Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

General Star Trek thread

Options
1261262264266267282

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    The tardigrades remained a thing just not the mutant ones to hunt down the crew which probably could have been an interesting limitation on the spore drive.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,448 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    Just came across this on YT - a must see for any TNG fans





  • Registered Users Posts: 3,850 ✭✭✭Rawr


    I remember that Discovery episode being the point where I started to smell a rat with regards the writing for Burnham. I was still pretty invested in Discovery in Season 1 up until Lorca started twirling his moustache and declaring that he was an Evil Terran! (Muu Ha! Ha! Ha!). But Michael was an issue pretty early, and it was the episode with the abandoned Crossfield-Class that started that off for me.

    In an attempt to build character, they shoehorned in the idea of Michael liking “Alice in Wonderland”. Normally, not a bad idea. This adds a little depth to a character. However, I’m not certain if this was due to bad directing or Martin-Green herself having a crap range, but they had Michael quoting Alice in Wonderland while she crawled around the Jefferies tubes of the other Crossfield Class, all without any context or even emotion. She wasn’t doing it because she was scared or worried or needed to focus; she just suddenly starts quoting….because the script said so…I guess. It became this very odd and almost jarringly artificial attempt to make her character appear to have depth. This was a bit off-putting and ruined my suspension of disbelief a little, an issue that was amplified when it became apparent that the whole show would orbit around her.

    So these episodes are usually quite good, but Discovery’s example has the distinction of being the one that showed me the first serious crack in the show’s format.

    Post edited by Rawr on


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Don't really remember the Alice in Wonderland thing but I think it was about the other ship being "through the looking glass" in terms of being a fuked up version of the Discovery.

    Saw the first half of that episode again recently and Stamets is like a whole different character. They really didn't have a clue what to do with him in later seasons and he has become the stereotype sitcom "gay neighbour"



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,850 ✭✭✭Rawr


    The first half of season 1 had much stronger legs than much of what happened afterwards. I suspect those early episodes was them using up material Bryan Fuller developed for the show before he broke ties with CBS. Once they had mined Fuller’s concepts for all they were worth they had to make up their own stuff with the less-than-great writers they had left and I suspect Stamets was a casualty of that.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,273 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Wasn't there some sting at the end of an season 1 episode where Stamets' reflection stayed in places, grinned evilly or something? IIRC that never went anywhere whatsoever in another case of the show being totally sellotaped together



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The official story is that the mirror universe plot twist was always part of the story but I never believed that.

    It's an awful pity that Discovery seems to have destroyed the idea of story arcs or darker Trek for a generation. No one will be brave enough to do a 21st century DS9 style show now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,902 ✭✭✭✭AMKC
    Ms


    So I see that there is a "Friends" recreation set in Dublin. Not fair how about a Star Trek Enterprise D bridge set in Ireland.

    Us trekies need to come together and demand some Star Trek here in Ireland.

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,047 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    I don't want to see another Fair Haven, thanks all the same.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,273 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The problem with "darker Trek" is that it almost inevitably ends up at "but what if the Federation wasn't all that great?", which aside from having been done already a dozens times, it's also something any old hack can do - but few can do well which as you suggest was Ds9's strength. They explored the dark sides of the Federation without ever wallowing, or completely undercutting the entire point of the thing.

    So to that end, I'm not sure where else a more modern Dark Trek could go, not without mining that already stripped out trope of Evil Admirals and Section 31 behind every curtain.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Well bright Trek also has "nowhere to go" and is just "mining stripped out tropes" like SNW is doing and everyone is jizzing over that.

    There is definitely room for serious arcs or dealing deeper issues without it being about the Federation being panto villain evil like Disco and Picard done.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,273 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yeah but it's running with existing tropes from Trek of which there are many. Lots of templates or story styles and even varying tones given the switch from horror to comedy to musical; "Dark Trek" has tended to go down one avenue when called upon so genuinely curious how you do that without it becoming "is the federation actually the bad guy?". But as you point out the key problem is the talent pool running Trek wouldn't be good enough, regardless how good the idea was.



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,974 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    I really liked early Stamets in Discovery. He had an edge to his character. Kind hearted and willing to do the right thing when called for (such as saving the Tardigrade) but also unwilling to suffer fools and the sort of bullshit Michael would offer up. They totally neutered him in subsequent seasons. I thought we would see original Stamets when it looked like he was going to throw up in his mouth upon hearing Tilly would be his superior officer but neutered Stamets quickly took over unfortunately.

    The gay aspect of his character was also done really well in season one imo. After 50 years of Trek completely evading the fact of gay people's existence, they introduced Stamets and Culber just as seamlessly as they introduced Uhura or Sisko or Janeway. Just competent officers being who they were and doing their thing and leaving the audience wondering why was it ever a big deal in the first place. It's a pity they didn't do trans people as much justice, Gray was a bit of a **** pointless character. I do like Adira though, some seriously weird writing around the character (Stamets and Culber adopting them as their adult child) aside.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    There are stories you could do as darker side of the Federation without bolting a twirlable moustache onto every character. In the Pale Moonlight is a good one to crib from as desperation forces good people to do bad things. Same with Homefront/Paradise Lost but Admiral Leyton wasn't in the main cast so it didn't have as much of an impact. The Wounded could also be a good template as Maxwell was completely right but the restrictions of the Federation forced Picard to go against him. Same for the Mauquis but that did kind of devolve into moustache twirling with some light attempted genocide. As slightly different angle an irreconcilable ideological split could drag the Federation into civil war which could pose some interesting angles especially with pulled punches protracting the conflict and creating a WWI style stalemate. leasing to some of the above.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,047 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    I think Mariner worded it perfectly in the latest episode of Lower Decks.

    "Starfleet is supposed to be about puzzling together the mysteries of life, not fighting wars! I don't want to be a general, I don't-I don't wanna send my friends off to die!

    Sub Starfleet for Star Trek and you get the idea.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Exactly my point "dark Trek has tended to go down one avenue" which has killed the idea of someone competent doing it.

    You are judging the idea on what has been done with it and not what could be done with it. It's like saying SNW is sht because JJ Trek was **** or because all the other Trek prequels were sht.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    Mariner, despite being a decade older than the rest of the lower deckers, is still the most childish and naive of the bunch. She will start fights that endanger others at the drop of a hat but can't own up to the responsibility of ordering others into dangerous situations.

    The very Irish perspective of "if we're nice enough we'll never have to fight" doesn't work in Star Trek, or real life. Being neutral doesn't mean you have no enemies, it means you have no friends.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    And the Klingon pointed out the flaw in that a minute later.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I always liked the idea of Starfleet being the scientists with the big sticks.


    There to explore but with the technology to back them up... but they keep undermining it considering they never bloody defend Earth



  • Registered Users Posts: 342 ✭✭eadrom


    Has war always been the default position for our imagination? Trying to think back to the 90s, I don’t remember that being so much the case. Maybe I was just too young to notice or I’m misremembering but I don’t remember anyone decrying the realism of Star Trek because they failed to show the “reality” of the darkness along the frontiers of utopia. 

    It’s a reflection of the time we live in now, and I get that sci-fi has a role to play there, but I’d still like Star Trek to dream of something better to be honest. Sure there are dangers to encounter, but encounter them as explorers and scientists.

    And yeah SNW is a bit light and bubbly. Love it, but there’s room for a more earnest take too. Just imagine something better than perpetual war.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    Season 1 of TNG had a character from a planet with rape gangs so the darkness on the frontiers has always been there. War has been a theme throughout the 90s Star Treks too but it wasn't until the later seasons of DS9 that there was budget to do the battle scenes justice and it seems subsequent writers saw how well the last few seasons of DS9 were received and took the wrong lesson from them. STD is a case in point they wanted to be season 5 of DS9 from the outset but hadn't laid the groundwork for it or had the talent to pull it off at all really.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    War was always the default position in 90% of sci-fi and Star Trek was the exception. Star Trek also always showed the darker side of things and many of the best episodes of TOS were grim. It's only the Federation who are generally good guys in Trek.

    I would love to see Trek deal more with in universe politics again. Thats the part of DS9 that I miss not the battles. Picard absolutely wasted both the Romulan fallout and the Founder separatists by having them mashed in with stupid "big evil" plot lines.



  • Registered Users Posts: 342 ✭✭eadrom


    @Evade

    Season 1 of TNG had a character from a planet with rape gangs so the darkness on the frontiers has always been there.

    I mean TNG season 1 had its fair share of ropey concepts. But also they didn’t spend a season long ark on the war effort to liberate the planet.

    And I’m not really discounting that there are pockets of turmoil and hard times in the Star Trek universe, but that’s just not what Star Trek is, at it’s best, imo, about.

    The last couple of seasons of DS9 were boring.



  • Registered Users Posts: 342 ✭✭eadrom


    @breezy1985

    War was always the default position in 90% of sci-fi and Star Trek was the exception.

    And so it should remain 🙂

    It's only the Federation who are generally good guys in Trek.

    Actually I would like to see a (probably mini-)series focused on one of the other races. That could be a back door into seeing a less utopian version of the Star Trek universe that I wouldn’t mind so much.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    My dream is a miniseries on how all the DS9 aliens are getting on post war. Bajor 20+ years under the Federation, explore Cardassia's attempts to rebuild and find out what happened to the remaining Jem'Hadar and Vorta (if they didn't all off themselves)

    Serious, tense and political without anyone actually shooting at each other.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,273 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Too lazy to Google but didn't season 1 also see the head honchos that replaced Fuller also get sacked? The season was obviously a total mess and there's probably a tonne of details that went nowhere cos of the change.

    Last time I watched Discovery, Stamets and Culber were angsting over the Trill girl they took a shine to; Stamets called her their "daughter" completely out of nowhere, having established no such relationship - they did dirty on both those characters.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,584 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Sorry if I'm repeating myself but having the non binary character date the trans one and get "adopted" by the gay couple was an absolutely pathetic attempt at being progressive. Way too 21st century looking.

    Have the non binary or trans character date a heterosexual and do it with absolutely no fuss or mention like it's the most normal thing ever.

    Or have some bisexual characters with no special episode or plot about it. Just have them be bi.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,769 ✭✭✭Evade


    I'm reasonably sure DS9 season 4 to 7 are generally very well regarded among Star Trek fans and about as far from boring as you can get.



  • Registered Users Posts: 342 ✭✭eadrom


    Just in my opinion. I've re-watched the show a couple of times in recent years and it always becomes a bit of a chore around season 6. The light goes out of it, and it's all subterfuge and turmoil and ends justifying the means.

    They might have done it objectively well on DS9 but so what? Just another sci-fi show about a messed up future and the "fight" for humanity. I found it pretty boring. Writing an interesting show about humanity's brightest future with little or no conflict would have been much more impressive. But of course the DS9 writers were famously only too happy to drop that Roddenberry edict.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,974 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    I think they were going for the concept of "queer chosen families" (where teenagers get disowned by their **** conservative parents and get "adopted" by someone in the community) but being the hack writers that they were just dropped that in like they just read a sentence from a Wikipedia article, not to mention that it doesn't make sense in the post-bigotry society of the Federation.



Advertisement