And all the crying… my god, so many tears 🙄
Comment on Is Star Trek Discovery that bad?
Nefara@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
I have an intense distaste for Discovery, and wouldn’t recommend it.
I could rant about it a la Jenny Nicholson for 4 hours but here’s my main issues boiled down to a bulleted list:
Some things I like about Star Trek:
• Optimistic future, humans can create greatness and beauty if they continue to check and overcome their faults • No black and white villains. All antagonists are given nuance and development and many become favored allies • Themes of teamwork, a functional ensemble, core crew are all valid and valued, no one star of the show. • No such thing as magic or gods, everything is in the realm of human understanding if we have sufficient knowledge
Guess what Disovery has?
• Nihilistic, apocalyptic future • Bad guys that are just bad, they’re evil, don’t ask questions • One principal star of the show that is the focus of nearly every episode • No attempt to explain “divine” phenomena/magic
Then add on some blatant examples of total ignorance for the universe it’s set in, attempts at ham handed fan service by shoe horning in clumsy references to characters from other series, and just medocre drama in general, you have a show that is farther from Star Trek than a 14 year old’s submission on IO9.
If you don’t really care,about Star Trek or know anything about it it can be entertaining I guess, but why watch it when there’s Strange New Worlds, Lower Decks and The Orville?
SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social 16 hours ago
CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 8 hours ago
With the soft speaking and camera panning across the bridge to catch everyone’s facial expressions in reaction to Burnham’s 13th motivational speech for the episode.
danielquinn@lemmy.ca 17 hours ago
I agree 100% with this take and want to thank you for that excellent video! I’m not all the way through yet, but I’m thoroughly enjoying it.
Corgana@startrek.website 11 hours ago
• Nihilistic, apocalyptic future
Do you have any examples of the Nihilism? I’m struggling to think of any… In fact Season 3 was about maintaining optimism and faith in the strength of the Federation against unbelievable odds.
• Bad guys that are just bad, they’re evil, don’t ask questions
Khan, Gul Dukat and the Clown from Voyager were all in Discovery?
• One principal star of the show that is the focus of nearly every episode
I agree that there was a main character, but I also enjoy a lot of media with a main character so I don’t see that as a bad thing.
• No attempt to explain things with any veneer of science
I suggest you avoid watching TNG and TOS because they do the same thing!
Nefara@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
I don’t have much time to respond so I’m going to just hit one bullet for now:
Are you going to try to argue that Khan and Gul Dukat weren’t given nuance and development? Some of the things that made them such compelling antagonists is that we were given insight into their motives and backgrounds and perspectives. Khan absolutely was nuanced and the persecution and illegality of genetically enhanced humans was a great stepping off point for him. Just about every antagonist that pops up in Star Trek gets some kind of explanation why they are doing the things they are doing, and the crew takes a moment to acknowledge their inherent worth as living beings and, if they’re sentient, discuss possibilities for negotiations or nonviolence. I haven’t forgotten that Klingons, Ferengi, Borg, Cardassians and many others start off as villains, but we are given many opportunities for them to be “humanized” through characters like Worf, Quark, Hugh/Seven, Garak and others. There are no “good” or “bad” aliens in Star Trek.
So keeping that in mind, how did things go with the Ba’Ul? How did they handle Control? What nuance was Lorca given? In Discovery, your first impression of a bad guy being bad is always correct.
Corgana@startrek.website 8 hours ago
You didn’t say Discovery villains didn’t “have nuance and development”. So no, I didn’t say that either.
MalikMuaddibSoong@startrek.website 10 hours ago
Gul Dukat
Maybe you drew too fast shot yourself in the foot?
Gul Dukat is arguably the most wellformed villain in ST canon. He is a delusional maniac pursuing a twisted vision of greatness. He even works alongside our heroes for a time!
Can I offer you an Armus instead?
Corgana@startrek.website 8 hours ago
I agree that Gul Dukat is a delusional maniac! The guy I replied to said that only Discovery had such characters. But that said I will gladly accept your Armus!
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 14 hours ago
It’s a romantic comedy. Not science fiction. I lost it at the musical. Musicals are what happens when writers have no ideas.
Corgana@startrek.website 11 hours ago
Musicals are amazing and you are worse than hitler for suggesting otherwise
usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 7 hours ago
They’re also completely absent from Discovery…
Corgana@startrek.website 2 hours ago
GreenMartian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 hours ago
The Orville came out at the perfect time. The world was craving a good Trek, and was served Discovery. Orville scratched that decade-long itch, hitting all the right notes (though S1 was a bit rough…)
Similarly with Picard and Lower Decks. Picard was a high-budget fanservice with a thin veneer of storyline. Lower Decks was good old classic Trek fun and shenanigans.