• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Star Trek Discovery?

The saucer section is meant to hypnotise you so that you are more susceptible to suggestion. First, spin the saucer, then cut to the cast saying "it's so fucking cool" and the audience repeats in a trancelike stupor.

"So... fucking ... coooooooooooool".

Really, what were they thinking? Does Star Trek become a better show now that they can say the F-word?
 
Jayjay said:
The saucer section is meant to hypnotise you so that you are more susceptible to suggestion. First, spin the saucer, then cut to the cast saying "it's so fucking cool" and the audience repeats in a trancelike stupor.

"So... fucking ... coooooooooooool".

Really, what were they thinking? Does Star Trek become a better show now that they can say the F-word?
Click to expand...
Worked for Team America.
 
Patooka said:
crazyfingers said:
Kids report no explanation so far why the saucer rotates.
Click to expand...

I can help you out there; it looks cool. I am certain that was all the thought and discussion involved the decision making process.
Click to expand...

True. But even my kids think that it's stupidly out of place for Trek.

Tonight we watched the remastered version of "Arena" and "Tomorrow is Yesterday" currently going through all the remastered TOS's.

Did u know that with the remasterds you can see where Nimoy's pionty ears attach?
 
So tell me, in Discovery, do they ever have to pause to wait while walking until the saucer turns enough so the doors line up? Does anyone ever get stuck between the rotating and non rotating parts?
 
So far as I know, there has been nothing in terms of visual or aural information about the two counter-rotating saucer sections, with a gap between. One would think that for the Trekkers out there they'd provide some excuse for what appears to be just a cool visual effect for those who don't care about how this thing fits or not into the timeline.
 
How about windows? When they look out the window, do the stars seem to be moving?

What about recreational facilities? I figure this would wreak havoc on the handball court.

How does the plumbing work? This the pre-replicator era, right? Does each section have its own waste processing facility? That would mean the whole ship would have at least three! Do you have to go to the non-rotating part to use the bathroom? add that to the door problem and you have a potential accident zone!
 
it's even worse than all that.

looking at this screen capture from the episode, none of the windows are moving... which means either:
1. the inner and outer rings aren't rotating, this is literally just the 'roof' of each section being able to slide around like a Space Fidget Spinner.
2. the CGI department was too stupid/lazy/incompetent to properly animate the sections spinning and just did it for the 'top' as a mistake.

hehehehehe... god this show is a load of bullshit.


giphy.webp
 
I didn't watch the opening show, since I wasn't going to deal with the later paywall requirements...
prideandfall said:
it's even worse than all that.

looking at this screen capture from the episode, none of the windows are moving... which means either:
1. the inner and outer rings aren't rotating, this is literally just the 'roof' of each section being able to slide around like a Space Fidget Spinner.
2. the CGI department was too stupid/lazy/incompetent to properly animate the sections spinning and just did it for the 'top' as a mistake.

hehehehehe... god this show is a load of bullshit.


giphy.webp
Click to expand...
That is funny-lame. It made me poke around and evidently Starfleet also runs Windows ROTFLMAO...

https://www.theverge.com/tldr/2017/10/3/16412372/star-trek-discovery-cbs-windows-code-command-line
The third episode of Star Trek: Discovery aired this week, and at one point in the episode, Sonequa Martin-Green’s Michael Burnham is tasked with reconciling two suites of code by Lieutenant Paul Stamets (Anthony Rapp).
<snip>
That’s right — in the year 2256, Starfleet’s latest state-of-the-art science vessel still runs Windows.

More specifically, it seems to be decompiled code for the infamous Stuxnet virus (thanks, aaron44126!), which is a particularly strange thing for a Starfleet vessel to be running, given that the virus was identified back in 2010 as a weapon created to disable Iran’s nuclear program.
Click to expand...
 
prideandfall said:
it's even worse than all that.

looking at this screen capture from the episode, none of the windows are moving... which means either:
1. the inner and outer rings aren't rotating, this is literally just the 'roof' of each section being able to slide around like a Space Fidget Spinner.
2. the CGI department was too stupid/lazy/incompetent to properly animate the sections spinning and just did it for the 'top' as a mistake.

hehehehehe... god this show is a load of bullshit.
Click to expand...
Are the rings inhabited or used on the interior or part of the propulsion or shield or... I don't know, a deli slicer?
 
Hey, its a brilliant solution to allow everyone in the spinning section to share those six windows! You just have to remember to look up at the right moment.
 
I'm sure that with a spinning saucer roof, they have to compensate just to keep the ship pointed in the right direction. No word on that problem.
 
Maybe it is to distract the enemy.

Weapons: Sir, we have them in firing range, shall we shoot?
Captain: Wait a sec... why are the two discs spinning?
Weapons: Unknown...
Captain: It shouldn't be for the spore drive...
Navigation: What is odd is that the windows aren't spinning around.
Captain: I noticed that too.
Weapons: So is it just the roof or is there an exterior core?
Captain: It can't be the whole thing spinning around, that'd make it impossible to work in...
Weapons: Oh shit, they're firing on us.
Captain: The script writers would know better, right?
Weapons: Shields captain?!
Niavigation: Yeah, because the rotation of a ship to simulate gravity doesn't work that...
*KABOOM*

 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Maybe it is to distract the enemy.

Weapons: Sir, we have them in firing range, shall we shoot?
Captain: Wait a sec... why are the two discs spinning?
Weapons: Unknown...
Captain: It shouldn't be for the spore drive...
Navigation: What is odd is that the windows aren't spinning around.
Captain: I noticed that too.
Weapons: So is it just the roof or is there an exterior core?
Captain: It can't be the whole thing spinning around, that'd make it impossible to work in...
Weapons: Oh shit, they're firing on us.
Captain: The script writers would know better, right?
Weapons: Shields captain?!
Niavigation: Yeah, because the rotation of a ship to simulate gravity doesn't work that...
*KABOOM*
Click to expand...
Maybe they could use that within The Orville script... ;)
 
I consider myself a trek fan having seen everything trek at some point, (except maybe some of the unpopular tos episodes) and I have to say that the Orville really does capture the spirit of Star Trek, except that it is self aware of (to humorous effect) all the ridiculous aspects of trek that trek tries to brush under the table. I am really enjoying it.

I haven't tried discovery yet but I am looking forward to it.
 
prideandfall said:
except that they totally don't.

the general rule of thumb for a big blockbuster movie is add at least half again the budget for marketing.
the first one pulled about 385 million worldwide on a 150 million dollar budget, meaning it actually profited like 160 million which is kind of not really that good.
the second one was about 470 million worldwide on a 190 million dollar budget which is a bit better but still puts it well in the lower middle for a big summer blockbuster with a supposedly big IP name.
the third pulled 340 on a 185 budget, which again is not very good.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm

by contrast, the force awakens pulled 2 billion on a 245 million dollar budget.

I do agree that this likely isn't a formula that will translate to TV well. I haven't watched STD, though, so I can't really say much.
Click to expand...
there is absolutely a market for gritty darkly toned future sci-fi and there are TV shows that do it exceptionally well (see for example The Expanse or to a far lesser extent Dark Matter) but trying to shoehorn an IP into a show that is tonally opposite of the original IP in a direction that nobody really cares about is a not a recipe for a good premise.
Click to expand...
No, you misunderstand, I was saying that JJ-Abram's style Star-Trek isn't great for TV, and they should have gone with something more serious.
 
funinspace said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Maybe it is to distract the enemy.

Weapons: Sir, we have them in firing range, shall we shoot?
Captain: Wait a sec... why are the two discs spinning?
Weapons: Unknown...
Captain: It shouldn't be for the spore drive...
Navigation: What is odd is that the windows aren't spinning around.
Captain: I noticed that too.
Weapons: So is it just the roof or is there an exterior core?
Captain: It can't be the whole thing spinning around, that'd make it impossible to work in...
Weapons: Oh shit, they're firing on us.
Captain: The script writers would know better, right?
Weapons: Shields captain?!
Niavigation: Yeah, because the rotation of a ship to simulate gravity doesn't work that...
*KABOOM*
Click to expand...
Maybe they could use that within The Orville script... ;)
Click to expand...
No, too funny.
 
prideandfall said:
Ford said:
I've watched all the episodes of this so far, and it strikes me as what teenage Seth McFarlane thinks Star Trek should be. A simplified copy of Next Generation with jokes.

I've only seen the first episode of Discovery, but it seems to be a serious effort to make a serious show.
Click to expand...
what you said here is both true and in no way contradicts what i said that you were replying to, lol.

the orville is more "star trek" in spirit than STD, it's more of a star trek show than STD.
yes, STD is trying (and failing, miserably) to be a serious compelling space drama, but it could be trying to be a pancake wrapped around a sausage on a stick for all the difference it makes to the fact that it is NOT star trek, and the orville is.
Click to expand...


I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Now that fall sweeps are over, the networks are in maintenance mode. Tonight Fox replayed the pilot episode of The Orville, and I watched to see if there was anything I'd missed.

Nope. There wasn't anything I'd missed, and there was a reason.



It was safe. There wasn't a moment in the show were you couldn't see what was coming a light year away. The conflicts between Ed and Kelly were superficial and predictable. There was never any doubt that the intrepid Orville crew would come out on top at the end of the episode. Everything was packaged up with a bow on top for the long-suffering Trek fans. It was easy, the ship looked lovely, and everyone in the cast was pitch perfect in playing their paint by numbers roles.

I'm sure the focus group was satisfied with the end product.


And that's the problem. The original Star Trek was challenging. The audience was hit with uncomfortable situations and pointed social commentary. It wasn't easy.


The Orville is easy.


Discovery, by all accounts, is hard. Controversial. Something that people will argue about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom