Irene Demova wrote:I liked that ep more than the past couple and whilst the ending was super obvious it at least left a bit of ambiguity it was such an obvious trap that it's entirely possible Lorca sent his mate to her death so he could keep his ship
Hexx wrote:
Dodgey ass back story
'fights like a klingon'
Yep
Also Voq's actor doesn't actually exist irl, the name is something like "livelong prosper" in a different language
I don't think it's the case though, they're laying it on way too heavy with fights like a Klingon and him saying "that's what being human is"
If we accept this spoiler, could this be a lead in to why all Klingons in TOS were just without forehead crests? I think they explained the difference between TOS and TNG by stating there was some sort of virus or disease in the species' past but could Voq's transformation be the first of many, similar to how T'Kvma was the originator of the cloaking technology?
It was already explained in Enterprise as a disease that was going to spread...
To lots of distain "Why answer a question no one asked! We accepted that make up had changes from the 60s!"
It was a pretty good set of episodes though that actually got Enterprise back to being a prequel and doing it right.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:02 pm
by Hexx
Tafdolphin wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:
Irene Demova wrote:I liked that ep more than the past couple and whilst the ending was super obvious it at least left a bit of ambiguity it was such an obvious trap that it's entirely possible Lorca sent his mate to her death so he could keep his ship
Hexx wrote:
Dodgey ass back story
'fights like a klingon'
Yep
Also Voq's actor doesn't actually exist irl, the name is something like "livelong prosper" in a different language
I don't think it's the case though, they're laying it on way too heavy with fights like a Klingon and him saying "that's what being human is"
If we accept this spoiler, could this be a lead in to why all Klingons in TOS were just without forehead crests? I think they explained the difference between TOS and TNG by stating there was some sort of virus or disease in the species' past but could Voq's transformation be the first of many, similar to how T'Kvma was the originator of the cloaking technology?
It was already explained in Enterprise as a disease that was going to spread...
To lots of distain "Why answer a question no one asked! We accepted that make up had changes from the 60s!"
But wasn't Enterprise set before TOS?
Yep.
Donkers ago - so the human looking virus should have spread though the empire.
So the Klingon Timeline looks like:
Early Enterprise: Cornish Pasty Heads Late Enterprise: Human Like Discovery: Sunburnt crabs and ?????? (If anything) TOS: Human-Like TOS Movies: Cornish Pasty Heads (don't think it's made clear when the disease was cured) TNG Onwards: Cornish Pasty Heads
I'd laugh heavily if it turns out between Ent and Disc they cured the disease and then between Disc and TOS caught another very similar one
:
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:03 pm
by Lagamorph
I could easily accept the appearance of the Klingons in Discovery as being the results of early attempts to cure the Augment virus.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:03 pm
by Peter Crisp
Tafdolphin wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:
Irene Demova wrote:I liked that ep more than the past couple and whilst the ending was super obvious it at least left a bit of ambiguity it was such an obvious trap that it's entirely possible Lorca sent his mate to her death so he could keep his ship
Hexx wrote:
Dodgey ass back story
'fights like a klingon'
Yep
Also Voq's actor doesn't actually exist irl, the name is something like "livelong prosper" in a different language
I don't think it's the case though, they're laying it on way too heavy with fights like a Klingon and him saying "that's what being human is"
If we accept this spoiler, could this be a lead in to why all Klingons in TOS were just without forehead crests? I think they explained the difference between TOS and TNG by stating there was some sort of virus or disease in the species' past but could Voq's transformation be the first of many, similar to how T'Kvma was the originator of the cloaking technology?
It was already explained in Enterprise as a disease that was going to spread...
To lots of distain "Why answer a question no one asked! We accepted that make up had changes from the 60s!"
But wasn't Enterprise set before TOS? Either Discovery or TOS is going to be waaaay off the canon set by Entreprise in that case.
I have a feeling this will be explained by them simply being a slightly different cast and that casts use some form of cosmetic surgery (we've seen a guy get his nose rebuilt on the show so we know the tech exists to change facial features pretty easily) to appear different. It's not a fantastic explanation but it's about the best I can come up with that isn't obviously a steaming pile of poop.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:06 pm
by Peter Crisp
Hexx wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:
Hexx wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:
Irene Demova wrote:I liked that ep more than the past couple and whilst the ending was super obvious it at least left a bit of ambiguity it was such an obvious trap that it's entirely possible Lorca sent his mate to her death so he could keep his ship
Hexx wrote:
Dodgey ass back story
'fights like a klingon'
Yep
Also Voq's actor doesn't actually exist irl, the name is something like "livelong prosper" in a different language
I don't think it's the case though, they're laying it on way too heavy with fights like a Klingon and him saying "that's what being human is"
If we accept this spoiler, could this be a lead in to why all Klingons in TOS were just without forehead crests? I think they explained the difference between TOS and TNG by stating there was some sort of virus or disease in the species' past but could Voq's transformation be the first of many, similar to how T'Kvma was the originator of the cloaking technology?
It was already explained in Enterprise as a disease that was going to spread...
To lots of distain "Why answer a question no one asked! We accepted that make up had changes from the 60s!"
But wasn't Enterprise set before TOS?
Yep.
Donkers ago - so the human looking virus should have spread though the empire.
So the Klingon Timeline looks like:
Early Enterprise: Cornish Pasty Heads Late Enterprise: Human Like Discovery: Sunburnt crabs and ?????? (If anything) TOS: Human-Like TOS Movies: Cornish Pasty Heads (don't think it's made clear when the disease was cured) TNG Onwards: Cornish Pasty Heads
I'd laugh heavily if it turns out between Ent and Disc they cured the disease and then between Disc and TOS caught another very similar one
:
What if they actually just really like Cornish pasties and just like some people have tattoo's of football clubs they go and just get a Cornish pasty face? In the next series all Klingons speak Cornish . Just think of the tourism potential .
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:09 pm
by Tafdolphin
I think I'm the only one who actually likes the new Klingons. They're genuinely nasty here, both in aesthetics and actions, and a fitting villain race fo' sho'.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:10 pm
by Hexx
Tafdolphin wrote:I think I'm the only one who actually likes the new Klingons. They're genuinely nasty here, both in aesthetics and actions, and a fitting villain race fo' sho'.
I like them
There's no need for them to be Klingons. (Or Discovery to be a prequel)
They could have easily set it 100 years in the future and avoided so many messes
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:12 pm
by Tafdolphin
Hexx wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:I think I'm the only one who actually likes the new Klingons. They're genuinely nasty here, both in aesthetics and actions, and a fitting villain race fo' sho'.
I like them
There's no need for them to be Klingons. (Or Discovery to be a prequel)
They could have easily set it 100 years in the future and avoided so many messes
That's true. There's no overt ties to the original series yet, apart from Sarek and a passing mention of Archer. They must be building up to something though.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:13 pm
by Peter Crisp
I quite like them. They are a real solid enemy and not something that can be defeated easily but at the same time they aren't powerful enough to just wipe out the Federation with ease. If they end up banded together as a single unified force I think they could be powerful enough to do so but this infighting will be interesting to watch. The show can still have a few enemy of the week type stories but always with the Klingons in the background causing trouble.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:13 pm
by Mafro
Looking forward to the Tartegrade returning to save the day at some point.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:13 pm
by Lagamorph
Hexx wrote:
Tafdolphin wrote:I think I'm the only one who actually likes the new Klingons. They're genuinely nasty here, both in aesthetics and actions, and a fitting villain race fo' sho'.
I like them
There's no need for them to be Klingons. (Or Discovery to be a prequel)
They could have easily set it 100 years in the future and avoided so many messes
The Spore Drive would've been a good future tech as well and would've avoided so many continuity issues and questions.
It does kind of seem like someone had the idea of "What if Spock had a sister" and went from there. Or they just thought the reboot movies were working well so let's just do that. Oh what do you mean we have to set it in the same universe as the TV show? Oh well let's just shoehorn it anyway.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:14 pm
by Tafdolphin
Peter Crisp wrote:I quite like them. They are a real solid enemy and not something that can be defeated easily but at the same time they aren't powerful enough to just wipe out the Federation with ease. If they end up banded together as a single unified force I think they could be powerful enough to do so but this infighting will be interesting to watch. The show can still have a few enemy of the week type stories but always with the Klingons in the background causing trouble.
I'd argue that's what this week's ep was.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:14 pm
by Hexx
Mafro wrote:Looking forward to the Tartegrade returning to save the day at some point.
Burnham made friend with it.
It's totally going to get a Big Damn Heroes/Gunship Rescue Moment
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:18 pm
by Peter Crisp
I think the Tartegrade will be left alone until the final episodes where they explain why the drive is now useless.
Just as long as it's not another alternate timeline.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:59 pm
by captain red dog
I like the behaviour of he new Klingons but honestly their look is just so generic. Not that impressed with Burnham still, I think it's because the Vulcan/Human thing has been done so many times already.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 9:08 pm
by Squinty
Liked that last episode. Some actual character growth for Michael and Lorca.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 1:18 am
by Green Gecko
I thought that was a pretty cracking episode with more location and character depth, nice to see a Vulcan world.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 1:36 am
by Peter Crisp
This does however remind me why I've become such a fan of bingeing series as it's really annoying having to wait a week for a new episode.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 7:12 am
by Squinty
Green Gecko wrote:I thought that was a pretty cracking episode with more location and character depth, nice to see a Vulcan world.
Maybe Michael will not be so closed off and bleh after this one.
Re: Star Trek Discovery
Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:20 am
by Corazon de Leon
Are we just calling the tardigrade a tartegrade or is that what they've actually called it?
.
.