Star Trek Discovery

primestar31

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 15, 2005
8,979
5,393
Beta Omicron Delta III
The whole "burn" thing sounds intriguing, but at the same time sounds somewhat like that TNG episode where they imposed a speed-limit of something like warp 6 because anything above that was harming some sub-space lifeforms or something like that...
Humm, here's ST: Disc in a few words: "Michael did it". Or: "everything revolves around Michael"

Michael BURNham.

Any bets that it'll eventually be revealed that she somehow caused it, perhaps with jumping around with her "Red Angel" suit?
 

DialgaChampion

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 27, 2015
234
192
New York
The whole "burn" thing sounds intriguing, but at the same time sounds somewhat like that TNG episode where they imposed a speed-limit of something like warp 6 because anything above that was harming some sub-space lifeforms or something like that...
The S3 storyline is basically Andromeda... and it's also a copy of "Shockwave" from Enterprise - "Archer was transported to a derelict 31st century building overlooking a devastated cityscape. Daniels appears telling him that bringing him into the future caused this dramatic change in the timeline. Archer asks to be sent back to repair the damage, but since all the time travel equipment is gone, they are both trapped."

Archer was responsible for bringing the different races together to form the Federation, and when he was removed from the timeline, that didn't happen.

Replace Archer with Burnham and there you have it. As primestar said, everything in this show revolves around what she did or what she didn't do. It's easy to predict that her being absent from a certain event that happened in the past resulted in this dystopian future (technically the whole show has been dystopian from the beginning, but anyways). By the end of the season, she'll find out what event caused it, then find a way to travel back into the past to that specific event, where she will alter the outcome in order to change what happened in the future.
 

Zookster

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 19, 2004
3,998
792
Here and Now
I agree that we'll get more of an explanation about what caused the Burn, and it will have something to do with Discovery and the crew.

Since the Burn involved the dilithium crystals failing, I suspect it had something to do with the technology Po (the child-prodigy queen) had developed to recrystallize dilithium, which Discovery used in the s.2 finale to recharge the time crystal. Maybe dilithium created in this way all had an ~800-year expiration date.
 

long_time_DNC

Politically Incorrect
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Apr 24, 2004
11,473
1,153
Pacific Northwest, where it rains a lot...
Now wouldn't that be something if Po was the one that caused the problem of the "burn"? ;) From the trailer at the end of s3e1, it looks like Burnham has something to do with fixing the problem...which bugged me that they threw that inference in the trailer at the end...
 

TheKrell

A mighty and noble race originating on Altair IV.
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 4, 2007
28,565
22,586
Fairfax, VA
I know the first season is just now airing for broadcast, but it has been out for two years now. I don’t see the need for spoiler tags based on that.
I for one, based on comments here which I read spoiler tags or not, skipped S1 and went directly to binge-watch S2 which I found fairly enjoyable. Now that S1 is being broadcast, I'm recording it OTA but alas have to wait a week to get my Hopper to skip commercials automatically.

IMHO it was highly implausible that Burnham would attempt to blast the Klingons first, and even more highly implausible that she'd get court-marshaled and sentenced to life in prison, and yet even more implausible than that for a Discovery captain to snatch her from oblivion to turn the tide of the war. And and and it's even more implausible still that a tardigrade grown to enormous proportions could navigate the cosmos. Really?

But the biggest offense for me was the ridiculous anachronistic Discovery spore drive supposedly being invented before TOS, apparently requiring the Discovery to roll rapidly before it works. And then there are a host of lovely new toys the likes of which all somehow disappeared and became cheap-looking props by the time Captain Kirk took the helm. What's the matter with these producers? I can't believe they couldn't find good writers to start up Discovery after Voyager to make all that glitz look plausible.
 

msmith198025

Member of the Year
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Aug 28, 2007
29,896
9,879
mississippi
I for one, based on comments here which I read spoiler tags or not, skipped S1 and went directly to binge-watch S2 which I found fairly enjoyable. Now that S1 is being broadcast, I'm recording it OTA but alas have to wait a week to get my Hopper to skip commercials automatically.

IMHO it was highly implausible that Burnham would attempt to blast the Klingons first, and even more highly implausible that she'd get court-marshaled and sentenced to life in prison, and yet even more implausible than that for a Discovery captain to snatch her from oblivion to turn the tide of the war. And and and it's even more implausible still that a tardigrade grown to enormous proportions could navigate the cosmos. Really?

But the biggest offense for me was the ridiculous anachronistic Discovery spore drive supposedly being invented before TOS, apparently requiring the Discovery to roll rapidly before it works. And then there are a host of lovely new toys the likes of which all somehow disappeared and became cheap-looking props by the time Captain Kirk took the helm. What's the matter with these producers? I can't believe they couldn't find good writers to start up Discovery after Voyager to make all that glitz look plausible.
Some of this is Just typical of future tech looking as we think it will based on tech we have at the time.

Can’t make a show now, based in the same time or not, with 60s looking future ideas.
That doesn’t bother me at all.

That said I do think they did a good job staying true to the Enterprise with a modern freshening.

As to what discovery can or can’t do, the federation is supposedly vast. We’ve seen a window into a very small part of it until now.
I don’t find it hard to believe at all, especially considering it’s fictional ;), that there are many things we haven’t seen before.

Much of the issues you have are addressed.
 

DialgaChampion

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 27, 2015
234
192
New York
What's the matter with these producers? I can't believe they couldn't find good writers to start up Discovery after Voyager to make all that glitz look plausible.
Not to be a broken record again Krell, but they had a good EP in Bryan Fuller and a good writer in Nicholas Meyer, before CBS fired and replaced them with people more concerned about pushing their own political agendas than having a good knowledge of Star Trek or even writing good stories. In fact, Kurtzman actually said in a video about a month ago that he views Star Trek as a "political platform", which is what most of us originally thought way back in 2017, though this was the first time he actually went on camera and admitted it. The annoying part is that you still see Fuller's name credited as an EP in the opening title sequence for all the episodes, so anyone who hasn't been keeping up with all the nonsense behind the scenes of this show will think he's involved with it, just like Rod Roddenberry, even though neither of them have had anything to do with the entire series.

People like to give S2 of Discovery a pass. It was more watchable but only because of the Enterprise and Pike (which they only added because of the tanking viewership by the end of S1). Even still, S2 suffered from the same plot inconsistencies, illogical decisions and unrealistic explanations that S1 suffered from (200 shuttles/fighters between 2 ships, interior doors withstanding torpedo explosions while armored exterior hulls could not, using space bridges to evacuate a ship but then using transporters to return, all religions being combined into one super religion, etc.).

There's a lot of suspension of disbelief in the Kurtzman era. Yes, Star Trek has always been classified as science fiction, but its roots have always been based around science fact. Barring the rare supernatural occurrence like Q, most of the futuristic technology like warp drive, grav plating, inertial dampers, etc. was constructed around theoretical physics and what would actually make logical sense down the road. This is also what happens when you have about 15 different non-Trek producers mashing their ideas into each episode. You should only have 1 or 2 like in past Trek series, not 10 or 15.

Fortunately though, Discovery, Picard, Lower Decks, Prodigy, etc. all take place in the Kurtzman timeline, so it doesn't matter to me anymore. I'm just waiting for his contract to expire and hoping that Emma Watts can return Star Trek back to the way it used to be... slow-paced, thought-provoking, philosophical... especially now that the brand is united again thanks to the re-merger of the companies.
 
Top