Doggie Howser Posted October 2, 2017 Posted October 2, 2017 Episode 3 - was a step in the right direction. More scifi less scidrama The missus wasn't too keen tho - she said it was still too dark and ST was always about a more enlightened time. The way I see it - this is the ST for this era. We are in a darker place today and the show's mood and theme definitely alludes to it but it still looks forward to a different time which we know is coming.
Doggie Howser Posted October 2, 2017 Posted October 2, 2017 Ah TNG how I missed u [embed=425,349] [/embed] Marriott Convention LMAO
Guest AndrewC Posted October 14, 2017 Posted October 14, 2017 Just caught Episodes 3 & 4... I like it a lot! ;D
Guest AndrewC Posted November 6, 2017 Posted November 6, 2017 Was wrecking my brain to remember where I'd seen Chief of Security Ash Tyler before... then it hit me!! Clem Fandango from Toast of London!! hahaha ;D [embed=425,349] [/embed]
Audio Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 Michael Burnham will be captain of a Star Trek vehicle one day.....you just see... (Audio)
whyeme Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 Black Mirror Season 4 Episode 1 was a damn good Trek show. Must watch!
Guest AndrewC Posted January 9, 2018 Posted January 9, 2018 Damn! Discovery episodes are getting really good... Frakes (aka No.1 ;D) directed episode 10... so, perhaps unsurprising that it's so good.
DJQ Posted January 10, 2018 Posted January 10, 2018 yeah. outstanding... after a few seasons. like TNG, potential for the crew to make it to the big screens.
Guest AndrewC Posted January 12, 2018 Posted January 12, 2018 Anyone else buying into the speculation that... Security Chief Ash Tyler is in fact Voq transformed into a Human spy (via surgery and memory transplant)? ...Pretty sure thats how it's playing out ;D
reno77 Posted January 17, 2018 Posted January 17, 2018 Anyone think the story writer came up with the mycellium network explanation after having some magic mushrooms? Stamets is actually named after a famous mycologist.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Stamets
artemov Posted January 17, 2018 Posted January 17, 2018 Binge watch for the past 2 days. Wow, I didn't see anticipate the 2 big twists! Good show!
Guest AndrewC Posted January 19, 2018 Posted January 19, 2018 Ha! Damn! The latest episode kicks! ;D Anyone think the story writer came up with the mycellium network explanation after having some magic mushrooms? Stamets is actually named after a famous mycologist.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Stamets ;D... Probably! The concept got slammed on Forbes; https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2017/10/30/new-star-trek-series-makes-massive-science-blunder/#741fce941b37
lonewold_sg Posted January 19, 2018 Posted January 19, 2018 I'm not a Trekkie and has not watched any episode of the Star Trek: Discovery. But I was intrigued enough by the foregoing discussion that I went to read the article in the Forbes. And frankly, the writer's assertion that 'I can't watch this nonsense. I'm willing to suspend disbelief for the sake of a good story (warp drive!), but I can't accept obviously bogus claims.' is a little amusing if not bewildering. ST:D is a science fiction show. It was made for entertainment not education. So what's the big fuss over something that may have been a little off scientifically speaking? It's not like ST:D was a documentary that was trying to explain the principle of instantaneously space travel. I dun get it. So I'm wondering if other Trekkies in here feel the same way as this writer.
Doggie Howser Posted January 19, 2018 Posted January 19, 2018 I guess you have to watch the show. Star Trek while fiction nevertheless grounds itself with issues that are centrally about the human condition. That said we have seen a steady progression of technology from Archers Enterprise to Kirk’s Enterprise NCC 1701 (s) and Picard’s 1701D beyond. This spore Drive is like out of this world. It outperforms anything short of what The Traveller and Q can do. I’m guessing they’ll resolve this at some stage why the tech was abandoned. But it’s an odd retcon because there’s no mention of it in the later timelines.
Guest AndrewC Posted January 21, 2018 Posted January 21, 2018 ... And frankly, the writer's assertion that 'I can't watch this nonsense. I'm willing to suspend disbelief for the sake of a good story (warp drive!), but I can't accept obviously bogus claims.' is a little amusing if not bewildering. ... In addition to what DH says above, I think some of the fuss is because Star Trek’s writers have traditionally been very diligent about adopting plausible science into the shows, to the extent that even NASA has a page on Star Trek; https://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/features/star_trek.html. Not to mention numerous books exploring the science on ST (my favourite is “The Physics of Star Trek” by Prof. Lawrence Krauss :)). But the writer of that Forbes piece goes a little overboard… I bet you he’s still following ST:D ;)
malsound Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 I think Jack White got a hand in design of the new other uniform. ;D [embed=425,349] [/embed]
Guest AndrewC Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Wow! Wow! wow! :o… I did not see EP12’s twist coming!! Just 3 more episodes to go and you can pretty much guess the Season 1 cliffhanger is going to be a bitchi! ;D
reno77 Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Omg omg, how did I not see that coming, it's been hinted on a few times from his behavior
whyeme Posted January 24, 2018 Posted January 24, 2018 awesome writing...making the orville seem like child's play now
Recommended Posts