• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Disco Season 3, "Genesis II", and "Andromeda"

I'm going to be Shocked if the Time Travelers Dulmur (well maybe not him as the actor who played him passed away in 2017) and Lucsly or daniels (Matt Winston) or Lieutenant Ducane (Jay Karnes) don't appear in Season 3 as they will probably be like, "WTF were you guys thinking?"
 
The Discovery is classified in the 23rd century, and knowledge of it suppressed or dwindling in the 24th, but by the 31st/32nd, that info might've come to light, and its use of spore drive and fight against AI might be seen as quaint in an age of slipstream and rights for all sentients.

It could be seen as legendary by the V'Draysh/Federation. They could have a welcoming party and all sorts of uplifting jazz. You know, before they turn out to be a bunch of organ harvesters.
 
Read plenty of books, even star trek books, that deal with the rise and fall of civilizations, Here its only been a thousand years, so kind of a blink of the eye for galaxy time scale..
You have a few options for the federation:
1. Its fine, and dandy still tooting along as is, just bigger.
2. It has completly imploded and doesnt' exist..
3. Something happened and it "splintered" in to new "countries" as it were.. say similar to the soviet breakup..
4. It was invaded by an alien and sundered.. ala a big borg invasion..
5. It rose, then it stagnated, and planets started to leave it ( something like that cartoon that was cancelled)
6. Kind of an alegory to today with the federal government.. after a number of wars, invasions, etc. the federation gets more dictatorial, and start doing things "for the greater good" and puts the needs of its "States" on the back burner and maybe Alchor 4 was trying to get out of the federation.. So not exactly a "Bad Federation" but one that has lost its way and maybe Disco Inferno can teach them to be better..
 
mattman8907 said:
I'm going to be Shocked if the Time Travelers Dulmur (well maybe not him as the actor who played him passed away in 2017) and Lucsly or daniels (Matt Winston) or Lieutenant Ducane (Jay Karnes) don't appear in Season 3 as they will probably be like, "WTF were you guys thinking?"
Click to expand...

I'll be shocked if anyone ever even thinks about them.
 
Serveaux said:
I'll be shocked if anyone ever even thinks about them.
Click to expand...

Contrary to what you may think is best, and what some claim to be the case, Discovery is the most referential Star Trek series in the franchise. They're going to be in or around the 31st century. The previous iteration of the 31st century will probably be addressed, in a particularly cringeworthy and eye-rolling manner.
 
Tim Thomason said:
Contrary to what you may think is best, and what some claim to be the case, Discovery is the most referential Star Trek series in the franchise. They're going to be in or around the 31st century. The previous iteration of the 31st century will probably be addressed, in a particularly cringeworthy and eye-rolling manner.
Click to expand...

I can't believe I'm going to say this but I agree with Serveaux. I don't think they'll be seen or referenced. The whole point of jumping so far ahead was to get away from everything else.

All TNG/DS9/VOY references will go to Picard. If the third season of Discovery refers back to previous Trek at all, it'll be whatever stood out the most. It's not going to be Dulmer and Lucly.

Alex Kurtzman's words:
We love playing within canon. It’s a delight and a privilege. It’s fun to explore nooks and crannies of the universe that people haven’t fully explored yet. That being said, we felt strongly that we wanted to give ourselves an entirely new energy for season three with a whole new set of problems. We’re farther than any Trek show has ever gone. I also had experience working on the [J.J. Abrams] films where we were stuck with canonical problems. We knew how Kirk had died, and we wondered how we could put him in jeopardy to make it feel real. That’s what led us to go with an alternate timeline; suddenly we could tell the story in a very unpredictable way. That’s the same thought process that went into jumping 950 years into the future. We’re now completely free of canon, and we have a whole new universe to explore.
Click to expand...

There will be canonical references to everything that has happened in the various shows; we’re not erasing that. But we’re so far past that point that all of that is a very distant memory. We’re very excited to see how you put the elements of Star Trek in an entirely new universe.
Click to expand...

He's not saying that they're erasing previous Trek but it will have been so long ago that it won't matter. Doesn't exactly sound like they'll have different characters from other series showing up willy-nilly at random, given when they are.

.
.
.

DSC will be taking place in the 32nd Century. 3187 to be exact. The most likely explanation is the 31st Century in ENT is that it was just a possible future. Not the future future. If anyone needs an explanation there are two:

1. The Temperal Cold War. It makes no sense. And whatever happened, everything was probably undone at the end. So it's like it never happened.

2. Gabrielle Burnham changed the future so many times going back and forth in time that whatever happened in the future before was probably all invalidated.

Both work for me.
 
Last edited:
CorporalCaptain said:
What does that even mean?
Click to expand...

References other Star Trek shows. Some say it's not "real Star Trek" because they "never" reference something from TOS or Enterprise, but they *always* reference TOS or Enterprise or TNG or whatever. They devoted an entire episode to following up The Cage. They had Harry Mudd show up as a recurring antagonist. They made a sequel to In a Mirror, Darkly.

They can't help themselves. It's just what they do. Star Trek: Picard will take care of some dangling 24th century threads, Lower Decks will probably have some sort of tongue-in-cheek nods to everything, and Discovery 3 will do some nod, however slight, to the known temporal shenanigans of the era.
 
Tim Thomason said:
References other Star Trek shows. Some say it's not "real Star Trek" because they "never" reference something from TOS or Enterprise, but they *always* reference TOS or Enterprise or TNG or whatever. They devoted an entire episode to following up The Cage. They had Harry Mudd show up as a recurring antagonist. They made a sequel to In a Mirror, Darkly.

They can't help themselves. It's just what they do. Star Trek: Picard will take care of some dangling 24th century threads, Lower Decks will probably have some sort of tongue-in-cheek nods to everything, and Discovery 3 will do some nod, however slight, to the known temporal shenanigans of the era.
Click to expand...
Nah, you said "most referential." All you've done here is tell me what "referential" means, and I already knew that.
 
Tim Thomason said:
Discovery 3 will do some nod, however slight, to the known temporal shenanigans of the era.
Click to expand...

They'll reference ENT in a way that makes sense. If it makes sense to come up. The Federation was still around in the 31st Century. If it's not still around in the 32nd, it fell or became something else.

If they reference the Temporal Cold War, see my previous post. From what I understand, the Temporal Cold War wasn't too popular even with ENT fans. So I don't know why they'd want to reference it. The stuff they're referencing seems to be the Greatest Hits.

"In the Mirror Darkly" is an episode people liked, so of course they referenced it. And since they had Georgiou already know what happened in "In the Mirror Darkly" that meant the Prime Universe didn't have to be explained to her, so they could keep the pace moving. That's why they did it.
 
CorporalCaptain said:
Nah, you said "most referential." All you've done here is tell me what "referential" means, and I already knew that.
Click to expand...

Sorry. It means it is more referential than previous series, in my opinion. I don't have the ability to measure whether, for example, if Enterprise as a prequel had more references (it does have a fair bit), or if DS9 somehow topped the meter with its MU episodes, so I could be objectively wrong.

It just seems that Discovery goes a long way to bring up threads from series in interesting or odd ways. Nothing wrong with that (continuity is my jam), but a little disconcerting when people claim it not to be the case at all.
 
I acknowledge that a kind of dystopian future seems likely, especially when you consider Kurtzman's style. But I can't help but think that that's what they want us to think and are going to throw us a curve ball.

But if there is dystopian, I hope it's "post war" and their focus is trying to restore something that resembles Federation values... maybe not for the galaxy, but for themselves. I guess similar to Andromeda (I remember watching the show, but I don't remember too much from it other than I had a pathetic crush on Lexa Doig). I just don't know if I'd like another season spent on war.
 
Tim Thomason said:
Sorry. It means it is more referential than previous series, in my opinion. I don't have the ability to measure whether, for example, if Enterprise as a prequel had more references (it does have a fair bit), or if DS9 somehow topped the meter with its MU episodes, so I could be objectively wrong.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Plus, DS9 has Klingon episodes galore, including episodes involving TOS Klingon characters. It has an episode set inside a TOS episode, with characters inserted into original series footage. Not to mention, the situation between the Cardassians and the Bajorans is a direct follow-up to events set up in TNG, and Sisko's story begins in "The Best of Both Worlds, Part II." That's just for starters.

Try as it might, TNG itself has lots of references back to TOS. TAS is highly "referential" of TOS, both in terms of having episodes that are direct sequels and in terms of using main and guest TOS characters and locations.

The issue is that it's unnecessary to try to establish DISCO as the most referential of any of the spinoffs, and anyway it's impossible to objectively establish it as such.

It just seems that Discovery goes a long way to bring up threads from series in interesting or odd ways. Nothing wrong with that (continuity is my jam), but a little disconcerting when people claim it not to be the case at all.
Click to expand...
Yes, DISCO definitely references TOS continuity, and does so as an essential ingredient, no question about it, though not exclusively.
 
Tuskin38 said:
I really enjoyed Andromeda, even the final season.
But there is a trend I've seen that I like things the loudest fans dislike.
Click to expand...

You are by no means alone. I liked Andromeda too and even season 5 to a degree, well parts of it anyway.

I think the Commonwealth fell right about the time of Rhade's betrayal and on the day or days after the ship got stranded. It happened suddenly.

Tim Thomason said:
The Discovery is classified in the 23rd century, and knowledge of it suppressed or dwindling in the 24th, but by the 31st/32nd, that info might've come to light, and its use of spore drive and fight against AI might be seen as quaint in an age of slipstream and rights for all sentients.

It could be seen as legendary by the V'Draysh/Federation. They could have a welcoming party and all sorts of uplifting jazz. You know, before they turn out to be a bunch of organ harvesters.
Click to expand...


"Welcome brave crew of the USS Discovery"
"Welcome and enjoy, and thankyou for your spleens and other bits."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top