Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

Gregatron

Master Member
Ugh, actually that's my bluff. I meant to say landing party. FP* Always had that habit.

Fixed.


No slight against you, of course. I have no doubt whatsoever that KurtzmanTREK uses the anachronistic term “away team”. Just like how the Abrams films described the Federation itself as “a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada”, and showed the Abramsprise being built on Earth and hanging out underwater on alien worlds, in gravity environments that the real Enterprise was never designed for. Because it’s a SPACEship, not a magic bus of stupid.

And let’s not forget the pretentious, gobbledygook dialogue, which if spoken quickly enough (and preferably while running and/or shouting) will somehow convince viewers that it’s actually smart. Like having Zoe Saldana’s NuUhura throw around words like “xenolinguistics” when she’s really just there to strip down to her underwear and be leered at by fratboy NuKirk, and to be NuSpock’s whiny girlfriend.
 

Treadwell

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Just watched the episode. Pike mentioned "trilithium resin" in the Enterprise's warp core, but isn't trilithium a 24th century tech?
It's a warp core byproduct that the baddies were trying to steal from Enterprise in "Starship Mine". So I suppose retroactively it couldv'e been around as long as there have been dilithium-powered warp reactors. (Never mind that in early Trek it was just called "lithium"... I don't know if canonically that was the same as dilithium).

edit: I see I'm late to the party on that
 

Gimpdiggity

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I really enjoyed the episode. I like when science and “fate” get intertwined in a story, it always provides interesting things to ponder.

I am really enjoying the cast. Production values seem pretty high, too.
 

Mottrex

Sr Member
Pike and his Number One were the highlight of Discovery for me. His grounded attitude and slight shooting from the hip style resonated.. I enjoyed the last two episodes and wanted more.

Strange new worlds gives us more of the same which is no bad thing and I've managed to hook my wife back in to Trek after calling it a day after the abysmal Picard...
Yes it's flashy yes it looks like a JJA reboot but I can say hand on heart it feels like a Trek show more so than Discovery ever was.
What I found strange was actually liking all the characters, maybe it's the familiarity of some but that's a rare thing.
Having watched ST since the 1970s this felt more Trek than a slew of other projects over the years..
I know the stories are bound to be similar to others told but hey there are only six real stories to be told if you believe the Greeks.. Pike was always a character you wanted to know more about and he did influence Kirk to be the Captain he became.
If you strip it back it is playing out like a Greek Tragedy...

Did I say I like this show ?
 

Inquisitor Peregrinus

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Was it? I can't find any transcripts that specify that in that episode.
I'll take one last whack at this. Spock, when finally telling his Captain what the heck is going on with him, talks about how he had hoped to avoid the pon farr due to his mixed biology. The wording in the scene very heavily implies that this is his first pon farr (as he has to mate or die and seems to have done neither prior), and now that it is upon him he must return to Vulcan to marry his betrothed and mate. T'Pring, when he asks her why she does not want to marry him, speaks of having followed his career and seen him become a legend and does not want to be the consort of a legend. They haven't seen each other, haven't corresponded. At least since he left for the Academy. Vulcan propriety also seems to place a very mid-century American value on no premarital sex. So I highly doubt they were hanging out down at the malt shop or Lovers' Lane between age 7 and when he left.

I have not seen the new episode yet, but if that's a dead Sam Kirk, we seem to be pre-empting him dying a decade later for his brother to find him. That... sorta puts the nail in the coffin of this being the same continuity as actual TOS. In which case, forget everything I was bringing up about Spock and T'Pring. Open season on continuity. They can do whatever the hell they want.
 

NakedMoleRat

Master Member
I remember a book from the 90’s (I know, not canon) where it was mentioned that biologically, Vulcans HAD to mate every 7 years for the Pon Far, any other time was up to their discretion.
 

Gregatron

Master Member
I'll take one last whack at this. Spock, when finally telling his Captain what the heck is going on with him, talks about how he had hoped to avoid the pon farr due to his mixed biology. The wording in the scene very heavily implies that this is his first pon farr (as he has to mate or die and seems to have done neither prior), and now that it is upon him he must return to Vulcan to marry his betrothed and mate. T'Pring, when he asks her why she does not want to marry him, speaks of having followed his career and seen him become a legend and does not want to be the consort of a legend. They haven't seen each other, haven't corresponded. At least since he left for the Academy. Vulcan propriety also seems to place a very mid-century American value on no premarital sex. So I highly doubt they were hanging out down at the malt shop or Lovers' Lane between age 7 and when he left.

I have not seen the new episode yet, but if that's a dead Sam Kirk, we seem to be pre-empting him dying a decade later for his brother to find him. That... sorta puts the nail in the coffin of this being the same continuity as actual TOS. In which case, forget everything I was bringing up about Spock and T'Pring. Open season on continuity. They can do whatever the hell they want.

It should also be noted that the “every seven years” thing came later, and the movies indicated that it only happens to the men (or at least happens on a different schedule for the men)…but then they wanted to do an an episode where T’Pol goes into heat for ENTERPRISE, so that changed, too.

And of, course, several TOS episodes indicate that Spock got freaky with guest-stars both before and after “Amok Time”, and yet some people got it into their heads that Vulcans only mated or could only mate when going through pon farr, which is clearly not the case.



Also, TOS clearly established George Samuel Kirk (who only Jim called “Sam”) as a civilian scientist and colonist, not a part of Starfleet. Could he have been, earlier in his life? Sure. Just like how, earlier in his life, Kurtzman could have been a talented writer and producer (But he wasn’t.). Going by Abrams/Kurtzman, it seems like Kirk’s entire family was in the service, now. I’m convinced that they threw continuity out the window JUST for the joke of having a Kirk on the ship in this show’s pilot, only to “cleverly” reveal that it isn’t Jim.

STAR TREK has fallen into the same trap as STAR WARS (especially under under Disney)—a constantly-shrinking universe, with many unlikely connections and relationships, as well as continuity going out the window, nothing making sense, and nothing mattering. Just flash and dazzle and awful writing which trashes beloved stories and characters.
 

Gregatron

Master Member
9D294BE9-8B1C-47D2-821D-699CFF4C8DAF.jpeg
 

firesprite

Master Member
I remember a book from the 90’s (I know, not canon) where it was mentioned that biologically, Vulcans HAD to mate every 7 years for the Pon Far, any other time was up to their discretion.

"Vulcans mate normally any time they want to. However, every seven years you do the ritual, the ceremony, the whole thing. The biological urge. You must, but any other time is any other emotionhumanoid emotion – when you're in love. When you want to, you know when the urge is there, you do it. This every-seven-years business was taken too literally by too many people who don't stop and understand. We didn't mean it only every seven years. I mean, every seven years would be a little bad, and it would not explain the Vulcans of many different ages which are not seven years apart." – D.C. Fontana (Captains' Logs: The Unauthorized Complete Trek Voyages)

Spock explains to his companions that Vulcan children enter into arranged marriages during a ritual ceremony. Spock further clarifies that while he earlier called T'Pring his "wife," this childhood bond does not have an exact correspondence with Human pairing, as it is "less than a marriage, but more than a betrothal." He explains that a bonding ceremony was held when they were seven years old, where they touched and "felt each other's thoughts," so when the time came they both would be drawn to Koon-ut-kal-if-fee due to the psychic bond. It is unclear if this bonding ceremony in childhood is a mind melding ceremony or if some other form of Telepathy is used. (See: Telepathic mating bond)
 

ALLEY

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Only for the next ten seasons View attachment 1575420

The most agonizing part of the future envisioned by Pike was when he realized that no one understood that “9 flashes” meant “more hair gel and a blow dryer, please….”

In this hellish future, he would be a rockabilly no more and dry, flat laying hair would be an unfortunate part of his personal suffering…

5DEBC25B-A2BE-40DC-B064-985708A33D62.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Mottrex

Sr Member
The most agonizing part of this future envisioned by Pike was when he realized that no one understood that “9 flashes” meant “more hair gel, please….”

In this hellish future, he would be a rockabilly no more and dry, flat laying hair would be an integral part of his suffering…
See if he was to re grow his Hipster Beard he wouldn't look half as bad..
CutPaste_2022-05-15_00-37-45-979.jpg
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.
Top