Comment on Star Trek Is Showing More Love To Scott Bakula’s Enterprise
1984@lemmy.today 3 months ago
Enterprise was my favorite star trek. I can’t even watch discovery, it’s horrible.
Comment on Star Trek Is Showing More Love To Scott Bakula’s Enterprise
1984@lemmy.today 3 months ago
Enterprise was my favorite star trek. I can’t even watch discovery, it’s horrible.
Greg@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
I agree. Discovery is the least progressive Star Trek series and is already aging poorly. The other series use the Star Trek universe to cleverly explore present day issues whereas Discovery lazily frames today’s social issues as if they’re universal truths. It was a real back step for the franchise.
astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 3 months ago
It’s not that Disco isn’t progressive; it’s just lazily progressive. Case in point: the scene that bothers me to this day is Adira coming out as non-binary, just beyond cringe-worthy and very 21st century. As a viewer, the scene read like Adira was waiting to be judged harshly for their identity, and it just totally took me out of the era. By the 32nd century, I’d expect that being judged harshly for one’s gender identity would be at least a millennium behind us, and the conversation should either have not happened or been so matter-of-fact that it was treated as nothing. I get what the writers were trying to do, and it fell so flat and felt so bluntly obvious. I’m all for the message, but the delivery was not great.
The saddest thing about Disco to me is that there were great ideas and great intentions, but the execution of those ideas was so poor. Really, it just shows that you can have great actors, great directors, and great concepts, but if the writers can’t make it work, it just all comes apart.
ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 3 months ago
That rather ignores the fact that Adira was an amnesiac stowaway at the time, with some pretty understandable trust issues.
It also ignores that the characters in the scene in exactly the way you’re saying they should have.
GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 3 months ago
The problem I had with that scene (and the whole series, really, especially season 3) was that it framed human culture of the future as being generally oppressive and backwards. Acceptance shouldn’t be portrayed as radical or exceptional. It should be normal and taken for granted among humans in the future. Like in TOS, Uhura’s role was a big deal for viewers specifically because it was not a big deal for the characters. They just showed us a better future, where a black woman in a respected professional position was normal.
Discovery didn’t show us a better future. It showed us a shitty future with a handful of decent people in it. This is just one example, but it’s one that stuck in my mind as well.
astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 3 months ago
I see your point, but I still don’t think the scene works, but thinking about it like that makes it much more watchable. My point is that the scene is simultaneously poignant and a throw-away. It’s a “big deal” but also just one scene.
By the 32nd century, something like that should be such a non-issue for humans, that it would be like stating just another fact about yourself (amnesia and trust-issues aside), which lends itself to being a throw-away…but that defeats the purpose of the scene. Again, I am all about the message and Stamets’ reaction, but it felt very 21st century and on-the-nose.
I’d have preferred if Adira were just non-binary from the beginning and maybe have a quick correction of someone when they were misgendered. Or, let that scene be the reveal of something else, like the symbiont. With that change (I’d have to rewatch the season to see where this scene was in relation to the symbiont reveal), I think the scene would still work while tightening up the writing. I also think it’d get the message across, too.
Now, if the writers really wanted that scene to stay as-is, there are options. Make them an alien from a culture not as enlightened (which would cause other issues) or have this scene play into a bigger theme of Earth backsliding post-Burn (like a Dark Ages) to have mores closer to the 21st century and show the 23rd century crew as horrified by it and work to bring Earth and humanity back toward enlightenment.
This kinda sums up my main problem with Disco. There were great options on the table to realize a concept, but they just wrote it in an awkward way that is unsatisfying (at least to me).
Greg@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
The scene you’re describing is a good example. Though I would argue that given this story line is set a millennium in the future, it isn’t just lazily progressive, it’s an ultra-conservative view of the future. It perpetuates today’s bigotries as universal truths instead of challenging the audience to perceive of a future without our current bigotries like the Kirk / Uhura kiss did 50 years ago.
Manabi@startrek.website 3 months ago
Yeah someone being non-binary or whatever and no one caring or commenting on it at all is a lot more progressive and meaningful. TOS did that really well with Uhura on the bridge. She was a black woman and absolutely no one on the ship acted like that was remotely odd. It sent a very powerful message.
DaleGribble88@programming.dev 3 months ago
I’ve only made it to season 2, so I’m holding out hope that it gets better, but lazily progressive seems to describe it pretty well.
The one that really runs me rough it how Tilly is very clearly coded to be some type of neuro divergent, probably autistic, but also only when it is convenient and quirky and will not interfere with the plot too much.
Her suddenly being very socially adept when the plot needed her to pretend to be an evil commander or whatever, and she dropped all of her character flaws to make it happen just felt so out of character and lazy.
Also the scenes with Spock and “child abuse bad” at the start of the red angel arc was very ham fisted.
I much preferred how SNW handled the “our wonderful society is supported by horrible child labor and death” arc. Still about as subtle as a brick, but it at least felt like an attempt was made to encode a message, and not just saying it at the viewer like a pre-school cartoon recapping the message of the episode.
Manabi@startrek.website 3 months ago
It also felt like it was shoehorning in all the progressiveness for the sake of being progressive which sends the exact opposite message than they hoped for. The crew was so amazingly diverse representing so many different things that any adult would look at it and go “the odds of all these different sexualities/etc. being on one ship at once are so improbable as to be impossible.” That makes it feel like pandering, not being progressive. That could work for kids, just being able to see someone like them on screen helps a lot, but Discovery is very much not meant for kids to watch.
Basically they tried too hard and didn’t understand what they were doing.
danielquinn@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
Can you give some examples of this? Admittedly I didn’t much care for Discovery and didn’t pay a lot of attention through it as a result, but I’m not picking up what you’re laying down ;-)
Greg@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
The original series was based in a post-race society. When Kirk and Uhura kiss, it wasn’t an interracial kiss in the show because the concept of race doesn’t exist in the 24th century universe. It got backlash when it aired because some people couldn’t contemplate a the future without their current bigotry existing. Star Trek explored current social issues by visiting some planet with a veiled of that issue.
Contrast that to Discovery where Burnham is having a conversation with an Admiral and the Admiral brings up Burnham’s family’s history of slavery.
danielquinn@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
Ah yeah, I remember a moment like that in DS9, where Sisko is lamenting the crew’s interest in a holosuite program set in the 50s because of how “our people” were treated back then. It always felt out of place for me, though DS9 is still my favourite Star Trek.