Star Trek Discovery

[Wojo 2,453]

Maybe a race like the J'Nai will have joined Starfleet. 

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

The previous Star Trek TV series were not diverse enough. Thankfully, we have this new series to finally correct those mistakes and do things right.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I don't see one single problem with anything Fuller said regarding character diversity.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Haven't we had this conversation before?  I can see how some people might take it as pandering.  It's great that some people eat that stuff up with a spoon, but you know, not everyone does.  

 

It's a woman captain.  Fine.  I'm probably more on board with that than most people.   But it's tiring and a little groan-inducing to constantly hear about how diverse something is going to be.  I don't care, just do it.  But, there are many for whom playing up this sort of thing is a selling point.  Oh well. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

13 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

I don't see one single problem with anything Fuller said regarding character diversity.

 

The Federation is a Homo Sapiens only party and should remain so!

[Jay 37,323]

'Star Trek: Discovery' Timeline Will Alter TOS Alien Physiology

 

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

And we feared it would be JJ who would ruin Star Trek!

 

[Wojo 2,453]

Well blue Andorians lived on a cold planet. Maybe orange ones have a skin disease or live on a hot moon. 

 

After all, had anyone seen a black Vulcan before Tuvok? 

[crocodile 7,990]

Oh I just read this series will be available on Netflix over here 24 hours after US premiere. Cool.

 

Karol

[Jay 37,323]

Majel Barrett May Voice The Computer In Star Trek: Discovery

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

I always thought they could make a killing using her voice on a GPS or smartphone.

 

On a related note, wouldn't it be the ultimate product placement if Apple paid CBS to use Siri as the computer voice?

[Brónach 1,301]

On 8/11/2016 at 8:22 PM, TheWhiteRider said:

Haven't we had this conversation before?  I can see how some people might take it as pandering.  It's great that some people eat that stuff up with a spoon, but you know, not everyone does.  

 

It's a woman captain.  Fine.  I'm probably more on board with that than most people.   But it's tiring and a little groan-inducing to constantly hear about how diverse something is going to be.  I don't care, just do it.  But, there are many for whom playing up this sort of thing is a selling point.  Oh well. 

 

I have three thoughts.

 

1) It's a current market demand. More demographics to sell stuff to. The demand is veeeery slowly reaching the mainstream, which reacts to stuff with a lot of inertia sometimes.

 

2) It's a classic Star Trek move. Calling this pandering is ridiculous. (It's more like "they no longer pander solely to me"...)

 

3) "Diverse" is, sadly, little more than a marketing tool for point 1. It says nothing about the quality treatment and development of characters. So I still don't know what to expect.

 

On 8/11/2016 at 1:52 PM, Stefancos said:

Ironic, since you're the type of person for whom this is all being done for these days. Or atleast that's what a lot of social justice warriors seem to think.

 

I really have no idea what it's being done "for me" in this show without seeing it. The appeal so far is "what if this contains good sci-fi/fantasy".

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

I expect ever Star Trek series to showcase diversity.  I take that as a given.

 

I just don't see why it has to be some selling point. "Look at us, we're diverse".  As if they want a gold star for that.  As if it's a virtue in the storytelling in its own right. All that diversity + a bad story still makes for a bad story, just with, you know, diversity.

 

Again, I expect Star Trek to be diverse. But I must confess to getting mildly annoyed that they have to announce it to the world this way, as if it makes them better people.

[Brónach 1,301]

Just now, Nick66 said:

I expect ever Star Trek series to showcase diversity.  I take that as a given.

 

I just don't see why it has to be some selling point. "Look at us, we're diverse".  As if they want a gold star for that.  All that diversity + a bad story still makes for a bad story, just with, you know, diversity.

 

Again, I expect Star Trek to be diverse. But I must confess to getting mildly annoyed that they have to announce it to the world this way, as if it makes them better people.

 

Easy cookies without showing the work, I imagine.

[Wojo 2,453]

36 minutes ago, Nick66 said:

I always thought they could make a killing using her voice on a GPS or smartphone.

 

On a related note, wouldn't it be the ultimate product placement if Apple paid CBS to use Siri as the computer voice?

 

They're working on it. They recorded her voice phonetically so all the pieces to have her narrate are there. I saw an article about it within the week. 

 

 

 

 

 

Star Trek has always promoted "diversity" but has usually done so from a safe distance and not featured long-term ramifications. 

 

The original pilot The Cage showed a female executive officer and alien second officer. The next pilot got rid of the female XO and she was recast as a nurse, a more gender friendly occupation. The alien stayed, but he was just another white guy. The bridge crew included a black woman, Russian, and Asian (the driver!) but these were all smaller roles than the straight white trio of leads. 

 

TOS did feature the first interracial kiss on TV, but weren't they goaded into it or under mind control? Kirk and Uhura never had a relationship beyond that kiss. 

 

Major diversity issues reflected the racial and political tensions of the day. Let That Be Your Last Battlefield (the silliness of white and black divisions) and Day of the Dove (Klingons) stand out. I don't recall episodes discussing sexual or gender issues because these were still taboo on TV. 

 

TNG added diversity with two black men, one of whom was a once hated alien now one of the good guys, but the three white women and a child were all safe. The Captain is still a white guy. We get female captains and admirals and Shelby. One episode addressed androgeny as a parallel for homosexuality, but Riker still kissed a female actor. Safe. Other episodes discussed more political tensions and xenophobia. In another episode, Dr Beverly falls in love with a male Trill, is cordial to the idea of her lover being in Riker's body, but cannot bring her self to pursue the relationship when her lover is in a female body. Diversity and progressiveness take a major hit there. Yet the Borg, who want to steamroll all diversity into their pasty asexual robo bodies, they're the real bad guys. 

 

DS9 enjoyed the most diverse cast yet, with a lot more aliens and a black captain. The white male humans became the minority, though it never became a plot point. Here we got a lesbian kiss, but the in universe taboo was past loves, not gender related. Bisexuality was enjoyed basically only by the sultry mirror version of Kira. OK, there was that one time Quark became a woman to promote women's rights in Ferengi society, but it was played for laughs and comes across as narrow minded. 

 

Star Trek remained racially and ethnically diverse, but the 60s and 90s weren't ready for mainstream weekly sexual diversity, so you don't find as much LGBT as in other shows now. Discovery needs to get with the times. 

[nightscape94 965]

The showrunners and the network just need to suck it up and go with it.  It's not about writing for today, it's about writing for 300 years from now.  What would that look like in terms of human relationships and gender?  Be more creative, and do it without feeling self-aware.

[Wojo 2,453]

They've never been able to do that consistently though. The original 2260s feel and look like the 1960s. The 2360s and 2370s feel like the 1980s and 1990s. The high octane 2150s really don't feel like they come before the more reserved 2260s, as they are a product of post-2001 fear. And there's no way the sexed up mirror 2260s equate to the original timeline.

 

Star Trek's future is a reflection of the era in which it was made. And it probably should be, because it's just a sandbox for morality plays about contemporary issues. At least, it used to be, before it became a soap opera more obsessed with technical details and special effects. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

18 minutes ago, nightscape94 said:

The showrunners and the network just need to suck it up and go with it.  It's not about writing for today, it's about writing for 300 years from now.  What would that look like in terms of human relationships and gender?  Be more creative, and do it without feeling self-aware.

Actually, it is about writing for today.  

 

Star Trek has never really been about 23rd century people in 23rd century situations. It was about 20th century people in 20th century situations...set in the future, in space. Whether it was the 60's or the 80's or the 90's. The point of Trek was always to be an analogy for our times, not a hard science look at future.  There's a place for that, and plenty of that kind of specualitive fiction out there if it's your thing, but that's really not what Trek is about.

 

In any event, don't think they could write about how people would act in those situations 300 years from now even if they wanted to.  One only has to look at speculative fiction from the 19th century (and older) about how 20th century people would act to see the folly in that.  

 

2 minutes ago, WojinPA said:

They've never been able to do that consistently though. The original 2260s feel and look like the 1960s. The 2360s and 2370s feel like the 1980s and 1990s. The high octane 2150s really don't feel like they come before the more reserved 2260s, as they are a product of post-2001 fear. And there's no way the sexed up mirror 2260s equate to the original timeline. Star Trek's future is a reflection of the era in which it was made. And it probably should be, because it's just a sandbox for morality plays about contemporary issues. At least, it used to be, before it became a soap opera more obsessed with technical details and special effects. 

I think we were pretty much writing the same thing at the same time.

[Wojo 2,453]

Star Trek ninjas? Probably the uniforms of the Hirogen with the sneakiness of Sloan. 

 

I would have loved to see the Hirogen encounter the Jem'Hadar. They'd probably embrace as brothers. Nah. 

[nightscape94 965]

56 minutes ago, Nick66 said:

Actually, it is about writing for today.

 

Star Trek has never really been about 23rd century people in 23rd century situations. It was about 20th century people in 20th century situations...set in the future, in space. Whether it was the 60's or the 80's or the 90's. The point of Trek was always to be an analogy for our times, not a hard science look at future.  There's a place for that, and plenty of that kind of specualitive fiction out there if it's your thing, but that's really not what Trek is about.

 

Lack of vision or creativeness, honestly.  That's why, as much as I love Star Trek, it sometimes feels laughably dated to the decade in which it was made.  That's acceptable for most shows, but since this is a science based show set in the future, formed in speculative fiction, I wish they would search beyond the 20th century.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

That's silly! Sci-finis typically the genre that dates the fastest.

[nightscape94 965]

You just reinforced my point.

[Wojo 2,453]

It's pretty hard to predict what the social problems and dialogue will be like hundreds of years from now. Star Trek has done an entertaining job so far but I'm not looking for them to be psychic and fortune tellers. I mean, the show hinges on humans meeting fucking aliens. That's just not going to happen. 

[Brónach 1,301]

15 hours ago, Nick66 said:

Actually, it is about writing for today.  

 

Star Trek has never really been about 23rd century people in 23rd century situations. It was about 20th century people in 20th century situations...set in the future, in space. Whether it was the 60's or the 80's or the 90's. The point of Trek was always to be an analogy for our times, not a hard science look at future.  There's a place for that, and plenty of that kind of specualitive fiction out there if it's your thing, but that's really not what Trek is about.

 

In any event, don't think they could write about how people would act in those situations 300 years from now even if they wanted to.  One only has to look at speculative fiction from the 19th century (and older) about how 20th century people would act to see the folly in that.  

 

A lot of the coolest science-fiction is the one that reflects current stuff. Because it has an actual impact on audience empathy/motivation/interest/emotions, as they recognize things. And gaining audience empathy is hard.

 

Interestingly, a lot of people read subtext in ST as kind of gay in general, particularly with the TOS characters. They really tried to make it more heterosexual looking in the reboot, and funnily enough it still didn't fly.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

What?

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

26 minutes ago, Brónach said:

 

Interestingly, a lot of people read subtext in ST as kind of gay in general, particularly with the TOS characters. They really tried to make it more heterosexual looking in the reboot, and funnily enough it still didn't fly.

Well reading gay subtext into almost all pop culture is a thing now, isn't it?  Particular in science fiction in fantasy.  Kirk and Spock must have been the first gay fan fic...although no doubt some victorian salon wrote gay Holmes and Watson fic as well.

 

Gay readers have been particularly upset at JK Rowling for not making more of the gay subtext they insist is in her books. These offences include not making Tonks a lesbian punk and making Lupin and Surius Black lovers, and of course not actually writing Dumbledore' sexuality into the books.  Not to mention the relative boring, heteronormative fate of most of the charters (who all pretty much marry their first loves and go on to have children and office jobs).

 

As to whether there's any "there" there, I guess that's in the eye of the beholder.

[Jay 37,323]

On 9/10/2016 at 11:51 AM, WojinPA said:

Star Trek's future is a reflection of the era in which it was made. And it probably should be, because it's just a sandbox for morality plays about contemporary issues. At least, it used to be, before it became a soap opera more obsessed with technical details and special effects. 

 

Indeed!

[Brónach 1,301]

13 hours ago, Nick66 said:

Gay readers have been particularly upset at JK Rowling for not making more of the gay subtext they insist is in her books. These offences include not making Tonks a lesbian punk and making Lupin and Surius Black lovers, and of course not actually writing Dumbledore' sexuality into the books.  Not to mention the relative boring, heteronormative fate of most of the charters (who all pretty much marry their first loves and go on to have children and office jobs).

 

As to whether there's any "there" there, I guess that's in the eye of the beholder.

 

Sometimes it's there. Cuarón read Lupin as gay. Rowling's admitedly using the werewolf as a metaphor for AIDS is... quite unfortunate. Sometimes it isn't there. Truth is, HP is a big white straight power fantasy, and Rowling probably didn't even think on that back in the day (to a lot of people it just doesn't even occur to them) and she just seems to try to connect with a big demographic of fans of her books by stating things after the fact, which it's just silly and doesn't work. Like, write something new and different instead of that. It's sad, but sometimes a thing gains a big LGBT following out of desperation by interpreting things a certain way and rolling with it, because doing that in your mind is all you have (or the thing just resonates with people even if it's unintentional). Outside of very unusual outliers like Steven Universe.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

On 04/08/2016 at 7:14 PM, WojinPA said:

Don't give them any ideas. TMP's orbital office was simply inverted to make Regula One. 

 

Thats how they got the Reliant.

Upside down, it looks like the Liberator.

[Brónach 1,301]

I have to say I don't like how this Discovery ship looks in the teaser. But I did like the Franklin in Beyond.

[Wojo 2,453]

Not gay enough? 

[nightscape94 965]

On Saturday, September 10, 2016 at 11:56 PM, WojinPA said:

It's pretty hard to predict what the social problems and dialogue will be like hundreds of years from now. Star Trek has done an entertaining job so far but I'm not looking for them to be psychic and fortune tellers. I mean, the show hinges on humans meeting fucking aliens. That's just not going to happen.

 

Well, yes and no.  Scientific discoveries certainly would be more difficult to predict, since one discovery leads to another, but Roddenberry knew, as well as others, which way the winds blew on certain societal issues.  There are certain inevitabilities.  A lot of what makes the show feel dated either stems from network interference or creativity working against its better judgment.

 

I don't ask for fortune telling, but rather showcasing sensible comprehension about likely outcomes without being overly didactic.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bullshit! Star Trek tells stories that are relevant today, just placed in a future setting.  It's never been a show about how things will really be like a couple of hundred years from now, which is something we cannot comprehend.

[Brónach 1,301]

I'm not sure how predicting outcomes works here given that the timeline differs radically from our world already in the 20th century. In ST they have that sort of war with the augments (correct me if I'm wrong here), we have global warming and antibiotic resistance and probably won't have those sort of problems with genetic editing. If Star Trek as a show had originated in this decade, it would follow a completely different timeline, and have different worries.

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

22 minutes ago, nightscape94 said:

 

Well, yes and no.  Scientific discoveries certainly would be more difficult to predict, since one discovery leads to another, but Roddenberry knew, as well as others, which way the winds blew on certain societal issues.  There are certain inevitabilities.  A lot of what makes the show feel dated either stems from network interference or creativity working against its better judgment.

 

I don't ask for fortune telling, but rather showcasing sensible comprehension about likely outcomes without being overly didactic.

Again, that's all fascinating, but why does it have to be Star Trek?  You're asking for Star Trek to be different than what it's been, quite successfully, for 50 years.

 

There's definitely a place for the kind of speculative fiction that you're looking for...there are plenty of books along those lines if that's your thing. But you're expecting Star Trek to be something it's not. It would be like asking why doesn't Walking Dead spend more time on the science behind the viral mutation (or whatever it was) that created the Walkers. That's not what the show's about.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

In TOS the Eugenics wars were in the late 20th century. But the latter shows have moved that up a bit. 

 

The 2 parter Past Tense from DS9 shows an America where the homeless and unemployed are imprisoned in large ghetto's, while Europe experiences great political unrest. That was set in 2024, just 8 years from now. And despite the fact that it looks like the future as portrayed in the mid-90's, it's certainly in the ballpark!

[Wojo 2,453]

Two novels were wrong in the past ten years to explain how all of recent human history fits into the Eugenics Wars of Star Trek that give rise to Khan Singh's empire across a quarter of the Earth and his subsequent escape into space. I haven't read them but I read they're well written and fun. 

 

But yeah, Star Trek wrote a future for thirty years in its 1960s future based on fears and dreams at the time. They didn't come to pass but they were already painted into a corner. 

 

Currently we don't do genetic editing on people to the scale done in Star Trek to make supermen. We modify our crops and livestock to get better yields and disease resistance, and we edit drugs to kill germs that just make supergerms. 

2 minutes ago, Nick66 said:

It would be like asking why doesn't Walking Dead spend more time on the science behind the viral mutation (or whatever it was) that created the Walkers. That's not what the show's about.

 

They did one episode about that stuff and it's not everyone's favorite from Season One. It did have a key ratification but that's it. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

14 minutes ago, WojinPA said:

 

They did one episode about that stuff and it's not everyone's favorite from Season One. It did have a key ratification but that's it. 

I remember that, and I actually liked the CDC bits. I think that may have been more of an emphasis in later seasons had Darbont stayed on.

Actually, that's what I hoped Fear the Walking Dead would have been...about the efforts of the World Health Organisation, CDC, virologists, etc. to figure out the plague from its inception as society crumbled around them. Perhaps something more like World War Z.  Instead we just got another group of civilians fighting zombies.  Which is fine, but there's already one very good show about that.

[Wojo 2,453]

K. 

[Jay 37,323]

Star Trek: Discovery has been pushed from a January 2017 release to May.

[Wojo 2,453]

Yay! 

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

I'm fine with them pushing it back as long as they get it right.  I actually have a pretty good feeling about this project.

[Brónach 1,301]

Is there any sort of clue as to who will write music for this?

[Jay 37,323]

No.

[Manakin Skywalker 4,891]

I hope they stick to the signature style of music. Hopefully it's not some generic all-synth shit TV score like most shows have today. They better get some of the original composers.

[Jay 37,323]

Bryan Fuller Stepping Down As Showrunner of “Star Trek: Discovery”

 

Well,  shit. 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Oh man I just saw that news too.  Holy shit.  Not a great sign.  And I was so excited to see what he would do.

[Dixon Hill 4,233]

Star Trek used to be better than everything.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Interesting that the lead character is described as a female lieutenant commender. That would certainly be a break from the norm. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

6 hours ago, Stefancos said:

Interesting that the lead character is described as a female lieutenant commender. That would certainly be a break from the norm. 

Especially since commender isn't a known Starfleet rank, so it sounds like they're messing with cannon.