TV Chat
Related: About this forum'Star Trek: Discovery' Season 3: What We Know and What We Hope For
Star Trek: Discovery" Season 2 spoilers ahead..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The third season will be set 950 years in the future

The Season 2 finale of "Star Trek: Discovery" left us scratching our heads somewhat after a one-way trip through a time wormhole to place a dangerous collection of data out of harm's way, the USS Discovery now appears to be trapped 950 years in the future t.
In the final moments of that episode, "Discovery" stopped being a prequel to "The Original Series" and instead became the farthest future-flung series in the history of the franchise chronology, rocketing past the events of "The Next Generation," "Deep Space Nine" and "Voyager," all of which take place in the 24th century and arriving at the end of the 32nd century, in the year 3187.
Compare that to the few decades' difference between "The Next Generation" and the new Jean-Luc Picard series, or the single century between "Enterprise" and "The Original Series." Now we potentially have a new, 14- or 15-episode story arc set nearly a millennium after the events of "Deep Space Nine" and "Voyager."
This certainly raises a few questions and offers some interesting potential routes for the series to travel next.
Contd https://www.space.com/amp/star-trek-discovery-season-3-possibilities.html

exboyfil
(18,194 posts)Warp has been lost (it was a story line at one point that warp actually degraded space). Discovery is the only warp capable spaceship around (or one of very few).
rogue emissary
(3,228 posts)FreepFryer
(7,086 posts)The writing of Discovery is atrocious. To have been so poor at writing Star Trek that, having demolished the setting and ham-handedly attempted to fix canon (their solution: its classified?!!?) now they are doing what they should have done from the outset: set the series in a future where the CGI might actually fit (their look was WAY off to make any sense as a prequel), and they can write screenplays that dont demand expertise the way Star Trek does.
Pike was well-played, and the highlight of what otherwise is a gigantic, tragic and unprecedentedly expensive piece of shit.
Just my $.02.
exboyfil
(18,194 posts)You are right about the rest.
FreepFryer
(7,086 posts)...exploring Pikes future and his acceptance and understanding of the tragedy to come was probably the most human and compelling plot point in the entire series. That it was a resolution of a tension point set up in the original TOS pilot only pointed more to the STD writers inability to conceive of and carry an entire plot arc. If they had had to write his accident from scratch, theyd have botched it imho.
Quemado
(1,262 posts)The different timeline and the canon violations.
Star Trek is a fandom in which canon is firmly established. Most Star Trek fans expect canon to be adhered to.
Star Trek since 2009, IMO, has gone down in quality big time.
BTW, I've been a Star Trek fan since 1965. I've seen every TV episode and movie.
FreepFryer
(7,086 posts)Thus, not true Star Trek. Roddenberrys vision on this question was unambiguous, if com0licating from a drama perspective. While TOS had horror aspects (the monsters etc), the sheer number of people sucked screaming out into the void of space tells me that these reboot universes are not the product of happy or optimistic writers.
LessAspin
(1,598 posts)eShirl
(19,258 posts)Now I'm about to watch part one of the mid-season two-parter. By myself. And I'm psyched!
LessAspin
(1,598 posts)Last edited Mon Jan 11, 2021, 07:35 PM - Edit history (4)
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet
Link to tweet