Star Trek Discovery ***Season 3*** [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

breezy1985

TheValeyard wrote: »

It had potential to be a great season and I felt it started off pretty okay. But it's just fallen so badly towards the end. And it made little or no sense in parts.

I was really excited after the first few episodes too but then they just seem to forget about everything they build up.

They showed us that Burnham was aware of her faults and also that there are consequences for her actions but end up justifying and rewarding her.
We waste a bunch of time watching Saru learn to be captain for nothing
Build an interesting PTSD plot for Detmer that goes nowhere

RandomViewer

TheValeyard wrote: »

It had potential to be a great season and I felt it started off pretty okay. But it's just fallen so badly towards the end. And it made little or no sense in parts.

I think the premise of jumping clear of 23/24th century and creating a new level of technology and visuals was good, but then the make the 31st century less advanced and tribal, opportunity lost

corkie

How Did Everyone Know The Same Music Was Never Explained in Star Trek Discovery Unsolved Mystery Box

Anyone want to write/script the over arching story line of (/summary) season 3, for people who don't want to watch it and skip to blank canvas for season 4.



How Star Trek: Discovery Set Up a Rebooted Voyager Plotline For Gray in Season 4
Remember when holograms had demanded that

“Photons Be Free?”

breezy1985

corkie wrote: »

How Did Everyone Know The Same Music Was Never Explained in Star Trek Discovery Unsolved Mystery Box

Anyone want to write/script the over arching story line of (/summary) season 3, for people who don't want to watch it and skip to blank canvas for season 4.



How Star Trek: Discovery Set Up a Rebooted Voyager Plotline For Gray in Season 4
Remember when holograms had demanded that

“Photons Be Free?”

They explained the music as some sort of yoke that carried through subspace and everyone could hear it subconsciously or something. Was such a minor thing they would have been better without it

~Rebel~

breezy1985 wrote: »

They explained the music as some sort of yoke that carried through subspace and everyone could hear it subconsciously or something. Was such a minor thing they would have been better without it

They also just started with a silly false premise to begin with, that with no dilithium the song couldn't have traveled to these different planets. Except that songs can exist for more than just the 100 or so years since the Burn. The melody could have been 200 years old. Or 500 years old. Or god knows how old. After all, we have plenty of recognisable melodies from classical composers that are hundreds of years old that would be recognisable around the world . But that never seemed a possibility to Burnham etc al when she heard it played from 2 different places.

Banana Republic 1

corkie wrote: »

How Did Everyone Know The Same Music Was Never Explained in Star Trek Discovery Unsolved Mystery Box

Anyone want to write/script the over arching story line of (/summary) season 3, for people who don't want to watch it and skip to blank canvas for season 4.



How Star Trek: Discovery Set Up a Rebooted Voyager Plotline For Gray in Season 4
Remember when holograms had demanded that

“Photons Be Free?”

If I was trapped on a desert island the most obvious thing I’d do is spell out a message in the sand that any airplane pilots would need an enigma machine to decode.

Banana Republic 1

Round up of season 3 skip the intro titles

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbl4FcKttd4

pixelburp

Episode 11 and thank God we return to the actual plot. So uh, yeah I enjoyed that episode by the barometer I've set for this show & season. Michaels thinking to get the Kelpian onside was smart, props where it's due for once. And I really like Book, his chemistry with Michael works and softens her thought edges IMO. The cause of The Burn is a bit stupid but at this stage I'm just going to roll with the "science" rather than fight it. Plenty of actual problems with the writing to flag than suddenly pretend Trek is hard sci-fi.

Plus, at least Tilly wasn't presented as a dithering mess for some cheap drama during her first stint as Captain. I was honestly expecting some major "Tilly doubts herself" rubbish, maybe that comes later. Ok, she lost the ship but it didn't seem like she did anything any differently than any other captain in her place. Discovery was lost through bad luck really.

a_squirrelman

The few decent Star Trek groups on Facebook have turned into Discovery love only domains. I particularly liked the s***posting group but it seems it's now a zero tolerance of Discovery dislike zone.

So since boards is a safe place, , I will always watch any new Trek, but god almighty Discovery was poor poor poor.

Bring on more Lower Decks.

silverharp

Rotten Tomatoes isnt kind to it, critics of course love it at 80 something but the audience score is in the 40's, so one where the critics score is to be discounted

Banana Republic 1

silverharp wrote: »

Rotten Tomatoes isnt kind to it, critics of course love it at 80 something but the audience score is in the 40's, so one where the critics score is to be discounted

The critics are bought and paid for.

pixelburp

Conversely, the public are prone to rants & fan tantrums by those barely capable of legibility. Both sides are full of idiots, and have almost never used aggregators to divine a preference. It's like getting your news from Facebook.

Rotten tomatoes is bullshít and wouldn't really ascribe any truth to a system that rates a 3/5 middling rating as inherently positive. Media criticism reduced to a percentage point is kinda dumb and defeats the point, only useful for confirmation bias really And given how dumped upon Discovery is by "the public" ~40% feels bigger than I'd have thought. Technically still a pass lol :pac:

Banana Republic 1

Bought and paid for!

silverharp

pixelburp wrote: »

Conversely, the public are prone to rants & fan tantrums by those barely capable of legibility. Both sides are full of idiots, and have almost never used aggregators to divine a preference. It's like getting your news from Facebook.

Rotten tomatoes is bullshít and wouldn't really ascribe any truth to a system that rates a 3/5 middling rating as inherently positive. Media criticism reduced to a percentage point is kinda dumb and defeats the point, only useful for confirmation bias really And given how dumped upon Discovery is by "the public" ~40% feels bigger than I'd have thought. Technically still a pass lol :pac:

it works for me, Ive never not enjoyed something with an audience score in the 80's as long as I ought to like it. A high or low critics score wouldnt tell me anything in isolation unless the audience score was low too. if the critics score is low and the audience score is high its going to be a good un

youcancallmeal

silverharp wrote: »

Rotten Tomatoes isnt kind to it, critics of course love it at 80 something but the audience score is in the 40's, so one where the critics score is to be discounted

I watched a movie last night called The Nest which had similar critic and audience scores. I should've known, it was awful, took all my strength to keep watching it to the end.

~Rebel~

pixelburp wrote: »

Conversely, the public are prone to rants & fan tantrums by those barely capable of legibility. Both sides are full of idiots, and have almost never used aggregators to divine a preference. It's like getting your news from Facebook.

Rotten tomatoes is bullshít and wouldn't really ascribe any truth to a system that rates a 3/5 middling rating as inherently positive. Media criticism reduced to a percentage point is kinda dumb and defeats the point, only useful for confirmation bias really And given how dumped upon Discovery is by "the public" ~40% feels bigger than I'd have thought. Technically still a pass lol :pac:

Rotten tomatoes is a decent barometer for things, it just feels counter intuitive. A rating of 70% doesnt mean it’s a 7/10, it means 7 out of 10 critics think it’s worth a watch. Not necessarily that they think it’s great - just worth a watch if the concept interests you.

I think that sort of system is useful for what it’s intended to be - is this worth my time, yay or neigh, and nothing more.

GSPfan

I’ve seen it mentioned here a good few times that The Expanse is an excellent show and I’m 6 episodes into the first season and I can already agree. It’s very good. I know more about The Expanses large cast of characters in 6 episodes than i do about the Disco crew over 3 seasons.

pixelburp

GSPfan wrote: »

I’ve seen it mentioned here a good few times that The Expanse is an excellent show and I’m 6 episodes into the first season and I can already agree. It’s very good. I know more about The Expanses large cast of characters in 6 episodes than i do about the Disco crew over 3 seasons.

Wait til you get to season 2 and the show really takes off; not least because Avarasala gets unchained and able to curse like a trooper. Christian dropping F bombs never gets old

alchemist33

GSPfan wrote: »

I’ve seen it mentioned here a good few times that The Expanse is an excellent show and I’m 6 episodes into the first season and I can already agree. It’s very good. I know more about The Expanses large cast of characters in 6 episodes than i do about the Disco crew over 3 seasons.

Unfortunately I don't have whatever platform its on but I'll get to it some day. In a similar vein my stay-at-home 12 year old wanted something new on Netflix so I thought we'd try some other Star Trek. He gave up on TOS after about 8 episodes - tbf it probably looks pretty dated to him so I next tried something more modern, Enterprise. So far he's liking it, but having only ever watched a handful of episodes I'm also liking it. I know people tend to s**t on it but compared to Discovery it's a like a safety blanket of trek. There's no gushing emotion flooding the episodes, and there's more characterisation in 3 episodes then in 3 seasons of Discovery.

alchemist33

alchemist33 wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't have whatever platform its on but I'll get to it some day. In a similar vein my stay-at-home 12 year old wanted something new on Netflix so I thought we'd try some other Star Trek. He gave up on TOS after about 8 episodes - tbf it probably looks pretty dated to him so I next tried something more modern, Enterprise. So far he's liking it, but having only ever watched a handful of episodes I'm also liking it. I know people tend to s**t on it but compared to Discovery it's a like a safety blanket of trek. There's no gushing emotion flooding the episodes, and there's more characterisation in 3 episodes then in 3 seasons of Discovery.

I’m currently just into series 3 in a full rewatch of it. It’s excellent, even like the second the more times I watch it. Deserved more than 4 years and a crap ending.

GSPfan

alchemist33 wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't have whatever platform its on but I'll get to it some day. In a similar vein my stay-at-home 12 year old wanted something new on Netflix so I thought we'd try some other Star Trek. He gave up on TOS after about 8 episodes - tbf it probably looks pretty dated to him so I next tried something more modern, Enterprise. So far he's liking it, but having only ever watched a handful of episodes I'm also liking it. I know people tend to s**t on it but compared to Discovery it's a like a safety blanket of trek. There's no gushing emotion flooding the episodes, and there's more characterisation in 3 episodes then in 3 seasons of Discovery.

Deep Space Nine is the one to beat and the one to get the kid watching. Seasons 1 & 2 have some funny teething issues (allamaraine), season 3 is strong, but from 4 onward it’s generally excellent. Gul Dukat is the best Star Trek villain of all time for me.

TNG in a close 2nd.
Voyager in a distant 3rd.
Enterprise not far behind Voyager in 4th.
TOS after this lot because I just never loved it - Maybe it’s because i was born early 80’s and found TNG before TOS.
Discovery is dead last. I’d rather not even associate it with the others to be honest.

Edit: Can I put The Orville on this list ahead of Voyager?

breezy1985

GSPfan wrote: »

. Seasons 1 & 2 have some funny teething issues (allamaraine),

How dare you. Move along home

pixelburp

Season 1 DS9 gets an overall pass for its awful episodes - and they're certainly up there with Trek's worst - purely for having Sisko punch Q square in the face. Cathartic.

GreeBo

GSPfan wrote: »

Deep Space Nine is the one to beat and the one to get the kid watching. Seasons 1 & 2 have some funny teething issues (allamaraine), season 3 is strong, but from 4 onward it’s generally excellent. Gul Dukat is the best Star Trek villain of all time for me.

TNG in a close 2nd.
Voyager in a distant 3rd.
Enterprise not far behind Voyager in 4th.
TOS after this lot because I just never loved it - Maybe it’s because i was born early 80’s and found TNG before TOS.
Discovery is dead last. I’d rather not even associate it with the others to be honest.

Edit: Can I put The Orville on this list ahead of Voyager?

+1 on The Orville, I really liked it and can imagine a 12 year old would too.

(hmm that sounds bad!)

Rawr

breezy1985 wrote: »

How dare you. Move along home

Alight ....

Inviere

I've watched the first three eps of Season 3 (finally gathered the motivation to do it). It's surprisingly actually ok so far. I've been here before with Discovery though....so we'll see.

RandomViewer

Inviere wrote: »

I've watched the first three eps of Season 3 (finally gathered the motivation to do it). It's surprisingly actually ok so far. I've been here before with Discovery though....so we'll see.

31st century was a blank canvas, so many missed opportunities

Inviere

RandomViewer wrote: »

31st century was a blank canvas, so many missed opportunities

No doubt....the show has mishandled everything it touched since it began...but I'm eye rolling a lot less at this season (so far!)

pixelburp

Star Trek Discovery feels like a show forever playing catch-up with itself. Like, I genuinely thought right; the production chaos has stopped, they have a settled producer now, the future setting was a deliberate jettison of the "prequel" constraints. Cool. Here we go. Star Trek does "Andromeda", easy-peasy.

And yet if I didn't know better, I'd have presumed the rotating door in the writers' room was still going on, Season 3 being that messy and half-assed. I know there is tonnes written here as to the flaws of the show, and it's not like Kurtzman isn't a known flawed quantity, but it's reached a point where I genuinely can't understand how a show with this kind of financial/logistical support results in such a jumbled mess. Writing isn't THAT hard.

Who is really calling the shots on this show, and how is it a team of writers can't come up with a straightforward, A-to-B arc across a measly 13 episodes? The pilot put an obvious, easy-to-implement arc in front of the show and it missed its own open goal. I'd kinda understand if this was a 22 episode season - even the best shows struggle to keep the quality going that long - but a mere half dozen episodes? This may be hubris talking, but I absolutely could have knocked out a simple 13-episode treatment for a season - and my procrastination when it comes to writing is EPIC.

It's like how parents say; I'm not even angry at the show anymore, just very disappointed (but also unsurprised Discovery has yet again stumbled home drunk all the same)

Banana Republic 1

Inviere wrote: »

I've watched the first three eps of Season 3 (finally gathered the motivation to do it). It's surprisingly actually ok so far. I've been here before with Discovery though....so we'll see.

It helps to be half cut on the couch.