Trek always had its allegories but rarely were they in your face and blatantly one sided.
Did you not read what I posted, or have you simply never watched any TOS episodes?
(I'll excuse a youngling like yourself not quite getting "Friday's Child", as that was a critique of the way the Vietnam conflict was handled in the beginning, with both the US and the USSR trying to claim their hands were clean because all they were doing was giving one side weapons and advisors...)
> @captaincelestial said: > These days people like to substitute actual names for acronyms, for sure. Like KFC for Kentucky Fried Chicken (supposedly because some people freaked out over the word fried, but it was because the US state got greedy and wanted royalties from any company that uses their state name). > > The worst acronym I've seen was Windsor Family Credit Union (WFCU). They like having their initials boldly shown and lit on their buildings. Driving home from work late at night, it reads as something rather rude to their customers.
This would be an excuse if we refered to the other series the same way. No one uses the ST:TNG or ST:DS9 or ST:V or ST:E.
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.
Actually it's used a lot for the movies, and yes, people have used the ST: for Star Trek TV shows long before Discovery plopped onscreen, to synch with the movies.
So, yeah, Star Trek: Discovery should have gone the way Enterprise did before Star Trek: was tacked on to it, if it wanted to avoid the acronym ST:D.
> @captaincelestial said: > Actually it's used a lot for the movies, and yes, people have used the ST: for Star Trek TV shows long before Discovery plopped onscreen, to synch with the movies. > > So, yeah, Star Trek: Discovery should have gone the way Enterprise did before Star Trek: was tacked on to it, if it wanted to avoid the acronym ST:D.
I’ve not seen anyone use the ST even when they abbreviate the movies. TMP and WOK are what I see. For the TNG movies I mostly see people refer to them by their subtitles: Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis. I’ve never seen ST:G, ST:FC, ST:I or ST:N.
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.
Actually it's used a lot for the movies, and yes, people have used the ST: for Star Trek TV shows long before Discovery plopped onscreen, to synch with the movies.
So, yeah, Star Trek: Discovery should have gone the way Enterprise did before Star Trek: was tacked on to it, if it wanted to avoid the acronym ST:D.
Well, it would have been quite apt ;-)
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,434Community Moderator
I’ve not seen anyone use the ST even when they abbreviate the movies. TMP and WOK are what I see. For the TNG movies I mostly see people refer to them by their subtitles: Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis. I’ve never seen ST:G, ST:FC, ST:I or ST:N.
This.
I have never seen anyone tack on ST to anything until Discovery, except for the odd 2009 reference. I admit I sometimes use STV (to imply roman numeral 5) or ST5 to reference Final Frontier, but that's mostly because I can't remember what the shorthand is for that off the top of my head in that moment. But I have never seen anyone refer to TOS as ST:TOS, or DS9 as ST:DS9. Its only been with Discovery that people tack on ST, and 9 times out of 10... its being used in a negative connotation because of what ELSE those three letters in THAT PARTICULAR order mean.
If Discovery like the FASA games, I'd have loved it...but all we got was fetish convention klingons and an annoying main character, ugly ships and an apparent contempt for TOS.
I’ve not seen anyone use the ST even when they abbreviate the movies. TMP and WOK are what I see. For the TNG movies I mostly see people refer to them by their subtitles: Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis. I’ve never seen ST:G, ST:FC, ST:I or ST:N.
This.
I have never seen anyone tack on ST to anything until Discovery, except for the odd 2009 reference. I admit I sometimes use STV (to imply roman numeral 5) or ST5 to reference Final Frontier, but that's mostly because I can't remember what the shorthand is for that off the top of my head in that moment. But I have never seen anyone refer to TOS as ST:TOS, or DS9 as ST:DS9. Its only been with Discovery that people tack on ST, and 9 times out of 10... its being used in a negative connotation because of what ELSE those three letters in THAT PARTICULAR order mean.
It's been used for the movies. Star Trek: Discovery would have done better if it had went for Discovery, like Enterprise before. Adding the Star Trek: made the the acronym ST:D easy, regardless if the show was much beloved or not.
Of course, short forms is very common in Star Trek. Like TOS, DS9, VOY, ENT, and of course DIS. Discovery actively encourages people to dis them.
Then again, Disco is not looked with great light in North America, considering that's what the short lived dance craze from the late '70s and early '80s is called.
CBS Marketing should have had a chat with the producers for Star Trek: Discovery before they picked the name of the program.
> @captaincelestial said:
> Actually it's used a lot for the movies, and yes, people have used the ST: for Star Trek TV shows long before Discovery plopped onscreen, to synch with the movies.
>
> So, yeah, Star Trek: Discovery should have gone the way Enterprise did before Star Trek: was tacked on to it, if it wanted to avoid the acronym ST:D.
I’ve not seen anyone use the ST even when they abbreviate the movies. TMP and WOK are what I see. For the TNG movies I mostly see people refer to them by their subtitles: Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis. I’ve never seen ST:G, ST:FC, ST:I or ST:N.
I'm sorry you never saw those short forms before. Yes, when the TOS movies were in full swing, ST: was put in front of movies and the TV series. ST:TNG, for example. When DS9 came out, it was at the same time as Seaquest DSV (Steven Spielberg produced submarine series).
Since Stephen Spielberg was a huge name in Hollywood, especially back then, ST:DS9 was used to help distinguish Star Trek: DS9 from Seaquest DSV (which is short for Deep Sea Vessel). Later on, the DSV was replaced with 2032, so that opened the doors to just using DS9 for more current fans of the show.
Just because you don't know or remember ST:DS9 and the like, I will use your three letter short form to make you happy.
I’ve not seen anyone use the ST even when they abbreviate the movies. TMP and WOK are what I see. For the TNG movies I mostly see people refer to them by their subtitles: Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis. I’ve never seen ST:G, ST:FC, ST:I or ST:N.
This.
I have never seen anyone tack on ST to anything until Discovery, except for the odd 2009 reference. I admit I sometimes use STV (to imply roman numeral 5) or ST5 to reference Final Frontier, but that's mostly because I can't remember what the shorthand is for that off the top of my head in that moment. But I have never seen anyone refer to TOS as ST:TOS, or DS9 as ST:DS9. Its only been with Discovery that people tack on ST, and 9 times out of 10... its being used in a negative connotation because of what ELSE those three letters in THAT PARTICULAR order mean.
It's been used for the movies. Star Trek: Discovery would have done better if it had went for Discovery, like Enterprise before. Adding the Star Trek: made the the acronym ST:D easy, regardless if the show was much beloved or not.
Of course, short forms is very common in Star Trek. Like TOS, DS9, VOY, ENT, and of course DIS. Discovery actively encourages people to dis them.
Then again, Disco is not looked with great light in North America, considering that's what the short lived dance craze from the late '70s and early '80s is called.
CBS Marketing should have had a chat with the producers for Star Trek: Discovery before they picked the name of the program.
They probably wanted to avoid just plain "Discovery" to differentiate it from the Discovery channel, especially in light of the fact that they were embroiled in an aggressive and very unpopular court battle with Axanar (and by extension the entire fanfilm community) at the time. It would have been a rather unfavorable irony in the minds of many potential viewers.
> @captaincelestial said: > I'm sorry you never saw those short forms before. Yes, when the TOS movies were in full swing, ST: was put in front of movies and the TV series. ST:TNG, for example. When DS9 came out, it was at the same time as Seaquest DSV (Steven Spielberg produced submarine series). > > Since Stephen Spielberg was a huge name in Hollywood, especially back then, ST:DS9 was used to help distinguish Star Trek: DS9 from Seaquest DSV (which is short for Deep Sea Vessel). Later on, the DSV was replaced with 2032, so that opened the doors to just using DS9 for more current fans of the show. > > Just because you don't know or remember ST:DS9 and the like, I will use your three letter short form to make you happy. > > DIS, DIS, DIS! > > There you go
I remember Seaquest very well. As a Jaws fan hearing Spielberg and Roy Scheider teaming up to go underwater was 1000% in my wheelhouse. The disappointment was major. I tried to watch it again on Peacock. Yikes. However I don’t see how DS9 would change its abbreviation because of a show that came out 9 months after it did and was losing its time slot against Murder She Wrote and Lois and Clark. It was on the chopping block after the first season and again after the second season.
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.
Seaquest is an interesting case that parallels Star Trek in genre-jumping, though on a smaller scale.
The DSV version was trying to harden their sci-fi by concentrating on real marine biology and oceanography centered plots whenever possible (though it often was a bit off-kilter), then jumped the shark and dumped all of that in the 2032 version for a sort of underwater space-opera style action romp that occasionally touched on soft sci-fi issues and even less than that on the hard science issues the show started with.
Similarly, the various Star Trek series (not the movies) spent decades as soft sci-fi then made an abrupt about-face in 2009 and has been solidly in space opera since.
> @phoenixc#0738 said: > Seaquest is an interesting case that parallels Star Trek in genre-jumping, though on a smaller scale. > > The DSV version was trying to harden their sci-fi by concentrating on real marine biology and oceanography centered plots whenever possible (though it often was a bit off-kilter), then jumped the shark and dumped all of that in the 2032 version for a sort of underwater space-opera style action romp that occasionally touched on soft sci-fi issues and even less than that on the hard science issues the show started with. > > Similarly, the various Star Trek series (not the movies) spent decades as soft sci-fi then made an abrupt about-face in 2009 and has been solidly in space opera since.
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.
> @phoenixc#0738 said:
> Seaquest is an interesting case that parallels Star Trek in genre-jumping, though on a smaller scale.
>
> The DSV version was trying to harden their sci-fi by concentrating on real marine biology and oceanography centered plots whenever possible (though it often was a bit off-kilter), then jumped the shark and dumped all of that in the 2032 version for a sort of underwater space-opera style action romp that occasionally touched on soft sci-fi issues and even less than that on the hard science issues the show started with.
>
> Similarly, the various Star Trek series (not the movies) spent decades as soft sci-fi then made an abrupt about-face in 2009 and has been solidly in space opera since.
You are right in that I forgot that Seaquest's switch to space opera was earlier than the name change.
It did not go "full Star Trek" though since it did not turn primarily soft sci-fi, rather it went more Star Wars or Buck Rodgers or one of the other space operas. The only space opera Trek back then was most of the movies and those are far outnumbered in total hours by the various series.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,434Community Moderator
I feel that season 1 of seaQuest was solid. But some idiot behind the scenes decided the show needed a soft reboot every season, and we only got 2.5 seasons out of it. The 2032 season never even finished. Here's how I see seaQuest seasons.
science!
sci-fi
build up to war
I liked how they tried to inject real science into season one, and some of the characters were likeable. Then for season 2 they ditched most of the cast and tried to revamp itself for a more sci-fi audience. Then they revamped again! Although I kinda liked how Michael Ironside played a career navy man out of his element in his short tenure as Captain Hudson. Going from commanding a warship to commanding a research vessel was a big switch for him, and his more military discipline style clashed at times with the established crew of seaQuest, who were used to Captain Bridger's more casual, science style.
Also if I recall, DSV stood for Deep Submergence Vehicle.
Honestly if the show was handled a lot better, it would have rivaled Star Trek IMO.
I'm actually able to mock up a season 1 seaQuest uniform in game with the Enterprise uniform. Still wanting to tweak the pants a bit, and haven't really found something that fits the season 2/3 uniforms. Its those dang buckle bits on the shoulders that are bugging me.
> @rattler2 said: > I feel that season 1 of seaQuest was solid. But some idiot behind the scenes decided the show needed a soft reboot every season, and we only got 2.5 seasons out of it. The 2032 season never even finished. Here's how I see seaQuest seasons.* science! > * sci-fi > * build up to war > > I liked how they tried to inject real science into season one, and some of the characters were likeable. Then for season 2 they ditched most of the cast and tried to revamp itself for a more sci-fi audience. Then they revamped again! Although I kinda liked how Michael Ironside played a career navy man out of his element in his short tenure as Captain Hudson. Going from commanding a warship to commanding a research vessel was a big switch for him, and his more military discipline style clashed at times with the established crew of seaQuest, who were used to Captain Bridger's more casual, science style. > > Also if I recall, DSV stood for Deep Submergence Vehicle. > > Honestly if the show was handled a lot better, it would have rivaled Star Trek IMO. > I'm actually able to mock up a season 1 seaQuest uniform in game with the Enterprise uniform. Still wanting to tweak the pants a bit, and haven't really found something that fits the season 2/3 uniforms. Its those dang buckle bits on the shoulders that are bugging me.
They felt the need to change it up after every season because the ratings were poor. When your big sci-fi show with Steven Spielberg’s name attached is losing to Murder She Wrote you got to try some new things.
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.
> @rattler2 said:
> I feel that season 1 of seaQuest was solid. But some idiot behind the scenes decided the show needed a soft reboot every season, and we only got 2.5 seasons out of it. The 2032 season never even finished. Here's how I see seaQuest seasons.* science!
> * sci-fi
> * build up to war
>
> I liked how they tried to inject real science into season one, and some of the characters were likeable. Then for season 2 they ditched most of the cast and tried to revamp itself for a more sci-fi audience. Then they revamped again! Although I kinda liked how Michael Ironside played a career navy man out of his element in his short tenure as Captain Hudson. Going from commanding a warship to commanding a research vessel was a big switch for him, and his more military discipline style clashed at times with the established crew of seaQuest, who were used to Captain Bridger's more casual, science style.
>
> Also if I recall, DSV stood for Deep Submergence Vehicle.
>
> Honestly if the show was handled a lot better, it would have rivaled Star Trek IMO.
> I'm actually able to mock up a season 1 seaQuest uniform in game with the Enterprise uniform. Still wanting to tweak the pants a bit, and haven't really found something that fits the season 2/3 uniforms. Its those dang buckle bits on the shoulders that are bugging me.
They felt the need to change it up after every season because the ratings were poor. When your big sci-fi show with Steven Spielberg’s name attached is losing to Murder She Wrote you got to try some new things.
Jumping the shark every season is something SeaQuest has in common with DSC. In SeaQuest's case it was the ratings issue (though that was more about bad schedule placement than the show itself) and with DSC it is more about damage control and trying to get more of the core fans back after Moonves's stick-in-the-eye to them.
Maybe DSC will stop the jumping in fourth season unless there is a strong element of disjointed sequelitis to it as well. A lot of cable shows suffered from that at first when arcs became the next big thing because they treated each season as a separate story instead of threads in a series-long arc. Some of them did that so badly that they felt more like an anthology that just happened to have the same characters rather than a single evolving story (unfortunately DSC is very very close to that level so far, hopefully it gets itself sorted before the end of the series).
> @phoenixc#0738 said: > Jumping the shark every season is something SeaQuest has in common with DSC. In SeaQuest's case it was the ratings issue (though that was more about bad schedule placement than the show itself) and with DSC it is more about damage control and trying to get more of the core fans back after Moonves's stick-in-the-eye to them. > > Maybe DSC will stop the jumping in fourth season unless there is a strong element of disjointed sequelitis to it as well. A lot of cable shows suffered from that at first when arcs became the next big thing because they treated each season as a separate story instead of threads in a series-long arc. Some of them did that so badly that they felt more like an anthology that just happened to have the same characters rather than a single evolving story (unfortunately DSC is very very close to that level so far, hopefully it gets itself sorted before the end of the series).
What was the jumping the shark moment for Discovery season 2?
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.
> @phoenixc#0738 said:
> Jumping the shark every season is something SeaQuest has in common with DSC. In SeaQuest's case it was the ratings issue (though that was more about bad schedule placement than the show itself) and with DSC it is more about damage control and trying to get more of the core fans back after Moonves's stick-in-the-eye to them.
>
> Maybe DSC will stop the jumping in fourth season unless there is a strong element of disjointed sequelitis to it as well. A lot of cable shows suffered from that at first when arcs became the next big thing because they treated each season as a separate story instead of threads in a series-long arc. Some of them did that so badly that they felt more like an anthology that just happened to have the same characters rather than a single evolving story (unfortunately DSC is very very close to that level so far, hopefully it gets itself sorted before the end of the series).
What was the jumping the shark moment for Discovery season 2?
At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style.
Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other.
Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future.
And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
> @phoenixc#0738 said: > At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style. > > Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other. > > Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future. > > And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
So “jumping the shark” is when a show’s rating lag and they decide to do some sort of event to drum up ratings. It gets its name from an episode of Happy Days where The Fonze jumps over a shark. It’s not about a main character change. Lots of things lead to a main character change. For Seaquest it was because Scheider didn’t want to do the type of show the producers and network wanted so he left. It’s also not adding characters and changing things. By your definition when Riker grew a beard was TNG jumping the shark, which it’s not. Discovery’s season one ending wasn’t a “shark jump” or even a “Deus Ex Machina”. Deus Ex machina is when something comes out of left field and solves the problem. Burnham’s decision to not blow up the Klingon Homeworld is a mirror to her decision to fire on the Klingons first in the pilot episode. Had Q showed up and snapped his fingers and everything was solved that would be Deus Ex Machina.
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.
> @phoenixc#0738 said:
> At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style.
>
> Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other.
>
> Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future.
>
> And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
So “jumping the shark” is when a show’s rating lag and they decide to do some sort of event to drum up ratings. It gets its name from an episode of Happy Days where The Fonze jumps over a shark. It’s not about a main character change. Lots of things lead to a main character change. For Seaquest it was because Scheider didn’t want to do the type of show the producers and network wanted so he left. It’s also not adding characters and changing things. By your definition when Riker grew a beard was TNG jumping the shark, which it’s not.
Discovery’s season one ending wasn’t a “shark jump” or even a “Deus Ex Machina”. Deus Ex machina is when something comes out of left field and solves the problem. Burnham’s decision to not blow up the Klingon Homeworld is a mirror to her decision to fire on the Klingons first in the pilot episode. Had Q showed up and snapped his fingers and everything was solved that would be Deus Ex Machina.
Jumping the shark can actually be several different kinds of damage control. And the shark jump in Happy Days did indeed herald a change of focus, the show was about the Cunningham family up until then and it shifted to be about Fonzie as the main character after that. It isn't actually necessary to get rid of people and replace them with others, it can be all the same people if the rest of it happens.
Also, if you didn't notice I did mention that it was in the fuzzy area where a classic shark jump and season-sequelitis (which planning a show season by season instead of multi-season arcs sometimes causes) overlap. Whatever you prefer to call it the result is the same: a very choppy lack of flow where every season almost looks/feels like they belong to different shows. It is quite a bit like Blake's Seven in that regard (and a few others).
Also, I said "near deus ex machina". I am aware that it was not completely out of nowhere (though as plots go it was close), but the writing has a very heavy sense that they plotted themselves into a corner they could not get out of fast enough to suit them so they thought up a deus ex machina just far enough ahead of time to feather in slightly, but only slightly. And yes, they could have planned it well before hand, but it is irrelevant since if that is the case the bungled it to the point were it gave that impression anyway.
No matter how you look at it, pulling a Star Wars like planet killer bomb out of their hindquarters and planting it on the Klingon homeworld like they did is a form of deus ex machina, especially the way it forced peace between the nations at the absolute height of the hostilities AND unity for the Klingons in one fell swoop.
The Discovery make up team did really well on some of the races, while Klingons were a mixed bag, they did really well on the Andorians, Tellarites, Terrans, Kelpians, Saurian and Barzans I hope we get those DSC redesigned races as well as Kalpians added to the playable roster.
The Discovery make up team did really well on some of the races, while Klingons were a mixed bag, they did really well on the Andorians, Tellarites, Terrans, Kelpians, Saurian and Barzans I hope we get those DSC redesigned races as well as Kalpians added to the playable roster.
The DIS-Andorians and Tellarites not yet being playable is a missed opportunity. Yup, we barely see them on S1/S2 of the show, but they're still founding-races of the federation.
The DIS-klingons finally being playable is good.
Barzans... were originally throwaway-aliens of the week and seeing one as a major cast-member was a pleasant surprise.
Kelpien... Saru is of course the exception, given the timeframe of the federation DIS-start it sadly doesn't make sense as a playable race.
The Discovery make up team did really well on some of the races, while Klingons were a mixed bag, they did really well on the Andorians, Tellarites, Terrans, Kelpians, Saurian and Barzans I hope we get those DSC redesigned races as well as Kalpians added to the playable roster.
The DIS-Andorians and Tellarites not yet being playable is a missed opportunity. Yup, we barely see them on S1/S2 of the show, but they're still founding-races of the federation.
The DIS-klingons finally being playable is good.
Barzans... were originally throwaway-aliens of the week and seeing one as a major cast-member was a pleasant surprise.
Kelpien... Saru is of course the exception, given the timeframe of the federation DIS-start it sadly doesn't make sense as a playable race.
Yeah but with Kelpians you can add them to the main Starfleet roster instead of DSC since they joined the Federation in the 25th century and we should also have Discovery Aenar since all Aenar are basically albino and blind Andorians appearance wise aside from the skin tone and eyes you wouldn't have to change the model much.
0
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,434Community Moderator
At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending...
To be fair... it was clearly an act of desperation on the part of the Federation to even attempt that, and Discovery's unique capabilities allowed for it.
There's something similar in the game Wing Commander III: Heart of the Tiger, where you pretty much do something similar to what the Federation threatened to do. Deploy a special bomb to take advantage of a planet's nature.
In WC3, its pretty much the tail end of the Terran-Kilrathi war, that had been raging for maybe 30 years by this point. Confed is losing. The player is assigned to TCS Victory, an older carrier, and ends up tapped for a desperate plan to win the war for the Confederation. First up was Admiral Tolwyn's TCS Behemoth, which is basically a mini Death Star. Kilrathi infiltrator ensured the incomplete dreadnought was destroyed. Then the player learns about his old friend Taggart's plan, which involves something called the Temblor Bomb, a weapon specifically designed for use on the geologically unstable planet Kilrah. The plan is for a starfighter to drop The Bomb into a designated fault, and let the planet literally shake itself apart. Plan works (canon ending), taking out not only Imperial leadership, but the majority of the fleet that was massing ahead of a major strike against Earth that would have been the death blow of the Confederation. The Kilrathi promptly surrender to the player character, Luke Skywa... I mean Col. Christopher Blair.
(Mark Hamil plays Blair in WC3, 4, and Prophecy.)
> @phoenixc#0738 said:
> At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style.
>
> Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other.
>
> Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future.
>
> And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
So “jumping the shark” is when a show’s rating lag and they decide to do some sort of event to drum up ratings. It gets its name from an episode of Happy Days where The Fonze jumps over a shark. It’s not about a main character change. Lots of things lead to a main character change. For Seaquest it was because Scheider didn’t want to do the type of show the producers and network wanted so he left. It’s also not adding characters and changing things. By your definition when Riker grew a beard was TNG jumping the shark, which it’s not.
Discovery’s season one ending wasn’t a “shark jump” or even a “Deus Ex Machina”. Deus Ex machina is when something comes out of left field and solves the problem. Burnham’s decision to not blow up the Klingon Homeworld is a mirror to her decision to fire on the Klingons first in the pilot episode. Had Q showed up and snapped his fingers and everything was solved that would be Deus Ex Machina.
Jumping the shark can actually be several different kinds of damage control. And the shark jump in Happy Days did indeed herald a change of focus, the show was about the Cunningham family up until then and it shifted to be about Fonzie as the main character after that. It isn't actually necessary to get rid of people and replace them with others, it can be all the same people if the rest of it happens.
Also, if you didn't notice I did mention that it was in the fuzzy area where a classic shark jump and season-sequelitis (which planning a show season by season instead of multi-season arcs sometimes causes) overlap. Whatever you prefer to call it the result is the same: a very choppy lack of flow where every season almost looks/feels like they belong to different shows. It is quite a bit like Blake's Seven in that regard (and a few others).
Also, I said "near deus ex machina". I am aware that it was not completely out of nowhere (though as plots go it was close), but the writing has a very heavy sense that they plotted themselves into a corner they could not get out of fast enough to suit them so they thought up a deus ex machina just far enough ahead of time to feather in slightly, but only slightly. And yes, they could have planned it well before hand, but it is irrelevant since if that is the case the bungled it to the point were it gave that impression anyway.
No matter how you look at it, pulling a Star Wars like planet killer bomb out of their hindquarters and planting it on the Klingon homeworld like they did is a form of deus ex machina, especially the way it forced peace between the nations at the absolute height of the hostilities AND unity for the Klingons in one fell swoop.
But it's not a Deus ex Machina or a near Deus ex Machina. It has to be impossible or improbable. Are you saying it's impossible or improbable that Star Fleet would have an explosive device? Are you saying it's impossible or improbable that Star Fleet would have a device capable of destroying a planet (especially in a Star Fleet that General Order 24: An order to destroy all life on an entire planet, given only if a commanding officer deems that a society poses a clear and present danger to the Federation.) exists? Did the bomb by itself forced peace or was it the decision to give it to L'rell what caused the peace?
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.
> @phoenixc#0738 said:
> At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style.
>
> Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other.
>
> Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future.
>
> And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
So “jumping the shark” is when a show’s rating lag and they decide to do some sort of event to drum up ratings. It gets its name from an episode of Happy Days where The Fonze jumps over a shark. It’s not about a main character change. Lots of things lead to a main character change. For Seaquest it was because Scheider didn’t want to do the type of show the producers and network wanted so he left. It’s also not adding characters and changing things. By your definition when Riker grew a beard was TNG jumping the shark, which it’s not.
Discovery’s season one ending wasn’t a “shark jump” or even a “Deus Ex Machina”. Deus Ex machina is when something comes out of left field and solves the problem. Burnham’s decision to not blow up the Klingon Homeworld is a mirror to her decision to fire on the Klingons first in the pilot episode. Had Q showed up and snapped his fingers and everything was solved that would be Deus Ex Machina.
Jumping the shark can actually be several different kinds of damage control. And the shark jump in Happy Days did indeed herald a change of focus, the show was about the Cunningham family up until then and it shifted to be about Fonzie as the main character after that. It isn't actually necessary to get rid of people and replace them with others, it can be all the same people if the rest of it happens.
Also, if you didn't notice I did mention that it was in the fuzzy area where a classic shark jump and season-sequelitis (which planning a show season by season instead of multi-season arcs sometimes causes) overlap. Whatever you prefer to call it the result is the same: a very choppy lack of flow where every season almost looks/feels like they belong to different shows. It is quite a bit like Blake's Seven in that regard (and a few others).
Also, I said "near deus ex machina". I am aware that it was not completely out of nowhere (though as plots go it was close), but the writing has a very heavy sense that they plotted themselves into a corner they could not get out of fast enough to suit them so they thought up a deus ex machina just far enough ahead of time to feather in slightly, but only slightly. And yes, they could have planned it well before hand, but it is irrelevant since if that is the case the bungled it to the point were it gave that impression anyway.
No matter how you look at it, pulling a Star Wars like planet killer bomb out of their hindquarters and planting it on the Klingon homeworld like they did is a form of deus ex machina, especially the way it forced peace between the nations at the absolute height of the hostilities AND unity for the Klingons in one fell swoop.
But it's not a Deus ex Machina or a near Deus ex Machina. It has to be impossible or improbable. Are you saying it's impossible or improbable that Star Fleet would have an explosive device? Are you saying it's impossible or improbable that Star Fleet would have a device capable of destroying a planet (especially in a Star Fleet that General Order 24: An order to destroy all life on an entire planet, given only if a commanding officer deems that a society poses a clear and present danger to the Federation.) exists? Did the bomb by itself forced peace or was it the decision to give it to L'rell what caused the peace?
A Deus ex Machina is more about the writers than the characters in the story (though obviously it effects both), it is when the writers write themselves into a corner and cannot figure out how to pull the story out of it (or in this case how to pull the story out in only two segments plus a few minutes of addition to a third (at the end of 13). It is a plotting level issue, not really an in-setting issue.
All signs point to the season originally ending with episode 13, the standard half-season length "season" commonly used by cable-only series, most likely either at the point they went into the spore network (as a cliff-hanger) or just after they came out and were in the "where are we" phase and probably a short hook for the next season (in fact, they may not have even added anything to the end of 13, the next season may have been meant to start with Cornwall taking over but go in a different direction with the war going on for at least another season or more).
Then late in the production phase they announced that they were extending the season by two segments, and the idea that they were executing a damage control maneuver by doing that is further supported by the fact that while everything else was foreshadowed to a fair thee well nothing about segments 14 and 15 was.
As for the technological thing, sure they could do General Order 24 easily enough. According to Roddenberry, GO24 is a case of destroying all life (or at least intelligent life) on a planet over about twelve hours time. Considering they supposedly have dozens of photon torpedoes and each of those has a warhead strength greater than the Tsar Bomba the USSR detonated if their warhead tanks are filled all the way, along with phasers that can scan along and cause that creeping disintegration seen in a lot of the episodes, that order would be technically quite easy to carry out if the ship did not have to worry about enemy ships the whole time.
A planetary biosphere has some resilience but probably not enough to take that kind of punishment without triggering mass extinctions. A tectonic weapon on the other hand probably would not do what the writers thought it would do, and furthermore the threat is more likely to divide the Klingon houses more than unite them since if the capital world was destroyed or badly damaged it would not do anything much to all the great houses who were based offworld except break the current governmental framework and give them a better shot at landing on the top of the heap as the government reforms.
But as I said, a Deus ex Machina is a writer-side plotting issue reflected into the story. It does not matter if the Federation has the technology for a tectonic world-killer weapon or not any more than whether a Greek god had the ability to fix the stuck plot in ancient times, it is the fact that the writers had to suddenly resort to that literary ejector seat to get out of the corner they put themselves in (or get out in time to have the next season something completely different in the case of DSC).
what is good about discovery. the story, the characters, the sets, basicaly everything.
what is bad about discovery... Enterprise tried so hard to make the ships in it look at least a little like TOS ships with rounded edges and cylindrical nacelles so that it made sence for the style evolution and then Discovery craps all over that by having these weird hyper angular looking ships suddenly right before everything goes back to smooth lines again for TOS and TNG as well as the 29th Century ships we see.
like Enterprise to VOY the ships are all like sleek 1950s and 1960s fighter jets but Discovery it's like they went from sleek fighter jets in Enterprise to space Cybertrucks in Discovery, i'll give them credit where it's due their version of kirks enterprise is my favorite version of it because it is done in the style of the NX and i can imagine it looking like that in the timeline but next to every other ship in discovery it looks so out of place.
i just wish the guys making discovery had at least tried to make the ships look like they fit between ENT and TOS instead of making a new style that destroys all the effort that Enterprise did to make their ships look the way they did
I'm not a discovery fan. I've watched every season hoping for it to get better and it just doesn't. With that said I can see why STO is adding basically exclusively Discovery stuff. It's the active series at the moment so they are trying to capitalize on that. Additionally, there is no new content for the previous shows and they have already released the majority of the ships from past star trek series so it's basically discovery or in house stuff.
and they have already released the majority of the ships from past star trek series so it's basically discovery or in house stuff.
oh really? then where is my warp delta, 22nd century Intrepid and ENT shuttlepod? where are my 22nd century andorian uniforms and ground weapons? and i want the 22nd Century MACO pistol too? and the huge number of Vulcan ships that were in ENT that could be added also there are designs out there for a ENT Era version of the Daedalus class that i would love to have but NOOOOOOOOOO Enterprise never gets any love in this game
Comments
(I'll excuse a youngling like yourself not quite getting "Friday's Child", as that was a critique of the way the Vietnam conflict was handled in the beginning, with both the US and the USSR trying to claim their hands were clean because all they were doing was giving one side weapons and advisors...)
> These days people like to substitute actual names for acronyms, for sure. Like KFC for Kentucky Fried Chicken (supposedly because some people freaked out over the word fried, but it was because the US state got greedy and wanted royalties from any company that uses their state name).
>
> The worst acronym I've seen was Windsor Family Credit Union (WFCU). They like having their initials boldly shown and lit on their buildings. Driving home from work late at night, it reads as something rather rude to their customers.
This would be an excuse if we refered to the other series the same way. No one uses the ST:TNG or ST:DS9 or ST:V or ST:E.
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.
So, yeah, Star Trek: Discovery should have gone the way Enterprise did before Star Trek: was tacked on to it, if it wanted to avoid the acronym ST:D.
> Actually it's used a lot for the movies, and yes, people have used the ST: for Star Trek TV shows long before Discovery plopped onscreen, to synch with the movies.
>
> So, yeah, Star Trek: Discovery should have gone the way Enterprise did before Star Trek: was tacked on to it, if it wanted to avoid the acronym ST:D.
I’ve not seen anyone use the ST even when they abbreviate the movies. TMP and WOK are what I see. For the TNG movies I mostly see people refer to them by their subtitles: Generations, First Contact, Insurrection and Nemesis. I’ve never seen ST:G, ST:FC, ST:I or ST:N.
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.
Well, it would have been quite apt ;-)
This.
I have never seen anyone tack on ST to anything until Discovery, except for the odd 2009 reference. I admit I sometimes use STV (to imply roman numeral 5) or ST5 to reference Final Frontier, but that's mostly because I can't remember what the shorthand is for that off the top of my head in that moment. But I have never seen anyone refer to TOS as ST:TOS, or DS9 as ST:DS9. Its only been with Discovery that people tack on ST, and 9 times out of 10... its being used in a negative connotation because of what ELSE those three letters in THAT PARTICULAR order mean.
THIS would have been much better
and
It's been used for the movies. Star Trek: Discovery would have done better if it had went for Discovery, like Enterprise before. Adding the Star Trek: made the the acronym ST:D easy, regardless if the show was much beloved or not.
Of course, short forms is very common in Star Trek. Like TOS, DS9, VOY, ENT, and of course DIS. Discovery actively encourages people to dis them.
Then again, Disco is not looked with great light in North America, considering that's what the short lived dance craze from the late '70s and early '80s is called.
CBS Marketing should have had a chat with the producers for Star Trek: Discovery before they picked the name of the program.
I'm sorry you never saw those short forms before. Yes, when the TOS movies were in full swing, ST: was put in front of movies and the TV series. ST:TNG, for example. When DS9 came out, it was at the same time as Seaquest DSV (Steven Spielberg produced submarine series).
Since Stephen Spielberg was a huge name in Hollywood, especially back then, ST:DS9 was used to help distinguish Star Trek: DS9 from Seaquest DSV (which is short for Deep Sea Vessel). Later on, the DSV was replaced with 2032, so that opened the doors to just using DS9 for more current fans of the show.
Just because you don't know or remember ST:DS9 and the like, I will use your three letter short form to make you happy.
DIS, DIS, DIS!
There you go
They probably wanted to avoid just plain "Discovery" to differentiate it from the Discovery channel, especially in light of the fact that they were embroiled in an aggressive and very unpopular court battle with Axanar (and by extension the entire fanfilm community) at the time. It would have been a rather unfavorable irony in the minds of many potential viewers.
> I'm sorry you never saw those short forms before. Yes, when the TOS movies were in full swing, ST: was put in front of movies and the TV series. ST:TNG, for example. When DS9 came out, it was at the same time as Seaquest DSV (Steven Spielberg produced submarine series).
>
> Since Stephen Spielberg was a huge name in Hollywood, especially back then, ST:DS9 was used to help distinguish Star Trek: DS9 from Seaquest DSV (which is short for Deep Sea Vessel). Later on, the DSV was replaced with 2032, so that opened the doors to just using DS9 for more current fans of the show.
>
> Just because you don't know or remember ST:DS9 and the like, I will use your three letter short form to make you happy.
>
> DIS, DIS, DIS!
>
> There you go
I remember Seaquest very well. As a Jaws fan hearing Spielberg and Roy Scheider teaming up to go underwater was 1000% in my wheelhouse. The disappointment was major. I tried to watch it again on Peacock. Yikes.
However I don’t see how DS9 would change its abbreviation because of a show that came out 9 months after it did and was losing its time slot against Murder She Wrote and Lois and Clark. It was on the chopping block after the first season and again after the second season.
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.
The DSV version was trying to harden their sci-fi by concentrating on real marine biology and oceanography centered plots whenever possible (though it often was a bit off-kilter), then jumped the shark and dumped all of that in the 2032 version for a sort of underwater space-opera style action romp that occasionally touched on soft sci-fi issues and even less than that on the hard science issues the show started with.
Similarly, the various Star Trek series (not the movies) spent decades as soft sci-fi then made an abrupt about-face in 2009 and has been solidly in space opera since.
> Seaquest is an interesting case that parallels Star Trek in genre-jumping, though on a smaller scale.
>
> The DSV version was trying to harden their sci-fi by concentrating on real marine biology and oceanography centered plots whenever possible (though it often was a bit off-kilter), then jumped the shark and dumped all of that in the 2032 version for a sort of underwater space-opera style action romp that occasionally touched on soft sci-fi issues and even less than that on the hard science issues the show started with.
>
> Similarly, the various Star Trek series (not the movies) spent decades as soft sci-fi then made an abrupt about-face in 2009 and has been solidly in space opera since.
You missed a step. Seaquest tried to go full Star Trek in season 2. Scheider railed against this change:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-xpm-1994-09-13-9409130211-story,amp.html
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.
You are right in that I forgot that Seaquest's switch to space opera was earlier than the name change.
It did not go "full Star Trek" though since it did not turn primarily soft sci-fi, rather it went more Star Wars or Buck Rodgers or one of the other space operas. The only space opera Trek back then was most of the movies and those are far outnumbered in total hours by the various series.
- science!
- sci-fi
- build up to war
I liked how they tried to inject real science into season one, and some of the characters were likeable. Then for season 2 they ditched most of the cast and tried to revamp itself for a more sci-fi audience. Then they revamped again! Although I kinda liked how Michael Ironside played a career navy man out of his element in his short tenure as Captain Hudson. Going from commanding a warship to commanding a research vessel was a big switch for him, and his more military discipline style clashed at times with the established crew of seaQuest, who were used to Captain Bridger's more casual, science style.Also if I recall, DSV stood for Deep Submergence Vehicle.
Honestly if the show was handled a lot better, it would have rivaled Star Trek IMO.
I'm actually able to mock up a season 1 seaQuest uniform in game with the Enterprise uniform. Still wanting to tweak the pants a bit, and haven't really found something that fits the season 2/3 uniforms. Its those dang buckle bits on the shoulders that are bugging me.
> I feel that season 1 of seaQuest was solid. But some idiot behind the scenes decided the show needed a soft reboot every season, and we only got 2.5 seasons out of it. The 2032 season never even finished. Here's how I see seaQuest seasons.* science!
> * sci-fi
> * build up to war
>
> I liked how they tried to inject real science into season one, and some of the characters were likeable. Then for season 2 they ditched most of the cast and tried to revamp itself for a more sci-fi audience. Then they revamped again! Although I kinda liked how Michael Ironside played a career navy man out of his element in his short tenure as Captain Hudson. Going from commanding a warship to commanding a research vessel was a big switch for him, and his more military discipline style clashed at times with the established crew of seaQuest, who were used to Captain Bridger's more casual, science style.
>
> Also if I recall, DSV stood for Deep Submergence Vehicle.
>
> Honestly if the show was handled a lot better, it would have rivaled Star Trek IMO.
> I'm actually able to mock up a season 1 seaQuest uniform in game with the Enterprise uniform. Still wanting to tweak the pants a bit, and haven't really found something that fits the season 2/3 uniforms. Its those dang buckle bits on the shoulders that are bugging me.
They felt the need to change it up after every season because the ratings were poor. When your big sci-fi show with Steven Spielberg’s name attached is losing to Murder She Wrote you got to try some new things.
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.
Jumping the shark every season is something SeaQuest has in common with DSC. In SeaQuest's case it was the ratings issue (though that was more about bad schedule placement than the show itself) and with DSC it is more about damage control and trying to get more of the core fans back after Moonves's stick-in-the-eye to them.
Maybe DSC will stop the jumping in fourth season unless there is a strong element of disjointed sequelitis to it as well. A lot of cable shows suffered from that at first when arcs became the next big thing because they treated each season as a separate story instead of threads in a series-long arc. Some of them did that so badly that they felt more like an anthology that just happened to have the same characters rather than a single evolving story (unfortunately DSC is very very close to that level so far, hopefully it gets itself sorted before the end of the series).
> Jumping the shark every season is something SeaQuest has in common with DSC. In SeaQuest's case it was the ratings issue (though that was more about bad schedule placement than the show itself) and with DSC it is more about damage control and trying to get more of the core fans back after Moonves's stick-in-the-eye to them.
>
> Maybe DSC will stop the jumping in fourth season unless there is a strong element of disjointed sequelitis to it as well. A lot of cable shows suffered from that at first when arcs became the next big thing because they treated each season as a separate story instead of threads in a series-long arc. Some of them did that so badly that they felt more like an anthology that just happened to have the same characters rather than a single evolving story (unfortunately DSC is very very close to that level so far, hopefully it gets itself sorted before the end of the series).
What was the jumping the shark moment for Discovery season 2?
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.
At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style.
Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other.
Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future.
And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
> At the end of season one they decided to quickly cancel the Klingon war with a near deus ex machina easy-button ending, then when they started up next season they did so with a large abrupt shift in story, highly significant changes in supporting cast (mainly Pike nearly stealing the show, and the heavy emphasis on Spock), and overall feel and style.
>
> Some argue that it was not a full classic shark jump because Burnham remained the main character despite all the changes around her, and there is definitely some merit to that view, but technically a shark jump in the sloppy way it is used nowadays does not necessarily require a change of main character, it can be a significant and unforeshadowed sudden shift in their circumstances coupled with other changes as long as there is a major shift in the way the story feels from one side of the jump to the other.
>
> Then at the second-to-third season join there is the even bigger sharkjump to the future.
>
> And yes, it is a sort of gray area between classic shark jump and anthology so it could be argued either way.
So “jumping the shark” is when a show’s rating lag and they decide to do some sort of event to drum up ratings. It gets its name from an episode of Happy Days where The Fonze jumps over a shark. It’s not about a main character change. Lots of things lead to a main character change. For Seaquest it was because Scheider didn’t want to do the type of show the producers and network wanted so he left. It’s also not adding characters and changing things. By your definition when Riker grew a beard was TNG jumping the shark, which it’s not.
Discovery’s season one ending wasn’t a “shark jump” or even a “Deus Ex Machina”. Deus Ex machina is when something comes out of left field and solves the problem. Burnham’s decision to not blow up the Klingon Homeworld is a mirror to her decision to fire on the Klingons first in the pilot episode. Had Q showed up and snapped his fingers and everything was solved that would be Deus Ex Machina.
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.
Jumping the shark can actually be several different kinds of damage control. And the shark jump in Happy Days did indeed herald a change of focus, the show was about the Cunningham family up until then and it shifted to be about Fonzie as the main character after that. It isn't actually necessary to get rid of people and replace them with others, it can be all the same people if the rest of it happens.
Also, if you didn't notice I did mention that it was in the fuzzy area where a classic shark jump and season-sequelitis (which planning a show season by season instead of multi-season arcs sometimes causes) overlap. Whatever you prefer to call it the result is the same: a very choppy lack of flow where every season almost looks/feels like they belong to different shows. It is quite a bit like Blake's Seven in that regard (and a few others).
Also, I said "near deus ex machina". I am aware that it was not completely out of nowhere (though as plots go it was close), but the writing has a very heavy sense that they plotted themselves into a corner they could not get out of fast enough to suit them so they thought up a deus ex machina just far enough ahead of time to feather in slightly, but only slightly. And yes, they could have planned it well before hand, but it is irrelevant since if that is the case the bungled it to the point were it gave that impression anyway.
No matter how you look at it, pulling a Star Wars like planet killer bomb out of their hindquarters and planting it on the Klingon homeworld like they did is a form of deus ex machina, especially the way it forced peace between the nations at the absolute height of the hostilities AND unity for the Klingons in one fell swoop.
The DIS-Andorians and Tellarites not yet being playable is a missed opportunity. Yup, we barely see them on S1/S2 of the show, but they're still founding-races of the federation.
The DIS-klingons finally being playable is good.
Barzans... were originally throwaway-aliens of the week and seeing one as a major cast-member was a pleasant surprise.
Kelpien... Saru is of course the exception, given the timeframe of the federation DIS-start it sadly doesn't make sense as a playable race.
Yeah but with Kelpians you can add them to the main Starfleet roster instead of DSC since they joined the Federation in the 25th century and we should also have Discovery Aenar since all Aenar are basically albino and blind Andorians appearance wise aside from the skin tone and eyes you wouldn't have to change the model much.
To be fair... it was clearly an act of desperation on the part of the Federation to even attempt that, and Discovery's unique capabilities allowed for it.
There's something similar in the game Wing Commander III: Heart of the Tiger, where you pretty much do something similar to what the Federation threatened to do. Deploy a special bomb to take advantage of a planet's nature.
In WC3, its pretty much the tail end of the Terran-Kilrathi war, that had been raging for maybe 30 years by this point. Confed is losing. The player is assigned to TCS Victory, an older carrier, and ends up tapped for a desperate plan to win the war for the Confederation. First up was Admiral Tolwyn's TCS Behemoth, which is basically a mini Death Star. Kilrathi infiltrator ensured the incomplete dreadnought was destroyed. Then the player learns about his old friend Taggart's plan, which involves something called the Temblor Bomb, a weapon specifically designed for use on the geologically unstable planet Kilrah. The plan is for a starfighter to drop The Bomb into a designated fault, and let the planet literally shake itself apart. Plan works (canon ending), taking out not only Imperial leadership, but the majority of the fleet that was massing ahead of a major strike against Earth that would have been the death blow of the Confederation. The Kilrathi promptly surrender to the player character, Luke Skywa... I mean Col. Christopher Blair.
(Mark Hamil plays Blair in WC3, 4, and Prophecy.)
But it's not a Deus ex Machina or a near Deus ex Machina. It has to be impossible or improbable. Are you saying it's impossible or improbable that Star Fleet would have an explosive device? Are you saying it's impossible or improbable that Star Fleet would have a device capable of destroying a planet (especially in a Star Fleet that General Order 24: An order to destroy all life on an entire planet, given only if a commanding officer deems that a society poses a clear and present danger to the Federation.) exists? Did the bomb by itself forced peace or was it the decision to give it to L'rell what caused the peace?
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.
A Deus ex Machina is more about the writers than the characters in the story (though obviously it effects both), it is when the writers write themselves into a corner and cannot figure out how to pull the story out of it (or in this case how to pull the story out in only two segments plus a few minutes of addition to a third (at the end of 13). It is a plotting level issue, not really an in-setting issue.
All signs point to the season originally ending with episode 13, the standard half-season length "season" commonly used by cable-only series, most likely either at the point they went into the spore network (as a cliff-hanger) or just after they came out and were in the "where are we" phase and probably a short hook for the next season (in fact, they may not have even added anything to the end of 13, the next season may have been meant to start with Cornwall taking over but go in a different direction with the war going on for at least another season or more).
Then late in the production phase they announced that they were extending the season by two segments, and the idea that they were executing a damage control maneuver by doing that is further supported by the fact that while everything else was foreshadowed to a fair thee well nothing about segments 14 and 15 was.
As for the technological thing, sure they could do General Order 24 easily enough. According to Roddenberry, GO24 is a case of destroying all life (or at least intelligent life) on a planet over about twelve hours time. Considering they supposedly have dozens of photon torpedoes and each of those has a warhead strength greater than the Tsar Bomba the USSR detonated if their warhead tanks are filled all the way, along with phasers that can scan along and cause that creeping disintegration seen in a lot of the episodes, that order would be technically quite easy to carry out if the ship did not have to worry about enemy ships the whole time.
A planetary biosphere has some resilience but probably not enough to take that kind of punishment without triggering mass extinctions. A tectonic weapon on the other hand probably would not do what the writers thought it would do, and furthermore the threat is more likely to divide the Klingon houses more than unite them since if the capital world was destroyed or badly damaged it would not do anything much to all the great houses who were based offworld except break the current governmental framework and give them a better shot at landing on the top of the heap as the government reforms.
But as I said, a Deus ex Machina is a writer-side plotting issue reflected into the story. It does not matter if the Federation has the technology for a tectonic world-killer weapon or not any more than whether a Greek god had the ability to fix the stuck plot in ancient times, it is the fact that the writers had to suddenly resort to that literary ejector seat to get out of the corner they put themselves in (or get out in time to have the next season something completely different in the case of DSC).
what is bad about discovery... Enterprise tried so hard to make the ships in it look at least a little like TOS ships with rounded edges and cylindrical nacelles so that it made sence for the style evolution and then Discovery craps all over that by having these weird hyper angular looking ships suddenly right before everything goes back to smooth lines again for TOS and TNG as well as the 29th Century ships we see.
like Enterprise to VOY the ships are all like sleek 1950s and 1960s fighter jets but Discovery it's like they went from sleek fighter jets in Enterprise to space Cybertrucks in Discovery, i'll give them credit where it's due their version of kirks enterprise is my favorite version of it because it is done in the style of the NX and i can imagine it looking like that in the timeline but next to every other ship in discovery it looks so out of place.
i just wish the guys making discovery had at least tried to make the ships look like they fit between ENT and TOS instead of making a new style that destroys all the effort that Enterprise did to make their ships look the way they did
oh really? then where is my warp delta, 22nd century Intrepid and ENT shuttlepod? where are my 22nd century andorian uniforms and ground weapons? and i want the 22nd Century MACO pistol too? and the huge number of Vulcan ships that were in ENT that could be added also there are designs out there for a ENT Era version of the Daedalus class that i would love to have but NOOOOOOOOOO Enterprise never gets any love in this game