That the Klingon sarcophagus ship had a cloak is very problematic as the first ship any Federation ship encountered with a cloak was NCC 1701's encounter with the Romulans in "Balance of Terror." Later the Klingons received cloaking technology from the Romulans in exchange for some battle cruisers in 2268, when they were allies.
No. When Captain Foley of TrekYards gives the 1st episode a 6 out of 10, and the 2nd episode a 5 out of 10, it isn't fashion it's because the show has major issues. He was practically in tears over this travesty.
I never heard of him up until a few days ago. Nothing against him, but if he is indeed "in tears" literally over a TV show, it's not the TV show that has issues, it's the person. Sounds to me like he's got far bigger issues than not liking a tv program. Thankfully he isn't representative of everyone.
For some reason, I picture him being like the poor soul being discussed in this video. lol
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is TRIBBLE these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long TRIBBLE all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
I found it a refreshing change have a darker trek, it was a mistake killing off Captain Georgiou this early
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
That the Klingon sarcophagus ship had a cloak is very problematic as the first ship any Federation ship encountered with a cloak was NCC 1701's encounter with the Romulans in "Balance of Terror." Later the Klingons received cloaking technology from the Romulans in exchange for some battle cruisers in 2268, when they were allies.
It's actually not certain that the Klingons got their technology from the Romulans in canon. That was only speculation, based partially on the talks of the Klingon-Romulan alliance that lead to the Romulans flying the D7 Cruisers.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
I really have to question whether or not you truly watched the episode and listened to the dialogue as from what I'm reading here, you've got the entire episode near completely wrong.
Which parts did I have wrong, how did you interpret Burnham's characterization? Simply saying my views are invalid without any other explanation isn't particularly constructive criticism.
Just watched it on prime time tv....uhhhh man...... If it continues like the first episode this will be a mini-series that lasts about a month. A real face-off with a Klingon would not have gone anything remotely close to this.... despite the story they are trying to portray here.... Watching this episode was like watching the first 20 minutes of Inglorious ****....
Aside from an assault already against her superior officer and a mutiny attempt.... I don't see how I could take much more of this series very seriously when compared to traditional Star Trek series.
The visuals are great.... and hoping this series is more true to sci-fi and not some modern day drama show with a linear approach.
Going to take time to adjust to the new Klingon "look".... but so far they seem to be on the right track with their race and culture by the dialogue and actions thus far...
Crossing my fingers here.... can't judge it all by one episode... but so far it has some major events that have already rubbed me the wrong way.
You actually only saw half of the premiere. The other half in on access and you have to sign up for a trial to see it.
I like this show, they're taking risks, they're breaking the formula, and there's no sign of that garbage "Roddenberry Rule".
And the Klingons actually are doing what they do for reasons that make sense from their perspective, not just some ballyhoosed "honor" TRIBBLE. They actually FEAR the Federation.
No. When Captain Foley of TrekYards gives the 1st episode a 6 out of 10, and the 2nd episode a 5 out of 10, it isn't fashion it's because the show has major issues. He was practically in tears over this travesty.
I never heard of him up until a few days ago. Nothing against him, but if he is indeed "in tears" literally over a TV show, it's not the TV show that has issues, it's the person. Sounds to me like he's got far bigger issues than not liking a tv program. Thankfully he isn't representative of everyone.
For some reason, I picture him being like the poor soul being discussed in this video. lol
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is **** these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long **** all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
Aside from an assault already against her superior officer and a mutiny attempt.... I don't see how I could take much more of this series very seriously when compared to traditional Star Trek series.
She committed at least two, and possibly three crimes that would be capital crimes under the UCMJ....it depends on whether her violations of both sections of Article 90 (ASSAULTING OR WILLFULLY DISOBEYING SUPERIOR COMMISSIONED OFFICER) were considered to be in time of war or not. Granted, the Federation only has the Death Penalty for one thing (going to Talos IV), but Burnham would have never seen the inside of a Federation starship again....except for the brig in the vessel taking her to prison.
The most laughable thing about it is that it would have made no difference if she had gotten her way.....they had come there to declare War on the Federation. All she would have done is pre-empt it by attacking first, which would have caused the Federation untold difficulty with the "peacenik" factions.
1. Don't assume that in this case, the only death penalty remaining is going to the planet of the telpathic buttheads. Also, Burnham is going to PRISON, not some "rehabilitaiton" colony. The intent here is to lock her up and throw away the key.
2. Also, the T'kuwa did what he did for a very specific long range plan, to maneuver the Federation to give the excuse needed for war. Nothing actually started until the Shenzhou locked phase cannons.
3. And... the Vulcans screwed up.... had been TRIBBLE up for decades.
Establishing bona fides, I've been watching Trek since it first aired. I collected the novels in the '70s, when it looked like that was all we'd ever get. (Yes, even novels like James Blish's Spock Must Die! and the Marshak and Culbreath Phoenix duology. It was all we had.)
I'd like to tell those of you blandly pretending to speak for all "old-school Trek fans" to kindly leave me the hell out of your hate-fest. To quote a T-shirt, I was a Trekkie before it was cool - not to mention before you were born. And I enjoyed what I saw. I would like more background on some of those bridge folks (I did enjoy coming to the understanding that Kelpians evolved sapience as a prey species, explaining Saru's extreme caution, reminiscent of Niven's puppeteers), but I also understand that this is an arc show and more will be revealed in time. I know, I know, you kids were expecting this to be another thing like VOY where each episode was separate from the others and the Magic Reset Button kept anything really bad from ever happening, but you have to leave the kindergarten sometime.
I know, I know, you kids were expecting this to be another thing like VOY where each episode was separate from the others and the Magic Reset Button kept anything really bad from ever happening, but you have to leave the kindergarten sometime.
I prefer the serial style, what makes me dislike the show are things like the holographic communication, the story issues, and the fact that Burnham as a character is simply unlikeable to the point I'd enjoy watching her die the same way I enjoyed watching Joffrey die in Game of Thrones. Imo Kahn is a more likeable and relatable character than she is, which is a shame because I think the actress is great and I loved her in The Walking Dead.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
Mr. Foley also openly called anyone who enjoyed the KT films, in numerous ways, an idiot. More importantly, he strongly inferred that those fans are not true fans.
Personally, I think that stinks he suffers from depression. I don't wish that on anyone.
That also doesn't give him a pass to be a rude elitist, especially if he claims to honor the purist Trek ideals. Debating ship design or visual appearances is one thing... ignoring infinite diversity in infinite combinations just because you didn't like something is self-defeating, at best.
No. When Captain Foley of TrekYards gives the 1st episode a 6 out of 10, and the 2nd episode a 5 out of 10, it isn't fashion it's because the show has major issues. He was practically in tears over this travesty.
I never heard of him up until a few days ago. Nothing against him, but if he is indeed "in tears" literally over a TV show, it's not the TV show that has issues, it's the person. Sounds to me like he's got far bigger issues than not liking a tv program. Thankfully he isn't representative of everyone.
For some reason, I picture him being like the poor soul being discussed in this video. lol
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is **** these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long **** all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
I found it a refreshing change have a darker trek, it was a mistake killing off Captain Georgiou this early
Why does all sci-fi have to be dark and gritty? Trek's not about that. And with so much dark and gritty sci fi out there, leave Trek alone. This is why Orville is doing so well...it's not dark and gritty.
No. When Captain Foley of TrekYards gives the 1st episode a 6 out of 10, and the 2nd episode a 5 out of 10, it isn't fashion it's because the show has major issues. He was practically in tears over this travesty.
I never heard of him up until a few days ago. Nothing against him, but if he is indeed "in tears" literally over a TV show, it's not the TV show that has issues, it's the person. Sounds to me like he's got far bigger issues than not liking a tv program. Thankfully he isn't representative of everyone.
For some reason, I picture him being like the poor soul being discussed in this video. lol
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is **** these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long **** all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
As far as her reasons for doing things, I think it was intended that logic was her driving force, but somewhere in the editing process it became more vague. I still hate the character though.
No. When Captain Foley of TrekYards gives the 1st episode a 6 out of 10, and the 2nd episode a 5 out of 10, it isn't fashion it's because the show has major issues. He was practically in tears over this travesty.
I never heard of him up until a few days ago. Nothing against him, but if he is indeed "in tears" literally over a TV show, it's not the TV show that has issues, it's the person. Sounds to me like he's got far bigger issues than not liking a tv program. Thankfully he isn't representative of everyone.
For some reason, I picture him being like the poor soul being discussed in this video. lol
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is **** these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long **** all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
No. When Captain Foley of TrekYards gives the 1st episode a 6 out of 10, and the 2nd episode a 5 out of 10, it isn't fashion it's because the show has major issues. He was practically in tears over this travesty.
I never heard of him up until a few days ago. Nothing against him, but if he is indeed "in tears" literally over a TV show, it's not the TV show that has issues, it's the person. Sounds to me like he's got far bigger issues than not liking a tv program. Thankfully he isn't representative of everyone.
For some reason, I picture him being like the poor soul being discussed in this video. lol
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is **** these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long **** all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
I found it a refreshing change have a darker trek, it was a mistake killing off Captain Georgiou this early
Why does all sci-fi have to be dark and gritty? Trek's not about that. And with so much dark and gritty sci fi out there, leave Trek alone. This is why Orville is doing so well...it's not dark and gritty.
That remains to be seen in the viewing numbers and what Fox will do with that knowledge. I hope it keeps going but three straight episodes it's down 4.6 million viewers and if it keeps bleeding numbers Discovery maybe our last hope!
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
The other thing well-done gritty does, is present an antagonist that is challenging, charismatic, and interesting. Discovery failed here too-they managed to make boring Klingons. lines delivered like they're reading from a powerpoint, moving like accountants cross-dressing in corsets, spoken like they're using ball-gags. The fetish look works great in stills, but failed thoroughly to provide a menace that was menacing, antagonists that were engaging, etc. etc. The visual spectacle of the Klingon ship scenes was undermined by how stationary, paralyzed, and non alive the crews are. the movements are stiff and restricted, the faces expressionless, the movements arthritic and the situation on the whole devoid of that key aspect for doing gritty and dark: they weren't mysterious, or engaging, there was no charm or menace to them.
so it fails on both ends. All that's left is set lighting and special effects.
Just let the Sisko go to the Discovery era, he'll solve the Klingon problem in 2 minutes, including the 1:58 needed to prepare the USS Ben Sisko's Mother****ing Pimp Hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHIkMDgvZdo
I'm one of the rare few that stopped liking anything "Trek" after the first 2 seasons of ToS. Didn't even like ANY of the movies since they were too Hollywood/Star Wars-ish for my taste and had nothing to do with the immersion of space travel (The Motion Picture though, I found the most tolerable).
I don't get all the hate for JJ since his movies really weren't that different when the previous movies that also tried to turn Kirk, Spock and Picard into idolized rockstars. But I guess it's having to do with "canon" - though since I only liked ToS - there really is no canon for me to begin with.
Since I didn't even like TNG and everything after (I mean sure there were some good episodes here and there, but still watered down), TRIBBLE is actually the least of my concerns - just wear protection when you watch it, since nowadays media has an obvious political agenda to brainwash you, and I'll leave it at that.
Comments
http://www.startrek.com/database_article/cloaking-device-klingon
Member since December 2009
Sorry if some of us care for something we cherish, ok.
Hell, I've given up on modern sci-fi myself for the most part....either it's getting the reboot treatment, or changed so severely like Dr. who . It's now at the point where I once said 95% of TV is TRIBBLE these days...it's now getting to about 99%. Not everyone is going to be thrilled with the "new, hip, trendy" styles of TV where, like Meimeitoo said:
" I think it's more to do, in that regard, with the 'JJ-Trek' era in general. Yes, JJ wasn't involved in Discovery, but his spirit certainly is: the one where they spit on lore, and only cater to a more youthful generation, who couldn't care less about canon, are easily pleased, and think everything is cool as long as things have pimped-out nacells, flashy FX, and a pretty girl -- no matter how obnoxious she is.
Like I said earlier, I'm not much about canon myself; but I can certainly see how Trek being torn down by populist writers like JJ, who utterly disrespect any and all tradition, is a trend which might irritate people. Me? I will definitely continue to watch Discovery; but I can certainly see why ppl might have a beef with this kind of TV.
Though I'd not say it's exclusive to a youthful generation, but in general the 'average slob' demographic.
Oh, and Mr. Foley deals with depression as well, he states that in one or two early episodes.
If it's considered 'okay' for people to feel like this when their team loses a game, or those women crying like banshees over the election (I still roll my eyes at them each time I see it), then it's ok for this.
If this is the direction Trek is going, might as well go take a nice, long TRIBBLE all over Gene's, Matt Jefferies, and so on's graves.
Watch out, Picard....you're gonna be replaced with a muscle bound Vin Diesel type guy, guzzling beer and commanding a star destroyer. |o.o\
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
Which parts did I have wrong, how did you interpret Burnham's characterization? Simply saying my views are invalid without any other explanation isn't particularly constructive criticism.
You actually only saw half of the premiere. The other half in on access and you have to sign up for a trial to see it.
I like this show, they're taking risks, they're breaking the formula, and there's no sign of that garbage "Roddenberry Rule".
And the Klingons actually are doing what they do for reasons that make sense from their perspective, not just some ballyhoosed "honor" TRIBBLE. They actually FEAR the Federation.
*hug* You tell 'em!
1. Don't assume that in this case, the only death penalty remaining is going to the planet of the telpathic buttheads. Also, Burnham is going to PRISON, not some "rehabilitaiton" colony. The intent here is to lock her up and throw away the key.
2. Also, the T'kuwa did what he did for a very specific long range plan, to maneuver the Federation to give the excuse needed for war. Nothing actually started until the Shenzhou locked phase cannons.
3. And... the Vulcans screwed up.... had been TRIBBLE up for decades.
I'd like to tell those of you blandly pretending to speak for all "old-school Trek fans" to kindly leave me the hell out of your hate-fest. To quote a T-shirt, I was a Trekkie before it was cool - not to mention before you were born. And I enjoyed what I saw. I would like more background on some of those bridge folks (I did enjoy coming to the understanding that Kelpians evolved sapience as a prey species, explaining Saru's extreme caution, reminiscent of Niven's puppeteers), but I also understand that this is an arc show and more will be revealed in time. I know, I know, you kids were expecting this to be another thing like VOY where each episode was separate from the others and the Magic Reset Button kept anything really bad from ever happening, but you have to leave the kindergarten sometime.
I prefer the serial style, what makes me dislike the show are things like the holographic communication, the story issues, and the fact that Burnham as a character is simply unlikeable to the point I'd enjoy watching her die the same way I enjoyed watching Joffrey die in Game of Thrones. Imo Kahn is a more likeable and relatable character than she is, which is a shame because I think the actress is great and I loved her in The Walking Dead.
Mr. Foley also openly called anyone who enjoyed the KT films, in numerous ways, an idiot. More importantly, he strongly inferred that those fans are not true fans.
Personally, I think that stinks he suffers from depression. I don't wish that on anyone.
That also doesn't give him a pass to be a rude elitist, especially if he claims to honor the purist Trek ideals. Debating ship design or visual appearances is one thing... ignoring infinite diversity in infinite combinations just because you didn't like something is self-defeating, at best.
I am all for that version of Picard!
Why does all sci-fi have to be dark and gritty? Trek's not about that. And with so much dark and gritty sci fi out there, leave Trek alone. This is why Orville is doing so well...it's not dark and gritty.
Stand still and close your eyes, please.
Hahaha! You're a stitch!
That remains to be seen in the viewing numbers and what Fox will do with that knowledge. I hope it keeps going but three straight episodes it's down 4.6 million viewers and if it keeps bleeding numbers Discovery maybe our last hope!
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
Just let the Sisko go to the Discovery era, he'll solve the Klingon problem in 2 minutes, including the 1:58 needed to prepare the USS Ben Sisko's Mother****ing Pimp Hand:
I don't get all the hate for JJ since his movies really weren't that different when the previous movies that also tried to turn Kirk, Spock and Picard into idolized rockstars. But I guess it's having to do with "canon" - though since I only liked ToS - there really is no canon for me to begin with.
Since I didn't even like TNG and everything after (I mean sure there were some good episodes here and there, but still watered down), TRIBBLE is actually the least of my concerns - just wear protection when you watch it, since nowadays media has an obvious political agenda to brainwash you, and I'll leave it at that.