Star Trek: Discovery has premiered

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

immortalfrieza:
War was inevitable because that's precisely what Klingons DO, there was no other options for The Federation except attacking and beating the Klingons back until they surrendered or were destroyed. Michael's course of action was the only correct one and the Admiral and the Captain's refusal to accept that is what made war inevitable. Even only counting the moments The Federation have encountered them in the time before this series takes place, Klingons have proven beyond all doubt that it is all but impossible to reason with them and that their so called "honor" is nonsensical and means precisely jack whenever they want it to. It reminds me of a quote from another franchise but it fits the Klingons just as well:

"They can't be bargained with, they can't be reasoned with, they don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear, and they absolutely will not stop, EVER, until you are DEAD."

Worf is one of the very very few decent and nonhomicidal Klingons in the entire franchise because he lives in a time when the Federation and the Klingons are allies (because incidentally, The Federation wised up and did exactly what Michael was suggesting) and because he actually gives a damn about Klingon honor. Michael's course of action should have been Starfleet's official policy to begin with, not to mention after she bothered to explain exactly what they should do and why. The captain should have heard the word "Klingon" and her response should have been basically "Let's get the hell out of here!!!" and when they showed up, her response should have been:
image
especially since they were outgunned. When you are outgunned you either run the hell away or blast the other guys first with everything you've got in the hopes of either taking them out outright or hurting them enough to put the two of you on equal footing. A lot of the time fiction justifies a character doing something stupid or avoiding doing the blatantly obvious by having a plot contrive it so they turn out to be right to do so this one time when 999,999 times out of a million they'd be wrong to do so, but having Michael turn out to be right about her stance in the next episode is simply following the natural course of events given what Klingons have shown themselves to be like.

Um...have we been watching the same franchise?

In the original series, the Klingons were the Cold War Soviet expies, while the Romulans were the proud warrior race. The peace between the Klingons and the Federation was brought about in the episode Errand of Mercy (as I recall) when the Organians - a very powerful ascended race - imposed terms on both sides. The Cold War itself came to an end in Star Trek VI, when the Klingons could no longer afford any hostilities due to an industrial accident causing critical damage to their homeworld (in canon, the treaty that brought an end to the Cold War was called the Khitomer Accords).

It's only in Star Trek: The Next Generation that they were established as the proud warrior race (and the Romulans took on the Soviet Cold War expy role), and the show took a great deal of time developing the Klingon culture on-screen - and they were never just mindless barbarians.

Now, I may not have been a fan of DS9 or Voyager, but I AM a fan of the original series, and the original cast movies, and the Klingons you described are not anything I have ever seen on screen.

KaraFang:
I paid for it.... I'm on Netflix thanks.

And no, I didn't like it, and it had nothing to do with SJW trends. I just thought it wasn't very well written, and it didn't "feel" like Star Trek to me. That's a personal taste thing. You like it? Good for you. I hope there's enough of you peeps who enjoyed it so it's not cancelled.

For me, what a let down. :(

For me, and everyone else in the U.S., its not on Netflix.

Ezekiel:

Kyrian007:
I thought the episode I watched was fine. Seems like (if not exactly looks like) the Star Trek I remember. Then I see some of the complaints here... and I notice a trend in the folks posting on the "hate it" side. Then I watch Moviebob's review, and he's in the "like it" camp.

Oh, now I see. This doesn't have anything to do with Star Trek at all...

Well weighing in on my side, Bob was more rational than the "hate it" folks here. But I'm not watching it. It might be a good series (with the correct politics) but I'm not getting another subscription service just to see Star Trek Discovery, or ANY one show.

I bet almost nobody here who watched it paid for it/subscribed. Yeah, I got bored of the discussion several pages back, when it became so political. I didn't think of SJW or any of that crap when I watched the two episodes.

I would have guessed the Trump/ggator/neocon/teapartier folks would have already been boycotting anything as pro-progressive and inclusive as Star Trek. Capitalism eliminated and replaced with a far more communist society, and capitalism seen as backwards and barbaric. A one world (then many world) government that is far more U.N. than U.S. All humans are considered a single race and racism between humans and alien species is seen as backwards and primitive. Its literally the worst nightmare of the Steve Bannon/Alex Jones mindset.

And then I remembered that there is nothing more those folk like than watching something they don't like and complaining loudly about it... so I should have expected the response.

immortalfrieza:

War was inevitable because that's precisely what Klingons DO, there was no other options for The Federation except attacking and beating the Klingons back until they surrendered or were destroyed. Michael's course of action was the only correct one and the Admiral and the Captain's refusal to accept that is what made war inevitable. Even only counting the moments The Federation have encountered them in the time before this series takes place, Klingons have proven beyond all doubt that it is all but impossible to reason with them and that their so called "honor" is nonsensical and means precisely jack whenever they want it to. It reminds me of a quote from another franchise but it fits the Klingons just as well:

Were you even watching the same show as me?
It went out of it's way, immediately after the mutiny scene, to demonstrate how she was not correct and her idea for an aggressive approach was just as bad as Starfleet's passivity.
The very next scene was 24 Klingon vessels arriving, demanding to know where the enemy heralded by the light of Kahless was, and acting a little incredulous that the Fereration was there. If instead they'd warped in to a full on battle between a Klingon vessel and a Federation one they wouldn't have had to ask.

The only character who had the "right" idea was Lt. Cmdr Saru, and that would have only delayed the inevitable.

immortalfrieza:

Worf is one of the very very few decent and nonhomicidal Klingons in the entire franchise because he lives in a time when the Federation and the Klingons are allies (because incidentally, The Federation wised up and did exactly what Michael was suggesting) and because he actually gives a damn about Klingon honor.

No they didn't, it took a famous human war hero putting aside his hatred for something greater than petty vengeance, when it had been revealed that the Klingon's themselves had acted without honour, to thaw relations between the Federation and the Empire. Even so they remained at odds for a century until the Enterprise C sacrificed itself to protect a Klingon outpost against a Romulan attack before they actually began peaceful relations.

immortalfrieza:

The captain should have heard the word "Klingon" and her response should have been basically "Let's get the hell out of here!!!" and when they showed up, her response should have been:
image
especially since they were outgunned. When you are outgunned you either run the hell away or blast the other guys first with everything you've got in the hopes of either taking them out outright or hurting them enough to put the two of you on equal footing. A lot of the time fiction justifies a character doing something stupid or avoiding doing the blatantly obvious by having a plot contrive it so they turn out to be right to do so this one time when 999,999 times out of a million they'd be wrong to do so, but having Michael turn out to be right about her stance in the next episode is simply following the natural course of events given what Klingons have shown themselves to be like.

I get how you want her to be right, white-knighting and all is a time-honoured internet tradition, but she's shown to be a damaged, broken person, barely holding her psyche together in the face of childhood trauma, acting out her deeply bigoted fears in all the wrong ways; it's the only thing that makes her character compelling. I'm seriously hoping that her major character arc is one of redemption, accepting of her hatred as poisonous, learning to forgive and treat individuals as such, not blaming a collective for the actions of a few. If the showrunners go the route of "the racist black woman was right all along with her bigoted views" it'll be deeply disappointing.

Kyrian007:

Ezekiel:

Kyrian007:
I thought the episode I watched was fine. Seems like (if not exactly looks like) the Star Trek I remember. Then I see some of the complaints here... and I notice a trend in the folks posting on the "hate it" side. Then I watch Moviebob's review, and he's in the "like it" camp.

Oh, now I see. This doesn't have anything to do with Star Trek at all...

Well weighing in on my side, Bob was more rational than the "hate it" folks here. But I'm not watching it. It might be a good series (with the correct politics) but I'm not getting another subscription service just to see Star Trek Discovery, or ANY one show.

I bet almost nobody here who watched it paid for it/subscribed. Yeah, I got bored of the discussion several pages back, when it became so political. I didn't think of SJW or any of that crap when I watched the two episodes.

I would have guessed the Trump/ggator/neocon/teapartier folks would have already been boycotting anything as pro-progressive and inclusive as Star Trek. Capitalism eliminated and replaced with a far more communist society, and capitalism seen as backwards and barbaric. A one world (then many world) government that is far more U.N. than U.S. All humans are considered a single race and racism between humans and alien species is seen as backwards and primitive. Its literally the worst nightmare of the Steve Bannon/Alex Jones mindset.

And then I remembered that there is nothing more those folk like than watching something they don't like and complaining loudly about it... so I should have expected the response.

No...people have no problem with Star Trek being Star Trek. Some people just seem to believe that all those things are the only parts of Trek and that's why people don't like it for some reason.

People like Trek because yes, bigotry has largely been eliminated in most races with forgiveness being at the forefront(with the exception of Sisko in pretty odd and randomly scattered instances for some reason). Between races? That's a crapshoot and you know it. The Romulans despise the Vulcans, Bajorans are still terrified to burning with hatred of the Cardassians, Klingons have a mild indifference to pretty much every other race out there, the existence of things like the Borg and people's various feelings about them, etc.

And c'mon, Capitalism isn't seen as backwards and barbaric, and you had better know it. It's simply seen as a part of history for humans and many Federation races. The main reason the current system works is pretty much purely on the existence of the Replicator and its ancestor technology. It's just not really understood anymore, has nothing to with it being backwards, just not needed when there is no longer a system of supply and demand when you can take a shit, click a button on the replicator, and have said shit reconstituted at the molecular level back into useable material and actual food.

What people DON'T like is when you fuck with established canon and tech level and act like it's not fucking with established canon. Or when you insert a pure fan-service character. Or when those things you just listed are the only things being marketed when there's literally so much more depth and interesting things going on in the universe besides the imagined utopia people seem to have of it. The best parts of the franchise are from when that utopia is shattered in favor of people still being people. Spock's sacrifice isn't as impactful if someone else on the engineering team had jumped in. The Federation's distrust of Picard because of Locutus' actions. Odo's near unadulterated racism of Feringi and Quark in particular during the early parts of DS9. McCoy not really trusting pretty much anyone that isn't in charge of some part of the ship. The Trill being distrusted from time to time and each host being held responsible for the actions of their symbiote in past hosts.

So please, can you drop the label-maker for people that don't like or are unimpressed by the show? It really shows how little you think or care about the complaints people have if you have to reduce them to those in your mind.

Redryhno:
People like Trek because yes, bigotry has largely been eliminated in most races with forgiveness being at the forefront(with the exception of Sisko in pretty odd and randomly scattered instances for some reason). Between races? That's a crapshoot and you know it. The Romulans despise the Vulcans, Bajorans are still terrified to burning with hatred of the Cardassians, Klingons have a mild indifference to pretty much every other race out there, the existence of things like the Borg and people's various feelings about them, etc.

Oh, all the folks seen on the show as "wrong" or "bad"... ok.

And c'mon, Capitalism isn't seen as backwards and barbaric, and you had better know it. It's simply seen as a part of history for humans and many Federation races. The main reason the current system works is pretty much purely on the existence of the Replicator and its ancestor technology. It's just not really understood anymore, has nothing to with it being backwards, just not needed when there is no longer a system of supply and demand when you can take a shit, click a button on the replicator, and have said shit reconstituted at the molecular level back into useable material and actual food.

Oh so backwards and barbaric times when humans had to enslave other humans to harvest crops aren't backwards and barbaric, they are just a part of history... got it.

What people DON'T like is when you fuck with established canon and tech level and act like it's not fucking with established canon. Or when you insert a pure fan-service character. Or when those things you just listed are the only things being marketed when there's literally so much more depth and interesting things going on in the universe besides the imagined utopia people seem to have of it. The best parts of the franchise are from when that utopia is shattered in favor of people still being people. Spock's sacrifice isn't as impactful if someone else on the engineering team had jumped in. The Federation's distrust of Picard because of Locutus' actions. Odo's near unadulterated racism of Feringi and Quark in particular during the early parts of DS9. McCoy not really trusting pretty much anyone that isn't in charge of some part of the ship. The Trill being distrusted from time to time and each host being held responsible for the actions of their symbiote in past hosts.

Yes, those are great moments and or plot points. But despite their existence making the story more interesting, they don't change the optimistic tone of the series as a whole (I'm saying "shattered" is a little hyperbolic.)

So please, can you drop the label-maker for people that don't like or are unimpressed by the show? It really shows how little you think or care about the complaints people have if you have to reduce them to those in your mind.

Yes, I knew we could agree on something. That was exactly my point, I do think and care little about the complaints people have. You nailed that on the head.

Ok, so I've had the chance to first watch Discovery and it sure looks and feels different from any other Trek I've seen (which admittedly is not a whole lot). The series basically starting off with war just feels ... off, compared to its predecessors. But, I'm not the most knowledgeable about Trek history so I'll just leave it at that.

I'm not as fond of the new art direction they took tho. I've seen someone compare it to Mass Effect, and yeah, I can sort of see it. The bridges of the Shenzhou and Normandy do have a similar vibe to them. Oh, and the lens flares. Could do with less of the Dutch angles tho.

Then there's the Klingons. I don't dislike their redesign, but they look like they could fit into Warhammer 40K with how ornately decorated all of their stuff is. I do like how they look a bit more distinct from humans, instead of simply like metalheads with bumpy foreheads.

Chimpzy:
Ok, so I've had the chance to first watch Discovery and it sure looks and feels different from any other Trek I've seen (which admittedly is not a whole lot). The series basically starting off with war just feels ... off, compared to its predecessors. But, I'm not the most knowledgeable about Trek history so I'll just leave it at that.

I'm not as fond of the new art direction they took tho. I've seen someone compare it to Mass Effect, and yeah, I can sort of see it. The bridges of the Shenzhou and Normandy do have a similar vibe to them. Oh, and the lens flares. Could do with less of the Dutch angles tho.

Then there's the Klingons. I don't dislike their redesign, but they look like they could fit into Warhammer 40K with how ornately decorated all of their stuff is. I do like how they look a bit more distinct from humans, instead of simply like metalheads with bumpy foreheads.

I only just watch it myself. Usually it take seasons for a Star Trek to get to a war. I don't have relationship with the characters so any dire situations don't feel that important. There's no stakes. Also, the lead is pretty crazy. She literally does everything she can to start a war. Why would anyone let her out of prison at this point?

Does anyone else think the sentence for mutiny being life in prison is ridiculous? I thought the future was supposed to be more civilized.

Kyrian007:

For me, and everyone else in the U.S., its not on Netflix.

You know this is a site that has non-American posters on it right?

Kyrian007:
I would have guessed the Trump/ggator/neocon/teapartier folks would have already been boycotting anything as pro-progressive and inclusive as Star Trek. Capitalism eliminated and replaced with a far more communist society, and capitalism seen as backwards and barbaric. A one world (then many world) government that is far more U.N. than U.S. All humans are considered a single race and racism between humans and alien species is seen as backwards and primitive. Its literally the worst nightmare of the Steve Bannon/Alex Jones mindset.

The irony here is that Burnham's rationale for her actions is right out of the Bannon playbook, and the portrayal of the Klingons (somehow even more uniform than the budgetary limited 90's series) just proves her notions. Hell, they should have just gone whole hog and her waving anthrax at Starfleet Tactical.

maninahat:

I suspect that the series is setting her up to prove her wrong; her prejudices might have saved them in the first couple of episodes, but it would be a vain death for her captain to have died and not have at least some of her wise perspective filter through - it seems obvious to me that they are setting up a progression where she is going to learn to stop viewing the Klingons as stereotypes, finally be forced into a similar choice as the series starts with (to attack or hail the Klingons), and she is going to make a different kind of choice to what she would at the start.

They have one hell of an uphill climb then if this is the case. Then again, given the marketing's hints about Isaccs and the Discovery I'm not hopeful. The show's emphasis on action and set-pieces so far hasn't impressed me.

Ezekiel:
Does anyone else think the sentence for mutiny being life in prison is ridiculous? I thought the future was supposed to be more civilized.

The cynic in me says it's probably to make her more sympathetic given how contradictory her reasoning for her actions was. So she becomes the character wrongfully put down as opposed to the maniac that wanted to kick off an interstellar war.

Cartographer:
Were you even watching the same show as me?
It went out of it's way, immediately after the mutiny scene, to demonstrate how she was not correct and her idea for an aggressive approach was just as bad as Starfleet's passivity.
The very next scene was 24 Klingon vessels arriving, demanding to know where the enemy heralded by the light of Kahless was, and acting a little incredulous that the Fereration was there. If instead they'd warped in to a full on battle between a Klingon vessel and a Federation one they wouldn't have had to ask.

The only character who had the "right" idea was Lt. Cmdr Saru, and that would have only delayed the inevitable.

You must have missed the first part of the show where they established that Klingons were incredibly violent and anti-social, conducting "terror raids" that murdered indiscriminately. They are isolationists that venture out to slake their blood-thirst, only stopping their rampage when they get shot. Sarek reiterates this when Micheal calls him. Now, you could say that Klingons are deliberately presented in this two dimensional way in order for Micheal to be right, but you cannot fault Micheal for operating on the only information they know about the Klingons.

With Klingons, as presented in Star Trek: Discovery, there can be no diplomacy. No communication. For in the grim future of Star Trek there is only war.

Redvenge:

With Klingons, as presented in Star Trek: Discovery, there can be no diplomacy. No communication. For in the grim future of Star Trek there is only war.

So Trek has become what happens when Americans take British satire and tongue-in-cheek pulp at face value, great...

WeepingAngels:
Actually, you're wrong: http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

I said the "average person," not "Star Trek fans."

Let me put it this way - think of all the Star Trek tropes that have been incorporated/parodied in popular culture. I can think of numerous examples that parody TOS, and to a lesser extent, TNG (Galaxy Quest, Orville, Big Bang Theory, Simpsons, Futurama, Stargate, etc.) I can't think of any that parody DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise.

Ninjamedic:

Yes. Many of the most well regarded episodes were science fiction stories, regardless of revisionist opinion. The dramatic and action elements were elevated (or at least distinct from other adventure series) by the ideas behind them.

Key word on "most well regarded episodes." The revisionist opinion is assuming that all Star Trek is up to their standard. TOS has some good parallels to the Cold War, but it's also outright bonkers in other areas (the Greek god episode, the baby space captain episode, the Nazi planet episode, the gorn fight episode, the Omega Glory (bleh) episode, etc.) TNG gave me the Measure of a Man, but also garbage like season 1 episodes (e.g. the African planet episode, the 'white people paradise' episode, the casino episode, the 'aliens need children' episode, etc.)

Ninjamedic:

Kyrian007:

For me, and everyone else in the U.S., its not on Netflix.

You know this is a site that has non-American posters on it right?

Yes, I do. I was informing someone who obviously does not have the US version of Netflix that not everyone gets Star Trek Discovery on Netflix. It is something that just such a non-American dwelling Escapist might not know.

Hawki:
#

Key word on "most well regarded episodes." The revisionist opinion is assuming that all Star Trek is up to their standard. TOS has some good parallels to the Cold War, but it's also outright bonkers in other areas (the Greek god episode, the baby space captain episode, the Nazi planet episode, the gorn fight episode, the Omega Glory (bleh) episode, etc.) TNG gave me the Measure of a Man, but also garbage like season 1 episodes (e.g. the African planet episode, the 'white people paradise' episode, the casino episode, the 'aliens need children' episode, etc.)

You're not going to find anyone defending Season 1 TNG outside of conspiracy, it's well established that production was horribly mismanaged and Rodenberry sadly wasn't well enough in any respect to helm the show.

And my point was never that it was perfect, just that we did get those moments where it explored ideas and concepts, and Discovery shows no sign that's it's interested so far, rather it's more interested in doing a serialised version of the Abrams films.

Ezekiel:
Does anyone else think the sentence for mutiny being life in prison is ridiculous? I thought the future was supposed to be more civilized.

In a military, mutiny at her level of rank within the hierarchy is a serious crime. On the other hand, Starfleet personnel are "explorers" until they are "military". I guess in 100 years since the Klingons and Romulans went on hiatus, not a single Starfleet vessel was shot at. So, whatever. Assume what you will. The future makes no sense in any case.

Ninjamedic:

Redvenge:

With Klingons, as presented in Star Trek: Discovery, there can be no diplomacy. No communication. For in the grim future of Star Trek there is only war.

So Trek has become what happens when Americans take British satire and tongue-in-cheek pulp at face value, great...

Well, the new Klingon designs are so ornately decorated, they wouldn't look that out of place.

Put some more spikes and sharp edges on that and it could pass for Chaos or Dark Eldar.

Redryhno:

Maybe, but we're also talking about a series where both showrunners and actors have trashed the established fanbase, made it clear they wanted a new market, and dared them to not watch it. They don't strike me as the type that would then turn around and make a main character have to actually answer for their actions beyond wrist-slaps and maybe an Admiral Kirk'ening. Especially when it's effectively a fanfic character. Seems a bit too...smart? Maybe ambitious is the right word.

When did do this? What did they say? That seems an unbelievably stupid thing to do when you're trying to sell any show (surely you want as many viewers as possible? don't alienate potential viewers/customers without very good reasons), let alone one that's using one of the most recognised franchises in fiction.

Hawki:

WeepingAngels:
Actually, you're wrong: http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

I said the "average person," not "Star Trek fans."

Let me put it this way - think of all the Star Trek tropes that have been incorporated/parodied in popular culture. I can think of numerous examples that parody TOS, and to a lesser extent, TNG (Galaxy Quest, Orville, Big Bang Theory, Simpsons, Futurama, Stargate, etc.) I can't think of any that parody DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise.

I said that Hollywood only wants to sample TOS and you just said that the average person was more familiar with TOS because Hollywood likes to sample TOS. Thanks.

That self fulfilling prophecy is hardly a reason to keep making prequels and Kirk era shows and movies, especially when Star Trek fans prefer TNG and Voyager to TOS.

WeepingAngels:

I said that Hollywood only wants to sample TOS and you just said that the average person was more familiar with TOS because Hollywood likes to sample TOS. Thanks.

I didn't say that at all. That's a lie and you know it. What I did say was that the average person is more familiar with TOS and TNG. I didn't say anything about Hollywood enforcing that.

Chimpzy:

Well, the new Klingon designs are so ornately decorated, they wouldn't look that out of place.

Put some more spikes and sharp edges on that and it could pass for Chaos or Dark Eldar.

To be fair these are explicitly religious Klingons, normal Klingons are probably not as ornate.

Based on the first two episodes: I like it! Though sadly the main character has obvious mental issues, maybe she'll grow as a person. Also, her behaviour somewhat reminded me of 7of9 from Voyager.

Some minor criticisms include:
-the phaser fires in space sounded very, cute? Same with the worp sound.
-less lens flare please
-T'Kuvma dying so quickly, though now they a proper martyr to rally the remaining klingons

Also, I've seen all of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and parts from ENT. So I know full well, how "klingons look wrong/weird". Guys, can't makeup artists be allowed to do something different, not just copying old designs?

WeepingAngels:

Hawki:

WeepingAngels:
Actually, you're wrong: http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

I said the "average person," not "Star Trek fans."

Let me put it this way - think of all the Star Trek tropes that have been incorporated/parodied in popular culture. I can think of numerous examples that parody TOS, and to a lesser extent, TNG (Galaxy Quest, Orville, Big Bang Theory, Simpsons, Futurama, Stargate, etc.) I can't think of any that parody DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise.

I said that Hollywood only wants to sample TOS and you just said that the average person was more familiar with TOS because Hollywood likes to sample TOS. Thanks.

That self fulfilling prophecy is hardly a reason to keep making prequels and Kirk era shows and movies, especially when Star Trek fans prefer TNG and Voyager to TOS.

I think you mean Deep Space Nine rather than Voyager. Voyager isn't very well regarded, on the whole.

09philj:

WeepingAngels:

Hawki:

I said the "average person," not "Star Trek fans."

Let me put it this way - think of all the Star Trek tropes that have been incorporated/parodied in popular culture. I can think of numerous examples that parody TOS, and to a lesser extent, TNG (Galaxy Quest, Orville, Big Bang Theory, Simpsons, Futurama, Stargate, etc.) I can't think of any that parody DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise.

I said that Hollywood only wants to sample TOS and you just said that the average person was more familiar with TOS because Hollywood likes to sample TOS. Thanks.

That self fulfilling prophecy is hardly a reason to keep making prequels and Kirk era shows and movies, especially when Star Trek fans prefer TNG and Voyager to TOS.

I think you mean Deep Space Nine rather than Voyager. Voyager isn't very well regarded, on the whole.

It is better liked than people think. My data is coming from this poll: http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

WeepingAngels:
It is better liked than people think. My data is coming from this poll: http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

Netflix recently also published data on the top 10 re-watched Star Trek episodes and Voyager had a lot of episodes in there.

http://www.startrek.com/article/netflixs-top-10-most-re-watched-trek-episodes

Although the most prominent conclusion one can draw from this is probably that people really like watching the Borg.

Ezekiel:
Does anyone else think the sentence for mutiny being life in prison is ridiculous? I thought the future was supposed to be more civilized.

The traditional punishment for mutiny is death, so this does qualify as more civilized.

Redvenge:

Cartographer:
Were you even watching the same show as me?
It went out of it's way, immediately after the mutiny scene, to demonstrate how she was not correct and her idea for an aggressive approach was just as bad as Starfleet's passivity.
The very next scene was 24 Klingon vessels arriving, demanding to know where the enemy heralded by the light of Kahless was, and acting a little incredulous that the Fereration was there. If instead they'd warped in to a full on battle between a Klingon vessel and a Federation one they wouldn't have had to ask.

The only character who had the "right" idea was Lt. Cmdr Saru, and that would have only delayed the inevitable.

You must have missed the first part of the show where they established that Klingons were incredibly violent and anti-social, conducting "terror raids" that murdered indiscriminately. They are isolationists that venture out to slake their blood-thirst, only stopping their rampage when they get shot. Sarek reiterates this when Micheal calls him. Now, you could say that Klingons are deliberately presented in this two dimensional way in order for Micheal to be right, but you cannot fault Micheal for operating on the only information they know about the Klingons.

With Klingons, as presented in Star Trek: Discovery, there can be no diplomacy. No communication. For in the grim future of Star Trek there is only war.

That makes them space Vikings, not mindless Barbarians who cannot be communicated or negotiated with. And if you've ever read up on the Vikings, there was a lot more going on than just raiding.

That said, the Federation in this series has absolutely zero ability to find common ground due to their own closed mindedness, so diplomacy IS impossible at this point in the series - but that is as much caused by the Federation treating their own approach as a catch-all solution as it is by the warrior culture of the Klingons.

bluegate:

WeepingAngels:
It is better liked than people think. My data is coming from this poll: http://www.startrek.com/article/poll-fans-most-watched-star-trek-series-is

Netflix recently also published data on the top 10 re-watched Star Trek episodes and Voyager had a lot of episodes in there.

http://www.startrek.com/article/netflixs-top-10-most-re-watched-trek-episodes

Although the most prominent conclusion one can draw from this is probably that people really like watching the Borg.

I think TOS is just too outdated to watch today for many people. I also think that it's no surprise that TNG is on the top (it was very popular during it's original run too) and since Voyager is the most like TNG it's no surprise that it's in second. I know people like DS9 (I do too) but it's serialized and that means it's hard to sit down and watch a single episode. DS9 was amazing the first time I watched it but every attempt to recapture that magic has failed for me. I still go back to watch many TNG and Voyager episodes, episodes like The Measure of a Man, The Inner Light and Living Witness come to mind. For DS9, there is The Visitor that I come back to sometimes. I don't go back to TOS or Enterprise.

I guess I want to know why the last 15 years of Trek have been looking back instead of forward. What do these producers know that we do not?

Gorfias:

I loved the 1st two episodes. The 3rd, which just dropped, felt like the worst of STNG: all social politics rather than fun sci fantasy and comedy.

To their credit, at least they went the "this is a topic you should think about" approach rather than the "this is what you must believe or you are evil", which is why they inevitably ticked off the folks who usually get angry about that sort of thing.

TheVampwizimp:

Yeah, that question makes no sense. Star Trek was fully SJW decades before that term existed. It's the most left-leaning sci fi property I've ever seen, and that is saying a lot. Anyone complaining that Discovery is somehow messing up Star Trek by being socially progressive or shoving diversity down our throats is a moron who is reflexively reacting to anything that remotely smells like social justice, regardless of context.

You do get the feeling that the people trying to sell ST:D on it's social justice and inclusivity just simply aren't aware of what franchise they were handed, probably because it was that gross thing that gross nerds were into before Enterprise or so (because by then it was socially permissible to be into geeky things). I mean, they were really trying to upsell how they have a BLACK WOMAN in a franchise that had one of those in the core cast back in the 60s, had a black commander in DS9 and a woman in command in Voyager. Selling how *diverse* you've made Trek is a bad call if you were at all aware of what you'd been handed, because it always has been.

If I were going to make one big complaint, it's that they set it between Enterprise and TOS and created yet another new version of Klingons to explain. If we take Enterprise as canonical, TNG-era Klingons are the original Klingons, and experiments with the same technology that created Augments caused the transformation into TOS-era Klingons, which then gets cured sometime between TOS and TNG. Now we've got post Enterprise, slightly pre-TOS Klingons that look nothing like any other Klingon for no apparent reason.

Redvenge:

Cartographer:
Were you even watching the same show as me?
It went out of it's way, immediately after the mutiny scene, to demonstrate how she was not correct and her idea for an aggressive approach was just as bad as Starfleet's passivity.
The very next scene was 24 Klingon vessels arriving, demanding to know where the enemy heralded by the light of Kahless was, and acting a little incredulous that the Fereration was there. If instead they'd warped in to a full on battle between a Klingon vessel and a Federation one they wouldn't have had to ask.

The only character who had the "right" idea was Lt. Cmdr Saru, and that would have only delayed the inevitable.

You must have missed the first part of the show where they established that Klingons were incredibly violent and anti-social, conducting "terror raids" that murdered indiscriminately. They are isolationists that venture out to slake their blood-thirst, only stopping their rampage when they get shot. Sarek reiterates this when Micheal calls him. Now, you could say that Klingons are deliberately presented in this two dimensional way in order for Micheal to be right, but you cannot fault Micheal for operating on the only information they know about the Klingons.

With Klingons, as presented in Star Trek: Discovery, there can be no diplomacy. No communication. For in the grim future of Star Trek there is only war.

And that's just what's presented in Star Trek Discovery, in every other Star Trek media the Klingons automatically assume everybody they meet who isn't a Klingon is a likely enemy and thus will attack as has happened in Enterprise several times. Even if one can get them to talk it's all but impossible to avoid offending them and having them attack anything. They have this near universal obsession with gaining honor and glory through battle and consider the greatest honor to die in battle, therefore they will fight based on any pretext whatsoever. In fact, the only reason the Klingons haven't obliterated the Federation long ago is because they were too busy fighting each other to bother. Attacking them on sight is the ONLY rational response to Klingons, it's an objective fact.

Cartographer:

I get how you want her to be right, white-knighting and all is a time-honoured internet tradition, but she's shown to be a damaged, broken person, barely holding her psyche together in the face of childhood trauma, acting out her deeply bigoted fears in all the wrong ways; it's the only thing that makes her character compelling. I'm seriously hoping that her major character arc is one of redemption, accepting of her hatred as poisonous, learning to forgive and treat individuals as such, not blaming a collective for the actions of a few. If the showrunners go the route of "the racist black woman was right all along with her bigoted views" it'll be deeply disappointing.

It's not about white knighting, if Michael was wrong I'd be among the first to have her up against the wall for it, but under all objective and nonbiased facts and reasoning the truth is that she IS right regardless of what either of these two episodes wants us to think. Based on all of the history of the Klingons throughout the franchise her choice of action is the only possible one that would have anything remotely resembling a positive outcome, that makes her correct regardless of any motivation for that action.

Chimpzy:

Well, the new Klingon designs are so ornately decorated, they wouldn't look that out of place.

Put some more spikes and sharp edges on that and it could pass for Chaos or Dark Eldar.

So much for fleshing out their civilisation.

Robert B. Marks:
That makes them space Vikings, not mindless Barbarians who cannot be communicated or negotiated with. And if you've ever read up on the Vikings, there was a lot more going on than just raiding.

The Discovery-era Klingons display no such nuance. The conduct murder through "terror raids" in which they gleefully murder unarmed civilians. They only stopped doing this once the Vulcans killed enough of them that the Klingons gave up. That is all these Klingons have going for them.

Robert B. Marks:
That said, the Federation in this series has absolutely zero ability to find common ground due to their own closed mindedness, so diplomacy IS impossible at this point in the series - but that is as much caused by the Federation treating their own approach as a catch-all solution as it is by the warrior culture of the Klingons.

The only information the Federation has on the Discovery-era Klingons comes from the Vulcans. Sarek and Micheal seem to be the gatekeepers of this knowledge because Wikipedia does not exist in the future.

The Klingons cannot be reasoned with. They do not want to talk. They murder indiscriminately. This is all that anyone knows about them because they are murdering isolationists. We the viewer can see slightly more nuance to the Discovery-era Klingons, but the Federation characters don't have the luxury of meta-knowledge.

immortalfrieza:

Redvenge:

Cartographer:
Were you even watching the same show as me?
It went out of it's way, immediately after the mutiny scene, to demonstrate how she was not correct and her idea for an aggressive approach was just as bad as Starfleet's passivity.
The very next scene was 24 Klingon vessels arriving, demanding to know where the enemy heralded by the light of Kahless was, and acting a little incredulous that the Fereration was there. If instead they'd warped in to a full on battle between a Klingon vessel and a Federation one they wouldn't have had to ask.

The only character who had the "right" idea was Lt. Cmdr Saru, and that would have only delayed the inevitable.

You must have missed the first part of the show where they established that Klingons were incredibly violent and anti-social, conducting "terror raids" that murdered indiscriminately. They are isolationists that venture out to slake their blood-thirst, only stopping their rampage when they get shot. Sarek reiterates this when Micheal calls him. Now, you could say that Klingons are deliberately presented in this two dimensional way in order for Micheal to be right, but you cannot fault Micheal for operating on the only information they know about the Klingons.

With Klingons, as presented in Star Trek: Discovery, there can be no diplomacy. No communication. For in the grim future of Star Trek there is only war.

And that's just what's presented in Star Trek Discovery, in every other Star Trek media the Klingons automatically assume everybody they meet who isn't a Klingon is a likely enemy and thus will attack as has happened in Enterprise several times. Even if one can get them to talk it's all but impossible to avoid offending them and having them attack anything. They have this near universal obsession with gaining honor and glory through battle and consider the greatest honor to die in battle, therefore they will fight based on any pretext whatsoever. In fact, the only reason the Klingons haven't obliterated the Federation long ago is because they were too busy fighting each other to bother. Attacking them on sight is the ONLY rational response to Klingons, it's an objective fact.

Cartographer:

I get how you want her to be right, white-knighting and all is a time-honoured internet tradition, but she's shown to be a damaged, broken person, barely holding her psyche together in the face of childhood trauma, acting out her deeply bigoted fears in all the wrong ways; it's the only thing that makes her character compelling. I'm seriously hoping that her major character arc is one of redemption, accepting of her hatred as poisonous, learning to forgive and treat individuals as such, not blaming a collective for the actions of a few. If the showrunners go the route of "the racist black woman was right all along with her bigoted views" it'll be deeply disappointing.

It's not about white knighting, if Michael was wrong I'd be among the first to have her up against the wall for it, but under all objective and nonbiased facts and reasoning the truth is that she IS right regardless of what either of these two episodes wants us to think. Based on all of the history of the Klingons throughout the franchise her choice of action is the only possible one that would have anything remotely resembling a positive outcome, that makes her correct regardless of any motivation for that action.

It's neither objective nor unbiased, the show literally went out of it's way to set up:

"How you think you should react to Klingons is wrong, and you're bigoted, borderline racist for thinking so, because you're treating the one(s) in front of you based solely on you preconceived notions of what a Klingon is and how they (notice the collective there?) act."

The whole situation was seemingly put in place to flash a mirror at the audience and point you that "you" are just as bad as Cmdr. Burnham, because "you" think you know best based on what you think you "know" about Klingons. That was arguably the most intelligent writing in the episode, the rest was pretty mediocre, standard sci-fi tripe (the lack of basic physics knowledge amongst the writers was truly awful, though as I've said Sarek's "space magic" gets a pass as it's just being slightly more "space magic-ey").

Cartographer:

It's neither objective nor unbiased, the show literally went out of it's way to set up:

"How you think you should react to Klingons is wrong, and you're bigoted, borderline racist for thinking so, because you're treating the one(s) in front of you based solely on you preconceived notions of what a Klingon is and how they (notice the collective there?) act."

The whole situation was seemingly put in place to flash a mirror at the audience and point you that "you" are just as bad as Cmdr. Burnham, because "you" think you know best based on what you think you "know" about Klingons. That was arguably the most intelligent writing in the episode, the rest was pretty mediocre, standard sci-fi tripe (the lack of basic physics knowledge amongst the writers was truly awful, though as I've said Sarek's "space magic" gets a pass as it's just being slightly more "space magic-ey").

It is perfectly objective and unbiased, if those words mean anything whatsoever. The show can set up whatever it wants to, the facts are the facts and the fact is that Klingons have shown time and again throughout the franchise that aggression is the only thing they understand and the only thing they respect, trying to be diplomatic with them when they haven't already been beaten into the ground by you first is futile. If the intention was to flash a mirror at the audience and point out that we are just as bad as Cmdr. Burnham, they failed miserably because they used an alien species that has gone out of it's way throughout the history of the franchise to make that very attitude justified in every possible way. This is a result of the writing for Star Trek pigeonholing species into particular attitudes and roles with few if any existing exception, but it's still perfectly valid.

"How you think you should react to Klingons is wrong, and you're bigoted, borderline racist for thinking so, because you're treating the one(s) in front of you based solely on you preconceived notions of what a Klingon is and how they (notice the collective there?) act."

It's not racist or bigoted to expect a cat to meow instead of bark, a horse to neigh instead of moo, and to expect a Klingon to refuse to listen to reason if they will even talk to you and to try to kill you on sight instead of being willing to sit down and talk. As a species the Klingons are just a notch below the Borg in terms of aggression and inability to be reasoned with, that's a fact and any attempt by this show to show otherwise is a outright retcon, there's no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here