Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Star Trek (2017) Star Trek (2017)

10-16-2017 , 06:34 PM
I still have no idea how this show is supposedly set *before* TOS in the timeline and yet every. single. thing. is shinier and way more modern than TOS. Not to mention that they're trying to propose this revolutionary jump drive that everyone just forgot, didn't even warrant a message in passing on Voyager.

Janeway, 10 minutes after passing through to the Delta Quadrant: "Wow, would be cool to have that jump drive right about now."
Crewmember: "Yeah, that would be boss, Captain. Oh well."

The worst part of it? There's no need for it!
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-16-2017 , 06:39 PM
I mean my ipad is like 1000 times better than those ******ed pads in TNG. This is set far in the future, they have to make the tech look futuristic compared to what we have right now. The devices in TOS look laughable now, so they have to make it look better. They did the same thing in the new movies and in Enterprise.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-16-2017 , 09:00 PM
I have no issue with things looking shiny and newer than shows in the trek future timelines. I understand why you don't like the spore drive since it is never talked about in the future. I get how it doesn't seem to fit but (no real spoilers but written after episode 5.
Spoiler:
First how many people outside of Discovery and a few Admirals know about it?
If Discovery is destroyed very few people in the future would ever have knowledge. As for the tech not being in the future I could see that happening. The entire science of it is organic so I can see a future of star fleet banning it after Discovery is destroyed and it starts turning people inside out like early in the season. Also they can easily say the use of the spore drive causes harm to the spore species and anyone using it going against the ethics of the future star fleet we see in the other shows.

Also doesn't Q have the ability to travel anywhere instantly?


I totally understand why Trek fans would hate this and just hate a serial Star Trek instead of the episodic formula and tone of the other shows. TV has moved way past that formula for a show to use in this day and age.

Last edited by ntanygd760; 10-16-2017 at 09:05 PM.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-18-2017 , 03:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
f-bombs on Star Trek? Truly where no man has gone before
Supposedly there were two f-bombs in this episode. I remember the one in the lab said by the roommate. Where was the other?
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-18-2017 , 05:36 AM
about 4 seconds later, same scene, lead scientist.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-23-2017 , 01:05 AM
This episode is probably going to be another haters gonna hate episode. I liked the dark places they implied certain characters are going to.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-23-2017 , 07:59 AM
Yeah I thought it was the worst episode yet. Deus ex magicka. With all of the hocus pocus it may as well have been a Halloween episode.

Also Admiral storyline was obv once she started calling out the Cap.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-25-2017 , 01:35 PM
Was thinking he'd sabotage her shuttle craft - that would've been a dark place to go.

Wonder if we'll ever get an episode that's a stand-alone.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-27-2017 , 09:58 PM
Th previews looked like the next episode might be stand alone.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-30-2017 , 12:53 AM
meh on that one off
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-30-2017 , 01:07 AM
Really didn't care for this episode...
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-30-2017 , 10:53 PM
would have been better if they hadn't done it already on TNG
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 04:58 AM
i'm loving this show. i realize it's not the best show ever, or maybe not even that good. but i love star trek! and i think this fit's in nicely. it's different from all the other trek shows in a lot of ways, but that's ok with me. it's got some interesting characters going on. i like how michael burnam is a mutineer and a "failure" for not being accepted into the vulcan science whatever. and i like how the captain is unfit for duty but still commanding anyway.

i do not like the stupid security officer and the stupid romance they have between him and burnam. he is terrible.

i like the nerdy redhead, and the gangly alien.

it seems broken if the ship can teleport anywhere anytime, especially if it blows up other ships around it when it teleports
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 08:42 AM
I'm watching it every week and I don't hate it and I love star trek...but this doesn't seem like star trek to me
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 09:27 AM
Have watched all the eps so far.

Burnham is terribly cast. The character acts nothing like a supposed Vulcan would, with regular sarcastic or snarky comments that are completely out of character for what I believe Vulcans are meant to be.

Captain is well cast and well done; he's bombastic and sure of himself and defies orders regularly.

Redhead is ok, but I have no idea what her role is on the show. She doesn't advance anything or have any particular character motivation.

As for the latest episode, what is the supposed reason that Stamets cannot get the new security guy to help him? The whole thing seems ridiculously forced, and the "secret" that Burnham tells Stamets is outlandish in terms of being something that she would certainly believe him in future time loop iterations.

As well, I find it a little difficult to believe that..

Spoiler:
the penalty for Mudd for attempting to steal the federation key weapon in the klingon war and sell it to the klingons is...to hand him over to his girlfriend. Especially for this particular captain.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 09:30 AM
yeah seems like summary execution should be on the table there. Treason, aid to the enemy in a time of war, murder, I could go on but come on even in Federationland these have to be bad
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 10:21 AM
Mudd is in a couple of episodes of TOS so they can't kill him off in this series which is set ten years earlier
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 10:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
would have been better if they hadn't done it already on TNG
That is why the entire episode seemed familiar. Been forever since I have watched TNG.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by filthyvermin
i'm loving this show. i realize it's not the best show ever, or maybe not even that good. but i love star trek! and i think this fit's in nicely. it's different from all the other trek shows in a lot of ways, but that's ok with me. it's got some interesting characters going on. i like how michael burnam is a mutineer and a "failure" for not being accepted into the vulcan science whatever. and i like how the captain is unfit for duty but still commanding anyway.

i do not like the stupid security officer and the stupid romance they have between him and burnam. he is terrible.

i like the nerdy redhead, and the gangly alien.

it seems broken if the ship can teleport anywhere anytime, especially if it blows up other ships around it when it teleports
I thought they just left behind explosives of some sort a few episodes ago when they jumped and then the klingon ships blew up.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregorio
Mudd is in a couple of episodes of TOS so they can't kill him off in this series which is set ten years earlier
Right, so maybe don't write him into an episode where he commits a capital crime and at the end of the episode have the crew all, toodles, best of luck bro
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 02:09 PM
Weird that Star Trek fans would hate that episode. Most Star Trekian of the series, by far.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 10:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by champstark
Weird that Star Trek fans would hate that episode. Most Star Trekian of the series, by far.
The problem is they took a concept that had been sort of done before, and did it worse.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
10-31-2017 , 10:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by champstark
Weird that Star Trek fans would hate that episode. Most Star Trekian of the series, by far.
Yeah, I guess it was. But just wasn't feeling it.
Star Trek (2017) Quote
11-01-2017 , 11:04 AM
i got tilted when they mentioned elon **** musk as one of the greatest names in history
Star Trek (2017) Quote
11-06-2017 , 02:07 PM
Good episode, looking forward to next week.

Quite enjoyed last week's also. Interesting to see people crediting it as "a TNG thing", which it is of course, but it's a staple trope and most any sci-fi (or often otherwise) series has a "Groundhog Day" episode at some point. Was TNG's Cause and Effect the first? Dark Matter's one earlier this year was a pretty good one. Person of Interest's is probably my favourite.
Star Trek (2017) Quote

      
m