Star Trek in Film and TV (and The Orville, too!) (Page 4 of 12)

You mean you agreed with me agreeing with you?

This was the photo.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CrY99ojUMAAGJZe.jpg

I haven't been watching Discovery simply because I have so many streaming services as is and it is difficult to keep going with them, not to mention adding new ones! Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime (not to mention Google Play for music and as free YouTube, as well as my desire to get  Brit box for Classic Who and Broadway Tonight for my love of musicals). I think I may subscribe after the season is done and then pay for it for a month and see if I can just binge it, if they are offering the whole season still by then (or maybe they'll do a Hulu, and only offer the latest episodes instead?).

I saw a YouTube video discussing Discovery and it was intriguing. To explain the advanced tech and uniforms and such, they theorized that Discovery is actually the origin story of Section 31. Gotta admit, that fan theory gave me pause and makes me interested if that is the case because of course, S31 would have access to advanced tech and such.

I'm not really into the darker aspect of the series, and is a reason why I never got much into DS9 which always felt so much darker and brooding than TNG. But Section 31 was always a neat concept to me, and the darkness of it didn't bother me, so if this is THAT story, I'll be coming aboard at some point I think.

Ireactions, I like that comment you mentioned of Seth McFarlane's and how all the Trek officers were just perfect all the time. The Orville definitely represents his view of a realistic Trekverse.

Always good to see tom2point0 here, he doesn't show up often enough. I have been listening to REWATCH PODCAST cover THE FLASH (90s series) with pleasure, but I didn't have time to watch the actual show, so I can say nothing other than noting that I continue to enjoy Tom and Cory's banter during my commutes and hikes.

DISCOVERY, however, most definitely does not present the secret origin of Section 31. Their name, Section 31, comes from the original 22nd century Starfleet charter: Article 13, Section 31 allows extraordinary measures against extreme threat. Starfleet and Section 31 pre-date the Federation and DISCOVERY.

Section 31 appeared on ENTERPRISE in the year 2155 as a secret cabal within the United Earth government and Starfleet with Enterprise-armsmaster Malcolm Reed a former member. Given that DISCOVERY takes place in 2256, it's clearly not Section 31's starting point. But this does give me an excuse to talk about Section 31.

The reason the DS9 creators came up with Section 31: they were telling war stories and needed to show that the Federation, like any government, would engage in bloody and covert black-ops missions. But Gene Roddenberry's TNG-era declaration that the future was a perfect world had become so entrenched in the franchise that the writers couldn't overturn it. So they introduced Section 31.

From their debut in "Inquisition":

                    BASHIR
            So, are you going to tell me who
            you are? Who you work for?

                    SLOAN
            I would think it's obvious -- the
            same people you work for. The
            Federation. Starfleet.

                    BASHIR
            You don't expect me to believe
            you're with Internal Affairs, do
            you?

                    SLOAN
            Of course not. Internal Affairs
            is a competent department, but...
            limited.

                    BASHIR
            Then what department are you with?

                    SLOAN
            Let's just say I belong to another
            branch of Starfleet
            Intelligence... our official
            designation is Section 31.

                    BASHIR
            Never heard of it.

                    SLOAN
            We keep a low profile. It works
            out better that way... for all
            concerned.

                    BASHIR
            And what does "Section 31"
            do -- aside from kidnapping
            Starfleet officers?

                    SLOAN
            We search out and identify
            potential dangers to the
            Federation.

                    BASHIR
            And once identified?

                    SLOAN
            We deal with them.

                    BASHIR
            How?

                    SLOAN
            Quietly.

                    BASHIR
            So if I had turned out to be a
            Dominion agent -- what would've
            happened to me?

                    SLOAN
            We wouldn't be standing here
            having this conversation.

                    BASHIR
            And Starfleet sanctions what
            you're doing?

                    SLOAN
            We don't submit reports or ask for
            approval for specific operations,
            if that's what you mean. We're an
            autonomous department.

                    BASHIR
            Authorized by whom?

                    SLOAN
            Section 31 was part of the
            original Starfleet charter.

                    BASHIR
            That was two hundred years ago.
            Are you telling me you've been
            operating on your own ever since?
            Without specific orders?
            Accountable to nobody, but
            yourselves?

                    SLOAN
            You make it sound so... ominous.

                    BASHIR
            Isn't it? If what you say is
            true, you function as judge, jury
            and executioner. I'd say that's
            too much power for anyone.

                    SLOAN
            I admit it takes exceptional
            people to do what we do -- people
            who can sublimate their own
            ambitions to the best interests of
            the Federation.
                (a beat)
            People like you.

                    BASHIR
            Me?

                    SLOAN
                (nods)
            We're on the same team. We
            believe in the same principles
            that every other Federation
            citizen holds dear.

                    BASHIR
            But you violate those principles
            as a matter of course.

                    SLOAN
            In order to protect them.

                    BASHIR
            I'm sorry. But the ends don't
            always justify the means.

                    SLOAN
                (calmly)
            Really? How many lives do you
            suppose you've saved in your
            medical career?

                    BASHIR
            I don't see what that has to do
            with anything.

                    SLOAN
            Hundreds... thousands? Do you
            suppose that those people give a
            damn that you lied to get into
            Starfleet Medical? I doubt it.

    Bashir is momentarily thrown by Sloan's argument --

                    SLOAN
            We deal with threats to the
            Federation that jeopardize its
            very survival. If you knew how
            many lives we've saved, I think
            you'd agree that the ends do
            justify the means.I'm not afraid
            of bending the rules every once
            in a while -- if the situation warrants
            it. And I don't think you are either.

                    BASHIR
            You've got the wrong man, Sloan.

                    SLOAN
                (confident)
            I don't think so. In time, you'll
            come to agree with me.

With Section 31, DS9 could show the Federation engaging in assassination, fraud, genocide, false flag operations, propaganda, facism, torture, psychological manipulation, violation of civil liberties and sheer ruthlessness -- but because Section 31 was a disavowed branch of Starfleet with no official sanction or existence, the writers left themselves an out. They could say the Federation's hands were clean by putting all the responsibility on Section 31. As seen in "Inquisition":

                    SISKO
            There's no record of a Deputy
            Director Sloan anywhere in
            Starfleet. As for Section 31...
            that's a little more complicated.
            Starfleet Command didn't
            acknowledge its existence. But
            they didn't deny it either.
            They simply said they'd look into
            it and get back to me.

                    BASHIR
            When?

                    SISKO
            They didn't say.

                    KIRA
            Sounds like a cover-up to me.

                    BASHIR
            Is it possible that the Federation
            would condone this kind of
            activity?

                    ODO
            Personally, I find it hard to
            believe that they wouldn't. Every
            other great power has a unit like
            Section 31... the Romulans
            have the Tal Shiar, the
            Cardassians had the Obsidian
            Order...

                    BASHIR
            But what would that say about us?
            That we're no different than our
            enemies? That when push comes to
            shove, we're willing to throw away
            our principles in order to
            survive?

                    SISKO
            I wish I had an answer for you,
            Doctor.

Perhaps the greatest Section 31 story (there were only three) is "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" where Section 31 manipulates Dr. Bashir into staging an assassination and framing an ambassador to maneuver a more controllable ally onto the political chessboard.

Dr. Bashir figures out the plan and needs Admiral Ross to stop it. Admiral Ross has always been an ally: he's allowed our heroes to skirt rules; he's tacitly encouraged the cast's crazier ideas; he's been the most pleasant and supportive admiral ever seen in STAR TREK.

Ross is Professor Arturo. Ross is Dr. Harry Wells. Ross is Dr. Martin Stein. Ross is Temporal Flux. Ross is Dad. Ross is suddenly debilitated by an illness and unable to help, and Section 31 wins. Later, Bashir confronts Ross, having realized: Ross faked his illness to allow Section 31 to proceed with its plans.

                    BASHIR
            And how long have you worked for
            Section 31?

                    ROSS
            I don't.

                    BASHIR
            Just a temporary alliance?

                    ROSS
            Something like that.

                    BASHIR
            And you don't see anything wrong
            with what happened?

                    ROSS
            I don't like it. But I've spent
            the last year and a half of my
            life ordering young men and women
            to die. I like that even less.

                    BASHIR
            That's a glib answer. And it's a
            cheap way of avoiding the fact
            that you've trampled on the very
            thing those men and women are out
            there dying to protect. Doesn't
            that mean anything to you?

                    ROSS
            Inter arma enim silent leges.

                    BASHIR
            "In time of war, the law falls
            silent." Cicero. So is that
            what we've become -- a twenty-
            fourth century Rome? Driven by
            nothing more than the certainty
            that Caesar can do no wrong?

                    ROSS
            This conversation never happened.
            You're dismissed.

Ross didn't kill anyone, didn't frame anyone; he simply chose to do nothing to prevent it and is therefore complicit. That's what makes 31 terrifying.

Despite the writers having left themselves a backdoor to say Section 31 is a rogue agency, it would be reasonable to take the view that Section 31 is the Federation and always has been.

Captain Lorca represents their values rather well. I think Lorca is one of them although there's the possibility that he doesn't know he's one of them. Section 31 has often maneuvered unwitting Starfleet officers into acting on their behalf.

Anyway. DS9's first two Section 31 episodes were great and can be read here:
http://www.st-minutiae.com/resources/scripts/542.txt
http://scifijaz.com/t/565.txt

Finished watching the first half of Discovery, and it feels more like Trek now.  For me it started in earnest with the Harry Mudd episode where he’s trying to take over the Discovery.  All told, that’s a faster turn around than the other modern Trek series; it took each of them a good two years to settle in.

I think DISCOVERY is an interesting exploration of Starfleet's dual purpose as a military and exploratory force. The scripts are strong. But the production is so distant from the 1960s STAR TREK that it's hard to grasp why it's a prequel. Bryan Fuller seemed to be pushing hard for including hints of the classic designs (red/blue/gold turtlenecks) and I imagine that under his control, DISCOVERY would have had a modern look but with orange highlights to be reminiscent of the pastels of the original series and the tech would have *looked* state of the art but had a somewhat more primitive function compared to the original series. Cooks instead of food slots, drones instead of holo simulations, etc.. The writing is perfectly in tune with the original series, but the production is at odds and many of Fuller's aesthetic wishes seem to have been discarded.

I've seen five episodes so far...

I'm a bit torn about it, honestly. The show doesn't feel like it was made by people who love Star Trek. It feels like it was made by people who want to cash in on Star Trek, and who are so unfamiliar with the Trek fandom that they think the only way to do this is to go backwards, time and time again. It is a massive mistake. And if they took out those throwback elements, the show would be so much better. Change the Klingons to a new species. Change Sarek to a different Vulcan (I swear, it feels like Vulcan has a population of about 6, and they just keep popping up). Change Mudd to a different character. Then set the series after DS9, because it already feels post-DS9. After all that, the series would work so much better. Even the idea of a Starfleet that is torn between soldiers and scientists feels like something that would come after the Dominion war.

The setting still hasn't been fleshed out enough, which is weird for Star Trek. They could change ships in every episode and I wouldn't notice, or care if it blew up. And similarly, the characters haven't been developed very well. It's a sad day when I think that Mayweather was a more developed character than most of the new crew.

That said, I really only wish they'd ditch one of the crew members this time (the engineer. I just don't think he connects with this world, and he doesn't handle technobabble well), so that's probably an improvement.

Whereas TNG suffered from an unwillingness to have conflict among the crew, Discovery sometimes has very forced conflict.

I don't hate the show. I think it's better than Enterprise, and even Voyager in many ways, but I think that some flaws are just strangling this series right now. I wish the modern decision makers would respect the full history of Star Trek, because many of us grew up with the later shows, and that is what we are fans of.

Finished.

Ultimately, the series seemed... careless. Like the people making it didn't care about Star Trek and its history, and they also didn't particularly care about telling the stories that they put out there.

Before the show came out, people related to the show spoke about how they drew inspiration from our world and our politics, and played up the idea of these characters representing Trump supporters, or those characters representing North Korea. And that was bullshit. The writers didn't put enough thought into the motivations or the politics within the show for me to find any sort of meaning in it. Even when they put in the "Make the empire glorious again" line in the mirror universe, I couldn't be bothered to care about yet another Trump jab by people who love them some Nazi solutes (which I imagine is just part of the union agreements in Hollywood at this point).

When they did the repeating day episode, it was halfhearted. Like they knew that the audience got which trope they were going for, so they didn't have to put much thought into it. Same with most of the other storylines. They give us a quick reference to which story they're playing with, and then fill out the hour without really exploring the stories very deeply. A Klingon grafted into a human body... okay. Sure. I'll go with that... if they actually bother to do something with that story. But they didn't. They wanted us to feel the emotional reaction, but they never invested in the story or character itself. I still don't even know what the hell they were talking about. The "Klingons" opened people up, crushed their bones, chopped up their insides, and... what the hell does this mean?! The guy passed a physical, so he obviously doesn't have an actual Klingon living inside of him.
And it doesn't matter, because that story ultimately went nowhere. He threw a couple of punches, spoke some synthetic Klingon words, and that was pretty much it. That was the grand plan.
Oh... then he ran off with the woman who brutally raped him in ways that we can't even imagine (and apparently the writers can't either). Because that's totally reasonable.

And right around the time that we discovered that he was a Klingon mole type sleeper agent type thing, we also learned that Lorka was a mole for a totally different cause. So now this is like 24, and everyone is a damn mole. And the one human male who wasn't written off of the show is the only one who I actually wanted written off of the show!

The show has a lot of interesting characters. The problem is, they have no interest in exploring them. They do nothing to balance big action stories with personal stories in the way that Trek shows normally do. So now we have a show that is set during a war, which they don't bother to explore. With technology that is ultimately a dead end, story-wise. And characters who they don't bother to explore (aside from Burnham, though I still don't get why everyone blames her for the war. She committed mutiny, but her actions didn't cause the war).

Going forward, I'd love to see more of Keyla Detmer. They could have explored her reaction to Burnham being there a bit more, as someone who was severely injured during a battle in which Burnham betrayed her people and lied to them. Yet, they didn't do that. They showed an odd moment where Detmer was happy to see (the fake) Captain Georgiou return, giving us the impression that she didn't know it was a fake. Yet there was no payoff to that beat.

Airiam is another interesting character, despite the fact that she looks a lot like Nebula, from Guardians of the Galaxy. I'd like to see more of her too.

Is it weird that a lot of the characters that I'm the most interested in are just recurring background characters?

The mirror Georgiou is pretty much just mirror Kira. I wonder if the writers genuinely think that they're exploring new ideas here, or if they just think that we won't remember the 500 hours of TV that came before this...?

The show has some potential. Most of the cast is fine (when they're not killed off or sent to live with their rapists), but I just don't feel like the people writing the show or making the design decisions actually care about it. It's like the show is being produced as a way to hold onto a licence, but nobody actually had an idea for it. But then again, some of the bad decisions seem deliberate. They didn't accidentally recreate the entire Klingon look and culture. They chose to take one of the most developed, fleshed-out species in Star Trek canon, throw them in a blender, and then dress the resulting mess in the Pennywise costume from the new It movie.

I'm trying to make sense of what was put on screen, and I just don't get what the point was. I had the song "Going Through the Motions" from the Buffy musical episode floating through my head through a lot of it.

I don't know. I'm still trying to decide whether or not I think it's a worthwhile series, but I'm pretty sure that it's not registering as "Star Trek" in my brain. It's probably not something I'd gather the family for, like when I watched TNG as a kid.

Okay, I'm going to to back and read through the rest of this thread when I get a chance.

Yeah, The Orville was a fun show. I'm not sure how long it will remain entertaining, since it's a very particular type of fun and that could get old, but so far it's been interesting. They've actually done some thoughtful stories too, which is nice.

One more thing that I don't get about Discovery is the need to have one central character. Most Trek shows are ensembles, where different episodes could explore different characters. This was definitely Burnham's show, and the world kinda revolved around her. We're going into season 2 without a captain or doctor, and I'm not even sure that we've seen main engineering. Who is in charge there, because whats-his-name seemed pretty focused on the spore drive, even when it wasn't working.

Okay, I've read the conversation! Most of the stuff, I don't need to comment on. So, here's what I do want to respond to:

People keep trying to figure out how to reconcile Star Trek with the fact that we already have a lot of this technology. I don't think it's necessary, if they just kept moving forward. It's not the history of *our* universe, it's the history of the Star Trek universe, which is a world where Eugenics Wars and WWIII happened, and where San Francisco became a sancua--wait, that happened.

I don't think many people think that Star Trek is a historical document. While it might be fun to figure out why the "future" in the 1960's series is behind where we are today, it doesn't really matter. What matters is that the Star Trek universe was the story of that world, through different generations, always moving forward. Their past looks like our past. Their future looks like what we imagine our future will look like. By going back in time and pulling at all of those threads and altering the past of that story, they're destroying the foundation of something huge and beloved. And they do it without any care or a second thought.

Furthermore, by throwing this whole spore drive idea out there, they're essentially invalidating the central plots of both Star Trek DS9 and Star Trek Voyager. And why? Where did that story go? What ultimate purpose did it serve? It was just a Dark Matter rehash, but not handled as well.

I'm not letting Bryan Fuller off the hook so easily. He was involved with redesigning the Klingons, and no decision in that process was the right decision.

I do think that Star Trek is usually an ensemble (aside from TOS). Even if we view Picard, Janeway and Archer as the leads of their shows, there was usually a b-plot that explored the other characters. Or there would be an a-plot that involved them in trouble, but had a b-plot where the captain got to be human for a while. DS9 was definitely an ensemble. Discovery only used the supporting characters as a way to move Michael forward, and never really cared to explore them.

I did think about them possibly jumping into the future too, and either having to adapt, or find their way home. Or maybe explore the Star Trek multiverse, which would explain all of the different styles somewhat. But they didn't do that. Oh well.

It was fun seeing Clint Howard show up though.

Interesting. This video suggests the changes that we may see for season 2. But how many of these solutions will only deepen the problems?

https://youtu.be/4n5TlyBl5Cw

True. But then again, most news programs today suffer from the same problems. I think this particular battle is already lost.

Looks like some bottle episodes in the future!   Don’t look out the window this week; we can’t even afford the black curtain and Christmas lights!

Honestly, one of my favorite episodes of Discovery season one was the Harry Mudd episode where he’s trying to steal the ship.  Unless I remember incorrectly, that was a total bottle episode.

You remember correctly. Don't you always? Isn't that your gimmick?

Patrick Stewart is getting a bit long in the tooth, but could still be great.   I would just like to see something move the overall narrative forward instead of more prequels.

By the time TNG came along, some of TOS technology already was already becoming a reality and seemed dated for a show set so far in the future. People shrugged it off because TOS was an old show, and TNG presented a more modern look at what the "future" looked like.

Now, TNG-era technology is a reality. I'm using it to type this comment right now. Yet Star Trek keeps going back to pre-TOS, trying to make that era fit into our current vision of the future, and it doesn't work. It destroys the universe created for the franchise. It makes it feel weird to watch the new shows. It doesn't play along with the rules that we all agreed to play by, with a wink and a shrug, back in the 80's.

They're creating a new franchise, calling it Star Trek, and demanding that we ignore the fact that it's not Star Trek.

So yeah, I agree. That was me saying that I agree in as few words as I can possibly muster while avoiding work.

Completely agree about the discussion about what Trek used to represent.

This is really surprising. I wonder what form this would take? Would he command a new ship and crew?

Finally binged Discovery.  Terrific show, really impressed with how they worked the story and whatnot.  My lone complaint are the Klingons.  They look and sound horrendous.  Terrible choice to alter them so much, yet leave pretty much every other race the same.

One has to imagine this project likely takes Picard off the Enterprise, and into some other role. Most of the other TNG actors have aged much worse, so I wouldn't expect much participation from them. There's also an animated series, an Academy series, maybe something Khan-related (Nicholas Meyer) possibly in the works. I think if they kept each to limited series, that could work. That said, I'll see how bad they make Discovery by focusing on Spock and Sarek in Season 2.