Explaining? Stars go supernova occasionally, there’s your explanation. There doesn’t need to be further cause or intervention behind it.
Stars don’t just randomly supernova. Stars have extremely predictable lifecycles. It’s hard to believe a warp-capable species never made it past a 19th century understanding of how their sun works, especially given how fundamental the underlying principles are to our own ability to observe and understand the universe.
It’s a plot hole in ST '09, though I agree that maybe it is best ignored unless they can come up with a truly compelling explanation.
i would think continually rehashing characters from the ‘60s is a move meant to appeal to people in their 60s.
i’m much more interested in the Star Trek: Legacy pitch, but even then i want them to keep legacy characters limited to guest appearances so that the new crew has a chance to stand on its own.
I love it when they try to take risks and do something new or different with the IP. Even if it fails, the end result is still usually more interesting than a safe retread would have been. Disco isn’t my favorite Star Trek, but it is one of the most interesting entries in the franchise, and has done a lot to expand and solidify the 23rd century canon.
People forget how controversial the Battlestar Galactica reboot was. Same goes for Daniel Craig’s James Bond. Simply being different from the source material is not enough to make it bad. Discovery isn’t as good as either of these, but i’m glad it tried.
