Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 43,690 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 1,748
Set Bookmark
HawgWyld
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 3:30pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@Peremensoe -- stating that escapism is the opposite of moral courage may be true, but how is that relevant in the least to Discovery? These cats are some of the most morally bankrupt, amoral people we've seen in positions of authority in Starfleet. Again, these folks behave like the jerks that are messing up the 21st century. Who wants that?
Set Bookmark
Peter Swinkels
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 3:15pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S6: Good Shepherd

@banjo: I noticed that bit about carrying pads atound the ship too.
Set Bookmark
Luke
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 2:57pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Third Season Recap

@WilliamB - I'd say Season Three is a slight improvement over Season Two on the whole. Though that is almost entirely due to the rather strong set episodes it ends on. It's mostly, like almost all of VOY, just average. Even the much-despised "Trilogy of Terror" isn't really that bad, in my humble opinion. I actually kind of like "Darkling", "Rise" is also just average and "Favorite Son".... well, okay, that one is pretty bad. ;-P

But, it does have more stand-outs than Season Two offered - "Fair Trade", "Unity", "Before and After" and "Scorpion, Part I". Whereas Season Two's only real stand-out episode was "Meld". Maybe "The Thaw" qualifies, but I think it falls just shy.

Season Four, however, is indeed a drastic improvement, almost right from the get-go. It's easily the best of the bunch. If memory serves it's the only season of VOY where I would award two ten of ten scores to separate episodes. One of these days I really ought to get back to my reviews of Trek, I'd love to finish up DS9 and then move on to VOY and ENT eventually. God, I can't believe it's been almost seventeen months since I last reviewed DS9: "Valiant"!
Set Bookmark
OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 2:44pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

Wolfstar, I support you all the way.

I too wish that 1990's Trek would have given us a gay character. I mean, they've pretty much included everyone else, so this omission was kind-of-a statement in itself.

The one thing that Discovery did right, and the fans bash it for it. Go figure...



Set Bookmark
Michb
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 2:37pm (UTC -5)
Re: TNG S6: Suspicions

What a dreadful episode. The flashback narration serves no purpose and is dull, the story is not engaging, the acting is terrible. It's not as bad as the Riker flashback episode, but at least that one had the excuse of a writers' strike. A half star. Barely.
Set Bookmark
BZ
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 2:36pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

"Revive it, the plot doesn't have time to deal with how."
This is exactly what the (acting) captain would say. It doesn't matter that he's a former science officer. It's not his job to do science.

"What happened to the good old Trek tropes of hiding in nebulae and making a mad dash for Federation space?"
We don't know how deep in Klingon space they are. It may be that warp would not do them any good.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 2:18pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S3: Third Season Recap

Well, it's that time again. I haven't written up a lot of the episodes this season but my watching continues apace so I might as well share some ratings. As always, provisional, etc. Difference with Jammer's ratings in parentheses.

Basics, Part II: 1.5 (-1)
Flashback: 2.5 (-0.5)
The Chute: 3 (=)
The Swarm: 2.5 (-0.5)
False Profits: 1 (-0.5)
Remember: 3.5 (=)
Sacred Ground: 2 (=)
Future's End, Part I: 3 (-0.5)
Future's End, Part II: 2 (-0.5)
Warlord: 2.5 (=)
The Q and the Grey: 1 (-1)
Macrocosm: 1 (-0.5)
Fair Trade: 3 (=)
Alter Ego: 2.5 (-0.5)
Coda: 1 (-1)
Blood Fever: 3 (=)
Unity: 3.5 (=)
Darkling: 1.5 (=) (I said 2, but I basically don't think this episode works)
Rise: 1.5 (=)
Favorite Son: 1 (=)
Before and After: 3.5 (=)
Real Life: 2.5 (-0.5)
Distant Origin: 4 (+1) (I might go down in rating on this one to 3.5, but I think it does mostly work very well)
Displaced: 2 (=)
Worst Case Scenario: 3 (=)
Scorpion: 4 (=)

So overall the season average is a touch lower than season 2, and so is pretty bad. But that doesn't give a good sense of the season overall. I agree with Jammer's assessment that it wanders aimlessly and inconsistently for the first 2/3 and then hits a real low point with the Darkling/Rise/Favorite Son triptych and then has a remarkably strong finishing string of episodes; I can't quite "recommend" Real Life but I thought it was still very well executed, and so the only weak ep in that run is Displaced. It's a really strange season, in that the characters who were at the bottom of interest in season two (Kim, Neelix, Kes, Chakotay) got good vehicles (The Chute, Fair Trade, Before and After, Unity) and my favourite characters (Tuvok, the Doctor) only had some near-misses (Flashback, Alter Ego; The Swarm, Real Life -- RL is the closest to one I'd actually recommend, but not quite). I end up feeling good about the season mostly because of that last run of episodes, and because the show seems to have at least dropped some of its more annoying elements (the Kazon, mostly) and seems to have picked a direction for some of its characters (the Tom/B'Elanna thing, in particular) that makes some sense. But really, looking over the season pre-Before and After, I feel like a lot of the shows could have been dropped quite easily, and some were actively harmful.

I feel vaguely depressed looking over the shows in the first 2/3 of the season, because even the ones I like leave me with trepidation; Remember and Future's End I are great shows but feel a bit like dead ends that don't quite contribute to the overall narrative (notably, the mobile emitter doesn't even show up to the much-worse Future's End Part II), which is not a problem with those episodes but does mean that they don't really raise my overall feelings about those eps much higher. Of the other eps I like (2.5+), Flashback seems to coast on nostalgia, The Chute and Warlord seem to lack a strong enough ending for their central characters, The Swarm has some good character moments with the Doctor but feels vaguely like wheel-spinning, over-investing in the tech side of the dilemma when there are no consequences to come from it. So that basically leaves Fair Trade, up until the Blood Fever/Unity set of two episodes which does seem to reinvigorate the show in ways that have real impact, in terms of characterization, relationships, reintroducing the Borg as major villains.... It immediately gets shot down by the triptych of doom but I kind of still see BF/U as a turning point in the season even more so than B&A-and-after. (I will add that I think the run from The Q and the Grey to Favorite Son as a whole has 10 episodes, 6 of which I gave sub-2 star ratings to -- and BF/U is in the middle of that! What a crazy season.)

I'm partway into season four now and I think that it's a big improvement, for what it's worth.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 2:04pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@ Chrome,

"One of the science officers, I believe, suggested that the tartigrade could be awakened by hydration, and it was Saru's expectation that they'd do just that. They've been using the creature for weeks now and likely have a better understanding of its biology. Anyway, I think because Stamets realized the risks to the creature were too great, he stepped in and used the stop-gap solution he and Burnham figured out instead."

The creature was being subjected to brain damage from the jumps, and upon being sufficiently drained or whatever it withdrew into an effective coma. The fact that it became dehydrated in the process is a lot different from just saying that it was thirsty so let's give it a drink and it'll be better. In a way it's giving the show some credit to suggest that the hydration idea was a Hail Mary and really had no basis in fact since they were desperate. We already knew it was damage done to Ripper that was the issue, not dehydration. But if you want to suggest that this was a legitimate way to revive Ripper then we enter the Dr. Who zone in full force where [insert magic technobabble] can solve any problem. The unknown alien life form that we don't understand is paralyzed with damage? Easy fix, give it the magic elixir. On this kind of reading of the episode you'd be right, that they could have revived Ripper at will and chose not to do so. But I never got that impression because they never took the time to have any sort of conversation about what reviving it would mean. See other shows re: "Sir, we can give him the adrenaline but he may die if we do" for context of how to handle the pros/cons of attempting revival, to say nothing of the fact that this would be applying an experimental treatment to a potentially unwilling life form. It was just "Revive it, the plot doesn't have time to deal with how." The actual state of Ripper's physiology was irrelevant to the episode, as was the idea of actually giving us a chance to learn about the creature (since you suggest they had studied it and learned). I guess Discovery is about discovering ways to move the plot along, rather than discovering things about a new and interesting being.

Putting aside the issue of how the issue of how to revive Ripper was hand-waved away, that still leaves the matter of whether you'd put your crew's life in the hands of a creature yanked out of a coma and probably on death's door. That's really better than using warp drive and making a run for it? What happened to the good old Trek tropes of hiding in nebulae and making a mad dash for Federation space? The fact of the matter is that Saru didn't even bother to notify Starfleet command that he was taking their precious tech into Klingon space under risky circumstances so that they could at least muster a fleet to try to rendez-vous in case the jump drive failed enroute. If the jump drive is really the lynch-pin to the war effort you'd think that safeguarding it would be of *such high priority* that at least this precaution would be taken. But no, Saru's 'character building' moment (aka character assassination) consisted of him potentially deep-sixing the whole war effort because he was jealous of his previous CO. Yeah, this guy should really be wearing command stripes alright.
Set Bookmark
William B
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 1:56pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S4: The Gift

Right, so, I guess I think that the Kes stuff in this episode almost worked, but mostly fell flat. It's nice that we got some goodbyes to some extent, and the final scenes with Janeway and Tuvok were effective -- especially that rightly-praised final shot of Tuvok. The Kes/Neelix resolution didn't work as much for me and I'm sad that there wasn't more with her and the Doctor, though at least they did have a few moments together (with the "I haven't seen you much lately" moment). Mostly though Kes' transformation felt mostly arbitrary; yes her powers have been hinted at for a while, and also yes she accessed her powers more in the previous episode by telepathic communication with Species 8472, but it doesn't seem as if the events of Scorpion were sufficient to suddenly transform her so completely (and so far beyond even where Tanis was in Cold Fire). There's a bit of a Wesley-in-Journey's End vibe here, where it's clear that the transformation is happening now because the character's story is ending and that's that. On the plus side, this episode has more and better character interactions than Journey's End did, but on the minus side whereas JE had to wrap up Wesley's story in one episode given that he hadn't been on the show in two years, it doesn't seem fundamental that the writers couldn't have had Kes' powers (and her control over them) growing over the end of season three. That her powers quite suddenly become uncontrollable to the point where she phases out of space makes it seem as if they are almost imposed by an outside force, which is worrying for a number of reasons.

I do appreciate that they paired the Kes story with the Seven one by having the two plots complement each other in some way; Janeway even lampshades it with the "I have an Ocampa who wants to be something more and a Borg who's afraid of becoming something less" line. Maybe the most important element here is that Janeway's indications to Seven that she will let Seven make her own decisions once she believes that Seven is no longer under external influence from her Borg programming/brainwashing gets bolstered by the fact that she does respect Kes' reasons for leaving. It makes Seven's plight clearer to look at the transcendence that Kes gains access to, and what Seven sees herself as losing.

As for Janeway's behaviour toward Seven -- the way she elides Seven's wishes -- I think it makes character sense and I see Janeway's point, and Seven's as well. Jeri Ryan and Kate Melgrew sell the scenes, and there's a really interesting question here about how to deal with people who are freed from an oppressive system but don't actually want to leave. Where Janeway becomes especially frightening is when she plays Borg-esque lines -- "You must comply," "You can't resist it" -- seemingly with the express purpose of using Seven's Borg programming to bring her in line with Janeway's own thinking. It's something where the justifications Janeway can provide are understandable, but there is still an open question of whether it really is necessary to push Seven so hard against her will into accepting a life she does not want. Here I think that having other characters voice reluctance with Janeway's methods more strongly -- probably Chakotay or the Doctor -- would have made the episode stronger; I know that we're going to come back to this material and the question of what (if anything) makes Janeway's manipulation of Seven "for her own good" different from the Borg Collective, and so I don't mind that it goes unresolved, but I can't really imagine Chakotay and the Doctor *not* having stronger feelings or hesitancy or objections to what Janeway does. The ridiculous suit the Doctor cooks up for Seven (with heels!) is, I know, largely a function of out-of-universe concerns but it is a bit hard to take and it undermines the good intentions we're supposed to accept from him.

I think I'll go with 2.5 stars on the whole. A disappointing but not terrible departure for Kes and a dramatically explosive but not wholly satisfying introduction for Seven's integration into the crew.
Set Bookmark
Chrome
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 1:39pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

'Saru's command to "just wake it up, do whatever you have to" was amongst the dumbest moments in Trek, where it wasn't even brought up how they could possibly do that or what state it would have to be in to function as navigator.'

One of the science officers, I believe, suggested that the tartigrade could be awakened by hydration, and it was Saru's expectation that they'd do just that. They've been using the creature for weeks now and likely have a better understanding of its biology. Anyway, I think because Stamets realized the risks to the creature were too great, he stepped in and used the stop-gap solution he and Burnham figured out instead.
Set Bookmark
TB
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 1:18pm (UTC -5)
Re: VOY S1: Heroes and Demons

So the crew have replicator rations because ordering a coffee uses up too much reserve power, but the holodeck, which must use an order of magnitude more is allowed?
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 1:11pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@ Peremensoe,

"William... what *did* Discovery do? The tardigrade was freed, and a crewman took its place in the drive system (at the possible cost of himself, maybe the whole ship, perhaps the war effort). It's not "devolved" to acknowledge that moral challenges can be complicated, that principles can conflict, that things are not always what they first seem, that people do not always know the right thing at once."

Not really. They already knew Ripper was being hurt when Saru commanded them into Klingon space and they made the jump anyhow. That was already over the line in terms of the devolution of Starfleet principles. Later on when Stamets inserted himself into the machine it wasn't even a question of whether to exploit the creature versus using himself; using the creature was already out of the question. Ripper had gone into hibernation and was out of the picture already, and they had zero knowledge of how to revive it or get it back into working condition. Saru's command to "just wake it up, do whatever you have to" was amongst the dumbest moments in Trek, where it wasn't even brought up how they could possibly do that or what state it would have to be in to function as navigator. Would you take a pilot who was in a coma, smack him on the head to wake him up and immediately give him navigational control of a starship? What we see here isn't merely cruel but stupid as well. And Saru was a science officer previously! I guess that got retconned away already.

Back to my point, when Stamets inserts himself it's not even clear that it's because he doesn't want to revive Ripper - we don't even know if he can. Using himself is actually the best chance for the ship anyhow. The plot itself took away the moral choice once they were in Klingon space since Ripper was out of commission. They had already transgressed. It's true that freeing Ripper at the end was a moral choice, but even then it's not clear whether this was to cease the enslavement or because it was the only way to prevent it dying. Either way it's a step in the right direction, but it's a far cry from refusing to use it anymore as a navigator. The fact that the story had Ripper cease to be able to do the job anymore undermined the ability for the crew to choose to stop using it of their own volition. That choice was never made, so all we have is that they used it until it nearly died, then they got rid of it.
Set Bookmark
Peremensoe
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 1:07pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

Yanks: "I don't know that I subscribe to the Multi-Verse thing in trek. We only got that in one episode (TNG: Parallels) right?"

"Parallels" is the most explicit presentation of the larger (beyond the MU) Trek multiverse. But it's *so* explicit, it seems to me you really can't have any other interpretation without throwing away that ep. And it's a great one (IMO) so why would you do that?

Accepting the Trek multiverse has a lot of advantages in interpretations of other episodes. It gives a logic and a 'place' for the MU (or the complex of related MUs), the reverse/antimatter universes, all manner of "fluidic" and "trans-dimensional" and "non-corporeal" spaces, the Nexus, the Continuum, and wherever the Traveler comes from. It gets you out of just about any time-travel 'paradox,' if you need it, as well as any continuity 'problem' between series.
Set Bookmark
wolfstar
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 1:04pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@Jim Oz

"This is not Star Trek. After watching for 25 years with my children I will no longer watch ST. Swearing? Openly gay characters. Pathetic. I'm getting a divorce after 25 years-I'm gutted."

My parents brought me up on Star Trek. TNG and TOS, then as a teen I graduated onto DS9 (which my dad wasn't into). Trek definitely played a big role in forming my values and worldview - Sisko and Kira are kinda my role models. I love that Trek characters act ethically, show solidarity with each other and are passionate about defending their values. I'm glad there wasn't unnecessary swearing, and think Trek should be a family show. But if there had been a gay scene in 90s Trek while I was growing up, even one as subtle as the one in Discovery... it would have made me feel less alone in the world. It would have helped me a lot. It would have made me feel like a future was possible for me.
Set Bookmark
BZ
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 12:29pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

"If a brilliant scientist could create a technology that could benefit Starfleet going forward, but its development might require risks to a life-form of questionable sentience, what would Discovery do? (Measure of a Man)"
In other words, even in the 24th century there is a question about such a situation that requires a court ruling, and that ruling is very narrow in scope.

"If the war could be won be converting an innocent into a WMD, what would Discovery do? (I, Borg)"
They have their cake and eat it too? By the way, in that episode, Starfleet is fine infecting Hugh. What saves him is emotional connection with the crew. Of course VOY later provides an unambiguous condemnation of this (Child's Play), but that just proves that opinions on such things may evolve even between TNG and VOY let alone in 100 years' time.

"If personal freedom was a barrier to the advancement of the war, what would Discovery do? (the Drumhead)"
I'm not sure what analogy between DSC and that episode you are referring to. In any event, whose personal freedom are you referring to? If ripper's then see above.

"If destroying targets that might be of military value would help the war effort, but you could not confirm that those targets were legitimate, what would the Discovery do? (The Wounded)"
Again, I'm not sure what analogy between DSC and that episode you are referring to, but the fact that a Starfleet captain in the 24th century could still justify such action allows that it was acceptable 100 years before.
Set Bookmark
Peremensoe
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 12:29pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

William... what *did* Discovery do? The tardigrade was freed, and a crewman took its place in the drive system (at the possible cost of himself, maybe the whole ship, perhaps the war effort). It's not "devolved" to acknowledge that moral challenges can be complicated, that principles can conflict, that things are not always what they first seem, that people do not always know the right thing at once.

HawgWyld: "The Federation was presented as an ideal which appealed mightily to the escapist in all of us."

Escapism is the opposite of moral courage. Star Trek was at its least important when the Federation, and the audience, were most comfortably assured.
Set Bookmark
OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 12:19pm (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@Konstantinos

Complaining that Trekkies nitpick their Trek is like complaining that water is wet.

That's what Trekkies do. It's the nature of the beast.

Set Bookmark
OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 12:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Krill

@Dougie

I see. Thanks for making your motivations perfectly clear, in case anyone doubted them.

@William

I really hope that the events of this episode receive a follow up. Now that we know why the Krill behave the way they do, I'd like to see how the Fed... I mean the Union use this knowledge to actually build an understanding with them.

Sure, it looks impossible, but that's why it is so interesting.
(Star Trek always tended to be on the naive side with this, and I'd really like to see the Orville's original take on gaining a mutual understanding)

Oh, and you're 100% correct about the humor. Comedy, more than any other genre, is a matter of personal taste. One person's gold is another person's pile of dirt (for me, btw, it's somewhere in between)
Set Bookmark
Konstantinos
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:43am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

I take your word for it, since I have just read some reviews. I understand what you are saying, I just think that sonetimes we have to enjoy something for what it is (even if it is mindless fun) than poke it for not being something else. I like Orville and Discovery (and Voyager) for being different. I can see their flaws but if I start nitpicking them I feel it will affect my love for the show and on the long term for sci-fi in general.

Btw a good place to look for a definition of Saru's psychology and his relationship with Burnham is the "desperate hours" novel by David Mack. In fact I was surprised to see elements from it getting into the show.
Set Bookmark
Chrome
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:40am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

I've heard this site been called many things, but never a "hate" page. If anything, he gave this episode mixed reviews while siding on the side of positive. The same could be said of many of his Voyager reviews, I guess?

Though it should be said you can critique something and still like it. I critiqued the heck out of DS9's "Apocalypse Rising", but I still thoroughly enjoy the episode. After multiple viewings, I just felt like it could've been more. No big deal.
Set Bookmark
The Tower
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:39am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

This is what you get when Star Trek tries to be BSG (reboot), but with poor writing and little thought given to "the big picture".

It's a shame, too, because there's definitely acting talent in this cast. It's just saddled with awful scripting and hole-riddled plots.

Thing I hate most is the production design. The Klingons have been discussed here, ad nauseum, so I won't get into that. It appears Fuller and Co. were so bent on putting their own stamp on Trek, they not only threw out the philosophies that make Trek what it is, but also anything that looks like it. I get that real-world tech today is more advanced than even 10 years ago, but these guys didn't even make an effort to have this look fit. The Abrams movies did a far better job of giving an updated retro look...One that's in the spirit of the original. Even ENT looked more period-correct.

As for the so-called "gay" scene at the end, it might have been something we've not seen on Trek before, and while it did seem a bit forced in its inclusion, the execution was just fine. In contrast, the Troi/Riker scenes in ST: Insurrection were completely forced, foolishly executed, and painful to watch, and probably the most offensive scenes ever shown in Trek, mostly because of their stupidity.

As for Discovery on the whole, well, perhaps Ron Moore or Ira Behr are available.
Set Bookmark
MadManMUC
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:37am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

Also, on the subject of money, I seem to remember Kirk in TOS once telling Scotty he'd 'earned his week's pay', as a compliment. Whether it was literal of figurative that Scotty gets paid a salary, we don't really know (although, I suppose we can assume he did).
Set Bookmark
MadManMUC
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:36am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

‘He legally can't do that.

CBS do not have the rights for the JJ-Trek universe (these are owned by Paramount).’

Well, at least there’s that much gained, if nothing else.

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

‘you don't have any reason to fear that Kurzman is going to do what said he'll do. He'd already done it and it's old news by now.’

I know. I guess maybe the shock of it all hasn’t worn off yet.

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

‘To be fair, ENT at least had the excuse of being set in an era when this moral "devolution" made sense.’

This is absolutely true, fair point. In fact, it was one of the central plot devices, so entirely intentional. I guess it just appeal to me, is all.

@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi

‘Also, those people who *do* write negative reviews aren't being subtle about it at all.’

But certainly articulate. From what I’m seeing, at the negative reviews are thought-out, as opposed to a blanket ‘This shows sucks.’ statement.

Set Bookmark
OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:17am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@Latex Zebra
"@Chrome - Damn you and you're Vulcanesque critique of my humour. ;o)"

I'll out-Vulcan the Vulcan and remind you that the Trekverse probably *did* have money in the mid 23rd century. There are quite a few references in canon in favor of this fact (including Kirk reminding Spock how much Starfleet had invested in him) and none against it.

The earliest reference of "no money" is - as far as I know - from ST4 (2286).

(way to kill a joke, I know)




Set Bookmark
OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Tue, Oct 17, 2017, 11:09am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: Choose Your Pain

@MadManMuc
"Actually, I'm not at all convinced Kurzman isn't slyly setting us up to take this into the JJ-Trek universe by the end of it all"

He legally can't do that.

CBS do not have the rights for the JJ-Trek universe (these are owned by Paramount).

As for:
"...So that he can basically shit all over Roddenberry's creation, and do whatever he thinks Trek is (which isn't pretty at all)."

Isn't this basically what we've got from episode one?

Like it or hate it, one cannot say in good faith that Discovery is making any attempt to fit into the established canon. Nor can one say in good faith that Discovery isn't an unprecedent departure from the tone and philosophy of all previous Trek shows.

TPTB can pertend all they want that this isn't true, but nobody is really buying it anymore. The majority of fans how enjoy DSC also acknowledge this. You can see this in the positive reviews by various commenters here. Take a look at a typical 3 star review of DSC (including Jammer's) and you'll see the way the fans are treating this series. They fully understand what this show is and isn't, accept it, and review it accordingly.

In short: you don't have any reason to fear that Kurzman is going to do what said he'll do. He'd already done it and it's old news by now.

@MadManMuc
"It absolutely is ... although, to be fair, we started seeing the hints of it in DS9 (Dominion War), but it started taking off with ENT"

To be fair, ENT at least had the excuse of being set in an era when this moral "devolution" made sense. After all, the 22nd century *should* be less enlightened than the 23rd/24th. It was quite interesting to see this intermediate step in our moral evolution, and I thought it was done quite well.

Of-course this doesn't necessarily make the dark turn that ENT took *enjoyable* (that's a matter of personal taste). But it doesn't undermine the Trek ethos anymore than a WW3 series (set in the 2050's) would undermine it.

@Konstantinos
"This must be the most amazing "hate" page I have ever found. I have been reading it for three days and the way that you manage to bash stuff with discretion is really something I respect..."

Since when does giving a show a good rating and that pointing out the flaws is "bashing"?

There's a huge difference between "hate" and being able to speak intelligently and criticially about a show you love. The nice thing about Jammersreviews.com is that the people here (usually) aren't blindly following the herd. You have no idea how refreshing it is to see actual fans of a show speaking thoughtfully about it and talking intelligently about the pros and cons of each episode and each series.

It is also quite rare.

In most other fan forums, people mumble either "it's great!" or "it's awful" depending on their "camp". So they have "fans" vs "haters", and "Team Orville vs Team Discovery" and other stupid nonsense like this.

We don't have this here (mostly), which I think is wonderful.

Also, those people who *do* write negative reviews aren't being subtle about it at all. When somebody really doesn't like a show, you can tell it from his very first sentence... and there's nothing really wrong with that, either.
Next ►Page 1 of 1,748
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2017 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. See site policies.