Herochat

Star Trek Discovery

Bran Mak Morn

  • ******
  • 3738
  • +8/-13
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2017, 10:26:11 PM »

Have you ever completely lost your shit when you discovered men have names like Kelly, Pat, Bobby, Chris, Sam, or Marion?

Kelly is pretty ambiguous.
I'd probably raise an eyebrow if a guy told me his name was Patricia instead of Patrick.
Same with Christine instead of Christopher or Samantha instead of Samuel.

If you read the summary of Discovery before even watching it, one would naturally assess a character with the name of Michael Burnham would be a man.

I kinda went from binge watching The Good Place straight into Discovery so I guess the resonance of Ted Danson's Michael still played on my mind. 

NeoGreenLantern

  • ********
  • 13973
  • +55/-17
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #31 on: September 28, 2017, 11:02:57 PM »
The roll was probably written for a man. When a woman got it they probably thought, "fuck it. Leave it. It's the future." which is a perfectly acceptable reason.

Mightily Oats

  • *******
  • 5723
  • +72/-575
  • Master of Fagnetism
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2017, 04:01:19 AM »
Men used to wear skirts on the original series to showcase the closing or closed gender divide

MPagar

  • 81
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #33 on: September 29, 2017, 12:42:22 PM »
Hah, that Next Generation man-skirt is actually available for free on Trek Online because of the recent Next Gen anniversary.

The first two episodes of Discovery were better than I honestly expected. There were things here and there that bugged me as a fan, but I'm cautiously looking forward to the rest of the season.

Tjackflash

  • *
  • 201
  • +1/-35
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #34 on: September 29, 2017, 01:43:07 PM »

Have you ever completely lost your shit when you discovered men have names like Kelly, Pat, Bobby, Chris, Sam, or Marion?

Kelly is pretty ambiguous.
I'd probably raise an eyebrow if a guy told me his name was Patricia instead of Patrick.
Same with Christine instead of Christopher or Samantha instead of Samuel.

If you read the summary of Discovery before even watching it, one would naturally assess a character with the name of Michael Burnham would be a man.

I kinda went from binge watching The Good Place straight into Discovery so I guess the resonance of Ted Danson's Michael still played on my mind.



   The actress who played the mom on the Walton's was Michael Learned.  So it is apparently a real if not usually seen name for a woman as well.
'cause justice is the one thing you should always find.

Bran Mak Morn

  • ******
  • 3738
  • +8/-13
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #35 on: October 02, 2017, 09:14:43 AM »
Well at least someone does point out the oddness of the name for a woman on ep3.


Not many likeable characters on The Discovery.

There's an asshole version of Trip Tucker.

Dlbiininja

  • ******
  • 2775
  • +15/-8312
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2017, 01:19:29 AM »
Saw the first.  Thought it was pretty good.  Was surprised to see Michelle Yeoh. Without a martial art fight scene,taking place. 
My negative Karma correlates to the amount of butthurt I've caused you! 
blowmeuptom.com/   https://www.facebook.com/tomleykisshow/
http://garyanddino.com/ 

Clownprince23

  • **
  • 427
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2017, 12:44:34 PM »
I like the show, I just think it's in the wrong time period. All off this happening before TOS, with technology way more advanced than TNG is the biggest problem for me.

therock

  • ********
  • 7798
  • +20/-63
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #38 on: October 03, 2017, 06:22:29 PM »
I like the show, I just think it's in the wrong time period. All off this happening before TOS, with technology way more advanced than TNG is the biggest problem for me.

Namely the reveal at the end

either their mission going to fail MASSIVELY...or they way beyond space travel tecenogy then any ship

Uhtceare

  • ***
  • 695
  • +7/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #39 on: October 03, 2017, 09:25:13 PM »
Combined with the movies, this makes me think that they are going to downplay exploring, and make everything about crises. No more traveling and slowly meeting people, it's all about hearing about a crisis and teleporting to it almost immediately. It's a more Star Warsy way of playing space-travel, where even the most cosmic distances never seems to take very long, and it's mostly about knowing where to quasi-teleport to inflict/prevent some horror.

altoon

  • *****
  • 1932
  • +5/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #40 on: October 04, 2017, 01:30:14 AM »
I like the show, I just think it's in the wrong time period. All off this happening before TOS, with technology way more advanced than TNG is the biggest problem for me.

Namely the reveal at the end

either their mission going to fail MASSIVELY...or they way beyond space travel tecenogy then any ship

They have to fail with the space travel  thing.  I do wonder if Discovery is actually part of that Black ops Star fleet group.  What with the black insignia some of them wore.

Bran Mak Morn

  • ******
  • 3738
  • +8/-13
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #41 on: October 04, 2017, 09:36:35 AM »
Combined with the movies, this makes me think that they are going to downplay exploring, and make everything about crises. No more traveling and slowly meeting people, it's all about hearing about a crisis and teleporting to it almost immediately.

That's the thing though...if this is set before TOS then they're still traveling, exploring & discovering new planets & species.

They'd be very limited to places they can actually teleport to if they haven't discovered it yet.

Master

  • ********
  • 7991
  • +34/-24
  • When is a raven a writing desk?
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #42 on: October 04, 2017, 04:30:54 PM »
I like the show, I just think it's in the wrong time period. All off this happening before TOS, with technology way more advanced than TNG is the biggest problem for me.

Namely the reveal at the end

either their mission going to fail MASSIVELY...or they way beyond space travel tecenogy then any ship

They have to fail with the space travel  thing.  I do wonder if Discovery is actually part of that Black ops Star fleet group.  What with the black insignia some of them wore.

Section 31, I think. But yeah, this teleport tech is waaay beyond later Star Trek tech. Unless they find a dangerous flaw or time travel to the future, this tech can't carry on.
9 outta 10 Masters are Master.

Clownprince23

  • **
  • 427
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #43 on: October 04, 2017, 08:03:43 PM »
I like the show, I just think it's in the wrong time period. All off this happening before TOS, with technology way more advanced than TNG is the biggest problem for me.

Namely the reveal at the end

either their mission going to fail MASSIVELY...or they way beyond space travel tecenogy then any ship

They have to fail with the space travel  thing.  I do wonder if Discovery is actually part of that Black ops Star fleet group.  What with the black insignia some of them wore.

Section 31, I think. But yeah, this teleport tech is waaay beyond later Star Trek tech. Unless they find a dangerous flaw or time travel to the future, this tech can't carry on.


That's what I'm thinking. The show would make way more sense if it  was placed some time after TNG.

altoon

  • *****
  • 1932
  • +5/-5
    • View Profile
Re: Star Trek Discovery
« Reply #44 on: October 04, 2017, 08:57:40 PM »
Section 31,

Ah that what it was called.  For some reason I was thinking it was Section B 13 but was sure that wasn't it.