Star Trek: Discovery (2017)

How are you watching Star Trek: Discovery?

  • Signed up for CBS All Access before watching the premiere

    Votes: 13 9.1%
  • Signed up for CBS All Access after watching the premiere

    Votes: 13 9.1%
  • Not signing up, but will watch if it's available for free

    Votes: 82 57.3%
  • On Netflix (Non-US viewer)

    Votes: 35 24.5%

  • Total voters
    143
That's the number one reason I don't read the novels or comic books anymore. Why waste the time if the stories aren't cannon?
 
That's the number one reason I don't read the novels or comic books anymore. Why waste the time if the stories aren't cannon?

But... but... you'll miss gems like this!
Trek02.jpg
 
Well, we can only hope that Fek'lhr drag them to the Klingon hell, otherwise to quote Bender: "We're boned!"
:facepalm
What's that word I'm looking for.. hmm, oh yeah
P'takh!

You're not the only getting the impression, that they're desperate for attention. I had the reeking smell of desperation for weeks, since they're excusing and lying and yadda yadda yadda.
I swear they just sound desperate to convince people.

" Our story of the Klingon War is our season one.”

There it is exactly as I expected. Right off the bat. WAR. In fact a WHOLE season of it. Easiest
lowest common denominator to drag in eye candy lovers.
I'm certain the battle FX will be to die for.
 
I think that's a narrative Hollywood is trying to push, not Roddenberry. Science and religion can easily coexist.

Agreed. One of the biggest myths out there is that the Church (as in the Vatican) is anti-science which is untrue, in fact, it's historically been a bastion of scientific study, They may not be in favor of all science but, in general, they do support science and I believe that the Church actually has priest-scientists.
 
I think that's a narrative Hollywood is trying to push, not Roddenberry. Science and religion can easily coexist.

If I understand you correctly, then disagreed, to the extent you state Roddenberry was not trying to push a narrative where mankind's evolution (via science) has moved mankind beyond religion. See, for example, this:

Gene Roddenberry himself is said to have rejected the idea of religion lasting into Humanity's future. Ronald D. Moore commented regarding the fate of specific religions in Trek history: "Gene felt very strongly that all of our contemporary Earth religions would be gone by the 23rd century, and while few of us around here actually share that opinion, we feel that we should leave this part of the Trek universe alone." (AOL chat, 1997) "It was a core tenet of Gene's Trek." (AOL chat, 1997)
Brannon Braga said that "In Gene Roddenberry's imagining of the future [...] religion is completely gone. Not a single Human being on Earth believes in any of the nonsense that has plagued our civilization for thousands of years. This was an important part of Roddenberry's mythology. He, himself, was a secular humanist and made it well-known to writers of Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation that religion and superstition and mystical thinking were not to be part of his universe. On Roddenberry's future Earth, everyone is an atheist. And that world is the better for it." [1](X)

And Roddenberry's own words in various interviews:

Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain.


I guess from that time it was clear to me that religion was largely nonsense--largely magical, superstitious things. In my own teen life, I just couldn't see any point in adopting something based on magic, which was obviously phony and superstitious.

And, since we know Gene liked to indulge in all manner of substances, we'll chalk this nonsensical doozy up to that:

As nearly as I can concentrate on the question today, I believe I am God; certainly you are, I think we intelligent beings on this planet are all a piece of God, are becoming God. In some sort of cyclical non-time thing we have to become God, so that we can end up creating ourselves, so that we can be in the first place. . . My own feeling is that relation to God as a person is a petty, superstitious approach to the All, the infinite.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, we can only hope that Fek'lhr drag them to the Klingon hell, otherwise to quote Bender: "We're boned!"

Fek'lhr - a real cutie :p if you go by the TNG version at least.
I prefer the Firefly version: humped :lol

Right you are. I guess I got sidetracked on the prequel JJ Abrams comic that was cannon for the first Abrams Trek.

- - - Updated - - -

This article makes me truly believe we are being trolled.
http://ew.com/tv/2017/08/03/jason-isaacs-star-trek-catchphrase/
"Git'R Done!".

*Canon ;) :p
 
If I understand you correctly, then disagreed, to the extent you state Roddenberry was not trying to push a narrative where mankind's evolution (via science) has moved mankind beyond religion. See, for example, this:



And Roddenberry's own words in various interviews:






And, since we know Gene liked to indulge in all manner of substances, we'll chalk this nonsensical doozy up to that:

I stand corrected then. I doubt that would happen, especially after a nuclear war. I would think survivors would embrace their religions after something like that.
 
The good news is that they're doing more than just Discovery toys and replicas, they've got the license to all Treks and are producing merchandise for all of them, and if the price of the Discovery phaser is any indicator ($30) they'll be very affordable.

Yeah Kirk is on the list.
When Art Aslyum was doing TOS, they did a decent job but stopped at doing Chapel and Rand. So hoping something comes along.
 
The good news is that they're doing more than just Discovery toys and replicas, they've got the license to all Treks and are producing merchandise for all of them, and if the price of the Discovery phaser is any indicator ($30) they'll be very affordable.
Phaser is $39.99.

Be careful buying this stuff. They might think people are interested in Discovery and keep making it.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top