|
Calling it now: the Picard show is going to be great. Return to idealism. Cogent case for compassion to refugees in the face of cynical isolationism. An exploration of understanding for the "other," synth/ex-borg or whatever. Unlike Discovery, its message will be unambiguous and wholly good-hearted without any need to descend quite so far into the grit in an incoherent attempt at edginess. Picard isn't edgy. The Federation in Picard will be in full evil-admiral mode, abandoning humanist ideals for "pragmatic" reasons, but Picard's personal idealism will shine through, without state/military backing. An old man who knows right from wrong, all on his own/with a band of scruffy misfits, will make a difference. Also Lore will be the villain. See if this all doesn't happen. Feel free to quote/mock me if any of this isn't true.
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2020 08:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 05:40 |
|
|
MikeJF posted:I think that's where it's going to go, but to me some of the greatest part of the idealism of Star Trek is that we might somehow make it to wisdom as a civilisation working together. That acts of idealism and morality aren't necessarily limited to heroes and individuals and small-scale stories, but something that we could collectively achieve together. Cast off the cynical idea that society must be a crushing, corrupted amoral machine dragging all of us down which must be defied if we want to do right, and instead present the idea that together we could build a civilisation to be proud of, one that could face times of darkness and struggle through while keeping ahold of its values and fight off the parts of itself that want to compromise them. I think things can get better, and state power can be motivated by ideals a lot more benevolent than the ones that currently motivate them. And I do think Star Trek depicts that, and will continue to depict that (with the possible exception of Discovery season 3). But there will always be failings. In this case, the Federation may be internally ideal, but it still exists in an imperfect galaxy and has to deal with international situations where people with wildly different ideals have to be respected, and the Federation has to compromise, and maybe it won't compromise well. That's a problem even a utopia could have. And the idea that people need to be vigilant and push back when things go wrong, even in a utopia, is a valuable and positive message. Ideally it would be a popular movement that corrects the Federation's lapse, but an idealistic individual we all know and love can represent that to make the story more coherent. The message is understood. We should all be like Picard. Edit: Timby posted:Counterpoint: Alex loving Kurtzman. And more generally, it's not that I've got faith in the people who make these things or anything. It's just that Star Wars taught me that even keeping my expectations low isn't going to keep me from being pissed at the absurdly incoherent mess they can poo poo out. I knew what to expect going into Rise of Skywalker- it was going to be bad and dumb and fail to appreciate what I appreciated about the other Star Wars movies. But then it did it and I was pissed anyway. So why bother getting preemptively pissed? I can at least spend this time before the show thinking about what I appreciate about Star Trek and these kinds of scenarios, rather than muttering and ruing the idiots running things before I even know for sure that they've ruined it. I can't protect myself with cynicism, so I'll do what I can to be positive as long as I can manage. Eiba fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2020 19:46
|
|
|
Good show! I like how they establish the political situation, and it's not great, but there's not a lot Picard can do by himself and he's kind of defeated. What gets him up and out is a personal quest to save an individual who's important to him. Because you know the situation's going to come back to politics. Romulans, synthetic people, Borg. Notably all in ruins. Echo's of Data's positronic core, being tinkered with by Romulan refugees in the hulk of a Borg cube- it's a lovely setup. If we're just going to have adventures with new life in ruins, exploring new possibilities out of the echoes of the past... those are good solid themes, and they really justify this as something built out of the stories told in TNG. Another great image from the opening: vineyards and Borg cubes. Such a great visual contrast, and both so obviously meaningful to Picard. Though now that I think about it, that's not an accident. The contrast was established in Family, when Picard deals with his Borg trauma at the family vineyard. Well, it was a good contrast back then too.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2020 22:28
|
|
|
What's TDS in this context? I don't really want to continue this thread too much, because it does not make me laugh, it just makes me sad. This person has very strongly held beliefs, and they're legitimately very upset. I just want to know why. It's not entirely clear from these if they're politically reactionary, or just reactionary about entertainment that's perceived to be a bit different than what they grew up with. And I don't want to watch any of their dumb videos to find out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2020 18:50
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:If the chart doesn't quite explain it the simplest way to think of it is that correcting X event in the past to prevent Y thing from happening because it already happened in your timeline. So you couldn't just go in the past and kill baby Thanos. You need to grab the gems from the past, bring them forward and restore the lives lost in Infinity War in the immediate present otherwise you just create a splinter timeline. They explicitly say if the changes are "small enough" it won't create a new timeline. Of course if you think about that at all that's nonsense magic. Fortunately nonsense magic is totally a thing in the Marvel universe so it's no problem in that movie at all. The only thing the movie brought up that might be relevant for other settings is that when you go back in time to fix something, from the perspective of those you left behind you're just disappearing forever and everything is just as horrible. When you go back into the future, that's a new future that exists in parallel to the old one, that still exists and now is just horrible without you. Traditional time travel is obviously morally abhorrent if you don't just forget about the entire universes of suffering you leave behind. To make it relevant to the Picard thread: If Picard thinks Spock just disappeared during the destruction of Romulus, then the people of Earth who sent Kirk back to pick up whales from the past just saw him disappear and continued to be hosed up by the confused whale loving probe. Kirk abandoned billions to die, while he personally had fun 80s adventures and eventually created a new timeline. The only way around this moral fuckery is to presume a stable time loop. Kirk always existed in his own past- before the whale probe showed up there were confusing records of a guy who looked a lot like Kirk running around in the 80s, and news archives of the whales going missing after they were released or whatever. This ends up kind of loving with peoples perception of "free will" (by actually going back in time Kirk was just fufilling his fate- there was no way he couldn't do it 'cause he had already done it), but free will is a bullshit concept anyway so I'm personally fine with that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2020 17:28
|
|
|
marktheando posted:But who made the glasses that Bones gave Kirk? It's almost logically consistent nonsense until you consider wear and tear on the infinitely old glasses. Even if you suppose bits of the frame broke and were replaced, ship of Theseus style, so all the components are fresh each time loop, you still have the question of who designed the glasses. And considering the complexity of the glasses with no apparent antecedents in its own past, the most plausible explanation is that it was God. (Okay, fine time loops aren't all that coherent themselves, but they have the surface appearance of logic, and they're funny, so they're okay with me. The only truly logical time travel is the boring/problematic kind where you keep creating new timelines whenever you go back.) Khanstant posted:Are there any time travel fictions that work on the premise of time not being linear? We always have to think that if we go back in the past and change this or that, it must have consequences for the future but in our world the nature of time is still kind of mysterious and in a fictional world you're obviously free to construct time to work however you want. Go back in time, kill your dad, go back to present and you still exist both with a dad and a dead dad. *Except ones where images fade into photographs or people fade out of existence. Forget the obvious question of why an object would fade away at one particular time and not another, what would happen if you took a picture of something fading away? What if it was an object and you tried to touch it? If someone sees it fading away, how could that series of events exist in the memory of the character seeing it happen? Wouldn't the memory that things had ever been different fade away too? In short, it's pretty easy to do a nonsensical time travel story and get away with it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2020 18:10
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Honestly i think her getting real mad about it is worse than the cursing, it just feels so out of place for someone in her position. I know she's gotta tell Picard no, but as I said before, there's better ways to get there. She's a professional starfleet officer, not a mob boss. (For the record, lest I be accused of agreeing with the admiral just because I understand her perspective, she's still obviously wrong- you help the god drat refugees who are dying, and then deal with the political fallout, even if it's severe. You don't just give up and sit back as people die.) Lizard Combatant posted:Something that felt a little odd was Admiral loving Hubris being completely closed to Picard's claim. I mean, he was just involved in a mysterious explosion on the roof of one of their buildings the day before (for which he does not appear to have been questioned by the police about) and I struggle to believe someone so incredulous would hold that rank unless they're also in on the plot (which it seems they are not?). She just accidentally asked the ringleader of the plot to look into it so that is why it's all down to Picard's rag-tag individual ship.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2020 21:54
|
|
|
I loved that episode! We have the start of a pretty charming crew in a nice feeling ship. With the exception of Raffi, who one imagines will have to grow on the audience, 'cause that was a rough introduction. Her angst made sense with her history, but being exposed to all of it at once in a big dump was... not good. Hugh was fantastic. I like his performance and his character. "She's fine, the only problem here is that your idiot guard didn't secure his gun," was a good moment. Not a hint of hostility or resentment to someone who's clearly having mental difficulties, even though they're being violent- just compassion. The EMH being the captain with a bad accent was hilarious, but the ENH being the EMH with a different bad accent was incredibly hilarious. I can't wait to see other emergency systems bad accents! The big ideas remain strong, but we're also getting to the part where it's fun. Picard's going on an adventure with friends! I can't wait to see where they go and what types of people they meet! Big Mean Jerk posted:
I feel like the references to her house vs Picard's chateau were more about him being somewhere where he can do something satisfying with his retirement, working the vineyard, while she's not in a place where she can live a satisfying life for herself at all. Because physically, her "hovel" was gorgeous! I'd love to live in a place like that, out in the wilderness by myself. That place really looked like a paradise, with the plants everywhere. So I have to assume her "embarrassment" at showing Picard around had more to do with how it clashes with the lifestyle that would give her personal satisfaction. The irony being that Picard later states that he too is not satisfied, even with his "luxurious" home. Just as she needs to put information together, Picard needs to be out there, making a difference. So off they go. It's a fine setup, and I'm glad they took this long establishing it all. Honestly, a lot of the character stuff seems rushed if anything, so the complaints of "glacial" pacing are utterly mystifying to me. zoux posted:Also apparently if you live in North Romula you get a Forehead. I love all the Romulan cultural development in general. Sitting behind someone and asking if "someone" may be admitted as a polite way of asking to join someone, and real fake Romulan doors were lovely bits of world building.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2020 21:17
|
|
|
There's no difference between Tom Paris working on 20th century cars and this guy smoking a cigar. In both cases the character thinks it makes them look cool because it's a "real" archaic thing that was seen as cool in its original context, but it actually makes them look weirdly pathetic. I'm fine with the captain being kind of lame and pretentiously "cool". It fits what we've seen of his character so far, like rejecting a dermal regenerator 'cause he wanted a cool manly scar. He's supposed to come off like he's wallowing a bit. The cigar adds to that effect, even if someone thought he'd actually look cool with it. Edit: marktheando posted:Yeah I assumed it was the cigar equivalent of synthahol.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:Ok sure, and I'm not arguing that btw. But you also can't ignore the actual dialogue spoken when making your case. Just keep it real. It is, in obvious fact, an incredibly fine house. Lovely location, spacious, clearly well kept. There's nothing materially wrong with her life at all. You can't ignore the actual things we see when making your case.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2020 03:23
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:Are you for real? Metaphorical? Eiba posted:I feel like she's upset at losing her job, not because of the pay, but because of her personal interests. "I lost my security clearance" is what she says before choking up. She's a conspiracy theory addict, and likes putting together puzzles from hidden pieces of information. She couldn't do that anymore as a civilian. I see what you're saying. It's definitely coded a certain way that resonates with certain modern scenarios. But she never says, "I couldn't pay for a better house!" she just implies she lost what she valued. Considering she was never being paid, that obviously wasn't money. It was security clearance. That's what she says it is she lost. It was a big deal to her. When she compares their houses she's comparing their lives. That's obviously the meaning of what she's saying. Even if she was literally living in a hovel in horrible material circumstances like 21st century Earth, those lines would still be about her life and his life. So yeah, I am for real. Metaphorical hovel. Timeless Appeal posted:My wife made a point that it actually would have been more interesting to see her not living in a future trailer, but suffering the mundanity of living in the Star Trek Utopia. She's this badass woman looking for fights and problems; and she's stuck in this virtuous society just painting or going to dance recitals all-day.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2020 03:55
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:Still laughing that the excuse for not calling up any of the Enterprise crew was that Picard didn't want them to risk their lives for this, so he immediately calls up a different former subordinate whose life he is apparently okay risking Picard doesn't want anyone dying for him.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2020 05:36
|
|
|
Well this is the best Star Trek since DS9. Though I realize that's kind of faint praise, I really do like this! I'm really digging all this explicit Romulan worldbuilding. The way Soji introduced herself to the myth lady last week and that whole conversation was great, but getting to see a diversity of opinions this episode was what I'm here for! The Way of Absolute Candor is a really fun contrast to Romulan cultural secrecy. The way it was introduced was fantastic- this lady's just being an rear end in a top hat to this kid, but in a very kind of coherent way you could see as a cultural tick, and you're left to think "huh, Romulans sure are weird." But then you get the explanation later that they're being deliberately weird as a reaction to mainstream Romulan society, but they're still doing it in a very Romulan way. Like, "A promise is a prison, don't be another's jailer," is something that totally vibes with Romulan's aloof nature, but really fits with these contrarian compassionate warrior nuns too. And then we got the Romulan Senator's point of view! "Your offer of help made us weak. We could have dealt with it better on our own and became stronger for it, but you made us doubt ourselves and accept your aid... and then didn't even follow through with it, leaving us like this." It was a much more coherent reason for hating Picard than I was expecting. Just "you failed us/lied to us, so we hate you" would have probably been enough for a less thoughtful plot, but they made a point to explain that the Romulans understand what Picard's intentions were, and what his outside limitations were, and they still blame him. His initial benevolent intentions were already harmful to Romulan society, from this man's perspective. And the way things played out you can see his point. Letting the Romulans admit helplessness, accepting outside aid, an act outside of their cultural norms and an admission that they are insufficient to the task, and then not even giving that aid, so they don't even benefit from that cultural blow- Picard's failed attempts to help were worse (from this perspective) than not trying at all. That's a neat idea! I can totally see why the Romulans see it that way. I was ruminating on that point when the senator's head got chopped off and I was horrified. The man didn't deserve to die, and that was such a gratuitously violent scene. But then, Picard had exactly the same reaction, and was furious with the kid as soon as they were safe. That's perfect! I love that Picard explicitly values life so much. There's so much casual killing in fiction, even good guys do it and it's like "well, we had to." Even in Picard, all those Romulan death squads were pretty casually killed, though there obviously was no choice there. I'm just so glad it's being called out here as bad. "That man made his choice by being violent" was not flying with Picard. I'm just so glad to have a truly compassionate hero. It was all slightly undercut by the implication that Picard engineered that situation to get the guy to change his mind... Also the evil incest spy sister is the worst. Holy poo poo, who thought that was a good idea? It's dumb because the conversation is interesting and understandable enough, but it feels like someone went back and was like, "this is too dry, let's sex it up" or something. I'm looking forward to Star Trek each week! This is so nice. Even though found enough I liked in Discovery to say I enjoyed it on the balance, it's such a mess compared to this. Picard has been absolutely hitting all the right notes for my sensibilities and interests. I'm so glad they're doing justice to a character I grew up with.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2020 22:22
|
|
|
So I've been unrelentingly positive about this show. All the nitpicks and pessimism just haven't mattered to me. But this episode bothered me. I actually watched all of Voyager in preparation for this show. Mainly because I hadn't seen most of it before and it was new Trek to me that I had been meaning to see, but this show motivated me to get into it 'cause I knew Seven was going to be in it. I had no idea who Icheb was before I watched Voyager a couple months ago, but he ended up being one of the most compelling characters on that ship to me. His story and development and relationship with Seven were all some of the most charming surprises in the general mess that was Voyager. I honestly wish I hadn't bothered. Killing Icheb in such a visceral disgusting way was bad and I didn't like it. It didn't make me invested and uncomfortable at the horrors being committed in the fiction, it took me out of it and made me think the writers were themselves cruel assholes. That's a personal reaction, but it super didn't land for me, and took me way out of everything else. "Oh, they're dressing up and doing a silly heist on a casino planet? Yeah, sorry, I'm still thinking about the mechanical viscera dripping from the still living but nearly dead earnest young man who faced all sorts of abuses and trauma in his life but kept trying to fit in and be helpful." That's not the tone I want this show to take at all. Honestly, it soured me on the rest of the episode, but when I try to put my other criticisms down it doesn't seem that bad. Seven going back to kill that woman secretly to preserve Picard's hope felt really lovely at the time, but I feel like it was actually a pretty solid continuation of the moral discussion they were having earlier about being a vigilante. That crime woman wasn't on her way to jail, she was gonna commit more atrocities if they let her go. It wasn't an abandonment of idealism or humanity, it was a continuation of Seven's new life as a do-gooding vigilante. It had an incredibly dense emotional core for Seven- her motives were not remotely pure- but they didn't need to be. If she was silently rebuking Picard by going back it wasn't because he was wrong about vengeance and humanity, it was because he was wrong about acting outside the law, in this case. Which is a discussion they had earlier in the episode so I'm not just pulling this out of nowhere. Elnor is surprisingly fantastic. I like these characters. I hope Raffi dealing with her thing is going to make her more fun to be around. When she's helping to plan things I quite like her. Not that personal issues aren't important, but one of the appeals of Star Trek has always been a group of people working together, so less obstacles to that are good. The twist at the end will be either good or bad depending on how the puzzlebox turns out. No judgement on that yet. I'm not going to waste time suspecting the worst, but I'm also not actually going to be into it until the plot proves coherent.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2020 05:30
|
|
|
drat this thread moves fast. So many people are saying so many ridiculous things about this show that I want to address, but who's got the time? I will say, with regards to Picard vs Seven and how the show made Seven look cool and Picard look naive- that's true, it did. Because Picard is naive in this context. He has always had massive institutional weight behind his justice, and so he has an institutional sense of justice. As a representative of a benevolent power, doing the right thing is doing things by the book. "The rangers have too much power/too little accountability, even though they're trying to do the right thing, so I don't support them" comes out as "they act outside the law," and you can see why that rubs Picard the wrong way. The conflict between Picard and Seven at the end was the same conflict, couched in emotional terms, but Seven wasn't wrong even in moral terms. That lady was not going to be held accountable, and there was no other way to bring her to justice- she hadn't broken any laws in a region without laws. Picard has to grow in this new setting. He doesn't just need to discover his old sense of purpose, he needs to figure out how to deal with the world when the government isn't on his side to bail him out, where he's not just the face of the Benevolent Empire, but an individual trying to make a difference. Essentially he needs to learn that rules, as a matter of principle, exist to support the established order, and if he doesn't respect the established order, he needs to stop respecting the rules, while staying true to his sense of justice. It's a good story for Picard. And still a very positive one. It's not his belief in doing the right thing that's being questioned, it's his belief in the rule of law.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2020 00:54
|
|
|
Tighclops posted:You guys are putting more thought into this than the people writing this show you know that right If you want to seriously speculate about intentions, there's probably a ton of them. And one intention is probably the one you're describing, to be honest. But with all the stuff Chabon is saying, it's clear at least one person writing this cared enough to come up with justifications after the fact (to give the least charitable interpretation), and that's not nothing. But honestly, imagining the mindset of the writers has clearly ruined this for you. They don't matter. What's actually there matters, what connections a viewer can see are as real as anything in Star Trek. I see a pretty interesting commentary on the pretty interesting world of Star Trek. A compelling world that, if we're going to be obsessed with intentions, is in large part unintentional. Or are you going to tell me that when a writer puts gory explosion conspiracy aliens in one episode, and has a random guy from the 80s be incredulous about a lack of currency in another episode, that there was a coherent world being created and not just everything being thrown at the wall to see what sticks? The lovely ideals in Star Trek are, in part, intentional. But so much messy poo poo was intended, and we've just latched on to the coherent story that we can dredge out of that. Star Trek Picard is just more Star Trek, in every way. You would probably enjoy it more if you were less hung up with trying to read the writers minds and feeling smug when you think they're dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2020 19:28
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:Because that was a theory mentioned on the show? Once you reach a certain level of synth complexity, the space Boogeyman wrecks your poo poo. They've said something shows up, First Contact style, if you get sufficiently advanced artificial life. And that "something" is very bad. Synths are not bad. No one has said synths will do anything at all in particular. There is a lurking ancient horror that hates synths so hard they'll turn your space civilization into Hell if you make them. In this context Soji is the Destroyer because she's sufficiently advanced to alert the ancient things that hate synths. There has been no indication that synths themselves are a problem. Which is good if, you know, you want to have a positive outcome at the end. Personally, my hope is that Picard will talk down the ancient horrors, and convince the Federation that the issue with the old way there were doing AI was that it was hackable, and you should really just give them more autonomy/not make them slaves, and everything will be fine and good. ... I hope there are happy, socially integrated synths in Discovery, and they don't poo poo on the idealism from a Star Trek that aired earlier the same year by making everything Picard accomplished pointless. I'm not entirely opposed to the general plot of "we gotta rebuild the Federation," if it in practice emphasizes what's important about the Federation's values, but there's a lot of room to make everything feel pointless, depending on how they explain the fall of the Federation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
Georgiou is Worf. She exists to say, "there's a new thing here, let's consider killing it," so that Saru can say, "no, gently caress that." She's fine. This episode was one of my favorites in the whole series, mainly because of the climax with Saru, Georgiou, and the alien who just saw his idealistic friend die. Georgiou says "kill the villain," Saru clearly disagrees, but further makes the point that it's not their choice and hands the torture phaser to the alien who just saw his idealistic friend die and says it's his choice. And the alien, inspired by Federation ideals, decides not to kill. If this show was truly cynical they'd have that guy teach Saru a lesson about trust and human nature by being cruel and torturing his tormentor to death. But they didn't take that route. People can be humane. Hope is still an option. That's the good poo poo. Georgiou played her part in letting that moment happen. She presented the case for cruelty and crass pragmatism. Pretty strongly, given the circumstances. Her strong case made the rejection of her beliefs and belief in Federation ideals all the more powerful. She's a foil, and she does that job well. Discovery is good. Saru is the best and I will cry if anything bad happens to him.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 06:55
|
|
|
AntherUslessPoster posted:I'm the Georgieu casually killing people around to save saru and tilly to be told not to kill the last guy.. Yeah sure the extras are expendable but the main villain of the episode is not. Apparently its shooo shtarfleet shuch moralsh' Marmaduke! posted:It's worse than that, as it also had the batman style of writing "I'm not going to kill you I'm just going to put you in a situation that will kill you. I'm so moral!" I feel like this is the issue with hatewatching. These points were pretty obvious and explicit in the context of the show, but if you assume the show is bad to start with you kind of glide right over what's actually going on to attack imagined tropes and hypocrisies that don't exist. It's pretty frustrating and why I had to drop this thread during the Picard show.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Everyone misses things, this weird idea that you can’t be wrong is consistent as it is dumb in TVIV Discovery has been kind of disappointingly cynical in the past. It's had an issue where the morals at the end of the day and the morals during all the action didn't really line up. So I get why people aren't being charitable. But I feel like they've really nailed it with this episode. They were focused on what it means to be "Federation" the whole episode and stuck to it. This episode especially is what a lot of the rest of Discovery was trying to be. The actions in the episode actually supported the stated ideals. So it's kind of frustrating to see people coming in and saying it's still bad. Because if you were really frustrated at the issues themselves, and not just wrapped up in happily making GBS threads on the whole package, you'd notice that those issues are notably lacking now. Discovery is no longer tainted by that cynical edginess. Discovery is good now. Or at least this episode was. I feel like the writers are going to have an easier time sticking to Discovery's ideals now that they have a lovely/amoral setting to play against. The Klingon War and a rogue Section 31 AI were situations that would require a lot of nuance to get right. Idealists in a world without hope is a lot more black and white. They could still gently caress it up if, for instance, the barkeep decided to repay his tormentor's cruelty with more cruelty- it could easily present a much more cynical worldview and beat down our idealistic protagonists in the name of edginess. It appears to not be going in that direction. Cynicism isn't cool anymore. Earnest idealism is where it's at.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Marmaduke! posted:So take your soapboxing about people not watching the show because they have a different take from you and shove it. You can have a much better conversation if you don't reply to someone with contempt. Because I'm actually enjoying Discovery! I'll make an effort to express what I like about things in a more positive way going forward, and try to avoid griping about the way other people are expressing themselves. Tone policing is lovely on any level, and I'm sorry about that. CharlestheHammer posted:Earnest idealism is the farthest thing I would use to describe Discovery.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
So someone mentioned Lower Decks wasn't the worst thing ever, so I gave it a try. There was a gag where Mariner had a family-guy style flashback that involved her friend getting brutally murdered. It was a comedy moment. It promoted further comedy in the episode. Holy poo poo is that loving not okay. Literally sickening. Worst Star Trek since that abominable tribble short where a guy with social maladaption was killed for laughs. The Orville was way more tonally coherent and it was literally made buy the family guy guy. Don't kill people in the name of comedy, loving Star Trek. How hard is that? gently caress. I'm mad. Anyway, I finished Lower Decks and the finale was actually really good and had some thematic coherency. It was saying something about maintaining ideals, not just thinking big things and leaving it at that. I liked it. I guess Lower Decks is a land of contrasts or whatever. It took a lot of alcohol to enjoy and I'm glad I'm done with it. I watched all of loving Voyager, so if they're making more Lower Decks I guess I'll keep with it since I've watched the entirety of Star Trek, but I have more sympathy for people hate-watching Discovery now. (Even though Discovery is legitimately good at its core and way better than the ideological mess that was Lower Decks.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2020 06:06
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:I guess you haven't seen the litany of jokes that have accreted in Star Trek fandom over the years about all the ways that people could and probably did just bite it randomly in Starfleet based on what happens on the Enterprise on a daily basis... People can make fun of the show itself all they want and that's fine. But the show itself trying to make the audience laugh with a death is incredibly uncomfortable and gross. I will admit the season 2 opening of Discovery kind of did as well, where the sexist guy got comeuppance with a karmic death. And that was pretty uncool too, but not nearly as bad as the tribble short and the Mariner flashback in Lower Decks. I'll admit, I'm still under the effects of the alcohol that made Lower Decks tolerable, but I don't think Star Trek has sunk to that depth outside of those three examples. That's pretty much my hard limit. I feel like Lower Decks skirted that a lot- trivializing really serious situations. But I think man-splainer's karmic death in Discovery, that awkward guy in the tribble short, and Mariner's friend dying in a flashback for the sake of a gag are each the absolute nadir of Star Trek as a franchise. Like, if the show is kind of lame, whatever. If you don't like Picard or Discovery, whatever. It's trying. There is an attempt idealistic message, and maybe it missed. Who cares. If the show is actively trying to make you feel good about someone dying, making you laugh or whatever, just... gently caress all the way off. That's gross and the most un-Star Trek thing imaginable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2020 08:03
|
|
|
Infidelicious posted:Not attempting to retrieve the away team, retreating or cloaking when a superior force is moving to engage her strategically vital, and irreplaceable ship is an enormous and avoidable mistake. (Especially when she is previously characterized as being 'by the book' and has standing orders from the Head of Starfleet to not to put Discovery at risk) She sent a ship for the away team, instantly cloaked, and gave the order to retreat when the cloak went down. She literally did all the things you said she should do. Her one "mistake" was not knowing a strike team had instantly beamed into Stammet's chamber through the shields somehow. Maybe she should have jumped instead of cloaking, but that would be leaving Book's ship full of radiation poisoned people to face Osyra's battleship by itself. In retrospect maybe she should have, but it's obviously not going to be her first choice. I liked that the initial reaction to this episode here was that it was an honestly amazingly good episode. But the discussion seems to be dominated by incredibly unforgiving nitpicks after that. Like, this is Star Trek. You could make way worse criticisms about literally every episode and movie of every Trek series ever. Bringing them out here, and calling the writers dumb/incompetent as a result is just a way of revealing that you don't want to like this show. And whatever, that's fine. The show has at times been way worse than this episode and I get that some folks may not have any goodwill to give anymore. One criticism I kind of understood was the person who basically said, "this would have been okay if it weren't for all the bullshit before it". Fine. There was bullshit before this. But if you can't enjoy this, the good episode where everything comes together and they utterly nail everything they're trying to do... then maybe you're really just not ever going to like Discovery.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 05:32
|
|
|
If the shields had been up in 10 minutes she could have just popped into the nebula, picked up the crew, and gotten out of there. But more importantly, why is this bothering you now? Either you've gone through all of Trek absolutely apoplectic about tactical realism the whole time, or you have been making mental excuses and giving things the easy benefit of the doubt, like I just did, and suddenly you're not. This isn't directed at just you, incidentally, there's a lot of people who have issues with that scene, and it's baffling to me. The scene was primarily about characters and stakes, as these kinds of scenes always are, and they did a pretty good job actually describing what these stakes were and why it was a close thing given the tactical situation. Admittedly, they sometimes don't. This show, Discovery, has at times been kind of a mess that takes you out of the drama. But this was clearly not one of those messes. And this show, Star Trek, has always had situations exactly like this where we just kind of roll with the premise.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
I'm totally lost as to why people are objecting to what happened. They teleported next to every member of the crew with guns. How much more clear did it have to be that there was nothing the crew of the Discovery could have done? Tilly made no bad calls. She ordered them to leave exactly when she should have, given her knowledge. She did not know they could teleport into Stammet's mushroom chamber with guns. I don't think the command training program would have prepared her for that one, either. In retrospect there are other things she could have done to be more careful, but if the enemy did not unexpectedly have the ability to teleport into the mushroom box with guns, then everything Tilly did would have been fine and good. How did they teleport? Why didn't Tilly know they could do that? Who knows. Probably something to do with the Emerald Chain tech Book used that the admiral chewed Saru out for allowing. This is a serialized story that may yet drop the ball. But the tactical situation in this episode was pretty understandable. Martytoof posted:I’m not up in arms about the Tilly thing, but my two cents is that dumb things happening in TNG are usually in service of a much more entertaining and enjoyable story so I tend to forgive them. Tilly is a really good and interesting character. I think she was depicted as doing her best, and honestly not doing that badly, but still, the ship was stolen from under her command without anyone firing a single shot. What's that going to do to poor Tilly's confidence? Her whole arc has been having command ambition, but the moment she gets into the chair, the second worse possible thing happens (only thing worse would be everyone dying). Her character has always been irrationally insecure, but now she's got real issues to work through. Recent Discovery has been pretty good at working through these kinds of relatable issues, so I actually have some faith that the issue will be treated with some respect and seriousness, and something positive will come from Tilly's difficult experiences. And then sometime in the future, Tilly will be in a position where she needs to overcome her issues and take command for some other contrived reason, and she'll do great and we'll all feel great for her. This is pretty clearly the first step in that kind of story, and I'm there for it, even though it'll be hard to watch sweet Tilly beating herself up about what just happened. I feel like half of people's complaints with this episode would have been addressed by someone earlier saying, "for extraordinary service, blah blah blah, you, Tilly, are being promoted to lieutenant" or something. Like a lot of people just seem pissed off at the rank thing, when an extra scene promoting her earlier in the season would have just dragged things out needlessly. The drama is from her experiences and abilities, contrast with her current responsibilities, not how many pips she has on her collar.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:From how it was edited, the Emerald Chain teleported into the engine room, did some stuff, and then later teleported onto the bridge. If those things were supposed to happen at the same time, they should have edited it better. With how it is now, it looks like there were several seconds of intruders being in the spore drive room before the bridge was taken over. If we're going to point to that as her command failing, maybe I could buy that. But that also seems like something only an exceptionally quick thinking experienced officer would be able to deal with. People seem concentrated on the catastrophic results and not paying attention to the fact that Tilly acquitted herself reasonably well at every individual decision point. If the point is "reasonably good" wasn't enough for this incredibly difficult situation, yeah. That's what happened. If the point is "this level of incompetence is straining my credulity" then I don't understand your credulity.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:I'm pretty sure I remember Tilly repeatedly asking "What's going on down there?" or something to that effect, so the engine room was taken before the bridge. It wasn't editing. quote:I'm not annoyed because the bad guys got the ship. I'm annoyed because it looks like the writers knew that the episode would end with the Emerald Chain getting control of the ship, but they were lazy about making that happen. "Oh, just have them talk about how fishy this supposedly Federation ship is for 10 minutes, then it'll be too late, and then they just beam on board, everyone immediately surrenders, and we mind control the engine guy so they can jump. And also, if a huge ship is touching Discovery, it jumps if Discovery does. Yeah, that'll work!" But then they did do the legwork, and provide a justification for every action. Like, it's all there in the episode. Infidelicious posted:Tillys options:  The only thing she didn't do was jump away earlier, which would have made the backup with Book's ship impossible, or jump into the nebula without shields ready, which they established would destroy the whole ship.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:Most of these are solid, but I can’t make head or tails of the Le Guin. They're all really, really good. Thank god they're not just a bunch of janky samey angles. If only we'd been able to see them more clearly in the show. The Le Guin is at a weird angle, but it looks like it's got a delta/saucer section floating above a ring with the front bit taken out and some bits trailing behind to give the idea of nacelles/main hull. I'm into it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2021 22:57
|
|
|
Discovery is good now, actually. I've always liked the characters well enough, and we have fully left the cruel grimdark bullshit in the past. Now that she's the captain, Burnham's loose canon bullshit is being called out and she's facing the fact that she needs to grow. The Federation president laid out her issues so well. It's kind of amusing how the scale of the danger keeps getting smaller, but that just makes the story work better. Season one, all life in the multiverse was threatened by spore shenanigans. Season two all life in the galaxy was threatened by robots. Season 3 the survival of the Federation was at stake. Now we're just worried about a spacial anomaly that can destroy random planets. And I say good. Let's leave it at that. That's big enough. So far there are no horrible villains, and they got rid of Georgiou. They followed through on the premise of last season and have actually gotten a good Federation back together, so we have intelligent cooperative people solving technobabble space problems for good reasons. In other words we finally have Star Trek. Last episode was entirely just the main cast talking about their feelings and solving space problems. It was lovely. You might need to throw off some of your well-earned cynicism to fully enjoy it, but it is fully enjoyable. My only issue is that destroying Kwejian is perhaps too heavy to really deal with. I felt Burnham and Tilly having trouble dealing with that random guy's death last episode was actually really good. Too often random people die in Star Trek and no one really cares, so it was nice that people were actually caring and thinking about what it meant. But then Book's whole planet blew up and that's almost too big a tragedy to deal with. But to their credit, I think they're dealing with it better than I expected them to. Even things like Gray's C plot about getting a body, he's feeling guilty about being happy after such a tragedy- that's an interesting thing to explore. The thing is, this is a show about emotions now. If you don't like the characters, it's not going to land. If you're focused on the "plot" it's not going to land. There's a lot of ways to go into Discovery season 4 and just have no fun with it at all, and that's fair. But I think they're finally doing what they set out to do. I think they did a good job overall with season 3 as well. The desire to be flashy and have "cool" action scenes is always going to weigh down this show, but I think they've really hit a good balance at this point. I like these characters and this setting and care about how this is all going to unfold. Good Star Trek!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2021 19:04
|
|
|
Honestly, you all are probably right about Burnham. It's too early to say where they're going to come down on her. I just felt the weight of being a captain, rather than rebelliously fighting against authority, might finally be the time when they look at her issues, and they very clearly pointed out where she's got room to improve. I'm impressed that the Federation president was actually just a nice and helpful person, rather than being what Burnham assumed her to be. But that doesn't mean they'll follow through. They have failed to do so in the past. I still think it's a potentially interesting character arc, but not yet evidence that the show is now Good Actually.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2021 19:57
|
|
|
Haramstufe Rot posted:In episode 3, Tilly intends to sit down with her superior officer for a talk. It's unsurprising that the idea that modern TV (and by extension Tilly) is written "by and for children" comes from a mega-chud. The whole appeal of the chud mindset when it comes to pop culture is imagining that things that aren't laser focused to your particular sensibilities are actually fundamentally bad. If you find something cringey, it's because someone is motivated to make bad things for bad people. Not good things for good people like you. If TNG can have a character like Barkley, Discovery can have a character like Tilly. Star Trek characters don't have to be perfect representations of professionalism. Sometimes it's valuable to let the audience see their flawed selves in this aspirational setting. Discovery is actually leaning pretty hard into that and I think doing a good job at that particular aspect of Star Trek.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2021 12:22
|
|
|
I think they got the scale just right in this season. Yeah, there's been a progressive lowering of the stakes, but this is where it should have been from the start. Season one was all life in all universes, season two was all organic life in this galaxy, season three was the very existence of the federation and only now in season four is it something that isn't so exhaustingly huge, and it still involves planetary destruction. The basic plot where there's a big scary world destroying anomaly they don't understand, and then bit by bit they come to understand it, is good. That it turns out to be an incredibly advanced mining rig is pretty cool. It's very Star Trek in that it involves figuring out a science problem and then a social problem, and not just doing violence better or anything like that. I even think having Booker be the villain was pretty compelling. There has been a lot of overwrought emotional stuff previously, so maybe all the goodwill had been spent, but Booker's reckless point of view made sense, as did Burnham's perspective. And to me at least, the two have legitimate chemistry, so this conflict had real personal emotional stakes. It's some solid emotional conflict between sympathetic characters that doesn't feel contrived. I thought the action scene in the DMA was pretty exciting and tense because, given the stakes, Discovery had a narrative chance to fail. The threat wasn't so bad that it would end the story. You know Burnham isn't going to die and the Discovery isn't going to be destroyed, but blowing up an alien mining rig and accidentally starting a war? That might happen. And in fact, at the end of the day it did happen, but not before some interesting twists, tactically, emotionally, and "scientifically." The idea that you could predict the DMA's movement by the trace particles it was mining made sense, and it was really cool that something like that was the key to deescalating with Booker at least. When after all that they failed anyway, there was a weird emotional letdown. They kept talking like they must succeed at their mission at all costs... but then they failed and had to keep on going and it was the oddest kind of deflation of tension. But I think it worked. Things are bad, but we have no idea how bad, and there's nothing we can do but deal with how bad they are. That at least is a novel feeling, and one that makes sense in the context of the show. We're going to have to deal with the repercussions later. A lot of the dilemmas this season have been about what to do in a dangerous situation with incomplete information, and here we are in a very dangerous situation, not knowing what's going to happen next. It's good all stuff. Seasons 3 and 4 have been more or less exactly what I want out of a Star Trek show after the rocky start of seasons 2 and especially 1. It's not perfect. There's a lot of moments that feel awkward or underwhelming. I feel they could have done a better job with that scene where the whole galaxy is supposed to be debating what to do about the DMA. It felt too small. But I think that's mainly an execution issue where the core idea is good, and I tend to be forgiving of those kinds of issues.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2022 19:04
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:Book is ironically best when he’s interacting with anyone other than Burnham, like his episodes with Stamets and Culber. I just don’t care about his search for revenge, especially since it seems to have completely walked back the little bit of acceptance and solace he got in the decent Vulcan episode. It’s boring! But personally, the way I'm engaging with the story I'm frustrated with him as a person, and not the writers. It's not a fun or satisfying direction for him to go, and so I'm sympathetic to the characters who are essentially all saying, "He's a great guy, even though I hate what he's doing right now." I would probably be more frustrated at the writers if they hadn't done a pretty solid job of making Booker vs Burnham into a pretty compelling conflict. On the plus side, if you want a more Han Solo roguish character, the only two paths forward I can see for Book are wasting away in some brig, or as a renegade going off on his own adventures. The writers might contrive something to pardon him if they want to get back to the status quo for some reason, but if they want Burnham to have a cool outlaw boyfriend, they've solidly laid the groundwork for that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2022 06:12
|
|
|
Discovery: Anyone else think the giant cartilaginous creatures that lived in the atmosphere of a gas giant and were nearly wiped out about a thousand years ago... might possibly be related to the extra galactic whale probe from Voyage Home? I respect people who aren't into the slow/awkward tone, but I really was into the premise of today's episode: let's save the day with some xenoanthropology! Discovery's relentless determination to be wholesome after that huge mess of a first season is nice, even if they keep raising the stakes way too high. Settle down, Discovery, I would care about your silly xenoanthropological adventures even if you didn't promise the destruction of Earth and Ni'Var. And, I appreciate how often they're mentioning it: Titan. Don't forget about Titan. Picard: Honestly, Picard's love life is not especially interesting to me. Feels like Insurrection where Patrick Stewart wanted to sex things up. Jurati being drunk in inappropriate situations was not very amusing to me either. Otherwise it was great! I do like the generally positive tone compared to last season. Borg asking to join the Federation and Starfleet freaking the gently caress out is a great framing point for an introspective look at fear and tolerance. Amazingly good thematic start. I wonder if it'll be pointed out that Q was the one who first introduced the Federation to the Borg. I wonder if this is going to have all been part of his plan- not just testing the strength of the Federation (as it seemed he was doing in that first Borg episode), but testing the idealism of the Federation with something truly alien. "Oh, you think you're powerful? You think you're enlightened? How would you deal with this?" He's being kind of appropriately cruel if Picard blowing up the Stargazer was final proof that the Federation wasn't as enlightened as Picard claimed, all those years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
So, was I the only one who really wasn't feeling Picard this week? This episode felt like a return to season 1 tonally hosed up Picard. I actually liked most of Discovery, but I am totally done with "fun" grim-dark mirror stuff. Like, you can tell the writers or actors or whatever are having a blast pretending to be Nazis, but miserable slaves, torture, and genocide aren't particularly charming to me and never have been. When Rafi threw Elnor to the guards to beat up as a distraction and we saw him being beat up in the background of tonally lighter scenes of Rafi hacking... was that supposed to be funny? When Elnor started killing people with com-badge shurikens... was that supposed to be funny? Q punching Picard felt exactly like the "mature" violence of season 1, where they take the things from Next Generation and earlier Trek and just... make it dark and violent for no reason. I think there will be interesting things said about morality and the path not taken. I think Picard's decision to blow up the (drat) ship will probably be criticized and I'm there for that. But there's nothing cogent in this cartoon mirror universe. Proud genocider Picard has absolutely nothing to say about our Picard. He's a cartoonishly different person. There's no, "oh, that's a negative trait of Picard taken to a disturbing extreme" or anything. It's just "that's a totally different person who is as comically evil as Picard is decent. For some reason." Finding out the point of divergence in 2024 promises to be interesting. Way more interesting than this grimdark cartoon world. I'm not anti-Picard. I actually liked Season 1 on the balance, even if it made a lot of missteps. I'm just shocked that folks here don't see this episode as a direct continuation of those missteps. Discovery was good. Felt like a dumbed down version Arrival. That's, uh, supposed to be a compliment. Arrival is a very good movie. Folks standing around trying to figure out an alien language is good stuff, and there were even some bits that followed logically in an interesting way. For instance offering the boronite as a gift was a neat idea- they really are just working with what few pieces of information they have for this. I really liked that it turned out the aliens were dumbing things down for the humans. You get the impression that these aliens are not at all interested or experienced in talking to other life forms, even though they were vastly more advanced. Jet Reno is the best, but it's kind of surprising that she was the one to finally get through to Book. But I guess what really got through to Book was Tarka being totally fine with everyone probably dying because who knows, maybe they won't. It does kind of leave us with only Tarka as a true villain- everyone else supported him because they were scared or angry, but still basically shared the same goals and values as our heroes. Tarka just plain has a different mission so there's less to negotiate and explore there.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2022 03:53
|
|
|
Charity Porno posted:Yeah but this ISN'T another species, it's the one that actively tried to destroy the free will of billions, multiple times, and was moments away from succeeding, again multiple times. Picard made the tactically correct decision blowing up the drat ship, especially when there was a long time period where the Borg could have explained any needs they required accommodation for during negotiations. Yeah there's a sound tactical reason for Picard to do what he did. He's not the cartoonish monster he is in this alternate timeline. He doesn't know what's going on, so he falls back on his knowledge of the Borg and makes a tough call. Except he's not looking at what's actually going on. There are enough inconsistencies that he should be reassessing what he thinks is going on. Why did they ask for Federation membership? Borg don't do subterfuge. Seven thinks it's an adaptation to their weakness, but doesn't consider that another adaptation to their weakness might be a desire to seek allies. They've even done that before in Voyager- that's where she's from. Someone said stunning people doesn't preclude assimilation and so stunning is potentially worse. True, but it doesn't sound like she needs a ton of drones right now. She's going after "power," whatever that means. And if this was an attempt at assimilation, she should have stunned everyone, not just the people shooting at her. And honestly there would be little reason not to just kill them, completely removing the factors that are most actively trying to oppose the Borg. None of that is getting through to Picard. For all his curiosity and idealism when sitting around making plans, when things get scary he falls back on his prejudices and hatred. And it should be pointed out that they are pretty reasonable prejudices and hatreds! It's not a tactically bad decision. But the Federation and Picard are supposed to be better than that. They should be better than that. People keep saying the Borg should have communicated more clearly. And yes, they should have. They did not efficiently communicate their position. But all the Borg are guilty of here is being incredibly bad at communication. And you know what, maybe a lot of the very basic intuitive interpersonal implications of acting certain ways are lost on a god damned hive mind. You and I know exactly how someone else would feel if we transported onto their bridge and started ripping up consoles. As hard as it is for us empathetic social creatures to understand, that's just not the kind of knowledge the Borg has ever needed. Even if the Borg can make some predictions about the behavior of social creatures, if they're in some sort of crisis situation (as they appear to be) and can't dedicate active processing power to to model the potential response... it's not going to naturally occur to them. The ability to understand how someone else will see them is not hardwired into them the way it is hardwired into every one of us. The Borg are bad at communicating on a fundamental level. Picard is not being sensitive to this. While I think the evil timeline is too over the top to be interesting or meaningful, I do think the inciting incident here definitely has enough nuance to carry the season. Picard's moral decision in the first episode is definitely what this is all going to be about, if any of this is going to mean anything. Edit: Alchenar posted:Yeah the whole point of First Contact is that Picard moves past being motivated by hatred and trauma and accepts that he just has to treat the Borg for what they are. But once people started getting shot and things got chaotic, Picard got scared. And who wouldn't at that point? It's totally natural. And when he was scared, he fell back on his prejudices. The interesting thing about this moral dilemma is that it's not black and white in the way Star Trek usually is. We're not meant to sit back and go "wow, prejudice is dumb as bricks," we're meant to go, "huh, I think I get what this prejudice thing is all about, it's way more easy to fall into than I thought." It's (potentially) about examining your own "reasonable" beliefs for prejudice you didn't know was an issue. Eiba fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Mar 13, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 18:39
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:This is at best an exaggeration Presumably the Borg are actually trying to join the Federation or generally want to negotiate/cooperate with them. If they weren't, this would be a very boring and silly series of Star Trek. I think there's even a line like, "We want to talk, but first we need power." So yes. It is an absurdly huge, Borg-scale, social faux pas. They honestly think they can stick a bunch of tendrils in peoples consoles and then negotiate in good faith. If that's self evidently absurd to us, I honestly can see that it wouldn't necessarily be self evidently absurd to the Borg. They have a truly alien mindset. They could probably have predicted the Starfleet people wouldn't be too happy about it, but thought they could still talk things over after, and certainly didn't expect Picard to blow up the (drat) ship.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 19:31
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Not even an abstract concept that he deserves a slap on the wrist either. We saw during the evacuation that people died as a result of his actions. Wonder how many died on the Earth and Ni'Var as people fought to be among the select few to get evacuated offworld. It's kind of an absurd contrivance, but no one is confirmed to have died. We saw huge asteroids hit the oceans, but they've got crazy 1000 years future technology. Maybe they transported everyone out of the immediate danger zones. All the "damage" that was mentioned was infrastructure and displacement. Unless I missed something obvious. I wasn't paying full attention the whole way through, but there was some line about infrastructure that got my attention at some point, and they really bent over backwards to not confirm any deaths after that. That said, even if he did kill a bunch of people, it's really cool that the Federation is all about rehabilitative justice, not retributive justice. A world where a mass murderer who legitimately feels bad about it is sentenced to community service is actually a really cool world.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2022 06:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 05:40 |
|
|
Roadie posted:This is also all ignoring the absurdity that is constantly grinding up whole star systems to power defenses for a single homeworld. It's a wildly wasteful difference of scale that just makes the beings involved look stupid. Also, not in response to this, but just while I'm defending the concept of the 10-C- they could obviously tell there was a lot of life around, but they didn't recognize it as having any sort of personhood as they understood it. It would be like if humans explored the galaxy and found it seemingly empty of complex intelligent life, just a bunch of microbes and molds everywhere, and then one day while they were setting up a mine on a desolate planet the mold broke their equipment and slapped them in the face and it turned out there were somehow complex single celled civilizations everywhere that were just too outside our frame of reference to recognize. Is that plausible? Who cares. It's good Star Trek.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2022 02:23
|
|