Page 10 of 49

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:10 am
by Paul Walker
One of my friends came up with an interesting hypothesis (which I fervently hope is wrong). That the spores on Discovery end up creating / affecting sporestitian life forms (i.e. the Caretaker).

I also think that it's a prequel just now so that we don't get upset that starfleet is now at war with the klingons, and because the books have made a real comeback, and no-one wants to risk affecting their popularity.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:04 pm
by Madner Kami
That would be "sporocystian". The word "sporocystian", despite it's seemingly clear roots in "spore" and "cyst" is a non-word, a word without meaning, technobabble and I'd find it quite stupid to tie in Discovery with Voyager of all series in such a hamfisted way.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:40 pm
by cilantro
Paul Walker wrote:
I also think that it's a prequel just now so that we don't get upset that starfleet is now at war with the klingons, and because the books have made a real comeback, and no-one wants to risk affecting their popularity.
The more I think about it, the more I start to think that Discovery should've been set like a 100 years after TNG or something.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:15 am
by technobabbler
###One of my friends came up with an interesting hypothesis (which I fervently hope is wrong). That the spores on Discovery end up creating / affecting sporestitian life forms (i.e. the Caretaker).

given episode 4's propulsion subplot, I swear a write/showrunner is paying an homage to psychedelic shrooms.

###The more I think about it, the more I start to think that Discovery should've been set like a 100 years after TNG or something.

All the reason STD should be real-time years post-DS9/Voyager. Cameo of Seven of Nine in a Wrath of Khan Project Genesis-like top secret briefing.... exposition-technobabble--here is the result of our research on the Caretaker: shroom-warp! Line drop that Engineer Stammits did his post-doc overseen by 7 of 9.

The Klingon subplot revolves around Tkuvma wanting to take out the Federation because post-Romulan homeworld blowing up, it's the Federation and Klingons as the two big powers left. And like the Highlander, Tkuvma says there can only be one

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:29 am
by cilantro
technobabbler wrote:###One of my friends came up with an interesting hypothesis (which I fervently hope is wrong). That the spores on Discovery end up creating / affecting sporestitian life forms (i.e. the Caretaker).

given episode 4's propulsion subplot, I swear a write/showrunner is paying an homage to psychedelic shrooms.

###The more I think about it, the more I start to think that Discovery should've been set like a 100 years after TNG or something.

All the reason STD should be real-time years post-DS9/Voyager. Cameo of Seven of Nine in a Wrath of Khan Project Genesis-like top secret briefing.... exposition-technobabble--here is the result of our research on the Caretaker: shroom-warp! Line drop that Engineer Stammits did his post-doc overseen by 7 of 9.

The Klingon subplot revolves around Tkuvma wanting to take out the Federation because post-Romulan homeworld blowing up, it's the Federation and Klingons as the two big powers left. And like the Highlander, Tkuvma says there can only be one

Yeah, I really do think that they should've just place Discovery like a 100 years (okay after watching a youtube video it pointed out that in like 117 years the Federation will get holograms BUT then maybe like a 150 years after TNG/DS9/VOY then?) after Picard/Sisko/Janeway. Everything is so weird and nothing really fits very well into an established canon.

Also, um STD is an abbreviation for certain type of diseases. :lol:

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:18 am
by GandALF
"To resist assimilation" interesting choice of words there.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:20 pm
by technobabbler
GandALF wrote:"To resist assimilation" interesting choice of words there.
from the limited news that I've heard of (I don't follow Trek news), the Disco-Klingons are supposed to be an allegory about Trump supporters. A little ham-fisted, but ok, I'll go with that.

But the writing/episodes so far (arguably) portray the Federation more like European "White Man Burden" colonial imperialists and the Klingons are written (arguably) as sympathetic. To me, STD/Disco is more like the British v. Zulus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War

And as in-universe, we never see a canon big-picture Alpha Quadrant map, for all we know, the Klingon Empire is on the verge of being surrounded by an expansionist Federation on one side and Romulans on the other (yes, space is 3-D ...assume everyone's on the same plane)

Given the writing, I'm cheering for the Klingons to capture Burnham and try her for war crimes and send her to the Klingon pce prison planet. The End. Season 2: fast forward to 20 years post-DS9.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:21 pm
by FakeGeekGirl
A lot of people are bitching about the spores / tardigrade thing but is it really any sillier than the anti-matter creatures that Captain Ransom was using to power the Equinox?

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:26 pm
by technobabbler
FakeGeekGirl wrote:A lot of people are bitching about the spores / tardigrade thing but is it really any sillier than the anti-matter creatures that Captain Ransom was using to power the Equinox?
willing to suspend my disbelief on Shroom-Warp but given it's never mentioned again for the next 100 years----writers are pushing it.

But to nitpick about canon, Bio-Shroom-Warp could be better technobabble-rationalized as having its origins in those Voyager bio-gel packs. And then Shroom-Warp research accelerated after Voyager came back with info on the Caretaker. In-Universe explanation: that space spore-life is rare in the Alpha Quad.

and longer the series develops without a good reason for being a prequel, the more cynical I get that it's a prequel only to keep Kirk, Spock and the gang as the ace in the pockets of showrunners.

But it seems that TNG (by a plurality) is people's most favorite Star Trek.

Re: Star Trek: Discovery - thoughts?

Posted: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:42 pm
by Fixer
Plot twist: The spores are actually midichlorians.

Life creates them, makes them grow. It's an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us; it binds the galaxy together. Discovery also travels by spinning, which is a good trick.