Discovery 2x09 'Project Daedalus' [ SPOILERS WITHIN ]

TheValeyard · 19-03-2019 12:14pm

seamus wrote: »

A "Risk analysis" AI calculates that the greatest threat to the galaxy is biological life itself and so goes rogue with the intent of eliminating the threat. Not gonna whinge though, you'd be hard pressed to find a unique storyline, especially when you're still confined to the Star Trek universe..

MW-GD647_skynet_20180213113524_ZH.jpg?uuid=e41f2218-10db-11e8-b127-9c8e992d421e

seamus · 19-03-2019 12:50pm

To be fair, Skynet didn't decide humanity was the target because of an overaggressive heuristic loop, it was just trying to protect itself from being shut off.

I, Robot (the movie) would be more similar.

Johnny Storm · 19-03-2019 3:17pm

bluewolf wrote: »

The spock projection was fairly ambiguous or male i think. Plus they're in a suit
I had a Google there and guesses are floating about both genders
Some article suggested lorca!

This one is fairly reasonable - https://trekmovie.com/2019/03/18/assessing-the-suspects-for-the-red-angel-on-star-trek-discovery/

Witcher · 19-03-2019 3:31pm

I love Pike, 'hit it' has to be the best way to order a jump to warp.

Tilly is a pain in the balls, the manner they have given her is so far away from how she should act. Look at how Pike/Michael/Saru act, they don't get flustered and blurt sh1t out, I know she's young/inexperienced etc. But she should be even more deferential to senior officers in that case, 'Go Ops' the other week...fcuk me :pac: I know she's in the mould of a wunderkind Wesley Crusher type with a touch of 'everyday' person that we can all connect with on a supposed easier level but it's too much. I want to see characters with a professionalism that befits their station, maybe I'm wrong.

helimachoptor · 19-03-2019 4:34pm

Witcher wrote: »

I love Pike, 'hit it' has to be the best way to order a jump to warp.

Tilly is a pain in the balls, the manner they have given her is so far away from how she should act. Look at how Pike/Michael/Saru act, they don't get flustered and blurt sh1t out, I know she's young/inexperienced etc. But she should be even more deferential to senior officers in that case, 'Go Ops' the other week...fcuk me :pac: I know she's in the mould of a wunderkind Wesley Crusher type with a touch of 'everyday' person that we can all connect with on a supposed easier level but it's too much. I want to see characters with a professionalism that befits their station, maybe I'm wrong.

yeah agree, the character just jars with everything star trek is imho.

Stark · 19-03-2019 4:42pm

For all Wesley's annoyances, he generally conducted himself with decorum from what I recall.

Sad Professor · 19-03-2019 6:44pm

Tilly as a character is fine. The issue is the failure of the characters around her to acknowledge that she's too much. Even if there was just one character who disliked her and consistently gave her a hard time, it would build sympathy in the audience for her.

This is a problem with Burnham as well, especially this season where everyone (with the exception of Spock) seems to be constantly in awe of her brilliance and just lets her do what she wants.

Goodshape · 19-03-2019 6:52pm

Could do with a "Lieutenant Broccoli" moment alright.

pixelburp · 19-03-2019 7:12pm

Tilly's manner seems to vacillate from episode to episode, to the point where I think the fundamental issue is not the character, but the writing. Her small scene with Admiral Cornwall was terrible, but it jarred because it felt more like the 'idea' of Tilly - hyperactive, starry eyed cadet with poor social skills - than the more robust versions of the character we've got in other episodes. I think the fault was the writer, who couldn't pitch her behaviour as deftly as others, so you get this constantly shifting scale of 'Tilly'ness

Rawr · 19-03-2019 8:49pm

jasonb wrote: »

The first proper image we saw, with Saru's enhanced vision, was clearly female I think. However, as bluewolf says, the one on the screen that Spock was looking at was a lot more ambiguous.

Hmmm....maybe they are not all the same person? Just thinking about that now....

Johnny Storm · 19-03-2019 9:07pm

Rawr wrote: »

Hmmm....maybe they are not all the same person? Just thinking about that now....

I'm thinking Spock's depiction of the Red Angel is not female in an attempt to throw us off the scent.
My money is on Tilly for the Red Angel
My thinking is that it would be just too bleedin' obvious for it to be Burnham.... :pac:

TheValeyard · 19-03-2019 9:37pm

Rawr wrote: »

Hmmm....maybe they are not all the same person? Just thinking about that now....

I think there is 3 Red Angels. But they might all be the same person from different realites.

Evade · 19-03-2019 9:42pm

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Holograms generated by advanced AI vs. dumb computer holograms? I think the Control incident is going to result in both AI and holo technology taking a step back for a few decades, at least until Soong-type androids show up.

That'd be a good point if not for the perfect hologram mirror and the Klingon battle simulation with Lorca and Tyler in season one.

uncleoswald · 20-03-2019 12:59am

Could be two Red Angels, one for each of Burham's parents. Would explain why one seemed female and the other didn't. Also Michael didn't actually see them die and Section 31 seem to be involved in their death in some way so there is more to be resolved there. It would be dumb but then I fully expect a dumb conclusion to the mystery anyway.

Also, I must have missed the explanation, but how do they know the Red Angle is a single time travelling entity and not just a member or members of an advance race from the present day?

Spear · 20-03-2019 2:28am

uncleoswald wrote: »

Also, I must have missed the explanation, but how do they know the Red Angle is a single time travelling entity and not just a member or members of an advance race from the present day?

There was chroniton particles associated with the sightings, although they did specify that this could have other explanations.

OldMrBrennan83 · 20-03-2019 7:26am

uncleoswald wrote: »

Could be two Red Angels, one for each of Burham's parents. Would explain why one seemed female and the other didn't. Also Michael didn't actually see them die and Section 31 seem to be involved in their death in some way so there is more to be resolved there. It would be dumb but then I fully expect a dumb conclusion to the mystery anyway.

Also, I must have missed the explanation, but how do they know the Red Angle is a single time travelling entity and not just a member or members of an advance race from the present day?

Spock said there were memories that hadn't happened yet when he mind melded.

bilbot79 · 20-03-2019 8:01am

I'd say the red angel is future Airiam

Rawr · 20-03-2019 9:18am

bilbot79 wrote: »

I'd say the red angel is future Airiam

What if the Red Angel(s) are The Traveller & Wesley Crusher?

(With a few other Traveller-buddies thrown in)

Wesley did go off and explore "other plains of existence" with him, so maybe time-travel / universe bending wouldn't be beyond their abilites. I know that for some reason he came back to Star Fleet before ST:Nemesis, but maybe he held onto his abilities and is now trying to save the Federation by stopping Control.

I know they probably won't do this, but since Wil Wheaton won't be doing any more work on The Big Bang Theory, maybe he was free to take on this role

pixelburp · 20-03-2019 9:28am

What about Pike? There has been a small flavour of his faith threaded into his contribution, maybe the climax of that will be that he becomes the personification of something visually divine?

FreudianSlippers · 20-03-2019 10:56am

pixelburp wrote: »

Tilly's manner seems to vacillate from episode to episode, to the point where I think the fundamental issue is not the character, but the writing. Her small scene with Admiral Cornwall was terrible, but it jarred because it felt more like the 'idea' of Tilly - hyperactive, starry eyed cadet with poor social skills - than the more robust versions of the character we've got in other episodes. I think the fault was the writer, who couldn't pitch her behaviour as deftly as others, so you get this constantly shifting scale of 'Tilly'ness

This.

Tilly the character is fine; Tilly the actress plays it out of the park almost every episode. Tilly is written for the original show which was penned to be more about the interactions of non-bridge crew working on a starship and they don't seem to have re-transitioned her well when interacting with superior officers.

I really don't get all the Michael hate though, her character is exactly how you'd expect a human raised on Vulcan by Sarek and Amanda to act. Spock is the character that I have the biggest problem with if this is really prime universe.

AtomicHorror · 20-03-2019 1:27pm

Evade wrote: »

That'd be a good point if not for the perfect hologram mirror and the Klingon battle simulation with Lorca and Tyler in season one.

You might need to remind me about the mirror?

Simulation of random Klingons doesn't negate the point- they're not supposed to look like anyone in particular so there's no standard to assess against.

Anyway I agree it needs some canon crow-barring to make sense.

Goodshape · 20-03-2019 1:44pm

AtomicHorror wrote: »

You might need to remind me about the mirror?

Tilly used a holographic mirror of herself to try on her Capt. Killy outfit.

Think it might have been used in another scene too. Can't quite remember.

As season two seems to be taking more care with the canon, I doubt we're going to see it again tbh.

Evade · 20-03-2019 1:44pm

AtomicHorror wrote: »

You might need to remind me about the mirror?

In episode four Burnham was putting on her uniform and used a perfect hologram of herself as a mirror. It starts at about 2:35 into the episode.

Stark · 20-03-2019 2:30pm

Still don't see the issue that's only moderately more advanced than 21st century technology. Still nowhere close to TNG era holograms that people can touch/taste/smell.

AtomicHorror · 20-03-2019 2:36pm

Stark wrote: »

Still don't see the issue that's only moderately more advanced than 21st century technology. Still nowhere close to TNG era holograms that people can touch/taste/smell.

For sure, I don't buy the holo-communicator/holodeck canon issues at all. TNG-era tech is something far beyond DSC-era. Though the inconsistency under discussion is why Sulu's hologram sucked when it seems like photo-perfect holograms are already in place by the 2250s.

I get the point re the mirrors, but I did suggest the key difference is AI and AI-generated holograms combined- that both will be set back significantly. TOS-era computers don't seem as smart as the standard shipboard computers on DSC, so the tech used for Sulu's hologram some decades later would presumably have limitations.

If they carry through with Control setting back AI, this stuff can be explained away. It's not neat and tidy, but probably the best they can do.

Goodshape · 20-03-2019 2:51pm

I continue to be happy enough with "it was made 30 / 50 years ago" as an 'excuse' for the differences.

Imagine it was a television or movie series depicting an ancient civilisation. The series made in the 60s or 90s wouldn't be as detailed or as well informed as the series made today, despite depicting the same time period. We're just getting that in reverse. Our ability to depict the "future" has improved. If TOS was made today, this is what it would look like.

AtomicHorror · 20-03-2019 3:07pm

Goodshape wrote: »

I continue to be happy enough with "it was made 30 / 50 years ago" as an 'excuse' for the differences.

Imagine it was a television or movie series depicting an ancient civilisation. The series made in the 60s or 90s wouldn't be as detailed or as well informed as the series made today, despite depicting the same time period. We're just getting that in reverse. Our ability to depict the "future" has improved. If TOS was made today, this is what it would look like.

Yeah I often think about this one as well, it implies a platonic "historical" version of Star Trek that various TV shows and films are trying to represent, like period dramas depicting the 18th century which operate within the same "canon" but often have wildly varying quality and production design. The facts of historical events and characterization of key people being more important than what color jacket someone is wearing. By comparison, the various iterations of Star Trek are remarkable for their attention to historical accuracy.

I think it'll work fine for some fans, but sadly most of them won't wrap their heads around that, nor accept it if they do.

Evade · 20-03-2019 3:36pm

There's a difference between improving the quality of the production and throwing in things that shouldn't be there. If the holograms were really glitchy, all looked more distorted like the communication holograms do, and were less ubiquitous it would make way more sense to have them on Discovery, it being a tech tester and all.

I have to wonder why control needed the false images to be holograms anyway.

AtomicHorror · 20-03-2019 3:52pm

Evade wrote: »

There's a difference between improving the quality of the production and throwing in things that shouldn't be there. If the holograms were really glitchy, all looked more distorted like the communication holograms do, and were less ubiquitous it would make way more sense to have them on Discovery, it being a tech tester and all.

It's analogous to anachronisms in period dramas- most viewers (and historians) will tend to be more concerned with the accuracy of larger historical events and consistency of the characters with other historical accounts.

It depends on the story impact too of course. If the captain of the Titanic uses a telephone to call for help, that breaks the story. Radios in the early 1900's didn't have the capabilities of a telephone and that fact contributed to those historical events. However in the Star Trek universe, holo-transmissions don't seem to have a material functional difference when compared with communication via viewscreen. The underlying technology is the same (subspace), so range, speed of contact etc are not an issue, the rest is just aesthetic.

Goodshape · 20-03-2019 4:03pm

AtomicHorror wrote: »

If the captain of the Titanic uses a telephone to call for help, that breaks the story. Radios in the early 1900's didn't have the capabilities of a telephone and that fact contributed to those historical events.

Exactly this.

And sure there's reason to be a bit annoyed at things like the spore drive, or the prevalence of Section 31, but there's plenty of room for head-canon as to why those aren't still around and it might even be explained on-screen before the end.

When people start complaining, as they do, about a hologram, a window on the bridge, that species X "doesn't look like that", or the design of the hull plating on the spaceships... it's all a bit tiresome. If TOS had those things, it wouldn't have changed any of the stories. If Disco didn't have those things it wouldn't look like the future anymore.

Evade · 20-03-2019 4:07pm

AtomicHorror wrote: »

It's analogous to anachronisms in period dramas- most viewers (and historians) will tend to be more concerned with the accuracy of larger historical events and consistency of the characters with other historical accounts.

That's mostly down to having to make do with what you have. This castle is't exactly the way it was in the 15th century but it'll have to do, or technically this type of plate wasn't common until half a century later but it's whats available, or there aren't enough of this type of gun for this battle scene so we'll give all the background guys the newer version and it'll be good enough, or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations. It doesn't really apply when you're making everything from scratch.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

It depends on the story impact too of course. If the captain of the Titanic uses a telephone to call for help, that breaks the story. Radios in the early 1900's didn't have the capabilities of a telephone and that fact contributed to those historical events. However in the Star Trek universe, holo-transmissions don't seem to have a material functional difference when compared with communication via viewscreen. The underlying technology is the same (subspace), so range, speed of contact etc are not an issue, the rest is just aesthetic.

I'm pretty sure the use of holograms is pretty significant plot point this season.

AtomicHorror · 20-03-2019 4:16pm

Evade wrote: »

That's mostly down to having to make do with what you have. This castle is't exactly the way it was in the 15th century but it'll have to do, or technically this type of plate wasn't common until half a century later but it's whats available, or there aren't enough of this type of gun for this battle scene so we'll give all the background guys the newer version and it'll be good enough, or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations. It doesn't really apply when you're making everything from scratch.

But the models and alien makeup in TOS were exactly that- what they could achieve at the time. If you take Goodshape's line that this is a representation of something more fundamental (in reality, Roddenberry's more complex imaginings, in headcanon an historical "real" Star Trek), then it makes perfect sense to do things better when we revisit the era.

In a way, TNG era producers compounded this issue by slavishly recreating the look of the TOS era a couple of times.

Evade wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the use of holograms is pretty significant plot point this season.

They might be made so in a future episode, but that's an effort to appease the canon purists (if that's even possible). However, to date I have not seen hologram communications do anything that could not be achieved by a viewscreen. For example, the faked admirals could easily have appeared in 2D, orchestrated via image manipulation by Control. No impact on that part of the story.

Evade · 20-03-2019 4:40pm

AtomicHorror wrote: »

But the models and alien makeup in TOS were exactly that- what they could achieve at the time. If you take Goodshape's line that this is a representation of something more fundamental (in reality, Roddenberry's more complex imaginings, in headcanon an historical "real" Star Trek), then it makes perfect sense to do things better when we revisit the era.

This is a bit apples to oranges. I don't think I've seen anyone advocate it has to look like exactly TOS, anywhere, it's the in-universe technologies that stick out.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

In a way, TNG era producers compounded this issue by slavishly recreating the look of the TOS era a couple of times.

It's Ronald D. Moore's fault. He did Relics and Trials and Tribble-ations. There was really no way around Trials and Tribble-ations but they already had the movie era bridge as a set on TNG it would have been easy to stick the movie era okudagrams into it and use that.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

They might be made so in a future episode, but that's an effort to appease the canon purists (if that's even possible). However, to date I have not seen hologram communications do anything that could not be achieved by a viewscreen. For example, the faked admirals could easily have appeared in 2D, orchestrated via image manipulation by Control. No impact on that part of the story.

Which is worse in a way because it's just change for the sake of change at that point.

AMKC · 20-03-2019 9:48pm

Evade wrote: »

That's mostly down to having to make do with what you have. This castle is't exactly the way it was in the 15th century but it'll have to do, or technically this type of plate wasn't common until half a century later but it's whats available, or there aren't enough of this type of gun for this battle scene so we'll give all the background guys the newer version and it'll be good enough, or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations. It doesn't really apply when you're making everything from scratch.

I'm pretty sure the use of holograms is pretty significant plot point this season.

or a Star Trek example it's too costly to create a new CG model of the Excelsior class so just use the Enterprise B from Generations.

But the Enterprise B is an Excelsior class ship.

Where else did they use the Enterprise B from Generations?

Evade · 20-03-2019 10:12pm

AMKC wrote: »

But the Enterprise B is an Excelsior class ship.

Where else did they use the Enterprise B from Generations?

In DS9's Homefront/Paradise Lost two-parter. The Enterprise B is a variant Excelsior that has bulges around the deflector dish that were put in so they could "kill off" Kirk. No other Excelsior class ship has those bulges, not even the ones they made for the Dominion War battle scenes except the Lakota from the two-parter. Which kind of leads to a fan theory that the Lakota is a recommissioned Enterprise B and had it's name changed so it doesn't get mixed up with the Enterprise D.

Just looked up while checking something, it was a physical model not a CG one.

Rawr · 21-03-2019 9:43am

AtomicHorror wrote: »

They might be made so in a future episode, but that's an effort to appease the canon purists (if that's even possible). However, to date I have not seen hologram communications do anything that could not be achieved by a viewscreen. For example, the faked admirals could easily have appeared in 2D, orchestrated via image manipulation by Control. No impact on that part of the story.

I'm a bit of a canon purist myself, but I still think that a lot of stuff can be explained away with some effort.

Bridge Windows: Part of me kind of wondered if this was something that was done away with because of the Klingon War. Being able see into the bridge from outside and shoot into what is probably less armored part of the hull seems like a quick way to take out a Starfleet vessel. I'm imagining fleet-wide retrofitting because of this, to replace the window with regular hull plates and a viewscreen.

Holograms: I wonder if this was done away with for the sake of transmission security. Added to the possibility that holograms could be used trick people into thinking someone was present (like the mirror). Thus maybe a general security regulation of Starfleet insisted on encrypted 2D viewscreen communicaion. Also the whole anti-social aspect of everyone beeming holograms around the mess-hall during lunch. Keep it on your screens people!

AtomicHorror · 21-03-2019 10:11am

Rawr wrote: »

I'm a bit of a canon purist myself, but I still think that a lot of stuff can be explained away with some effort.

Bridge Windows: Part of me kind of wondered if this was something that was done away with because of the Klingon War. Being able see into the bridge from outside and shoot into what is probably less armored part of the hull seems like a quick way to take out a Starfleet vessel. I'm imagining fleet-wide retrofitting because of this, to replace the window with regular hull plates and a viewscreen.

The history of windows and viewscreens is a bit messy though- USS Franklin (which is a prime timeline ship despite appearing in Star Trek Beyond) had a window at the time it went missing in 2164, but the contemporary NX-class used viewscreens. The Enterprise uses a viewscreen in 2254, then a window by 2256, then a viewscreen again by 2265.

I'd prefer they just start to show some ships that use viewscreens on DSC and leave it without comment. Some ships use them, some don't, configurations change.

Rawr · 21-03-2019 11:10am

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I'd prefer they just start to show some ships that use viewscreens on DSC and leave it without comment. Some ships use them, some don't, configurations change.

+1 totally agree there. Much like any other design of things you'll get plenty of configurations. The one the works the best has a knack becoming standard.

My theory is that window-less bridges were shown to be the safest option in battles and then became the standard. Ships that survived the Klingon War (like Enterprise for example) may have had refits over the years to fit that trend.

Kind of like the old DART carriages being retrofitted to include digital displays and LED lights

AtomicHorror · 21-03-2019 11:29am

Rawr wrote: »

+1 totally agree there. Much like any other design of things you'll get plenty of configurations. The one the works the best has a knack becoming standard.

My theory is that window-less bridges were shown to be the safest option in battles and then became the standard. Ships that survived the Klingon War (like Enterprise for example) may have had refits over the years to fit that trend.

Kind of like the old DART carriages being retrofitted to include digital displays and LED lights

Yep- I think this approach would work for the Klingons too. Introduce some human-ish looking Klingons. Introduce some TNG-looking ones. Leave it at that. There's a diversity in the population, and demographics change over time.

Goodshape · 21-03-2019 2:08pm

I'd prefer they just stick to their guns and leave the 30 - 60 year old sets, makeup, and effects where they are – in the past.

We don't need an "in-universe" explanation for time passing in the real world. That Klingon-augment storyline in Enterprise was embarrassing.

Rawr · 21-03-2019 2:48pm

Goodshape wrote: »

I'd prefer they just stick to their guns and leave the 30 - 60 year old sets, makeup, and effects where they are – in the past.

We don't need an "in-universe" explanation for time passing in the real world. That Klingon-augment storyline in Enterprise was embarrassing.

I did kind of like Worf's comment in the TOS/DS9 crossover when DS9 crew noticed the 60's-era "Heavy-Makeup Klingons":

Worf: "We don't discuss it with outsiders"

That comment enough for me

My own issue with the bridge-window is that it seems like a really big mistake strategically. If you were a clever enemy you could zoom in on the bridge and see who was there and what they were up to. You might even be able to zoom in on their tactical display and get enough data for a fatal hit (ala Duras Sisters' attack on the Enterprise D).

Security-wise, I feels like it makes more sense to cover that all up.

Evade · 21-03-2019 11:48pm

Goodshape wrote: »

I'd prefer they just stick to their guns and leave the 30 - 60 year old sets, makeup, and effects where they are – in the past.

Why not reboot entirely at that stage?

Goodshape · 22-03-2019 9:02am

Evade wrote: »

Why not reboot entirely at that stage?

No need. The stories that were told were told well already and space is big enough for new adventures without erasing or rehashing them.

Evade · 22-03-2019 11:00am

Goodshape wrote: »

No need. The stories that were told were told well already and space is big enough for new adventures without erasing or rehashing them.

A reboot doesn't mean a rehash it could just be a blank slate to take the series in any direction you want.

Stark · 22-03-2019 1:18pm

Not too impressed with the Kelvin reboot so glad they didn't another reboot. While the canon purists can be annoying, I still believe the shared universe they've built over 50+ years is the franchise's greatest strength.

Discovery 2x09 'Project Daedalus' [** SPOILERS WITHIN **]

Comments

Discovery 2x09 'Project Daedalus' [ SPOILERS WITHIN ]