Yeah, kids are really going to relate to this black racist chick who gives no fucks. Damn. Those were two crazy episodes. Lol.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Trek: Discovery |OT| To Boldly Stream Where No One Has Streamed Before
- Thread starter berzeli
- Start date
Yeah, kids are really going to relate to this black racist chick who gives no fucks. Damn. Those were two crazy episodes. Lol.
Well, at this point, we are diving beyond what the pilot presented us with. Which is fine for the long time fans, but this is my first star trek TV series, so that's unknown territory for me.
T'Kurma knowing about the federation doesn't necessarily mean that Georgieu knows about Klingons. I got the impression that she knew general information of what she was required to know as a federation captain, but nothing beyond that, while Michael clearly had specialized knowledge of them. Either way, my point is is that of every character shown, Michael had the strongest understanding of Klingons.
You should rewatch it. The death blow had already happened. A brief reaction shot of Michael who then purposely turns the phaser from stun to kill. Not a "reflex". Even incorporates a shot of her processing the event and making her decision.
Not everyone lives in the states.
When there's a new Bond out, and I get to see it earlier here in the UK, I wouldn't go into the OT and post unmarked spoilers.
I think major spoilers should be tagged for just the first couple of days. It's not like we're saying don't talk about it, but even just black out one or two parts. It's not that hard for people to just click on a spoiler ¯\_(ツ
_/¯Stallion Dan
Member
It's a work of fiction with established technology for its universe, real world technology should have no affect on it. Especially when the show is trying to claim it is set in that universe.
If you don't care about canon are you angry the Captain didn't just reach up her own arse and pull an I Win button out? I know it not in canon that Captains can do that, but apparently you don't care about establishing a universe with rules.
Outdated tech hasn't stopped sci-fi shows shows being good ever.
Not everyone lives in the states.
When there's a new Bond out, and I get to see it earlier here in the UK, I wouldn't go into the OT and post unmarked spoilers.
I think major spoilers should be tagged for just the first couple of days. It's not like we're saying don't talk about it, but even just black out one or two parts. It's not that hard for people to just click on a spoiler ¯\_(ツ
Ideally people who didn't have early access to said Bond film wouldn't be perusing the movie's official thread until they had seen it. It's not that hard for people to just not click on a thread ¯\_(ツ
_/¯Not everyone lives in the states.
When there's a new Bond out, and I get to see it earlier here in the UK, I wouldn't go into the OT and post unmarked spoilers.
I think major spoilers should be tagged for just the first couple of days. It's not like we're saying don't talk about it, but even just black out one or two parts. It's not that hard for people to just click on a spoiler ¯\_(ツ
Even if you had a point, which you do not, and I say this as a non-US person, it is available in the rest of the world through Netflix. So you pretty much never had that point to begin with.
Probably a good point.
This is the first Trek show where our POV is attached to just one character and what's going on around them. It's a boots on the ground Trek, where before the episode theme was really the character and we were just watching the crew acting in the play.
It's going to feel a bit different seeing one person navigate the story and universe this way.
That said, I'm a little worried it'll go too grim-dark. Also wondering why people are so blown away from the production values, as it doesn't look totally different than other good shows, or trek that came before it. Moody lighting isn't really "production values" in my book, it's just a change in cinematography style.
CGI looks on par with what you'd expect from a halfway decent FX house, and the practical FX and sets are on par with everything that came before (great).
One thing I'm wondering is if we'll see engineering at all, since that'll be an expensive set too. But one less frequented by a first officer, so I wouldn't be suprised if they saved some money and don't go there.
Stallion Dan
Member
Ideally people who didn't have early access to said Bond film wouldn't be perusing the movie's official thread until they had seen it. It's not that hard for people to just not click on a thread ¯_(ツ
It's not hard to use a spoiler tag and not spoiler stuff also.
Netflix air it Mondays.
Ideally people who didn't have early access to said Bond film wouldn't be perusing the movie's official thread until they had seen it. It's not that hard for people to just not click on a thread ¯\_(ツ
OTs cover more than just plot discussion. I just wanted to see what people thought of the opening episode to this, and if there were any subscription stats yet.
I mean, you're technically correct, but it's only been up since the morning here. It's not realistic to think anyone outside of the US could have actually seen it yet.
In gaming OTs, plot discussion is spoilered, even though technically people do have access to it, it's possible for a variety of reasons that they haven't experienced the story yet, and want to discuss other elements about the game.
I always thought unless something was specified as a spoiler thread, major spoilers had to be tagged. I suppose I'm in the wrong though, and didn't really understand how things worked. My bad.
I suggest you go back and rewatch it, because I did, and you're wrong. The sequence of goes like this: Michael escapes the hold of the albino klingon and is looking for the gun. Georgieu is fighting the T'Kuvma and just broke her arm. Michael picks up the gun and is turning back to the fight. Then it cuts to T'Kuvma breaking Georgieu's arm and stabbing her, then cut to Michael aiming with an intense look and firing (It also seems to be whirling up and beeping before firing, so maybe it was some kind of start up sequence?). All this happens in seconds. There is about a second and a half between the stab and Michael firing. It's pretty clear that this is all happening extremely fast. Also, she shot him in the back, so she wouldn't even have a clear view of Georgieu being stabbed with a killing blow.
Oh, and you know how else I know that Michael didn't think her captain was dead? It was really subtle, so I can understand how you missed it, but if you look and listen closely, she spends the rest of the scene desperately trying to get her on the ship, arguing against the dude on the comm whose trying to tell Michael that he doesn't see any lifesigns to the Captain's body.
So, yeah, I think we can conclusively conclude that Michael was trying to save Georgieu.
JonnyDBrit
Member
You know, that does make me wonder if a lot of the potential criticism towards Burnham's character may ultimately stem from, even while critical of her being correct in hindsight in the episodes, her being deeply wrong in hindsight for the franchise. So for you, as someone new to the franchise, her presumptions as to the inherently violent, war-seeking ways of the Klingons come off as correct based on the information in the first two episodes. To anyone who's seen an episode from TNG on, or so much as glanced at Star Trek VI, they are at odds with both the lore and themes of the franchise at large. Kirk's whole arc in the aforementioned film is realising that, while he has legit grievances against the Klingons, he also cannot allow his specific strain of xenophobia to bar the opportunity for reconciliation, and peace. Compare we get from Burnham with this scene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiH1Bk6WmvI
And anecdotally, I have heard that many weren't comfortable with this scene, because it broke the common presumption that the protagonist - particularly in Star Trek - be a morally certain hero. Some of the criticism here does read somewhat similarly - ie, that Burnham is the protagonist, but because her behaviour may be difficult to readily support, some find it hard to accept her character, and therefore, she is an ill fit as a protagonist.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
Boy CBS All Access has a pretty narrow range of devices upon which it is supported.
I watched the first episode on TV away from home with relatives. To try and pull down the follow-up I tried a bunch of different options among the Smart TVs and Smart Ble-Ray players in the house, all of which have Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Video.
No dice. I even thought of watching on a PC here but I need Windows 10 and not 7, apparently. Therefore, not wanting to watch the second episode on a small screen like my phone... I haven't seen it yet!
Oh noes, my two day free trial is ticking away!
You've helped me put my finger on it:
It feel like watching a TNG contact story through the viewpoint of Worf.
Intriguing.
I watched the first episode on TV away from home with relatives. To try and pull down the follow-up I tried a bunch of different options among the Smart TVs and Smart Ble-Ray players in the house, all of which have Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Video.
No dice. I even thought of watching on a PC here but I need Windows 10 and not 7, apparently. Therefore, not wanting to watch the second episode on a small screen like my phone... I haven't seen it yet!
Oh noes, my two day free trial is ticking away!
You've helped me put my finger on it:
It feel like watching a TNG contact story through the viewpoint of Worf.
Intriguing.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
This show... jesus. I don't even know why I bothered. I mean, I am a bit biased as I was instantly annoyed with it being another prequel instead of being set after Nemesis, but fuck, this makes the first two seasons of Enterprise look good.
I'm out. Maybe I'll watch the rest after it gets cancelled.
I'm out. Maybe I'll watch the rest after it gets cancelled.
SlipperyFishes
Banned
Watched on Netflix this morning, there were a couple of scenes where the grading changed dramatically during a scene that made me think someone might have uploaded an unfinished first episode (when Cap/Burn were talking).
Anyone else see that?
Anyone else see that?
Both were alright episodes. I'm not completely on board yet, but there wasn't anything I seriously disliked except for the Klingons which is more a Star Trek problem than Discovery's. I just find Klingons and other warrior type cultures to be boring antagonists.
Most Star Trek shows take a while to find their footing so DIS is already leagues ahead since it has a cohesive vision already. We're going to be following a crazyadmiral commander and diving deeper into their decision making process. I am very curious to see if they are going to have Michael redeem herself or continuously fuck up like her successors.
Most Star Trek shows take a while to find their footing so DIS is already leagues ahead since it has a cohesive vision already. We're going to be following a crazy
JetBlackPanda
Member
I am in for the season but I really hate this CBS streaming thing. It was a weird night I watched both episodes of Discovery and then started the Orville.
I have lots of weird feelings..
I have lots of weird feelings..
EvilRedEye
Member
Yes, it made me worried my TV was broken!
Even in TOS, the Klingons aren't shown as so singularly warlike as they are here.
It's possible that a reconciliation and understanding on Michael's part is going to be part of her character arc, but I'm not entirely sold on that happening given how hard they've leaned into the species stereotypes.
Like I've said before, we're going by standard TV thread rules, once it airs you can post about it.
The same rule applies when a show airs first in another country that isn't the US for what it's worth.
No you're wrong. Go watch it again. The phaser on the ground is blue, set to stun. She picks it up and it's still blue, only after the Special Guest Star is stabbed does she aim, flip to red, and fire. Also, she says "I'm not leaving without her BODY" when replying to the comms guy. She knew.
Stallion Dan
Member
Screen going bright to dark?
I saw that, the desert shot right at the start was one, thought it was my TV doing it at first but a few scenes do it.
British Monsoon
Member
For as detailed as the CG work is, I thought the ships came across as oddly ill-defined. I liked the Klingons, even if they are muddying the waters of continuity and seem to have been shed of some depth of cultural personality. Overall there were a bunch of minor and not so minor misgivings I had with the plotting and pace of the episodes, but that's stuff I'm willing to give a pass because it's the pilot.
My biggest concern is with the general tone going forwards. It needs to feel like a Star Trek TV series, and not just some sci-fi action adventure wearing Star Trek's skin. I've accepted that some concessions have to made to modernity (we'll probably never see a Trek show with a design direction as clean as pre-JJ Trek again given current trends) and that procedural television is very much out of favour at present, but it's how it presents its individual stories that will determine how much I enjoy this going forward, I think.
But regardless of all that, it is great to have new Trek again and I'm hoping for the best.
My biggest concern is with the general tone going forwards. It needs to feel like a Star Trek TV series, and not just some sci-fi action adventure wearing Star Trek's skin. I've accepted that some concessions have to made to modernity (we'll probably never see a Trek show with a design direction as clean as pre-JJ Trek again given current trends) and that procedural television is very much out of favour at present, but it's how it presents its individual stories that will determine how much I enjoy this going forward, I think.
But regardless of all that, it is great to have new Trek again and I'm hoping for the best.
JonnyDBrit
Member
Guess it's a cost of also how hard the marketing and production has leaned into this being a part of the Prime timeline, and a prequel to TOS in particular. Using alignment with a greater continuity as part of why a show should be watched is going to make those who get onboard for that reason factor in such continuity as part of their assessment of the show.
I also know of Klingons through popculture osmosis, so my understanding of the Klingons is that they complex and nuanced enough to be interesting, but they are indeed a war based culture.
But as far as an interesting story goes, I don't see what Michael does as particularly immoral. That scene has Kirk being actively callous to a race of entire people. Michael isn't advocating for genocide, she's saying that they should follow the procedure that has been set and proven to be effective by the only beings who they've had records of being in contact with.
Again, I admit it's not perfect, but it's not just that the Klingon's are a war like people who we, as the audience, get to see are up to no good. It's the fact that the line about how the Vulcans handled it suggests that it's not that peace isn't possible; it's that peace has to be communicated in a way that Klingon's understand. If they only see peace possible with a state whose combative abilities have been proven, then how is that not the correct way to peace?
Haven't watched it yet, but that sounds disappointing. One thing I liked about the Klingons in the TNG era and some TOS, is that there was obvious class separation going on between more battle-hungry Klingons and those that leaned more towards diplomacy and politics. After all, regardless of how they got the tech, a civilization like that can't survive without a political structure that functions.
Soooo, since I missed the actual TV broadcast the only way to even watch the first episode in the US is to sign up for the free trial? Haha, screw that CBS.
I don't know what the flip to blue to red means in this instance. Is this that "set phasers to stun/to kill" thing I've heard about? If it is, then yeah, nevermind, it's a deliberate kill decision.
I feel the body line could be ambiguous, but if she did know, then I think it's not until the alien dude told her he doesn't sense any life signs. I mean, she'd know he can't teleport a body without lifesigns otherwise, right?
We'll have to wait until the clip is put on YT by someone, but you are, well, wrong.
We see the phaser on the ground with its blue circle indicating its stun status. When Michael sees T'kuvma stab Georgieu we see and hear her flip a switch on the side, turning it to red and firing a kill shot.
She purposely switched it from stun to kill. There's no getting away from that.
The transporter stuff is just her wanting to recover her friend's body and maybe desperately hoping against hope that something can be done.
JonnyDBrit
Member
Ah, I think there may be a bit of confusion here. Michael asking for how the Vulcans kept peace with the Klingons (prior to the former becoming part of the Federation) doesn't mean the Vulcans are the only people who've ever dealt with them. She simply went for a reference from a source she personally trusted. The Federation has met the Klingons before and dealt with them.
Yes, the blue/red thing is meant to show that she intended to kill him. Remember, the mission (HER IDEA!) was to capture him because they absolutely MUST NOT kill him to make him a martyr!!! Pretty bad call there!
I'm really curious how they end up making this series "work" in the long run. She's officially a war criminal. She's charged and imprisoned. She's going to get off because there's a captain that's just as crazy and probably likes having a war criminal on board his ship. It's a really ???????????? premise for a scifi series in a franchise that's meant to be about hope and optimism.. Lol.
Mark Andrew
Member
Damn, I was shocked to see the 52% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. I loved it! And it seems GAF generally did too.
Timezones, how do they work?
Yeah, see above. If she flipped the settings, then yeah, I was wrong. The pacing and framing of the scene otherwise felt like a very fast and frantic decision which, if not for the light thing that I didn't understand until now, I would still argue is fast and in the moment.
It's getting review bombed by alt-righters and whiny piss baby trekkies.
JonnyDBrit
Member
Redemption arc and learning how to properly exercise her judgement is gonna be the big thing, I think. Burnham thinks like a soldier, so the person who can make her into someone actually deserving of the Captain's chair is a military man.
I'm not sure I'll ever understand how there are so many regressive trekkers.
Tal Shiar Agent
Member
Well, that's one way to dismiss criticism.
radios shipping overview
Member
I'm kind of waiting to see where they're going with that, but the way it would fit into the established timeline is that T'Kuvma built his own cloaking device based on stolen Romulan documents. Enterprise established that the Suliban and the Romulans both had cloaking technology in that era. Klingons weren't shown to have cloaking tech until the TOS movies.
I was specifically referring to the review bombing, but if you feel that it applies to you then by all means.
Took the time to watch the first episodes and I am hooked. I was a big ST fan back in the days, but Enterprise lost me .. Some quick thoughts:
- CGI was mostly great. Love the looks of the new aliens and the klingons (like Worf said: Not every Klingon looks the same)
- The tech is a lot more advanced as in the TOS or in TNG. That's ok, I think. TNG was a lot more advanced than TOS and you can't have a carpet on every bridge. Look was a lot like Enterprise and the Abrahamsverse (especially the learning beacons on Vulkan). ST was always of imaginating a new future, a lot of our current tech was inspired by the series (just think of the Motorola StarTek).
- in TOS, the Federation and the Klingons are at a troubled peace. Canon-wise fitting that we see on Discovery how they got there
- The battles were shot pretty good,
-
- The main protagonist is likeable and I am interested in her backstory
- CGI was mostly great. Love the looks of the new aliens and the klingons (like Worf said: Not every Klingon looks the same)
- The tech is a lot more advanced as in the TOS or in TNG. That's ok, I think. TNG was a lot more advanced than TOS and you can't have a carpet on every bridge. Look was a lot like Enterprise and the Abrahamsverse (especially the learning beacons on Vulkan). ST was always of imaginating a new future, a lot of our current tech was inspired by the series (just think of the Motorola StarTek).
- in TOS, the Federation and the Klingons are at a troubled peace. Canon-wise fitting that we see on Discovery how they got there
- The battles were shot pretty good,
especially the scenes when the ship is taking a lot of damage and people are dragged into space
Loved the shot of the huge ship destroying the Europa
Look if you don't like women committing war crimes you must be a sexist.
No matter what sort of redemption arc we're talking about, I would never put the person who did the stuff in the first two episodes here in a captain's chair, ever. Lmao.
RPGCrazied
Member
Wow, just watched the 2nd episode. Amazing. I hope it can keep up the production values. Impressed so far.
old manatee
Banned
I only saw the first episode, but I didn't have any problem with Michael. She's obviously a loose cannon, and I salute her for it.
This is going to be a case of where there is a group of people that don't want this to exist at all and the quality of it doesn't matter. If you read through some of those low audience scores there is complaining about CBS all access even being a thing, Fuller not being on the show, SJW talk, lens flare, etc. There was this stuff for weeks taking place with people randomly coming in praising the Orville (before it even aired) as the second coming, etc. They try to vote down anything and everything Discovery related no matter how simple and innocent it is. They did the same with newer films as well. Review bombing I believe it's called. There are some people that appear to be mad that the critic scores are positive.
That's not to say people can't honestly dislike what they saw. I can see where people would have some issues. I'm just highly questionable of things because of what has been going on for while now. That said that number is higher then it was earlier this morning I believe.
JonnyDBrit
Member
Honestly? I suspect if divorced from any presumptions of a 'political' message (no matter how bleedingly obvious the franchise makes such), then the franchise's primarily military focus unfortunately does lend itself to a more authoritarian, anti-progressive audience. Bolstered further by DS9's willingness to dabble with the idea of the ethical compromises made in the name of maintaining utopia, which many fans take up as completely correct and without question because pragmatism.
British Monsoon
Member
I liked the design of the Crepusculans;
TNG era Trek and beyond could really do with more 'out there' looking alien designs.
TNG era Trek and beyond could really do with more 'out there' looking alien designs.
Yet again, I was specifically referring to reviews with things like:
"Dreadful. The first television show ever written by an AI generator set to full political correctness."
"One star is generous. Looks OK but the diversity thing has missed the fan base."
"Terrible.Director and writer have their own agenda,which is not to create a new Star Trek series in the same traditions of the past but to create some drug induced political statement.Weird."
"It's not Star Trek. It is a Social Justice Warrior political statement."
But feel free to lump yourself with those people if you want to