Star Trek: Discovery. Series talk and discussion
#81
Posted 25 September 2017 - 05:00 PM
#82
Posted 25 September 2017 - 06:36 PM
#83
Posted 25 September 2017 - 06:43 PM
Moot point since anyone watching has to have AA or another streaming service... so you have access to all the episodes... the only reason to not watch them in order is because you choose to.
#84
Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:05 PM
#85
Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:16 PM
#86
Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:34 PM
It doesn’t contradict canon at all.
#87
Posted 25 September 2017 - 07:40 PM
In your opinion.She has a part of Sareks Katra, not the entire thing like McCoy.
It doesnt contradict canon at all.
#88
Posted 25 September 2017 - 08:10 PM
As far as I know, this is the first situation where someone has had part of a Vulcan Katra and not the whole thing.
#89
Posted 25 September 2017 - 08:47 PM
#90
Posted 25 September 2017 - 08:50 PM
#91
Posted 25 September 2017 - 09:25 PM
There is probably a long list of things that the past wouldn't contradict, but would they make good plot devices?, probably not.Since we dont know much about the Vulcans Katra, we dont know how it works, but it does. Its canon, and nothing in the past contradicts it.
#92
Posted 25 September 2017 - 09:29 PM
The Katra is essentially the Vulcan, sharing a part of it would logically connect them in a way.
Sarek said himself that it was taking a physical toll on him by using it to telepathically communicate with Michael, so I dont expect it to be a common occurrence.
#93
Posted 26 September 2017 - 06:18 AM
it's the same crap from the same small group of so called fans. The only thing these people are fans of are complaining about every version of Star Trek that isn't their favorite.
I'm glad that they chose a new direction and visual aesthetic for the show. It needed freshened up a bit. If they had stuck with the exact same thing that came before then the majority of the people watching would just be the complainers and that's not enough to carry a show.
I deleted my comment on Facebook because I just can't listen to the crap any more. I wasn't even trying to start a discussion and basically got attacked by a group trying to convince me of why it's a bad show... lol.
I was going to stay out of this thread for the same reason but just put the main offends on ignore.
I don't mind a good discussion but I can't stand small minded people that want to do nothing but complain about change or anything new.
#94
Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:14 AM
haters gonna hate!
I've already described some of my issues with the show... but in general, so far I think it shows a lot of promise. we clearly have a new story, there is obvious respect for what came before, while still taking some license.
Something Discovery doesn't have is character baggage (yet)... unlike the recent movies your not going to (even subconsciously) compare Kirks or Spocks, etc...
I'm intrigued by Michael Burnham. We all have conflict with-in us, and it seems like they are going to explore that aspect of humanity.
This is beautiful looking show... and I don't have an issue with the Trek Tek we've seen thus far!
#95
Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:37 AM
I hope this show goes OK and I continue to like it. Then maybe some around here will see that I, and others like me, weren't just dismissing the JJ-verse for superficial reasons -- but because it truly felt hollow to us in other ways as well.
Regarding katra, I have always hated that & the mind meld & Betazoids etc. Mysticism bleeding into my Star Trek. This seems to make it even worse IMO -- because it seems like I am meant to believe they are actually communicating somehow over a great distance with what is effectively telepathy. Or is it just supposed to be like when characters speak with visions of their dead parents, etc -- they're really talking to themselves? I couldn't really tell, but it seemed to be presented as more literal direct communication with the line about how it takes a lot out of him or whatever. I don't like straight-up telepathy like Troi has either, although I suppose I could entertain that some kind of biological EM transmission/reception mechanism could evolve naturally...but not some magic one that crosses all time and space instantaneously or allows you to communicate in any way whatsoever with others who lack that same exact biology.
I'm don't consider myself to be nitpicky there, I just like Star Trek to leave the voodoo religious magic alone, which it usually does 80-90% of the time...
#96
Posted 26 September 2017 - 08:44 AM
I'm intrigued by Michael Burnham. We all have conflict with-in us, and it seems like they are going to explore that aspect of humanity.
Her name being Michael sure is confusing to me, but I won't go into that! An entire generation is now going to think Michael is a girl's name...which is ok with me, I guess, since that's not my name! Lulz. And you know I'm not a sexist, I just don't get why they had to do that. Some of the more raving feminists will be like "finally, we have even taken their names" and others will be like "why does she need a man's name, is a woman's name not good enough to stand on its own?" Oh well, we tend to call Trek characters by their last name anyway...
So...is the premise going to be that she's on some kind of rehab ship with a rag-tag crew all "serving time" for one thing or another? Did I read that here or somewhere else? That could be an interesting way to have their cake of a better humanity while eating their other cake of interpersonal drama.... A ship full of Suders???
#97
Posted 26 September 2017 - 09:42 AM
Her name being Michael sure is confusing to me
Maybe she's supposed to be French
The previews from Ep 3 suggested that while en route to what ever rehab facility, Discovery has her released to their custody.
Something is def odd about Discovery... and we're gonna find out whats going on! Can't wait!
#98
Posted 26 September 2017 - 11:32 AM
Something Discovery doesn't have is character baggage (yet)... unlike the recent movies your not going to (even subconsciously) compare Kirks or Spocks, etc...
I saw a couple commenters wondering how Sarek is still alive after all this time. When it was explained that Discovery took place prior to TOS, they argued it didn't.
Some people see what they want and ignore the rest.
#99
Posted 26 September 2017 - 11:57 AM
Lol... I guess thats true!
#100
Posted 26 September 2017 - 05:30 PM
Interesting read on the aesthetic differences that is directly addressed in the new Discvoery book.
Spoilers for the Discovery book.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users