Star Trek

Archer and Fucker, sorry I mis-spelled Tucker somehow, piss me off.

There's a lot of little reasons to hate Enterprise, but the main issue I had was that it was a crew of unlikable shits. Archer's an irresponsible jackass with daddy issues, T'Pol has all the energy and agency of a recent stroke victim - pro-tip Joelene, 'emotionless' doesn't mean 'lifeless' - Tucker has an annoying accent and never stops fucking whining about things, Phlox is just Neelix combined with The Doctor and the rest of them barely qualify as characters. If you're going to watch more episodes, play the Mayweather drinking game. You take a drink any time Mayweather says something other than "aye sir, course laid in". You won't actually need alcohol to play it. The pilot is the most amount of lines he gets before the one episode about him (I think it's in season 1), and then after that he goes back to doing nothing.

Other than that most of seasons 1 & 2 are just re-hashed Voyager plots, but worse.

 

Enterprise has a good premise (the beginnings of the Federation, some of the first voyages, etc), but I take it the way they worked with it may have had issues.

I imagine people may still like it though.

 

I'm a huge ST nerd, but I stopped watching Enterprise because the intro music was just so bad. Maybe someday I'll give it a fair shot.

 

I don't think the intro is that bad. They played it on the Space Shuttle as a wakeup tune.

 

Episode 4 was an actual Star Trek episode with science and ethics (if slightly predictable ones) and feels and stuff.

Spoiler

Although I did rather enjoy Landry getting horribly killed, which maybe isn't the best sign in terms of character development

 

Spoiler: timeline question

Is the Romulan homeworld getting destroyed in the JJ Abrams Star Trek movie in an alternate timeline, or the main one?

 

Spoiler: overlong reply

Not 100% confirmed.

Initially the Abramsverse was intended to be an alternate timeline created by the Hobus Supernova that destroyed Romulus in 2387, and Nero & Spock accidentally going back in time during the latter's efforts to stop the shockwave. Therefore, the destruction of Romulus happened in the main timeline.

Now most serious Trek fans pointed out that there were way too many differences in between the Abramsverse and the main timeline to be explained by temporal incursion, even one as willfully destructive as Nero's. Subsequently both Simon Pegg & Alex Kurtzman (I think) suggested in interviews that the Abramsverse might have always been a separate universe to the main timeline and Old Spock in the Abrams movies actually came back from the future of the Abramsverse timeline, not the main one in which all the TV series had taken place. Therefore leaving it unclear as to whether the destruction of Romulus happened in the main timeline.

The Star Trek: Countdown comic series and Star Trek Online both assume it happened in the main timeline, but neither are canon.

tl;dr There's no definite canon answer, but most non-canon assume it happened in the main timeline.

As an aside, if we go by the original idea that the Abramsverse is a timeline created by the destruction of Romulus and doesn't exist without this event, if Old Spock left the required information for Starfleet and/or the Romulans to stop the Hobus Supernova, and they succeed in doing so, does the Abramsverse timeline then delete itself?

 

I wonder what Roddenbery would think of the series that came after he passed away?

 

Brief Discovery update, reacting to most of the things people do and say like this:



Tilly's the only actual plausible human in it.

 

In both STNG (Where No One Has Gone Before) and VOY (The Gift), it's said that "thought is the basis of reality" and "thought, space, and time are really the same thing." Sounds kind of magical.

Then again, since matter and energy -- including brain activity -- impact subspace according to the narrative, you could say that thought is the same as other spacetime stuff without invoking magic.

 

Poor Wil! Someone out there still thinks of you!

 

Wesley isn't that bad. I think many nowadays have an excessive dislike of Mary Sue (or Mary Sue-esque).

Although from what I've heard, Wheaton hates his role in the series.

 

Watching some more Discovery. Still not completely sold on it. One thing I don't like is the swearing. Look my ears are not sensitive but F-bombs don't belong in Star Trek and I'm pretty sure Rodenberry would not approve.

Really the only thing that interests me about the series is Jason Isaac's character. The whole Sarek/Burnam thing is cringey as hell.

 

wat

There's f-bombs in Discovery?

ow the edge

 

That there's basically the problem with it. They said it once and framed it in a way where it was clearly a case of wanting to break down some imaginary barrier about swearing on on Star Trek. They can say "fuck, shit, cock, asshole, cunt, wank" all they want, but when they leave "This is fucking awesome" hanging in the air for a few seconds whilst everyone looks at the character who says it, just in case the audience might miss it, it just comes across as edgelordism.

Riker's "we're through running from these bastards" in Insurrection was much more natural.

Whilst the fact that Lorca is supposed to be dodgy as fuck (as opposed to Archer came across as a moron unintentionally) and what'll happen to him is probably the most interesting potential plot thread, that he was basically able to lie through what should've been a rigorous psychiatric evaluation to still be in command of a starship makes Starfleet look stupid. Well, stupider than normal.

 

Does Discovery have any humorous moments in it, or is it all serious?

 

The Orville is really good. As far as I'm concerned, it's 100% canonical Star Trek.

 

Star Trek: The Orville

Spoiler

(I'm not the first to say it either)

 

While not funny, I happen to also like this jam :

Worf shaking his head is great though.