test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Michelle Yeoh Star Trek spin off in the works

1235713

Comments

  • Options
    angrytargangrytarg Member Posts: 11,001 Arc User
    I agree. The passionate criticism of the character of Michael Burnham is really old at that point and the majority of it is based on the old "when I was in the navy that wouldn't fly" argument. If you are a military aficionado 'Star Trek' really is not your show. It is not about that, maybe JAG is more to your liking.

    The whole "Vulcan Hello" thing however is a complete arsepull and something Starfleet captains or the Admiralty (which includes Vulcans!) aren't familiar with? Yes, the Shenzhou's crew is the viewer because they don't know about it because the writers just changed the rules. That's complete nonsense. The whole mutiny thing isn't the problem here.
    lFC4bt2.gif
    ^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
    "No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
    "A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
    "That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    angrytarg wrote: »
    The whole "Vulcan Hello" thing however is a complete arsepull and something Starfleet captains or the Admiralty (which includes Vulcans!) aren't familiar with? Yes, the Shenzhou's crew is the viewer because they don't know about it because the writers just changed the rules. That's complete nonsense. The whole mutiny thing isn't the problem here.

    Agreed. For the episodes which were supposed to 'hook' people into DSC, Battle of the Binary Stars made a real hash of it. I'm not saying the rest of DSC was gold dust or anything, but the pilot probably had the weakest writing of the entire show!
  • Options
    artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    azrael605 wrote: »
    > @ryan218 said:
    > angrytarg wrote: »
    >
    > The whole "Vulcan Hello" thing however is a complete arsepull and something Starfleet captains or the Admiralty (which includes Vulcans!) aren't familiar with? Yes, the Shenzhou's crew is the viewer because they don't know about it because the writers just changed the rules. That's complete nonsense. The whole mutiny thing isn't the problem here.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Agreed. For the episodes which were supposed to 'hook' people into DSC, Battle of the Binary Stars made a real hash of it. I'm not saying the rest of DSC was gold dust or anything, but the pilot probably had the weakest writing of the entire show!

    In what way was Binary worse than Encounter at Farpoint? Threshold? The Storyteller? A Night in Sickbay? Code of Honor (an episode so bad the TNG cast still appologizes for it)? Turnabout Intruder? Take off the rose colored beer goggles.

    Season 2 starts tonight, can't wait.

    I don't think he's saying it was a 'worst ever episode' only that it wasn't a good pilot. I'd agree. The only pilot I enjoyed was The Cage and it's a shame TOS wasn't like that.
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • Options
    brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,214 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    The truth of the Klingon's intentions has no bearing on the act Burnham performed. She had no way to know, no evidence, that their intentions were anything but the usual border raid stuff that had been going on since Enterprise. She acted on the arrogant assumption that she was wiser than her captain, whose greater experience alone deserved a degree of respect Burnham never acknowledged.

    Clearly you didn't watch the episode or listen to the dialogue and are just parroting the usual diatribe because you don't like the show. Burnham's instincts were correct. Georgiou even agreed with her. Sarek reasoned her assumptions about the Klingons behaving out of the ordinary were correct. If anything, it was adhering to protocol and procedure that allowed everything to happen.
    The result is irrelevant. Even had she stopped a war from happening, her actions were the actions of an insubordinate egotist who should never have been a heartbeat away from the captaincy. In fact, I would have had trouble with her scrubbing conduits in the engine room.

    And James Kirk should have been tossed out of Starfleet Academy for cheating on the final exam. How many time did Picard violate the Prime Directive? Or are those ok because you liked those shows?


    None of my arguments are based on if I liked the show or not. In fact, I saw the first episode and I didn't see anything that caused me to 'dislike' it. I personally think it would have been better as generic sci-fi because it violated core concepts of Trek. Without the Trek baggage, none of my objections would be valid.

    A service which selects officers based on nepotism rather than professionalism would indeed spit out the occasional Burnham or Arbuthnot, but Starfleet is supposed to be a professional navy with competent admirals promoted based on merit.

    As for Picard: like TOS, you'd have to ask me episode by episode if I liked it or not. They were pretty hit-and-miss. I'm not a Discovery hater. I just disagree with the direction they've taken Trek.

    I shall sum up my position once again so that posters do not feel they have to extrapolate opinions I do not hold from what I've posted:

    "The new Trek has taken away the optimistic view of humanity's future which was a primary factor in my enjoyment of the show and replaced it with all the things which make our world suck. I don't need to see the dark side of Trek; I can walk down my street and see all of that I care to see."

    All of the rest of my arguments were intended to support that thesis.
  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    azrael605 wrote: »
    > @ryan218 said:
    > angrytarg wrote: »
    >
    > The whole "Vulcan Hello" thing however is a complete arsepull and something Starfleet captains or the Admiralty (which includes Vulcans!) aren't familiar with? Yes, the Shenzhou's crew is the viewer because they don't know about it because the writers just changed the rules. That's complete nonsense. The whole mutiny thing isn't the problem here.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Agreed. For the episodes which were supposed to 'hook' people into DSC, Battle of the Binary Stars made a real hash of it. I'm not saying the rest of DSC was gold dust or anything, but the pilot probably had the weakest writing of the entire show!

    In what way was Binary worse than Encounter at Farpoint? Threshold? The Storyteller? A Night in Sickbay? Code of Honor (an episode so bad the TNG cast still appologizes for it)? Turnabout Intruder? Take off the rose colored beer goggles.

    Season 2 starts tonight, can't wait.

    When I said 'entire show', I meant the show (Star Trek: Discovery), not the entire franchise.
  • Options
    brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,214 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    "The new Trek has taken away the optimistic view of humanity's future which was a primary factor in my enjoyment of the show and replaced it with all the things which make our world suck."

    Except, it hasn't.

    Show me how we're seeing a positive outlook for humanity rather than simply bringing all the old problems with us into space in newer Trek. But in another thread, this one's about the spin-off.
  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    I'm just going to repeat my sentiments from the first page:
    ryan218 wrote: »
    "Hey, I have an idea! You know that evil version of Captain Star Power?"

    "You mean Emperor Georgiou?"

    "Yeah! Why don't we make a series focusing on her?"

    "You want to make a show where the main character is an authoritarian, xenophobic, cannibalistic lunatic with absolutely no morality, no displayed desire to be anything resembling a good person, and who is completely unrelatable to the audience?"

    "Yeah!"

    "Genius!"

  • Options
    khan5000khan5000 Member Posts: 3,007 Arc User
    Your pain runs deep.
    Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
  • Options
    tigerariestigeraries Member Posts: 3,492 Arc User
    like discovery, no interest since it's all behind a paywall... and it is ONLY in development. announced before season 2 to drum interest/news buzz... like ST4 was announced before ST3 was released. let's see how this all plays out with the fullness of time.
  • Options
    markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ...Her actions disrupted the functioning of the ship and crew in a high-stress environment that was also high-threat, this makes her at fault for the destruction of her ship-because she forced a situation where the crew could not perform due diligence in the face of the external threat, because they were busy and thrown off by her actions generating an internal threat.

    The Klingons were going to start a war and destroy every ship they could no matter what. You can try to blame her for it from now until the end of time and it still won't make it true.
    Yeah the only thing weird about that scenario is how Starfleet forgot about the way the Vulcans interacted with the Klingons back before the Federation was a thing.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • Options
    artan42artan42 Member Posts: 10,450 Bug Hunter
    valoreah wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ...Her actions disrupted the functioning of the ship and crew in a high-stress environment that was also high-threat, this makes her at fault for the destruction of her ship-because she forced a situation where the crew could not perform due diligence in the face of the external threat, because they were busy and thrown off by her actions generating an internal threat.

    The Klingons were going to start a war and destroy every ship they could no matter what. You can try to blame her for it from now until the end of time and it still won't make it true.
    Yeah the only thing weird about that scenario is how Starfleet forgot about the way the Vulcans interacted with the Klingons back before the Federation was a thing.

    Did the Vulcans ever tell them? They're not exactly known for offering anything freely except sarcasm and condescension.
    22762792376_ac7c992b7c_o.png
    Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
    JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.

    #TASforSTO


    '...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
    'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
    'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
    '...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
    'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
    '...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek

    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    The issue with that theory Pat, is that it's established Burnham's assignment was a special case.
  • Options
    lordgyorlordgyor Member Posts: 2,820 Arc User
    > @khan5000 said:
    > https://trekmovie.com/2019/01/17/showrunner-assures-section-31-series-will-not-abandon-star-trek-optimism/

    Optimistic Grim Dark! It could be a whole new subgenre. Seriously, do they know Section 31 are the bad guys, abit ones that work for a great cause?

    I'm not sure how optomistic a show about a Shadowy, rogue, none governmental spy agency, who are completely ruthless,and accountable to no one, with an agent who is Cannibal Space Hilter can be.
  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    lordgyor wrote: »
    > @khan5000 said:
    > https://trekmovie.com/2019/01/17/showrunner-assures-section-31-series-will-not-abandon-star-trek-optimism/

    Optimistic Grim Dark! It could be a whole new subgenre. Seriously, do they know Section 31 are the bad guys, abit ones that work for a great cause?

    I'm not sure how optomistic a show about a Shadowy, rogue, none governmental spy agency, who are completely ruthless,and accountable to no one, with an agent who is Cannibal Space Hilter can be.

    My thoughts exactly.
  • Options
    brian334brian334 Member Posts: 2,214 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    Show me how we're seeing a positive outlook for humanity rather than simply bringing all the old problems with us into space in newer Trek.

    I'm not seeing a dystopic/apocolyptic nuclear wasteland future on Earth anywhere in Discovery.


    Since I never made that argument, this is not a refutation of my position. Humanity's failure to progress culturally is my issue. Or, in the words of the post just prior to the one I quoted above,
    ryan218 wrote: »
    "Hey, I have an idea! You know that evil version of Captain Star Power?"

    "You mean Emperor Georgiou?"

    "Yeah! Why don't we make a series focusing on her?"

    "You want to make a show where the main character is an authoritarian, xenophobic, cannibalistic lunatic with absolutely no morality, no displayed desire to be anything resembling a good person, and who is completely unrelatable to the audience?"

    "Yeah!"

    "Genius!"

  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ryan218 wrote: »
    The issue with that theory Pat, is that it's established Burnham's assignment was a special case.

    just about every time someone's friend, brother or in-law gets an important job they're not qualified for, is a "Special Case", Ryan, and most of the time the person using the leverage will insist it's a special case, a 'necessary exception to the rules', even if they did the same thing last week and the week before.

    More or less, Burnham having that position is a symptom of a deeper malaise, and suggests there are lots of such exemptions in Starfleet, which in turn fits with their record in the field when a war finally did come. It fits, it makes sense that Starfleet would lose their asses as badly as the show said, if the people in critical roles were...ehm...less than qualified, having gotten their position either by connections, or internal politics, rather than competence or ability. A bit, as I said, like the French Army of Napoleon III in the 1870s.

    You know what "special" means, right? It means "atypical". If Starfleet was as contaminated with Nepotism as you say, it wouldn't be atypical. The buying of commissions in C19th France (and Prussia, and the U.K., and Russia) was typical. If you were a member of the aristocracy, you had to secure an officer's commission for your eldest son (in Britain the second-oldest went to the navy, because the navy was seen as more dangerous than the army). It was never a special case. No one even pretended as such.

    By contrast, Starfleet has an Officer Academy, with millions of applicants, which we know produced the finest officers in the service: Christopher Pike, James T. Kirk, Phillipa Georgiou, Robert April, Spock, Jonathon Archer.

    Indeed, the only reason it appears Burnham got the place was because her grades from the Vulcan Science Council were considered sufficient (Sarek and the entire Council knew full well she qualified for the Vulcan Expeditionary Fleet; in fact, it appears as though she recieved a passing mark but was failed anyway). In any event, every single other character we see went through the academy. The accusation of institutional nepotism is baseless.
  • Options
    ryan218ryan218 Member Posts: 36,106 Arc User
    edited January 2019
    Okay, a few things:
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ryan218 wrote: »
    patrickngo wrote: »
    ryan218 wrote: »
    The issue with that theory Pat, is that it's established Burnham's assignment was a special case.

    just about every time someone's friend, brother or in-law gets an important job they're not qualified for, is a "Special Case", Ryan, and most of the time the person using the leverage will insist it's a special case, a 'necessary exception to the rules', even if they did the same thing last week and the week before.

    More or less, Burnham having that position is a symptom of a deeper malaise, and suggests there are lots of such exemptions in Starfleet, which in turn fits with their record in the field when a war finally did come. It fits, it makes sense that Starfleet would lose their asses as badly as the show said, if the people in critical roles were...ehm...less than qualified, having gotten their position either by connections, or internal politics, rather than competence or ability. A bit, as I said, like the French Army of Napoleon III in the 1870s.

    You know what "special" means, right? It means "atypical". If Starfleet was as contaminated with Nepotism as you say, it wouldn't be atypical. The buying of commissions in C19th France (and Prussia, and the U.K., and Russia) was typical. If you were a member of the aristocracy, you had to secure an officer's commission for your eldest son (in Britain the second-oldest went to the navy, because the navy was seen as more dangerous than the army). It was never a special case. No one even pretended as such.

    By contrast, Starfleet has an Officer Academy, with millions of applicants, which we know produced the finest officers in the service: Christopher Pike, James T. Kirk, Phillipa Georgiou, Robert April, Spock, Jonathon Archer.

    Indeed, the only reason it appears Burnham got the place was because her grades from the Vulcan Science Council were considered sufficient (Sarek and the entire Council knew full well she qualified for the Vulcan Expeditionary Fleet; in fact, it appears as though she recieved a passing mark but was failed anyway). In any event, every single other character we see went through the academy. The accusation of institutional nepotism is baseless.

    you seem to forget there were a great many fine officers in the 19th century in spite of the system of purchased commissions.

    Now you're contradicting your own supporting argument.
    patrickngo wrote: »
    and widespread does not require being universal-simply widespread enough in peacetime Starfleet of the '50s to leave the service, ahm... 'broken'.[/i]

    And twisting my words, since typical doesn't - and never has - mean universal.
    patrickngo wrote: »
    SFA may have produced some very fine officers indeed, but it also produced Gary Mitchell, Kelvar Garth, various corrupt captains and admirals throughout TOS, TNG, etcetera., kind of like for every Lee, Grant or Sherman, there's a Custer, Burnsides, etcetera.

    Yes, but nowhere near the number that the C19th practice of purchasing commissions did.
    patrickngo wrote: »
    See, you don't have t have an entire service that is inept and incompetent, the Poles put up a hell of a fight against the germans in 1939 and BEAT the russians in the 1920s, but if there are enough political appointees, you get the Russian Army at the start of Barbarossa in 1942-where there weren't enough good officers, good LEADERS, in proportion to the political appointees and party members who wanted to wear a uniform.

    No, you get the Red Army at the start of Operation Barbarossa where there aren't enough officers in general because Comrade Stalin had them all shot because he had nightmares of Trotsky. By Barbarossa, the authority of the Commissars had been seriously curtailed because all those problems were identified during the Winter War with Finland. There just wasn't enough time to train enough new officers to any level of competency to fight a major war against a country which had been constantly engaged in battle for 3 years, had a sensible enlisted:officer ratio, and whose command was made up of WWI vets and generals who are widely recognised as some of the greatest of the C20th.
    patrickngo wrote: »
    Hell, TNG even gave us a Pre-Burnham example named "Wesley Crusher".[/i]

    You mean the Wesley Crusher who qualified for and graduated from Starfleet Academy? That Wesley Crusher?
    patrickngo wrote: »
    It Fits the situation. It's not a pretty picture, but it certainly makes more sense than the alternative explanation in which, for want of a better term, "The Best" are completely and totally inept except for Marysue Burnham and a refugee from the mirror universe.

    You know what else would make more sense than that? That there are compete t's we just don't see onscreen because they're commanding ships other than the ship with a miracle drive being constantly sent behind enemy lines on solo missions. Or that Starfleet hasn't been at war for nearly a century and stubbornly refuses to call itself a military, so it's military training is hopeless, and a large portion of its fleet was blown out of the sky in the war's opening engagement.
    patrickngo wrote: »
    if Starfleet of the 2250s was 'CLAIMING' to be the best, while not? or had fallen into the complacent habit of big, bureaucratic states with little to no oversight or accountability and it cost them? that works a hell of a lot better than the alternative, because it leaves room for someone to have their TRIBBLE together and pull them out of it during the nice break after almost-being-completely-overrun by an enemy that can't even fight competently.

    Yes, none of which requires Starfleet to be overrun by the Right Honourable Lord Nincomp Yoop, Third Earl of Inbredham and his fellow Etonians.

    EDIT: And why can I not split my quotes anymore?
  • Options
    starkaosstarkaos Member Posts: 11,556 Arc User
    valoreah wrote: »
    brian334 wrote: »
    Show me how we're seeing a positive outlook for humanity rather than simply bringing all the old problems with us into space in newer Trek.

    I'm not seeing a dystopic/apocolyptic nuclear wasteland future on Earth anywhere in Discovery.


    This would actually be an interesting Star Trek prequel. Have it set during World War III. Colonel Green wanted to kill hundreds of thousands of people that had radiation sickness so Earth had to have been a apocalyptic nuclear wasteland to some level. Of course, some areas were more of a nuclear wasteland than others.
Sign In or Register to comment.