S04.E13: Coming Home

[paulvdb]

Quote

The DMA approaches Earth and Ni'Var. With evacuations underway, Burnham and the team aboard the U.S.S. Discovery must find a way to communicate and connect with a species far different from their own before time runs out.

Season finale. Premiere date: March 17, 2022.

[paigow]

If Janeway had been in charge, she would not have used the wormhole...

[NeenerNeener]

Stacey Abrams! Woo hoo!

I knew they weren't really going to kill Book but my eyes got puddle-y anyway when they lost his transporter stream. Nice to see Tilly again, but if I was spending my last 10 minutes of life alone with Oded Fehr we wouldn't waste time drinking.

Edited March 17, 2022 by NeenerNeener

[paigow]

3 hours ago, NeenerNeener said:

Nice to see Tilly again, but if I was spending my last 10 minutes of life alone with Oded Fehr we wouldn't waste time drinking.

Dude did not want his last 10 minutes to be a Starfleet HR violation....

[NeenerNeener]

The drinking was already an HR violation....

[MissLucas]

WTF!!! They sent my Queen into exile!!! Just when I started to look forward reading her log entries!

I wish this show would stop doing serialized seasons and return to good old-fashioned one plot per episode story-telling. Those epic arcs where EVERYTHING is at stake get tiresome. 

It was nice to see Tilly again. And yay for Saru and T'Rina!

[starri]

I'd like to remind everyone of Primetimer's rules regarding discussions about Politics.  Multiple posts have been removed regarding Stacey Abrams' appearance.

It's totally fine to mention her appearance, but her career, her political beliefs, and people's opinions on the same are out of bounds.  

Thank you.

[CarpeFelis]

6 hours ago, MissLucas said:

WTF!!! They sent my Queen into exile!!! Just when I started to look forward reading her log entries!

My thoughts exactly! I’m hoping they’ll do a time jump before season 5 so Book is finished doing his community service and can return with The Queen to Discovery. Barring that, would love to see some episodes centering around their adventures away from Discovery. (Better yet: a spinoff Star Trek: Grudge.)

ETA: I enjoyed the graphic novel Star Trek: Discovery—Adventures in the 32nd Century #1 as it’s told from Grudge’s POV. She has some amusing thoughts about Michael.

Edited March 18, 2022 by CarpeFelis

[Stardancer Supreme]

I was a mess when Book's transport signal was lost.  How awesome of the Ten-C to save him.  

I was mildly surprised that the General survived. Figured she should have sacrificed herself because of her treachery.

Maybe next season could be less of a roller coaster! Just do one plot and let the Bridge members have a few adventures on the side.  My nerves are bad and I can't take another World Level Extinction Event. 

Now we all knew Tilly and the lone Admiral in Starfleet was going to live another day! There doesn't seem to be another Admiral around to take Vance's place.  

Now Federation President and Michael are buddies. At least it didn't happen instantaneously.  I want to see who will be the captain of Voyager! 

Go Saru! Get your Vulcan boo! 

[LaylaGirl]

2 hours ago, Stardancer Supreme said:

I was mildly surprised that the General survived. Figured she should have sacrificed herself because of her treachery.

I found it odd that she apparently wasn't punished in any way. Not that Book's punishment seemed all that harsh.

[thuganomics85]

So, it looks like a descendent of Stacey Abrams will end up becoming the President of Earth itself!  Thought she did a good enough job with her lines despite not being experienced with the whole acting thing.

Actually enjoyed the finale more than I thought it would.  It didn't really hold any surprises, but it was nice to see a clean win for the team, with the only major death being Tarka, who at least did seem to see the error of his ways and seemed to be at peace with his death.  Still wish I cared more about him, but Shawn Doyle was excellent here.  Not surprised Booker's death would be a fake out and he'll end up being saved by Ten-C, but it worked enough to bring some emotional drama here.

Great seeing Tilly again and I'm glad she stayed on the ship because I figured that meant Vance was going to be safe as well.  Nice seeing her briefly reunite with the rest of the Discovery crew, but I'm guessing she's going to be involved with the whole Startfleet Academy spin-off?

Booker did get held accountable for his actions, but it sounds like he's basically just doing a form of community service, so I guess it could have been worse.  I don't see him being away from everyone else for too long.

Aww, Saru and T'Rina are already at the "holding hands, giving each other flowers, and calling each other by their first names" part of their relationship!  They'll be hitched in no time!

All in all, it was another typical season of Star Trek: Discovery.  Some good to even great moments throughout the season, but other ones that didn't quite work out as well as they should have.  Can't quite put my finger on what the main issue is, but it feels like it's usually a case of them having a lot of intriguing ideas, but not being able to execute them properly.  But I won't pretend that I won't be back, because even Trek at it's worst can still make for interesting television viewing.

[sugarbaker design]

9 hours ago, Stardancer Supreme said:

I was a mess when Book's transport signal was lost.  How awesome of the Ten-C to save him.  

I knew Book would come back, ST:D is too much of a love fest.

9 hours ago, Stardancer Supreme said:

I was mildly surprised that the General survived. Figured she should have sacrificed herself because of her treachery.

Same here, I was shocked she survived.

 

9 hours ago, Stardancer Supreme said:

There doesn't seem to be another Admiral around to take Vance's place. 

Everyone can be replaced.

Tilly makes everything better, Bobcat!

 

 

[Chit Chat]

I find that this show has become unworthy of being in the Star Trek franchise for a number of reasons.   I will just leave it at that.  :(

[Joimiaroxeu]

Good to see Tilly again, stepping up to the plate and and being a boss during the crisis.

Grudge's holo cat door disruptor FTW.

Well, I respected Ndoye's choice to put herself in mortal peril to try to stop Tarka. It was the least she could do to make amends for her betrayal.

Bobcat? Lol, stay weird, Reno.

Aw, Saru should've kissed T'Rina. Take your shot, my guy. At some point you gotta forget presidential protocol.

Of course Book magically got to reappear. But is that it for him now? Whatever, I'm glad Grudge left with Book to go do his community service. Burnham is definitely not a cat person.

Is Tarka finally assumed dead? 😒

Stacey Abrams as President of the Earth. I wonder how she reacted when they approached her for the cameo?

This almost seemed like a series finale to me. Oh well, on to Season 5.

Quote

If I was spending my last 10 minutes of life alone with Oded Fehr we wouldn't waste time drinking.

I know that's right. 😏

[marinw]

Ugh. That was painful. So talky and self-congratulatory. I read a book during that last twenty minutes. Life forms do not give up their vastly superior technology becuase a lower life form asks nicely. Or maybe they do? I don't even know anymore. I would think the best you could achieve is indiffrence.

Not to be too negative, I do like the theme of restorative justice this season, both with Book and Romulan Warrior Nun who's name I no longer remember. Maybe the Federation doesn't even have prisions? I would be cool with that.

The Genreal seems to have avioded any punishment for her betrayal but her intentions were good, so it's all ok?

Edited March 19, 2022 by marinw

[Chit Chat]

2 hours ago, marinw said:

Ugh. That was painfull. So talky and self-congratulatory.

Extremely slow and painful!  I've renamed this to Star Trek Discovery; Ship of crybabies.   I think Mr. Chat and I are now done with this show.  We can't take another season of that kind of exploration of feelings.  Ugh.  

[aemom]

This drove me crazy: One of the first questions that I would have asked is:

What do you call yourselves?!?!

I feel fairly confident that it's not 10-C. Wouldn't we have liked to know?

[millennium]

So many Hallmark moments!   Lifetime must look at Discovery as the one that got away.

Saru gets the Reg Barkley award for not understanding social cues.   When your inamorata has just had her brain scrambled by mind-melding with every last member of an unknown species ... when she has green blood streaming out of her nose ... probably the last thing she wants or needs is an "about last night" speech suggesting she ought to reconsider her position about a relationship with you.

Booker, the criminal, who jeopardized the lives of everyone aboard Discovery, not to mention the billions of people who might have been killed back on Earth, Titan, Ni'var, etc., gets a hero's welcome when he suddenly appears alive.   Everyone's so fucking high on sappy romance pheromones that they're all willing to stand back and let him dictate terms to our new alien friends right smack in the middle of first contact despite that he is a terrorist and a traitor.   (When he was materializing, I thought, "This will be hilarious if it's Tarka.")  Then, upon departing, they allow the treacherous felon to stand right there free as a bird on the bridge at the Captain's side in a position usually reserved for a First Officer or Chief of Security.  What. The. Hell.

And what's Booker's penalty for putting an entire galaxy at risk?  For causing untold millions to flee their homes even as others were forced to confront the horror that there was neither time nor resources to evacuate them so they'd just have to hunker down and die with their families and children?  Community service in the Peace Corps!

I could complain about Burnham's total failure as an authority figure, falling to pieces when her boyfriend magically appears not to mention the fact that she shows absolutely no hesitation to re-engage with someone who knowingly and willingly placed her ship and crew -- which are supposed to be more important than anything or anyone -- in harm's way.   But what would be the point?   This show sucks and that's all there is to it.

One last thing -- Stacey Abrams.

Star Trek is supposed to be for everybody.   It's supposed to be about a unified Earth.   The idea of casting a current political figure in the role of "President of United Earth" sends a direct message to half the country that Star Trek isn't for them or about them.   It marks Star Trek as a show with a clear political agenda.  

It made me cringe, actually.

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by millennium

[marinw]

On 3/19/2022 at 8:10 AM, millennium said:

So many Hallmark moments! 

I'm thinking of the CW. If the entire crew were horny teenagers and their slightly older horny instructors on a training mission, the dialogue would be about the same.

Edited March 21, 2022 by marinw

[Chit Chat]

3 hours ago, millennium said:

So many Hallmark moments!   Lifetime must look at Discovery as the one that got away.

Your entire post reflects my feelings to a T, except you express yourself more eloquently than I can!  

3 hours ago, millennium said:

And what's Booker's penalty for putting an entire galaxy at risk?  For causing untold millions to flee their homes even as others were forced to confront the horror that there was neither time nor resources to evacuate them so they'd just have to hunker down and die with their families and children?  Community service in the Peace Corps!

Sadly, I think our society is heading in that direction.  

[MissLucas]

He! Tarka showing up instead of Booker would have been epic!

But yeah, Booker having to spend a couple of weeks picking up litter after having recklessly endangered millions of lives is ridiculous. The fact that he and the treacherous general got off scot-free illustrates the writers unwillingness to take risks. But that's this show's MO since season one.

[Ottis]

So many "Trek" lessons in this. My two favorites:

• "Love always ends in grief." And yet you try anyway, to make your days and nights brighter. Go Saru!
• "Reasons matter." People who commit crimes are not equal - why they do them counts. Hello Book, and General. 

Despite my frequent mocking of the overemoting and "feelings" focus of this show over the seasons, damn if this ending didn't get me. In fact, my single biggest disappointment after it ended wasn't the show - it was that I had to return to the real world, where idiots argue over nothing and our planet is in grave danger.

Also? I didn't know that was Stacy Abrams, but thank you for noting it because the camera stayed on her as she came off the shuttle and I was trying to figure out why.

On 3/17/2022 at 3:17 PM, MissLucas said:

wish this show would stop doing serialized seasons and return to good old-fashioned one plot per episode story-telling. Those epic arcs where EVERYTHING is at stake get tiresome. 

I'm with you. I need some weekly adventure again. 

On 3/18/2022 at 12:41 AM, thuganomics85 said:

It didn't really hold any surprises, but it was nice to see a clean win for the team, with the only major death being Tarka, who at least did seem to see the error of his ways and seemed to be at peace with his death.  Still wish I cared more about him, but Shawn Doyle was excellent here. 

I didn't buy that Tarka was motivated by lost love. It came out of nowhere a few eps ago, and it never convinced me. It fits Discovery's vibe, just thought it should have been introduced earlier in the character.

3 hours ago, millennium said:

This show sucks and that's all there is to it.

I have criticized Discovery since its first episodes, mostly about Michael being a special snowflake who saves everyone and the ridiculous emotional levels of most episodes when there is work to be done. And yet ... when you take a step back and accept that "love" is Discovery's theme, it all hangs together. It can be annoying, but honestly - wouldn't it be great to be surrounded by people who work with you AND care about you, and a society that considers motivation as well as action? 

Well done, show. Annoyances aside, Discovery = love. Now we just have to wait for it to end in grief!

Edited March 19, 2022 by Ottis

[Chit Chat]

2 hours ago, Ottis said:

It can be annoying, but honestly - wouldn't it be great to be surrounded by people who work with you AND care about you, and a society that considers motivation as well as action? 

It's a nice thought, for sure, but since the dawn of man, there has been conflict.  Sustaining that level of 'happy, happy, joy, joy' like Discovery is not realistic. 

There still has to be an appropriate punishment for a crime, otherwise every criminal will make up their own intent in order to justify their misdeeds.  I like Book, but what he did was wrong.  A slap on the wrist is not an adequate punishment for risking so many lives.  That won't be much of a deterrent in the future if he gets off so easily this time.  

[starri]

In the clearest possible terms, it is okay to discuss that:

A) Stacey Abrams appeared on the show and has an acknowledged love of Star Trek

B) Your feelings about the appropriateness of casting a politician on the show WITHOUT including the commentary on that politician's positions

C) The fact that Star Trek has historically featured certain philosophical themes WITHOUT relating those to contemporary politics

It is NOT okay to discuss:

A) Stacey Abrams' specific positions

B) Whether or not you agree with those positions or feel that they are or are not in keeping with Star Trek's philosophy

C) Anything else regarding contemporary politics as spelled out in the official Primetimer policy.

I understand that this is quite the needle to thread.  I just request that you err on the side of caution if you're not sure the comment you want to make is allowed.  

If you have specific questions, please send me a Private Message.

Thanks.  

 

[Ottis]

1 hour ago, ChitChat said:

It's a nice thought, for sure, but since the dawn of man, there has been conflict.  Sustaining that level of 'happy, happy, joy, joy' like Discovery is not realistic. 

Setting aside that one of the premises of Star Trek is that conflict between nations is over (with a unified Earth), striving to support each other doesn't mean conflict between people is over. It just means we try to be better.

1 hour ago, ChitChat said:

There still has to be an appropriate punishment for a crime, otherwise every criminal will make up their own intent in order to justify their misdeeds.  I like Book, but what he did was wrong.  A slap on the wrist is not an adequate punishment for risking so many lives.  That won't be much of a deterrent in the future if he gets off so easily this time. 

Good point, let's talk about that. Booker was a guy who lost his entire planet and its population to the floating boron collector (ADM? I always forget its initials). And so he takes actions to try to stop it, partly in revenge and partly to keep it from killing others. As part of his actions, he uses a iso-something bomb to blow it up, but it doesn't work. In doing so, he fights bad guys and then, later, disobeys a Starfleet order. Question: Did any of his actions kill anyone? I don't think so, but I may not remember. Also, he sacrifices his own ship, and puts his own life at risk. At worst, as far as I can remember, he holds Jett comfortably hostage for a bit.

So when you look at his actions, and then his motivations, and also his intent, in a more enlightened world, you can make a case for leniency. Whether helping other refugees for a while is enough, I don't know. But putting Book in jail seems excessive.

If other criminals can claim their worlds were destroyed and in trying to stop the killer they disobeyed an order, well, I'd listen to them and take their motivations into account. I'm guessing, though, that will be a very small number of criminals. Most criminals commit crimes for personal enrichment. 

Putting people at risk? Book actually didn't know what was going to happen until Jett clued him in. Until then, in Book's view he was reducing risk. 

I struggle more with the General's punishment. The military isn't going to trust someone who did what she did, regardless of reason. The military depends on obeying the chain of command. For optics alone, they can't welcome her back. Discovery should have had her die in the explosion, or at best, given her a civilian job with the president, IMO. 

 

[paigow]

4 minutes ago, Ottis said:

If other criminals can claim their worlds were destroyed and in trying to stop the killer they disobeyed an order, well, I'd listen to them and take their motivations into account. I'm guessing, though, that will be a very small number of criminals. Most criminals commit crimes for personal enrichment. 

ST: Generations is all about grief... Soran was not after money / power... just an alternate reality for himself... unfortunately, that plan required killing a lot of innocent people... did he deserve the death penalty?

[millennium]

40 minutes ago, Ottis said:

Setting aside that one of the premises of Star Trek is that conflict between nations is over (with a unified Earth), striving to support each other doesn't mean conflict between people is over. It just means we try to be better.

Good point, let's talk about that. Booker was a guy who lost his entire planet and its population to the floating boron collector (ADM? I always forget its initials). And so he takes actions to try to stop it, partly in revenge and partly to keep it from killing others. As part of his actions, he uses a iso-something bomb to blow it up, but it doesn't work. In doing so, he fights bad guys and then, later, disobeys a Starfleet order. Question: Did any of his actions kill anyone? I don't think so, but I may not remember. Also, he sacrifices his own ship, and puts his own life at risk. At worst, as far as I can remember, he holds Jett comfortably hostage for a bit.

So when you look at his actions, and then his motivations, and also his intent, in a more enlightened world, you can make a case for leniency. Whether helping other refugees for a while is enough, I don't know. But putting Book in jail seems excessive.

If other criminals can claim their worlds were destroyed and in trying to stop the killer they disobeyed an order, well, I'd listen to them and take their motivations into account. I'm guessing, though, that will be a very small number of criminals. Most criminals commit crimes for personal enrichment. 

Putting people at risk? Book actually didn't know what was going to happen until Jett clued him in. Until then, in Book's view he was reducing risk. 

I struggle more with the General's punishment. The military isn't going to trust someone who did what she did, regardless of reason. The military depends on obeying the chain of command. For optics alone, they can't welcome her back. Discovery should have had her die in the explosion, or at best, given her a civilian job with the president, IMO. 

 

One of the most horrific moments in Star Trek Canon, IMO, was in TNG when the scientist destroyed the Crystalline Entity because it had killed her son while feeding on a planet.  The Crystalline Entity had not killed out of malice.  It was just feeding.

Picard was so aghast at what had happened he basically said "I don't know how to judge your actions" before she was taken away.

In Generations, Tolian Soren blew up a densely populated planet because it stood between him and the Nexus.   His justification was that the Borg had destroyed his planet and his family.   Picard had to kill him to stop him.

In neither instance were there celebrations, happy tears, passionate embraces.  There was no sense of "see you next season."   It was made clear that both the scientist and Dr. Soren had acted selfishly and deplorably.

But the Discovery writers' room seems to have decided from the outset that Booker would go free, then, upon realizing that wouldn't fly,  worked backwards from that premise until they reached the least possible punishment they thought viewers would swallow.  Community service! 

I would also contend that Booker's motivations were not entirely altruistic, i.e., reducing risk.  It was personal.  He had gone full Ahab.

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by millennium

[MissLucas]

39 minutes ago, Ottis said:

Putting people at risk? Book actually didn't know what was going to happen until Jett clued him in. Until then, in Book's view he was reducing risk. 

I struggle more with the General's punishment. The military isn't going to trust someone who did what she did, regardless of reason. The military depends on obeying the chain of command. For optics alone, they can't welcome her back. Discovery should have had her die in the explosion, or at best, given her a civilian job with the president, IMO. 

 

I admit I zoned out during the many technobabble discussions but IIRCm didn't Tarka's plan put the Ten-C at risk? And if not there was at least the possibility that they would retaliate. Whatever the case, Booker was compromised by his emotions including whether he wanted to admit it or not a desire for revenge. That's why it was not up to him to take matters into his own hands. So yes, he deserved more than a slap on the wrist. And having him dictate terms to the Ten-C while several high-ranking diplomats were present was utterly ridiculous (okay that was probably his girlfriend rubbing off on him).

That said Burnham and Co were also taking risks (but they were based on a vote). If human history is anything to go by there was a good chance that the Ten-C's reaction could have been 'oops, sorry for destroying your habitat but our need for fuel/resources clearly outweighs your underdeveloped species' or at best 'yeah, sorry about the inconvenience - how about we relocate to you some backwater planets in a region we have already harvested' *ZAP!!!

There was never a true challenge in this whole arc  - except the possibility that Burnham must pull the trigger on her lover. And even there the show whimped out by bringing Nhan on board. There was enormous story potential for a broken Burnham for next season - and real sacrifice and loss but the show would not go there. Yes, Booker lost his home-world but that was almost as abstract as the crew leaving behind their families back in season one. The real gut-punches that leave everyone reeling are hard to find in this show and that makes it pretty to look at but also boring.

One of the reasons the Borg were such fantastic antagonists was that they pushed the Federation in the form of Picard to its limits challenging everything it stood for and nearly breaking it. The challenges Discovery had to face during the last two seasons was a teenager with abandonment issues and gigantic, smelly space mits who loved their children. We get  'and they lived happily everafter'-endings and the whole thing feels like overeating on too much candy. 

 

[Chit Chat]

1 hour ago, Ottis said:

So when you look at his actions, and then his motivations, and also his intent, in a more enlightened world, you can make a case for leniency.

He went vigilante because all he could see was his own pain, thus putting himself and others at risk.   In a more enlightened world, he should've waited to see if diplomacy would work rather than go rogue.   His actions warranted more than community service, in my opinion.   YMMV. 

[staphdude]

So many people deserved a good airlocking but no one has the stones.

[millennium]

1 hour ago, staphdude said:

So many people deserved a good airlocking but no one has the stones.

It's funny you bring up Battlestar Galactica because a lot of what I felt towards Booker resembled my frustration with Gaius Baltar.   That guy had plot armor made from pure Teflon.

[Orbert]

Kinda cool that Keyla was willing to sacrifice herself because they needed a really awesome pilot.  Especially after we had the very special episode with her and I figured she was gonna die then.  But then Ndoye volunteered, and I was fine with that because Ndoye was a traitor and deserved to die.  Then Ndoye didn't die, which at first I was thinking somehow cheapened Keyla's willingness to sacrifice herself, but no, it just cheapened Ndoye's own sacrifice.  Good.  Let her live with her guilt then.

[millennium]

I liked the Federation President Laira Rillak and think she has more potential as a character and foil for Mary Sue Burnham.   I find her more compelling and interesting to watch than Saru (who annoys me in a Jar Jar Binks way).   I have to admit, my dislike of Saru may in part be due to his appearance -- his face makes me think of an intestinal tract.   This series doesn't do a very good job with non-humans.   The Academy cadet who looks like a wolf or something -- did they buy that mask at Party City?  And the guy on the bridge who resembles a frog or a bug or a Gorn -- he looks totally plastic.  Even the Orion woman, the leader of the Emerald Chain -- really bad wig and wicked witch makeup.  Then again, this is Star Trek, the same brand that brought us the ass-faced Ferengi so ... (FWIW, I believe the Ferengi were THE worst development in all of Star Trek history)

[Ottis]

5 hours ago, paigow said:

Soran was not after money / power... just an alternate reality for himself... unfortunately, that plan required killing a lot of innocent people... did he deserve the death penalty?

This isn't anything at all like Discovery. Soran blew up a star system, people died, and he didn't receive the death penalty, he died while trying to execute his plan after Kirk distracted him.

5 hours ago, millennium said:

One of the most horrific moments in Star Trek Canon, IMO, was in TNG when the scientist destroyed the Crystalline Entity because it had killed her son while feeding on a planet.

Back to my original post ... did Booker kill anyone? I honestly don't recall. He tried to stop the DMA, *not knowing* that doing so would kill other beings until Jett told him (at which point Booker tried to stop the plan). The scientist killed a member of a sentient species.

5 hours ago, millennium said:

I would also contend that Booker's motivations were not entirely altruistic, i.e., reducing risk.  It was personal.  He had gone full Ahab.

As noted in my post, Booker had two motivations - "And so he takes actions to try to stop it, partly in revenge and partly to keep it from killing others."

I could quote more responses, but no need. Keep in mind Booker was trying to stop the DMA-  not kill Species 10-C. Might the effort to stop the DMA have impacted 10-C? Maybe, no one was clear on what exactly would happen to 10-C (and Discovery, and other planets) until Jett did the math.

4 hours ago, ChitChat said:

His actions warranted more than community service, in my opinion.   YMMV. 

Agree, and as noted earlier, "Whether helping other refugees for a while is enough, I don't know. " Stronger measures were probably called for. Not imprisonment, though, IMO.

It was clear that the writers created an ending that linked directly to what Star Trek is all about - the best sides of ourselves. We can quibble about whether Booker (and the General) should have been punished more, but in a franchise that aspires to rise above so many of the flaws we have today, it fit the show. 

11 minutes ago, millennium said:

(FWIW, I believe the Ferengi were THE worst development in all of Star Trek history)

Unbridled capitalism - I only wish that had gone further with the Ferengi!

[millennium]

5 minutes ago, Ottis said:

Unbridled capitalism - I only wish that had gone further with the Ferengi!

For me, it wasn't what they represented, but their ridiculous appearance and clownish, obnoxious characterizations.

[Chit Chat]

1 hour ago, Ottis said:

We can quibble about whether Booker (and the General) should have been punished more, but in a franchise that aspires to rise above so many of the flaws we have today, it fit the show. 

I don't consider having punishment for misdeeds as a flaw of our society.  The attitude of those around them of seemingly letting them off the hook so easily just irritates me.   

1 hour ago, millennium said:

I have to admit, my dislike of Saru may in part be due to his appearance -- his face makes me think of an intestinal tract.

Hadn't thought of it that way, but I do see what you're saying!  Sorry, but intimacy between Saru and T'rina isn't something I want to see play out on the screen.  I like Saru, but I don't want to see him and her getting busy.   Ferengi's gross me out too.  It's the teeth with them, well, and everything else.  Ick.  

[GreyBunny]

6 hours ago, ChitChat said:

He went vigilante because all he could see was his own pain, thus putting himself and others at risk.   In a more enlightened world, he should've waited to see if diplomacy would work rather than go rogue.   His actions warranted more than community service, in my opinion.   YMMV. 

Yup, and it was pure spineless cheese to have the 10-C bring him back. It would have meant more if he was gone for good.

Ugh, what a tedious season. With good writing it could have been done in 2-3 episodes, instead we got too many ham-fisted conversations about feelings. 🤮

Edited March 20, 2022 by GreyBunny

[Frozendiva]

A bit of a lacklustre season. Let's fly made me want to fly away.

Who are Ten-C? Some sort of future Klondike pioneers - with their own Gold Rush of mining uninhabited planets and some inhabited ones on the side? Do they want to inform anyone who they are and what they want and why? Why the DMA? Do they have a history to share with the Federation or just any sort of universal archive? Do they want to get to know the neighbors or just clean up the mess and find other galaxies to mine - and mine for what? Surely there was some sort of better story behind this race of aliens.

Was surprised they sent Book back so quickly. The Captain sobbed about the person she loved and boom, he was returned? Why? Tarka was on some weird death mission - he wasn't coming back from the DMA. Tilly and the Federation president had some drinks, and all the families were put back together. Ho hum another day in the universe. Burnham gets her boyfriend back and she isn't stuck looking after the cat and explaining to the cat that his cat dad is gone and vanished but one never knows, may turn up at some point.

I hope Saru and T'Rina happen off-screen.

Book gets some sort of community service gig for his crimes? The General was a traitor and also just got off with.... nothing. Not to do it again. Uh huh, sure thing.

Edited March 20, 2022 by Frozendiva

[rtms77]

Earth, last time I heard was not part of the Federation, they are independent. Hence why the General was a Rep, not a member. For all we know her military council or Earth council told her, “look if the Feds are playing hug a alien instead of blasting this C10 entity ,  you have our permission to do as you see fit”. I think this is why she didn’t get any punishment . Did she foolishly fall for Book and Tara’s solution? Yup but Discovery and Burnham was taking for ever to solve the problem. While in hindsight it was the wrong decision, at the time for her it seemed right. 

[NeenerNeener]

So what was the message for this particular story arc? Fracking is bad? Cutting down the Amazon rainforest is bad? Ignoring climate change is bad? Strip-mining is bad? All of the above?

Star Trek has always been preachy (and I started watching it when it first came on in the 60s):

1. nazis are bad
2. racism is bad
3. killing your parents at the request of a being that claims to be an angel is bad
4. jingoism is bad
5. Chicago gangsters are bad
6. gunfights are bad
7. Roman gladiators are bad
8. all out war is bad
9. cheating on your husband with Kirk is bad
10. Ferengi-style capitalism is bad
11. fascism/authoritarianism is bad
12. slavery is bad
13. rape is bad
14. dozens more "bads"

But those were always obvious and in your face. This one may be too subtle or include too many "bads" rolled up into one to get the message across.

 

Edited March 20, 2022 by NeenerNeener

[Chit Chat]

11 hours ago, Frozendiva said:

Who are Ten-C? Some sort of future Klondike pioneers - with their own Gold Rush of mining uninhabited planets and some inhabited ones on the side? Do they want to inform anyone who they are and what they want and why? Why the DMA? Do they have a history to share with the Federation or just any sort of universal archive? Do they want to get to know the neighbors or just clean up the mess and find other galaxies to mine - and mine for what? Surely there was some sort of better story behind this race of aliens.

I thought that the explanation of the Ten-C was a big letdown.  All I gathered from the episode was that it was a big blob of feelings.  I was so bored that I probably missed the point of their existence.  This season was a huge disappointment for us.  

[MissLucas]

2 hours ago, NeenerNeener said:

So what was the message for this particular story arc? Fracking is bad? Cutting down the Amazon rainforest is bad? Ignoring climate change is bad? Strip-mining is bad? All of the above?

 

I thought the message was 'when something bad happens don't lash out blindly in retaliation - first try to find out as much as you can about why that bad thing happened, if it was intentional and if the intent behind it was really evil'. Yeah, doesn't sound that catchy. And I'm sure that message has already been delivered more than once in ST. I'd say even last season had the same message. Nothing wrong with the message but I really think it did not warrant a plot stretched out over so many episodes 🤷‍♀️

[Joimiaroxeu]

Quote

Star Trek is supposed to be for everybody.   It's supposed to be about a unified Earth.   The idea of casting a current political figure in the role of "President of United Earth" sends a direct message to half the country that Star Trek isn't for them or about them.   It marks Star Trek as a show with a clear political agenda.  

The Star Trek TV and film universe has always been progressive in its messaging. Whether or not it was ever meant to be for "everybody" is debatable, IMO.

Quote

Star Trek has always been preachy (and I started watching it when it first came on in the 60s):

1. nazis are bad
2. racism is bad
3. killing your parents at the request of a being that claims to be an angel is bad
4. jingoism is bad
5. Chicago gangsters are bad
6. gunfights are bad
7. Roman gladiators are bad
8. all out war is bad
9. cheating on your husband with Kirk is bad
10. Ferengi-style capitalism is bad
11. fascism/authoritarianism is bad
12. slavery is bad
13. rape is bad
14. dozens more "bads"

A Hollywood-produced Star Trek show/film which was based on the opposite of most of these bads would be more like a dystopian show/film, I think. For the most part I think Hollywood has only allowed the presentation of such things as slavery, racism, rape, murder, and unmitigated war to happen in cautionary tale, horror, or historical terms. Under such restraints, whether or not the Star Trek universe has been particularly heavy-handed in its approach is also debatable, IMO.

Quote

I thought the message was 'when something bad happens don't lash out blindly in retaliation - first try to find out as much as you can about why that bad thing happened, if it was intentional and if the intent behind it was really evil'.

I agree. The problem, IMO, is that Burnham is usually the one who gets to define what is "evil." That is until she's proven wrong. Then it becomes all, "Oh well, bygones!" Pretty much this whole season was bygones AFAIC.

[Starchild]

Overall, I thought it was OK. Some specific thoughts:

• Huh, Burnham didn't save the day at the end. Book FTW
• I am impressed how much emotion Doug Jones is able to project through all that latex -- what a fantastic physical actor
• Progress in the relationship between Saru and T'Rina, glad to see that
• If I were part of the Culber-Stamets family, there would have been a bit more touching at what might be the end of everything
• I wish they'd be a bit more subtle about the "we are family" vibe -- we're not Cro-Magnons, we get that they love and respect each other 
• Boy, that language mapping algorithm got really good really fast, go Zora
• The ceiling is quite high back at the space station, why was everyone hunching over all the time, is that a reaction to stress?
• I was kind of hoping that next season would be kind of a mini-Voyager premise, with them spending the whole season getting back home, but discovering new stuff along the way, with all these civilians on board
• Besides the great quips, Reno's speech is so efficient: "We.ve got 10 minutes. He loves you. Do what you have to." Anyone else would have taken a couple minutes
• Book got off a lot lighter than he should have -- I suspect Grudge intervened
• Stacey Abrams, more power to you -- great when a superfan gets a cameo, and she was pretty good for an amateur
• Tarka was hoping the destruction of his ship would generate enough power for his transporter, and there's nothing on screen to say it didn't work -- I was kind of hoping the 10C would note that there was a brief interdimensional rift right at the end there, and Book could hope that his friend made it to his paradise after all
• I wish we'd gotten one more scene of that linguist eating something
• This felt a lot like a series finale, is next season confirmed yet? If so, had it been when this was filmed?

[NeenerNeener]

4 hours ago, Starchild said:

This felt a lot like a series finale, is next season confirmed yet? If so, had it been when this was filmed?

According to The Futon Critic website it will be back in 2023. 

[millennium]

12 hours ago, NeenerNeener said:

So what was the message for this particular story arc? Fracking is bad? Cutting down the Amazon rainforest is bad? Ignoring climate change is bad? Strip-mining is bad? All of the above?

Star Trek has always been preachy (and I started watching it when it first came on in the 60s):

1. nazis are bad
2. racism is bad
3. killing your parents at the request of a being that claims to be an angel is bad
4. jingoism is bad
5. Chicago gangsters are bad
6. gunfights are bad
7. Roman gladiators are bad
8. all out war is bad
9. cheating on your husband with Kirk is bad
10. Ferengi-style capitalism is bad
11. fascism/authoritarianism is bad
12. slavery is bad
13. rape is bad
14. dozens more "bads"

But those were always obvious and in your face. This one may be too subtle or include too many "bads" rolled up into one to get the message across.

 

LOL @ number 3

[Frozendiva]

15 hours ago, NeenerNeener said:

So what was the message for this particular story arc? Fracking is bad? Cutting down the Amazon rainforest is bad? Ignoring climate change is bad? Strip-mining is bad? All of the above?

Star Trek has always been preachy (and I started watching it when it first came on in the 60s):

1. nazis are bad
2. racism is bad
3. killing your parents at the request of a being that claims to be an angel is bad
4. jingoism is bad
5. Chicago gangsters are bad
6. gunfights are bad
7. Roman gladiators are bad
8. all out war is bad
9. cheating on your husband with Kirk is bad
10. Ferengi-style capitalism is bad
11. fascism/authoritarianism is bad
12. slavery is bad
13. rape is bad
14. dozens more "bads"

But those were always obvious and in your face. This one may be too subtle or include too many "bads" rolled up into one to get the message across.

 

Ancient Greek gods are bad and humans don’t want to collect laurel leaves any more. Granted a lot of humans wouldn’t know a laurel leaf if one fell on them.

[Stardancer Supreme]

On 3/19/2022 at 2:40 PM, Ottis said:

Good point, let's talk about that. Booker was a guy who lost his entire planet and its population to the floating boron collector (ADM? I always forget its initials). And so he takes actions to try to stop it, partly in revenge and partly to keep it from killing others. As part of his actions, he uses a iso-something bomb to blow it up, but it doesn't work. In doing so, he fights bad guys and then, later, disobeys a Starfleet order. Question: Did any of his actions kill anyone? I don't think so, but I may not remember. Also, he sacrifices his own ship, and puts his own life at risk. At worst, as far as I can remember, he holds Jett comfortably hostage for a bit.

So when you look at his actions, and then his motivations, and also his intent, in a more enlightened world, you can make a case for leniency. Whether helping other refugees for a while is enough, I don't know. But putting Book in jail seems excessive.

Let's be real for a minute.  What could the Federation really do to Book to pay for his crimes?  He is not a member of Starfleet or the Federation.  The only reason they could touch him in any way is because of Michael's relationship with him.  She didn't even ask for leniency for him! He decided to take the punishment so he can go back to Michael and gain further healing for his grief later.  If he had decided to biff the community service, he wouldn't have gotten far.  His ship was destroyed and Grudge was on Discovery.  His home planet and people are still gone; what purpose would jailing him have done? 

Now I expected General Ndoye to at least get a verbal reprimand from the Earth President.  Earth rejoining the Federation might be enough of a sting to the general to forever remember her shenanigans.

[Quark]

This season was rather mediocre.

We need more Jet.

[Quilt Fairy]

On 3/22/2022 at 5:40 PM, Quark said:

We need more Jet.

We definitely need a Jett Reno spinoff.