The biggest problem with Kurtzmans garbage is he has forgotten what Gene Roddenberry was trying to show that the human species can and will constantly evolve to better them selves.

@mcse2000ca said:

The biggest problem with Kurtzmans garbage is he has forgotten what Gene Roddenberry was trying to show that the human species can and will constantly evolve to better them selves.

This is very true, mcse2000ca. Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was always about humanity evolving, moving beyond the 20th and 21st century behavior.

Meanwhile Kurtzman's dumpster fire shows have us believe all that progress never happened. Like the human species keeps regressing over and over again to perpetuate the retcon that Star Trek is like some HBO style dystopia

Of course, sometimes people forget that everything good in Star Trek happens AFTER the devastation of World War 3.

Both STD and STP put most of the focus on Burnham and Soji at the expense of all other characters, like the majority of Discovery's bridge crew for example. Three seasons in and they're still less defined than Ensign Ro Laren, who only appeared a handful of times on TNG.

Which Seth MacFarlane also clearly has mastered because we know more about the secondary cast of The Orville after 2 seasons than STD in 3 seasons .

@Knixon said:

Of course, sometimes people forget that everything good in Star Trek happens AFTER the devastation of World War 3.

This is true, followed by what was called a post-atomic nightmare.

Which begs the question, why doesn't Kurtzman do a show set before/during/after World War 3? It would tick so many of the boxes seen during Kurtzman's producing reign, like miserable characters, a bleak setting, harsh cursing, vomiting, peeing, alcoholism, smoking, suicidal behavior, corruption, betrayal, horrific violence, emotional instability, and it would be a prequel too.

It would be Star Trek but without the Star Trek.

Wait, isn't that just STD?

Except there was little or no star travel, let alone TIME travel, in that period. There were the slower-than-light early colony ships that went out to various places including Alpha Centauri, where somewhere along the way or something, Zefram Cochrane discovered warp drive. And on a technological level, it wouldn't surprise me if something like warp drive isn't discoverable anywhere near a gravity well such as a star or even a planet. Once discovered and then advanced, it might be possible to find a way to use warp drive closer to large masses. But being somewhere in interstellar space - not just interplanetary - might be necessary for the original discovery.

@VobIdem said:

@Knixon said:

Of course, sometimes people forget that everything good in Star Trek happens AFTER the devastation of World War 3.

This is true, followed by what was called a post-atomic nightmare.

Which begs the question, why doesn't Kurtzman do a show set before/during/after World War 3? It would tick so many of the boxes seen during Kurtzman's producing reign, like miserable characters, a bleak setting, harsh cursing, vomiting, peeing, alcoholism, smoking, suicidal behavior, corruption, betrayal, horrific violence, emotional instability, and it would be a prequel too.

It would be Star Trek but without the Star Trek.

Wait, isn't that just STD?

But it hasn't got Spock,Sarek,The Klingons ,The Romulans,Section 31 that he can monetize or use to lure in Trek fans.

blah blah blah that was Roddenberry who at least was more creative in coming up with a new IP unlike Kurtzman who steals from other franchises or rehashes stuff from Star Trek ,Kurtzman is a creative black hole.

@Invidia said:

@VobIdem said:

@mcse2000ca said:

The biggest problem ... he has forgotten what Gene Roddenberry was trying to show that the human species can and will constantly evolve to better them selves.

This is very true, mcse2000ca. Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was always about humanity evolving, moving beyond the 20th and 21st century behavior.

---

ACTUALLY **this is NOT TRUE due to

RODDENBERRY also created another SHOW called EARTH FINAL CONFLICT

This is also a passage from NIETZSCHE's THUS SPOKE ZARATHUSTRA

As APE is to MAN, so SHALL MAN be to the OVER MAN.

THE MOTELY COW where he finds a MAN walking across a TIGHTROPE

out comes the LITTLE MONEY

STUCK in a LOOP

one can WITNESS on a BEACH where a GROUP of YOUNG BOYS

the SUN and the MOON exchange places

ever since HUMAN KIND was CREATED

the END of SPACE/TIME

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth:_Final_Conflict

Majel Barrett-Roddenberry

HUMANKIND is NOTHING

DR. JEKYLL and MR. HIDE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Case_of_Dr_Jekyll_and_Mr_Hyde

a London legal practitioner named Gabriel John Utterson

REMOVE the APE LIKE PART

So DREAM ON

@Invidia ALSO said:

WHY is it YOU CAN NEVER seem to ever STICK to a TOPIC and always have LEAP to other SUBJECTS that have NO BEARING UPON the TOPIC at hand???

Good question!

So, why can't you stick to the topic, Invidia?

Well if we are going to apply Nietzsche to Star Trek the Vulcans seem the ones that seem to tick off the most boxes of Nietzsches over-humans theory and ENT kinda dealt with the moral and ethical problems that that kinda of thinking creates during the run of it's four seasons.Plus history itself showed us the dangers when a bastardized version of the Übermensch (courtesy of Nietzsche's own sister) was used by the Germans to justify genocide of an entire group of people.

@Invidia said:

@Nexus71 said:

blah blah blah that was Roddenberry who at least was more creative ...

AND it was also RODDENBERRY who CREATED EARTH FINAL CONFLICT where he DEMONSTRATES for us what would happen if we EVOLVED to the POINT where we RID OURSELVES of our APE LIKE NATURES.

The RESULT would be DISASTEROUS for US, due to the way we'd have NO SEX DRIVE anymore, which would also lead to the END of OUR SPECIES (like the case was with the TALONS).

In other words, we're STUCK with OUR DUAL NATURES ... which was also DEMONSTRATED for us in FORBIDDEN PLANET ... where they DISCOVERED how if you INCREASE your IQ, you also INCREASE the APE LIKE PART of you (your ID) at the same time as well.

PLUS there's also the other MATTER to CONSIDER where even IF we could become OVERMEN and/or OVER WOMEN, that would also mean we HUMANS would also be APE LIKE CREATURES to them (the same way as the APES are INFERIOR CREATURES to us HUMANS who EVOLVED from them).

So do we REALLY want to EVOLVE to become some kind of OVER BEINGS or SUPER HUMAN BEINGS when that would also REDUCE OUR STATUS to being like that of the APES???

Roddenberry never "demonstrated" anything. He just made up some stuff. You seem to fall into that trap a lot, inexplicably. If Roddenberry makes up something that is appealing, we can like it. If he makes up something else that doesn't make sense at all, that doesn't mean it's "true" just because he made up something else that a lot of people like. Similarly, just because people WRITE - MAKE UP - books and movies and TV shows where - for example - men treat women badly etc, that doesn't prove that men really/always/often/if-they-can-get-away-with-it treat or "dream of" treating women that way, or that it's "the nature of things" or whatever. It MIGHT prove that a lot of writers have odd minds. But most people don't write books and movies and TV shows.

But we weren't talking about Nietzsche we were talking about the rather bland shallow supporting characters.

@Nexus71 said:

Both STD and STP put most of the focus on Burnham and Soji at the expense of all other characters, like the majority of Discovery's bridge crew for example. Three seasons in and they're still less defined than Ensign Ro Laren, who only appeared a handful of times on TNG.

Which Seth MacFarlane also clearly has mastered because we know more about the secondary cast of The Orville after 2 seasons than STD in 3 seasons .

Good points and I wanted to reply sooner but Invidia's nonsense made it difficult without double posting.

Yaphit, Klyden, Teleya, Marcus and Ty Finn, Admiral Halsey are all better defined and I find myself wanting to know more about them. Like will Claire allow Isaac to resume being a father-like figure to Marcus and Ty? Or will Bortus and Klyden stay married under so much marital strain?

While on STD, I feel indifferent about Doctor Culber and Stamets newfound role as parents to Adira for example

@Invidia said:

@Knixon said:

@Invidia said:

@Nexus71 said:

blah blah blah that was Roddenberry who at least was more creative ...

AND it was also RODDENBERRY who CREATED EARTH FINAL CONFLICT where he DEMONSTRATES for us what would happen if we EVOLVED to the POINT where we RID OURSELVES of our APE LIKE NATURES.

The RESULT would be DISASTEROUS for US, due to the way we'd have NO SEX DRIVE anymore, which would also lead to the END of OUR SPECIES (like the case was with the TALONS).

In other words, we're STUCK with OUR DUAL NATURES ... which was also DEMONSTRATED for us in FORBIDDEN PLANET ... where they DISCOVERED how if you INCREASE your IQ, you also INCREASE the APE LIKE PART of you (your ID) at the same time as well.

PLUS there's also the other MATTER to CONSIDER where even IF we could become OVERMEN and/or OVER WOMEN, that would also mean we HUMANS would also be APE LIKE CREATURES to them (the same way as the APES are INFERIOR CREATURES to us HUMANS who EVOLVED from them).

So do we REALLY want to EVOLVE to become some kind of OVER BEINGS or SUPER HUMAN BEINGS when that would also REDUCE OUR STATUS to being like that of the APES???

Roddenberry never "demonstrated" anything. He just made up some stuff.

ON THE CONTRARY, what he DEMONSTRATED is that HE ALSO STOLE SOMETHING from SOMEONE ELSE because the TALONS were also LIGHT BEINGS (like the one's in BSG).

PAUSE this VIDEO at the 8:40 TIME MARK and you'll see 3 LIGHT BEINGS in the BACKGROUND:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-sQJbxh9T4&feature=emb_logo

Earth Final Conflict 0311 Interview

And they also have a conversation about HUMANS being a SUBSPECIES to the TALONS.

So the ENTIRE TIME NEX keeps COMPLAINING about how the WRITERS for the NEW TREK SHOW STOLE STUFF or IDEAS from others, RODDENBERRY also did the SAME DAMN THING.

Uh.

The Organians from "Errand of Mercy" were "light beings" way before BG. And then if Roddenberry wanted to use that idea again in his later show, so what?

@VobIdem said:

@Nexus71 said:

Both STD and STP put most of the focus on Burnham and Soji at the expense of all other characters, like the majority of Discovery's bridge crew for example. Three seasons in and they're still less defined than Ensign Ro Laren, who only appeared a handful of times on TNG.

Which Seth MacFarlane also clearly has mastered because we know more about the secondary cast of The Orville after 2 seasons than STD in 3 seasons .

Good points and I wanted to reply sooner but Invidia's nonsense made it difficult without double posting.

Yaphit, Klyden, Teleya, Marcus and Ty Finn, Admiral Halsey are all better defined and I find myself wanting to know more about them. Like will Claire allow Isaac to resume being a father-like figure to Marcus and Ty? Or will Bortus and Klyden stay married under so much marital strain?

While on STD, I feel indifferent about Doctor Culber and Stamets newfound role as parents to** Adira** for example

Oh, yeah, Adira from Babylon 5.