AllForIt wrote: » The only stand out episodes of disco for me is the Mudd episode (S1, time repeating itself) and the second last espisode of S2, where they catch mom. The rest of my memory cells of disco have been overwritten since.
Rawr wrote: » Ahh, but this is scifi and nothing is really dead so long as the plot requires it. Especially when we're talking about a living computer virus that knows how to hop between different hosts. They merely killed it's last host...the virus itself could still be operating in that pool of gore we saw them clean up in Episode 2. I'm not saying that I actually want Control to return. Like many thinks in Discovery it was an interesting idea that was very poorly executed. However I think it's possible that they would bring it back as the big-bad of this show again.
breezy1985 wrote: » If you don't forget certain things about that show you'll go mad. Like the fact that Burnham is Starfleets first ever mutineer and gets her job back almost straight away after pulling a gun on her captain and starting a war
~Rebel~ wrote: » This ep was ok... I liked the idea of it more than the execution. Particularly on the planet, the pacing felt weird - everyone jumping straight into delivering their cultural point of view within seconds of them landing. I feel like all that could have been stretched out much longer and made more natural and interesting, and saved all that emotional bluster for later. Could have been welcomed at first and gotten to learn a bit about the trill over the past centuries. Then we find the yellow chap plotting against them and delivering his speech about her being an abomination, with the red chap appearing to save them from death/forced separation. Then the final act would have been in the caves. I always feel like this show doesn’t trust their audience and want to throw heavy emotion at us up front all the time to hook us in, like a CW show or something - when if there’s one audience you can trust to hang in there and appreciate a good narrative build it’s the Trek audience.
The White Wolf wrote: » This episode and the preceding one made me realise the problem I have with the show; this episode was quite good when focusing on the story that they were trying to tell, but the constant pausing, smiling at each other and exclamations of "you're awesome, no, you're awesome" is so bloody irritating.
Banana Republic 1 wrote: » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGEdDBbeVYE
Sesshoumaru wrote: » Do fans really think the STD show creators are trying to 'fix the problematic past that is much too white and male' ?
Banana Republic 1 wrote: » Apparently so, there a 3 or for bloggers like this. I’d agree about male thing but the other stuff I’d have to disagree with. I think the calibre of writing on this show is just to poor to label it agenda driven.
mikhail wrote: » I think they do have an agenda. I don't really have an issue with that if it's well done. It's not well done.
Sesshoumaru wrote: » I just watched a few minutes of his live stream. Kind of shocked a bit at his commentary on episode 5. I'm not sure why this guy is watching the TV show at this stage! But there must be audience for this kind content?
[Deleted User] wrote: » Trek should have an agenda. It should always try to hold a mirror up to society. They are crap at it though
ilovesmybrick wrote: » He's one of a string of youtubers whose entire stick is beating on any new Star Trek. I've seen a few of his before, and a handful of others, and they seem to be the most miserable, angry Trek watchers. Honestly I think part of it is a bit they're doing for youtube to get clicks.
silverharp wrote: » without good reason or with good reason? If we are talking about Nerdrotic , he likes The Expanse , and the Orville and I assume all the old Trek series so by all accounts would be positive to SiFi shows if they stand up There are clear reasons to see std as a fatally flawed series, why shouldnt people review it so online?
CramCycle wrote: » Because, presuming its like similar reviewers, they don't review the show, the writing, the set pieces, flow, storyline etc. They loosely link something that shouldn't be an issue and often isn't an issue in the show and use it to drive up clicks by offending or pulling in agreeable people. i mean some of the sh1t that these channels come out with. 2 POC in high up positions in the cast, must be a desperate nod to BLM or racism, rather than, it just so happens that 2 POC were the most suitable cast members. A few females in positions of power, clearly a nod to feminism rather than, they are simply characters that happen to be women. It's complete BS and if they were genuine fans, they wouldn't notice these non existent issues, they would just critique the pacing, the poor writing and so on. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a buffoon, and in the modern world it is important that people from various backgrounds, genders, orientations, races etc. are seen in more positive and high up roles but in regards the actual show, this does not affect the show. I am a big fan of the idea, if you can see it, you can be it, but again, this is not ssomething that affects the quality of the show. Christ on a bike, some of the sh1t spouted online, as if it was a statistical anomaly that 2 POC would bump into each other if she had to meet someone (the issue here is that I would have thought bumping into a human first was the statistically unlikely thing), or that there would be a variety of sexes and sexual orientations. People who give out about this stuff only hold a mirror up to themselves and their own lackings, I refuse to line their pockets by clicking on their youtube videos anymore I'll give kudos to discovery in that they have more varied background characters than I remember in any other trek show ie aliens. Which makes sense, I know humans breed like rabbits but I find it hard to believe that in every ship the federation has we are in the majority.
silverharp wrote: » you might end up straw manning or cherry picking the criticism of the show. No one has a problem with inclusion in the show, Star Trek has always done that. Where recent Trek has gone “woke” is, they cant do it without taking down the white male characters. Contrast with Voyager , Janeway’s character didn’t have to belittle the male characters to somehow make her look good. This Trek does though. My memory is fading of the earlier 2 seasons but you could sum it up as Burham barking at Pike for the entirety. The show just falls into every predictable but boring modern Hollywood trope that just make shows less watchable and only seems to please a minority Apart from all that clearly whoever made this show had little knowledge or love of any of the Trek history apart from some plot synopsis so a lot of original fans are never going to get past that. Rotten Tomatoes are giving this series a 50% viewer rating, which is by definition meh so its not pleasing the audience.
breezy1985 wrote: » Does The Expanse ever get much flak online for it's casting. Quite often Holden and Amos are the only 2 white people and the idea that most of the human race is mixed race is a big part of The Expanse universe. Also if they follow the books there should be a full polygamous crew coming into the show soon
silverharp wrote: » you might end up straw manning or cherry picking the criticism of the show. No one has a problem with inclusion in the show, Star Trek has always done that. Where recent Trek has gone “woke” is, they cant do it without taking down the white male characters. .
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5dc0c82bb5d5c9e7a358d7971a18240f.svg)
