Star Trek: Discovery

spoilers

#1

As this is a pretty hot topic among geeks, I think we could give a topic about this a shot.

I personally have not watched it yet but I plan to do that, no matter what the internet says. :wink:


#2

I didn’t realize its on Netflix as well, so I was able to watch it in the UK :smiley:

It’s good I liked it. Its definitely one of the better Star Trek pilots.

I’m not fond of the overuse of glow and lens flares when its on scenes from the Federations perspective (seems that’s when they use it) maybe its just on their ships…

Spoiler question

What was up with Michael Burnhams insane mutiny? She grew up with Vulkans but went completely off the rail like she had a mental break. That’s currently my only explanation for what seems completely out of character for a 7 year officer. Saw the Klingons > had a mental break. At least I hope they try to explain it

(could we tag the topic for spoilers so it can be openly discussed? up to you)


#3

Hello. Star Trek Discovery is a breath of fresh air in a way…


#4

Sounds like there’s more here?


#5

To answer your spoiler:

Spoiler answerShe wanted to “save” the crew, and especially her friend, the captain. She changed quite much from the time she entered Philippas command (and left the Vulcans) and the first/second episode. Imho, you already see that when she talks to Sarek

All in all a bit too much glow, flare and shinyshiny stuff, but I was positively surpirised by the story. The only thing I am very curious about is

another spoilerhow they will explain the look of the klingons. They said Discovery plays in the "old" timeline, so if you look at TOS, you see quite human-like klingons (explained with the plague in ENT) so they either have to think of something quite big and/or complicated
And hopefully they will develop the characters AND make some good stories. But please no timejumps and whatnot. ENT had that. VOY had "far far away" stuff, TOS had "action action" and TNG was "dimplomacy and character development" and Wil Wheaton.

#6

[this entire post is spoilers]

She wanted to save the crew… by mutiny, attacking the captain, and putting the ship in danger. Her character changed as far as i can tell once she got back from her encounter, after that she sounds frantic. She talks to the whole bridge like they don’t believe her, rebukes accusations of delusion when no one said she was and when the captain doesn’t want to fire on them she attacks the captain and tries to take over command to execute that task to completion.

None of these things line up with anything that happened before the encounter at least from what i can tell. Which is why my only thought is that the encounter broke her, at least temporarily.

On the Klingons, there in the “main” timeline. Apparently they do have a reason for their look and will explain it. Who knows. We also didn’t see all the houses, only about half a dozen of them so its possible others look different.


#7

The whole thing looks completely different from every other Star Trek so far. I think that’s okay as personally I want to see something new rather than more of the old stuff.

I hope they’ll put some more depth to the characters. To me they look a bit under developed.


#8

Apparently (and im just going off of anecdotes) the two episodes out are essentially pilot/pre episodes to the USS Discovery.

I dunno. But from the things ive seen i expect it should no doubt improve where it needs to over time.

I hope they put a little bit of TNG’s style of charachter focus and deplomacy in it.


#9

Discovery I can never consider as canon Star Trek.

1.) They completely screwed up the look of the Klingons completely.

2.) Why the frack are they using Holograms to communicate? That is not a thing in this time period, or any other time period that we know of yet.

3.) There are to many subtitles. While as a Trekie I appreciate the fleshing out of Klingon. They could of started them off in Klingon then transitioned them to English. (I am iffy on how I feel about this one).

4.) What is with all the lens flares? Who brought back J.J Abrahams?

5.) What is up with guy they showed in the hologram? Racism among humans is supposed to be dead by this point.


#10

on 1 I fully agree. I am keen to see how they explain it. Hopefully not with some super fancy parallel timeline.
2: even on VOY they communicate via displays, so that hologram stuff is unnecessary. I may also add the episode 4 “mirror” hologram to that list. That is so TNG hologram technology. Wasn’t even invented in DIS time.
3. imho, it adds to the atmosphere. Nothing wrong with that. Explaining their culture and all that. I think, that is one main topic in DIS.
4. Lens flares are nowadays “wanted” “cool” “super fancy”. Like Blur and ambient occlusion in video games. To be honest, I think it’s horrible. All three.
5. I don’t know what you mean. Can you tell me what episode, and approx which minute?
The “albino” klingon is discriminated by the klingons, most probably because they’re klingons


#11

On 5 I am talking about the federation. Not anyone else. It is canon that racism isn’t a thing any more among humans.
@Bubi


#12

Is this an American thing? It seems to be something that Europeans don’t care about as much, they talk in another language… there’s subtitles.

Where have you watched up to? At first I thought it was a decision for including that type of effect for federation vessels (Klingon vessels didn’t seem to make use of lens flares.) But further on it seems to only be used on specific scenes where there’s space light causing it (except for one flare in the initial discovery reveal)

When?


#13

Was about to ask the same

Still don’t know which episode you are talking about


#14

@Bubi the first one.


#15

You mean the conversation with the admiral where he suggests she doesnt make assumptions based on race, and she says not to confuse race with culture?


#16

#17

Yes. But he obviously meant to be racist.


#18

Not sure I follow. In what way?


#19

I’ve not seen this and don’t plan on it for any particular reason aside from I just don’t really watch that much television, but I stumbled across this video and remembered this thread existed.

All of that being said, it looks like a shiny turd of a production.


#20

The way he said did not match the words.

You know what people say some times. “It’s not what you say. It’s how you say it.” The way he said it. It sounded like he meant to be racist.