|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 3, 2017 20:51:33 GMT
I'm not watching the show, since I'm not paying for it, so I can only comment on this in a general sense. Stuff like you mention is a tropey way of generating conflict. It's true that she wasn't responsible for the deaths. BUT mutiny is a serious issue in the military. While it's dumb for them to blame her for those deaths, and for her to blame herself, it is perfectly reasonable for there to be trust issues and so forth (and just general anger) because of the mutiny.
There's also the fact that she isn't serving out her whole sentence, receiving the full punishment for her crime. She got out early because of plot reasons, so there is bound to be additional resentment because of that. Being raised on Vulcan, while somewhat interesting, doesn't make her that exceptional that the military would vacate her sentence. She doesn't have some unique magical abilities or knowledge that make her so much better than the average Starfleet officer. If the show is spinning it like she does, then it's full of shit. Well...
Trust issues is what I expected. That would be sensible, but they seemed to go further than that.
As to her not serving her full sentence, actually that brings up another issue for me. The Federation is supposed to be some utopian ideal society, and yet they still throw people into jail for life? That seems to run against the Trek ethos to me.
Also. up until the end of the episode, no one (except presumably Captain Lorca) knows that she is doing anything other than helping out until her prison transport shuttle is fixed, so the resentment about her not serving her sentence is presumably still to come.
They are presenting her as an exceptional officer/genius type. Not quite sure how much better than the rest she's supposed to be as yet, mind...
Edit: And to all you North American types, it sucks that you can't watch on Netflix like the rest of us. If I were you I'd just say "fuck 'em" and pirate it... I don't have cable and I watch a bunch stuff on cbs so paying 6 bucks a month isn't bad for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 10:31:12 GMT
I'm enjoying it so far, but could someone please explain to me:
What about Michael's mutiny makes any of the deaths in the battle or the subsequent war her fault? She was stopped before she could launch her preemptive strike, and the fighting would've taken place anyway, as was clearly T'Kuvma's plan. The only difference would've been that she was on the bridge instead of in the brig, and yet everyone, including those that were there, seems to blame her for the war. She even seems to blame herself. It makes no sense.
Hello to Jason Isaacs. yea i was annoyed by it too. but mb her going to explore that unknown thingie and killing a klington first might have been a reason? i mean its not like they still wouldnt have attacked but mb not at that right moment idk |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 10:32:29 GMT
im enjoying it so far, but is it really a prequel, meaning happens beofre even kirk is born or when? that kinda lessened my enjoyment, i hate prequels urgh
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 13:38:48 GMT
im enjoying it so far, but is it really a prequel, meaning happens beofre even kirk is born or when? that kinda lessened my enjoyment, i hate prequels urgh I believe it's set 10 years before the original series. It is technically a prequel in that it supposedly is set in the timeline of Trek Prime, but with all of the changes it might as well be something new. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 8, 2017 14:28:38 GMT
im enjoying it so far, but is it really a prequel, meaning happens beofre even kirk is born or when? that kinda lessened my enjoyment, i hate prequels urgh I believe it's set 10 years before the original series. It is technically a prequel in that it supposedly is set in the timeline of Trek Prime, but with all of the changes it might as well be something new. Yea its 10 years before the original series so Kirk is out there somewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 1:19:51 GMT
I'm really digging the Klingon. Always enjoy getting multiple points of view in a show.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Drell on Oct 9, 2017 7:16:12 GMT
A small science nitpick about episode 4: First of all, O-type stars are extremely rare. Randomly materializing above one is an almost negligible possibility. Secondly, O-type stars are blue-white, so someone clearly goofed on the research here. Thirdly, O-types are the largest main-sequence stars so there is no way the Discovery would be visible at that scale. Zooming in on the discovery with the star below should probably not reveal such a pronounced curvature of the star itself. The star would just be too big for that to happen. Fourthly, they are the hottest stars on the scale. Being so close to one is almost certainly fatal. I find it extremely hard to believe that the Discovery would survive that encounter, regardless of whatever primitive shielding it possesses.  Hm, Elite Dangerous doesn't make them intimidating enough then. Still impressive though. |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Drell on Oct 9, 2017 7:47:18 GMT
Hm, Elite Dangerous doesn't make them intimidating enough then. Still impressive though. Beyond a cursory google search, I don't know much about Elite Dangerous, but I would be surprised if an open-world game managed to render stars of different spectral classes accurately and to scale. The sheer vastness of the universe required for such a feat would present definite problems. But it does manage to have all 400 billion star systems of our galaxy in the game, so what it does do is very impressive. (And I'm not getting payed by them i just love it lol.) |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Drell on Oct 9, 2017 8:09:20 GMT
But it does manage to have all 400 billion star systems of our galaxy in the game, so what it does do is very impressive. (And I'm not getting payed by them i just love it lol.) Lol. Well, I don't know if quantitative parity is quite as impressive as an accurate representation of scale. One Mole of any element contains 602,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms, more than the number of stars in the galaxy, but I dunno if staring at one mole of carbon is as impressive as looking at the galaxy.  But I am not trying to disparage this game. I'm sure it's great. When it all comes together, it's beautiful.   |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 13:52:20 GMT
A small science nitpick about episode 4: First of all, O-type stars are extremely rare. Randomly materializing above one is an almost negligible possibility. Secondly, O-type stars are blue-white, so someone clearly goofed on the research here. Thirdly, O-types are the largest main-sequence stars so there is no way the Discovery would be visible at that scale. Zooming in on the discovery with the star below should probably not reveal such a pronounced curvature of the star itself. The star would just be too big for that to happen. Fourthly, they are the hottest stars on the scale. Being so close to one is almost certainly fatal. I find it extremely hard to believe that the Discovery would survive that encounter, regardless of whatever primitive shielding it possesses. Agree on all points but it is possible the classification of stars is different in this universe. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 13:53:26 GMT
Since maybe they based it on a galactic standard rather than a earth standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Drell on Oct 9, 2017 13:57:25 GMT
Since maybe they based it on a galactic standard rather than a earth standard. But that wouldn't stop O type stars from being as bright and hot as they are. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 14:19:22 GMT
Since maybe they based it on a galactic standard rather than a earth standard. But that wouldn't stop O type stars from being as bright and hot as they are. That has nothing to do with it. My point was what we call O-type stars they might call blarg class. It's more likely they screwed up but I was just saying our naming conventions aren't necessarily the same as theirs. |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Drell on Oct 9, 2017 14:26:11 GMT
But that wouldn't stop O type stars from being as bright and hot as they are. That has nothing to do with it. My point was what we call O-type stars they might call blarg class. It's more likely they screwed up but I was just saying our naming conventions aren't necessarily the same as theirs. @regulus what did they call it in the show? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 14:30:51 GMT
That has nothing to do with it. My point was what we call O-type stars they might call blarg class. It's more likely they screwed up but I was just saying our naming conventions aren't necessarily the same as theirs. @regulus what did they call it in the show? It was O-type. It's not a huge deal, just making a point. |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Drell on Oct 9, 2017 14:37:16 GMT
@regulus what did they call it in the show? It was O-type. It's not a huge deal, just making a point. I just don't get the point, since they call it the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 14:38:45 GMT
It doesn't matter haha, just forget about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2017 16:35:45 GMT
Have any of you been watching The Orville? I get that the humor might not be for everyone, but it does have a Trek feel that I'm liking quite a bit. Spoiler for a character whose presentation some of you might be interested in. There is a character that comes from an all-male species. His mate is also living on the ship. Before the show's release, some were concerned that he would be used as the butt of jokes for maleness or other things, but none of that has come to pass. They actually had a baby, which our main guy hatched via sitting on an egg. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 16:40:13 GMT
Red Fox Sir Drell No, the Trek universe uses the stellar classification system that we're all familiar with. There are articles on Memory Beta and the Star Trek Theurgy Wiki that bear this out. Memory BetaTheurgy So what they mean by an O-type star is precisely what we mean by an O-type star. That's why I think this was a mistake. But yeah, it's not a huge deal. I'm just nitpicking. It's just that it was a moment that broke my immersion, and it's so easily fixable with a little research. It just surprised me. I know jack about star trek lore so feel free to correct me if I'm talking out my ass. Thanks for the correction. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Fox on Oct 9, 2017 16:40:54 GMT
Have any of you been watching The Orville? I get that the humor might not be for everyone, but it does have a Trek feel that I'm liking quite a bit. I love The Orville. It has some serious moments mixed in with the toilet humor you would expect. |
|
Much love right back at ya!
