effort to appease the canon purists (if that's even possible). However, to date I have not seen hologram communications do anything that could not be achieved by a viewscreen. For example, the faked admirals could easily have appeared in 2D, orchestrated via image manipulation by Control. No impact on that part of the story.

Which is worse in a way because it's just change for the sake of change at that point.

AMKC

Evade wrote: »

That's mostly down to having to make do with what you have. This castle is't exactly the way it was in the 15th century but it'll have to do, or technically this type of plate wasn't common until half a century later but it's whats available, or there aren't enough of this type of gun for this battle scene so we'll give all the background guys the newer version and it'll be good enough, or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations. It doesn't really apply when you're making everything from scratch.



I'm pretty sure the use of holograms is pretty significant plot point this season.

or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations.

But the Enterprise B is an Excelsior class ship.

Where else did they use the Enterprise B from Generations?

Evade

AMKC wrote: »

But the Enterprise B is an Excelsior class ship.

Where else did they use the Enterprise B from Generations?

In DS9's Homefront/Paradise Lost two-parter. The Enterprise B is a variant Excelsior that has bulges around the deflector dish that were put in so they could "kill off" Kirk. No other Excelsior class ship has those bulges, not even the ones they made for the Dominion War battle scenes except the Lakota from the two-parter. Which kind of leads to a fan theory that the Lakota is a recommissioned Enterprise B and had it's name changed so it doesn't get mixed up with the Enterprise D.


Just looked up while checking something, it was a physical model not a CG one.

Rawr

AtomicHorror wrote: »

They might be made so in a future episode, but that's an effort to appease the canon purists (if that's even possible). However, to date I have not seen hologram communications do anything that could not be achieved by a viewscreen. For example, the faked admirals could easily have appeared in 2D, orchestrated via image manipulation by Control. No impact on that part of the story.

I'm a bit of a canon purist myself, but I still think that a lot of stuff can be explained away with some effort.

Bridge Windows: Part of me kind of wondered if this was something that was done away with because of the Klingon War. Being able see into the bridge from outside and shoot into what is probably less armored part of the hull seems like a quick way to take out a Starfleet vessel. I'm imagining fleet-wide retrofitting because of this, to replace the window with regular hull plates and a viewscreen.

Holograms: I wonder if this was done away with for the sake of transmission security. Added to the possibility that holograms could be used trick people into thinking someone was present (like the mirror). Thus maybe a general security regulation of Starfleet insisted on encrypted 2D viewscreen communicaion. Also the whole anti-social aspect of everyone beeming holograms around the mess-hall during lunch. Keep it on your screens people!

AtomicHorror

Rawr wrote: »

I'm a bit of a canon purist myself, but I still think that a lot of stuff can be explained away with some effort.

Bridge Windows: Part of me kind of wondered if this was something that was done away with because of the Klingon War. Being able see into the bridge from outside and shoot into what is probably less armored part of the hull seems like a quick way to take out a Starfleet vessel. I'm imagining fleet-wide retrofitting because of this, to replace the window with regular hull plates and a viewscreen.

The history of windows and viewscreens is a bit messy though- USS Franklin (which is a prime timeline ship despite appearing in Star Trek Beyond) had a window at the time it went missing in 2164, but the contemporary NX-class used viewscreens. The Enterprise uses a viewscreen in 2254, then a window by 2256, then a viewscreen again by 2265.

I'd prefer they just start to show some ships that use viewscreens on DSC and leave it without comment. Some ships use them, some don't, configurations change.

Rawr

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I'd prefer they just start to show some ships that use viewscreens on DSC and leave it without comment. Some ships use them, some don't, configurations change.

+1 totally agree there. Much like any other design of things you'll get plenty of configurations. The one the works the best has a knack becoming standard.

My theory is that window-less bridges were shown to be the safest option in battles and then became the standard. Ships that survived the Klingon War (like Enterprise for example) may have had refits over the years to fit that trend.

Kind of like the old DART carriages being retrofitted to include digital displays and LED lights

AtomicHorror

Rawr wrote: »

+1 totally agree there. Much like any other design of things you'll get plenty of configurations. The one the works the best has a knack becoming standard.

My theory is that window-less bridges were shown to be the safest option in battles and then became the standard. Ships that survived the Klingon War (like Enterprise for example) may have had refits over the years to fit that trend.

Kind of like the old DART carriages being retrofitted to include digital displays and LED lights

Yep- I think this approach would work for the Klingons too. Introduce some human-ish looking Klingons. Introduce some TNG-looking ones. Leave it at that. There's a diversity in the population, and demographics change over time.

Goodshape

I'd prefer they just stick to their guns and leave the 30 - 60 year old sets, makeup, and effects where they are – in the past.

We don't need an "in-universe" explanation for time passing in the real world. That Klingon-augment storyline in Enterprise was embarrassing.