Well, no. As the person making the claim the burden of proof is on you to do the research. My responsibility to provide proof of your claim is zero. But I'm a curious sort and found this via a search, an article on Wikipedia .The article traces the concept of warp drive to John W. Campbell's 1957 novel "Islands of Space" which predates Star Trek by nearly a decade. It also sites antecedents going back to 1931. It also mentions the closest real world analog, the Alcubierrie drive which originated in 1994, well after Star Trek. It also has an extensive section on Star Trek's use of the term. But what it doesn't have is a mention of JPL. An oversight? Perhaps you have research that can clarify and confirm?
Thank you. I honestly did not know this. Marvel has made billions of dollars off of the stuff. Don't mistake your opinion for broad trends. It really doesn't matter whether or not you have branching timelines, it is whether the writers can make it engaging for the audience.
It's not just my opinion. How well did Quantumania perform in theatres again? The Flash? When's the next Kelvinverse movie coming out? How'd DC'S New 52 work out? What's the status for Marvel's Ultimate universe? Repeatedly, the market has shown that reboots have diminishing returns. Like I've said elsewhere, a reboot hardly ever lasts even a fraction as long as the original. You want to kill Star Trek? Start doing more reboots and alternate timelines. The problem is that eventually people stop caring because nothing means anything. It doesn't matter if Vulcan is blown up, because it's still around in that other universe, etc, etc
I accidently click on a DISCOVERY thread, and it turns out to be a good one... Another thing they could have done was set it in the mid 25th century and use the new Klingon makeup design for a species like the Hur'q if you wanted a Klingon angle. Burnham could have been ~Spock's~ adoptive daughter. Or maybe Tuvok's. Instead they went with the worst possible option, splintering everything. Infinite reboots are the path to nihilism. Some people seemingly just want to reboot TOS every decade. Star Trek has decades of continuity and rich lore. That is an asset to be built upon, not wiped away in the name of a format that says okay a group of people on a ship in a quasi-utopian future.
What's splintered again? It still has connections to the past produces, with a very similar design movement in changes in visuals. The problem is one of balance. TNG felt futuristic in the 80s but then doesn't any more. So do we kick down to the 25th or 26th century, while still working in Voyager timeframe put out about the Timeship Relativity, and other time travel shenanigans, while creating something with the technology? Or, do we just treat Star Trek as a period piece and just extrapolate its tech and ignore current understandings of tech?
For me, DISCO didn't jump a shark. It went full Evel Knievel and jumped several sharks set end to end in season 1. To wit: T'Mushmouth and his merry band of mumbling lizard Klingons Magic mushroom super-duper insta-warp drive Giant killer misunderstood space tardigrade/Guild navigator Undercover Klingon driving a human meat suit and the laziest play of all... Returning to the overused-to-death Mirror Universe That's my opinion. I know plenty of people like/love the show.
Especially the MU. The MU is fantastic and the hatred of it baffles me to this day. And probably tomorrow too.
These two had such great sci-fi value. Go anywhere in the universe, anytime. Yet, was just a gateway to nostalgia.
I wouldn't say it was fantastic. The original TOS version was meant as a cautionary tale, and quite possibly just a made-up scenario by the Halkans, and the MU didn't actually exist (which would have been the most logical way of looking at the episode.) The DS9 version was just a bastardized attempt to show some lesbianism, leather, and beloved characters acting like over-the-top assholes, and the ENT version was just a carryover from that. The DSC version, while fantastic in a production sense, simply showed just how ridiculous the entire concept of the MU is, and that it is a completely unrealistic way of life. And I detest the Emperor Georgiou character almost as much as Michael Burnham, because she is completely irredeemable and modern Trek is making her out to be some kind of idol when she is nothing of the sort. She's just an asshole like everyone else in the MU.
Reminds me of empires and organized crime. Who's idolizing her? Being a protagonist does not make you an idol. The very flower of humanity, to quote Spock.
Which is not a life anyone without criminal intent would want to have. The producers of DSC and every character on that show. Semantics. Still an asshole.
Depends on the society. You and I must define idolozing much differently. Hardly. The point of the episode is how we, as humans, have a deep dark side, that can be fostered and motivated and grown as easily as prosocial behavior. This idea that mutual cooperation must be the only way of human society runs smack against different cultures in human history. Yeah, I know, no one cares. But, I found it fascinating, and interesting insight in to what humanity can become, and what we can work hard to not become, and grow beyond. If humanity is ever to learn from the tragedies of its mistakes it starts with acknowledging our capacity for great evil as well as great good.
If you say so. Apparently. Nope, still not buying it. Nothing I've seen has indicated to me that Georgiou has learned some sort of lesson or has realized the error of her ways. I'm sure we're going to see her in the Section 31 movie being just as ruthless, conniving and cold-blooded as she was in DSC.
All of this! TOS used it as a novel one-off and moved on to better things. TNG and VOY wisely stayed away. DS9 ran it into the ground and kept going lower. I never saw ENT's take, and that's fine. I'm not interested.
And again, we must have watched different episodes. Study history. Study humanity. Or organized crime of the modern era. We are not so far removed from this idea as a species as we would like to believe in our modern world. Now realize that the MU doesn't teach mutual cooperation but mutual use to gain power and that Georgiou did not grow up with the highly cultured moral sense that Prime humans can benefit from. She had to see it, learn from others, and value it. Unless we assume all morality is universal and goes across cultures, and alternate universes. It did a decent job for what it was. TOS is still top tier, and DSC not far behind, with a comic series right there as the top three Mirror stories. Fascinating stuff, to quote Spock.
The TOS Mirror Episode was fun, but it was '60s TV. The DS9 Mirror Episodes are NOT what I would've done. You all know what I think of ENT. The DSC Mirror Episodes are the only ones to do it true justice. IMO, of course. No other series after DSC will do it as good either. I said "will" because it'll probably pop up at some point again, somewhere. The problem with Star Trek in general now is that TPTB care too much about what people think. That wasn't a problem during DSC S1. Everything ever since has been about walking back from that, except for PIC S1. Not that I haven't liked a lot of what's come out since then, but the observation stands. As far as I'm concerned, any version of the Mirror Universe that's not DSC is a poor substitute. I consider the DSC version to be the definitive version. EDITED TO ADD: This is also why I'm all about agreeing to disagree. I know a lot of people won't agree some of with my viewpoints. No point in belaboring it... like I did just now.
The most logical way of looking at it? Hard disagree. Four people from the Mirror Universe beamed aboard the USS Enterprise when the landing party crossed over and beamed aboard the ISS Enterprise. It wasn't just some daydream that the landing party experienced.