[Official] Star Trek: Discovery Thread

[+John. Subscriber¹]

Also Dwight from the office on the prison ship? This series is seriously messing with the canon.

 

Spoiler

Seriously though, I'm thinking the guy that was rescued, Ash I think? Definitely Klingon/Voq.

 

[shockz]

I cannot stand that first officer, Saru. Haven't liked him since episode 1, and I'm not sure how he's advanced to such a rank. It really is a plot hole to me, that someone as cowardly, jealous and hot headed made it to a first officer rank. Character is not enjoyable at all and honestly a bit of a turn off to watching the show.

 

There's growing into a character as the series progress, but he by far is the most annoying character I've ever saw in Trek, and that's even when throwing Nelix into the mix. Hope they game of thrones his arc and kill him off sooner than later.

 

None of the characters have been likable yet, even Lilly or the doctor, which are probably the closest to being likable imo. Hope this new Ash character gets some additional screen time, he seems to have an interesting story to tell.

Edited October 16, 2017 by shockz

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

So tonight's episode felt VERY much like a Trek episode.  The struggle of kill the creature to use it or not is pure Trek through and through.  And then choosing a different path is absolute Discovery.  The fact that Saru chose to use it, then calls Michael dangerous and to be feared is a real pointer.

 

And s*** said once and f*** said twice, it felt very forced.  Just like when they swear in old Trek.

 

Definitely felt like a Trek episode - heck it even felt episodic in nature.

1 hour ago, John. said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Seriously though, I'm thinking the guy that was rescued, Ash I think? Definitely Klingon/Voq.

 

100%

[Son_Of_Dad]

8 hours ago, shockz said:

I cannot stand that first officer, Saru. Haven't liked him since episode 1, and I'm not sure how he's advanced to such a rank. It really is a plot hole to me, that someone as cowardly, jealous and hot headed made it to a first officer rank. Character is not enjoyable at all and honestly a bit of a turn off to watching the show.

 

At first I found him to be the closest match to a real starfleet officer, he questioned Lorca and the ships morals however this week became another member of team the ends justify the means. "Crack it open" holy F as starfleet officer said that? Well it goes inline with admiral guest star mentioning they were hunting to put one on each ship, you know having a slave race is cool isn't it!

 

I agree with the crew not being at all likable, the closest one to being so is Tilly but she's very Wesley Crusher like, she actually worse she's Wesley Crusher with extreme social anxiety.

 

 

[Son_Of_Dad]

7 hours ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

So tonight's episode felt VERY much like a Trek episode.

Couldn't disagree more. What was actually linking it to the Star Trek ethos?

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

7 hours ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

Couldn't disagree more. What was actually linking it to the Star Trek ethos?

As explained quite clearly above.  

[techbeck]

15 hours ago, John. said:

 

 

  Hide contents

Seriously though, I'm thinking the guy that was rescued, Ash I think? Definitely Klingon/Voq.

 

I hope not...otherwise we will need tribbles again.

[Son_Of_Dad]

50 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

As explained quite clearly above.  

Jebus one point in which the officer who had actually shown some degree of morals came out looking much weaker

[George P Global Moderator]

16 hours ago, John. said:

Also Dwight from the office on the prison ship? This series is seriously messing with the canon.

 

  Hide contents

Seriously though, I'm thinking the guy that was rescued, Ash I think? Definitely Klingon/Voq.

 

I think you're spot on, the more I think about it the more that makes sense.

 

Spoiler

Also, if it's true, it'll show us how these klingons ended up like the ones from TOS and then how they yet again tried to change back in TNG, looks wise.

 

58 minutes ago, techbeck said:

I hope not...otherwise we will need tribbles again.

There is one in the captains room, you see it a few times.  I actually think it's there more than just for show and a nod to the original.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

19 minutes ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

Jebus one point in which the officer who had actually shown some degree of morals came out looking much weaker

Sorry, I didn't really ask for or care for your opinion - you said you disagree with me, fair play but you asked for a justification and I gave you one....  You seem predisposed to dislike any Trek that isn't old-school and this very much isn't that.  The episode juxtaposed older Trek values against a war-like sci-fi show - so I get it, this isn't "Your Trek" - I'm happy for you.

[George P Global Moderator]

As far as this episode goes,  it depends on how each person views trek.   The moral questions/dilemma placed forth is very much trek,  the show has that, and while you figure since it's trek they'll all take the moral high ground and do the noble thing or w/e, no, that's not always the case.     I hear the argument from one side that says, trek is suppose to be the best of humanity doing the right thing etc, yeah, I agree for the most part.   This show is not TOS and it's not TNG, first off we're at war, I don't understand how many times it has to be said, war changes things.     Just because we're used to Kirk and Picard setting this high bar, and their crews doing the same, that doesn't mean everyone in star fleet is the same.  The enterprise is the flagship of the fleet, it stands to reason that the best of the best will be on the flagship.  Now the other ships?  It's like any "fleet", or military, in my mind.   

 

I like that we're getting a dab or realism in here, while you're used to one thing happening in Trek, let's be real here, you think at war time they wouldn't use this tech?  They wouldn't try to find more of the tardigrade sp?  To use that to win the war?   I mean in order to be better and reach this epitome of moral stability, you gotta go through the hard stuff.   If it was easy we'd all be at peace with one another right now, today.  

[Son_Of_Dad]

23 minutes ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

You seem predisposed to dislike any Trek that isn't old-school

 

[Son_Of_Dad]

22 minutes ago, George P said:

 first off we're at war, I don't understand how many times it has to be said, war changes things.

DS9's crew didn't crumble to 'the ends justify the means' which in this series might actually be Starfleet's prime directive. When Sisko ventured down a slippery slope he almost beat the hell out of Garrack for facilitating it. To think that leaders wouldn't be evaluating their actions simply due to being in (the early part of) a war seems very short sighted. Have they quickly become a 23rd century Rome?

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

2 hours ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

DS9's crew didn't crumble to 'the ends justify the means' .

Eddington and the chemical weapons, the founders poisoning, bringing the Romulans into the war.

 

Predisposed, and your cute little image was hardly any form of rebuttal considering your posts.

[Son_Of_Dad]

5 hours ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

Eddington and the chemical weapons

Not part of the Dominion war

 

5 hours ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

the founders poisoning

S31 not DS9 crew

 

5 hours ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

bringing the Romulans into the war.

Exactly what I had referenced

 

 

In conclusion WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

10 hours ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

Not part of the Dominion war

Never once said it was?

 

10 hours ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

S31 not DS9 crew

Never once said it was?

 

In conclusion IGNORED, IGNORED, IGNORED - your predisposed nonsense and stance that only "your trek" is "real trek" adds nothing to this, so I shan't see any more!

[Son_Of_Dad]

1 hour ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

Never once said it was?

Then you really should have replied given war was a point of conversation

 

1 hour ago, Nefarious Trigger said:

so I shan't see any more!

I could borrow the quote from the 21:49 mark because this is the only smart reply you've made.

[FloatingFatMan]

Guys...  Instead of pointless arguments and comparisons to old shows long gone, how about we discuss the pro's and con's of the new show, hmm?

[HawkMan]

On 17.10.2017 at 11:24 PM, Son_Of_Dad said:

Not part of the Dominion war

 

S31 not DS9 crew

 

Exactly what I had referenced

 

 

In conclusion WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

1

Which IS Trek AND Federation. and more importantly, this series is either S31 or the founding of S31. 

 

As for following trek morale, I'd say the DS9 of never going to all lengths to survive and win is fairly unrealistic, and again as has been pointed out. didn't actually happen. but you keep moving the goal posts: "It didn't happen in DS9" -> "Well it didn't happen by the main DS9 crew I liked"...  logical fallacy

[HawkMan]

1 hour ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Guys...  Instead of pointless arguments and comparisons to old shows long gone, how about we discuss the pro's and con's of the new show, hmm?

That's easy. Pro's it's a good Scifi Show, it caters to a broader audience than old trek while still maintaining "trek" for the old fans so it can actually survive, it shows the darker and desperate times of war in the federation and the lengths you need to go to, to survive and "win" and the cost of going to those lengths and stretching the regulations of your own and your nations morality. 

 

As for cons... eh, not enough mondays in the week... ?

[Son_Of_Dad]

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

this series is either S31 or the founding of S31. 

Section 31 having been formed over a century before. Anyone actually watched Star Trek before? Nothing better for a clandestine organisation to be flying around on a starship letting everyone find out about them.

 

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

but you keep moving the goal posts: "It didn't happen in DS9" -> "Well it didn't happen by the main DS9 crew I liked"...  logical fallacy

Comparing the primary characters of one Star Trek series to the primary characters of a second Star Trek series involves changing the goal posts how?

 

1 hour ago, HawkMan said:

and the lengths you need to go to, to survive and "win" and the cost of going to those lengths

Except they didn't win for anyone who knows about Star Trek, unless all series history is out the window. At an ideological level the Klingon's won given the reasoning for the current conflict.

[Son_Of_Dad]

3 hours ago, FloatingFatMan said:

how about we discuss the pro's and con's of the new show, hmm?

Cons, mentioning any sends people to pieces

 

Pros, it's decent sci-fi if you remove the words Star Trek or set it much further in the timeline. And possibly find a race other than Klingons

[Yogurth]

I'd like to see  Star Trek moved beyond TNG, let's say 15-20 years, new but still familiar and since we have seen all of the Milky Way Quadrants in action, perhaps introduce Andromeda into the picture or another dimension unintentionally opened with high WARP engines. 

 

Anyhow, Discovery still, IMHO, does not have it's footing. I am hoping for some serious story Arc of the Two Renegade Klingons and the bringing of the 24 houses together as the Federation story line does not work yet. I am hopeful about the Mirror though. Might be the mirror Universe, or something more sinister.

[HawkMan]

1 hour ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

Section 31 having been formed over a century before. Anyone actually watched Star Trek before? Nothing better for a clandestine organisation to be flying around on a starship letting everyone find out about them.

 

Comparing the primary characters of one Star Trek series to the primary characters of a second Star Trek series involves changing the goal posts how?

 

Except they didn't win for anyone who knows about Star Trek, unless all series history is out the window. At an ideological level the Klingon's won given the reasoning for the current conflict.

3

Having been formed a century before does in no way negate the point that this IS S31... at this point your cherry picking part of sentences and arguments to prove a point that doesn't exist for why you don't like the show. just accept it's Trek but you don't like it. it's not that hard. 

 

It's changing goal posts because the argument was never about the main characters, but about Trek and about what was done in previous trek and by the federation. if they're going to do the exact same thing they did in the previous trek shows... ummm why make a new show... new stories and new characters and new challenges.

 

Did you even read my posts or where you to busy to find points you could cherry pick and argue to death that you didn't notice that "" around win ?  At this point you're not even arguing you're just ranting and not even reading what others write. 

[HawkMan]

1 hour ago, Son_Of_Dad said:

Cons, mentioning any sends people to pieces

 

 

Provide actual cons and no, not really. 

also you're the one who goes up in arms if anyone argues that "your" cons aren't universal for Trek and certainly not the whole trek fanbase. if you just stuck to making the cons, YOUR cons and not a universal rule, there would be no argument. But flat out saying " These arbitrary reason show that the trek show isn't trek because the peopel I liked in previous shows didn't do them even though they still happened" that's not an argument against the show not being trek. Technically the only people who decide if it's trek or not is the IP owners, but even extending beyond that to Trek ethos of the past of events of the past this show clearly fits in with what the federation has had to do, even if it's outside the Federation mandate.

 

You'll also note that you're the only one who's arguing by posting childish meme pictures instead of actually articulating your arguments.