S01.E03: Context Is for Kings

[paigow]

2 hours ago, starri said:

Spock is already serving under Pike.

Nobody on Discovery / prison shuttle asks what her foster brother thinks of having a mutineer in the family? No angry holo-call from Spock to Burnham?

[paigow]

4 hours ago, xaxat said:

Earlier, I mentioned Jason Isaacs playing real life US officer Michael Steele in the movie Black Hawk Down. I went to reread a profile of him. From the article,

The Delta team went out of their way to disrespect him in the movie....

[KimberStormer]

5 hours ago, FiveByFive said:

She never argued about what happened in the events prior to this episode although she could have. (A Klingon attacked her, she protected herself. She couldn't convince the Captain to fire a shot at the Klingon ship to show their strength as it has worked in the past -- but since they didn't they were attacked. Her problem was attacking the Captain and not following orders but she thought it would have saved lives.)

I don't see her as a Mary Sue and I don't think she sees herself that way either. 

I don't see her as a Mary Sue either, I don't even believe in Mary Sues.  I do think she doesn't understand what her own flaws are.  Which is probably true of all of us, and interesting!  But it doesn't make me like her.

If she was "right" to want to shoot first at the Klingons then I don't want to watch this show.  If I want to be told how violence is the solution to every problem, I can just go literally anywhere on the Internet.  I am watching under the assumption that she and Lorca are both wrong, because this is Star Trek.

[2727]

Yay for a narrowcast audience of me, I guess, since the show hits all my TV pleasure receptors. It helps that I'm not fussed about ST history or continuity. I prefer my protagonists to be capable and smart so Michael slots in there for me as well.

I think the production/set design is gorgeous and I'm intrigued by all the characters, Michael and Lorca in particular. Be a fun ride figuring both of them out. Michael's (understandably) a little too noble and self-abasing at the moment, but her intractable nosiness and rule-breaking redeem her to me.

I was glad to see Tilly be calm and courageous during the landing party shoot-em-up. I hope her nervous chattiness remains a minor character trait.

Saru has also tamped down his quivery panic since the first episode. I'd give him a hug if I weren't afraid I might snap him like a twig. Tall and willowy, that one.

The word "mutineer" makes me think of Disney animatronics, so that's fun.

Edited October 3, 2017 by 2727

[starri]

1 hour ago, paigow said:

Nobody on Discovery / prison shuttle asks what her foster brother thinks of having a mutineer in the family? No angry holo-call from Spock to Burnham?

Considering that Spock had been friends with Kirk for 25 years without telling him about Sybok, I doubt their relationship is common knowledge. 

Hell, no one knew Sarek was his father. 

[Peace 47]

34 minutes ago, 2727 said:

I was glad to see Tilly be calm and courageous during the landing party shoot-em-up. I hope her nervous chattiness remains a minor character trait.

 

I saw speculation elsewhere that Tilly might not be what she seems.  As in, why would they put an impressionable cadet of all people in a room with a genius mutineer who might be able to influence her in negative ways?  And she was stone cold calm and collected in the landing party when the situation became life-or-death, which might not be how you would expect a green cadet to react.  I don't know, though.  I'm leaning towards her being a bit "comic relief" and what she seems.  On the other hand, I don't really trust anyone to be what they say they are.

 

26 minutes ago, starri said:

Considering that Spock had been friends with Kirk for 25 years without telling him about Sybok, I doubt their relationship is common knowledge

To my mind, Star Trek is a soap opera.  So all this stuff about Amanda reading to Michael and Sarek and Amanda being her foster parents (interesting that Michael didn't say adoptive parents, but foster ....) is just par for the soapy course.

Anyway, the Star Trek saga has been going on for decades just like a soap, and so of course creators are going to shoehorn in estranged parents, long-lost siblings and secret spouses over time (all of which have been done for Spock even before DIS came along, all to Kirk's surprise every single time).  Does it make perfect sense?  Maybe (if the one thing Spock doesn't talk about is his family), or maybe not.  But the soapiness doesn't really bother me.

I feel like that I will end up watching this show as I did Mad Men or Breaking Bad, though:  I watched those shows in suspense (or even dread) about what would happen next, but often found the characters unlikable and difficult, although intriguing and compelling (which is how I find everyone in the cast right now at ep. 3).  That hasn't been how I've watched Star Trek in the past (I seriously love every single TNG character to pieces as my dear cinnamon rolls), but it's definitely one way that I watch shows.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Peace 47

[CanadaPhil]

39 minutes ago, Peace 47 said:

I saw speculation elsewhere that Tilly might not be what she seems.  As in, why would they put an impressionable cadet of all people in a room with a genius mutineer who might be able to influence her in negative ways?  And she was stone cold calm and collected in the landing party when the situation became life-or-death, which might not be how you would expect a green cadet to react.  

That was my feeling as well. The way she exclaimed "You in the shadows.. come out" was all large and in charge as the saying goes. 

You can also see by Security Chief Landry's facial expression that she was was even taken aback for a moment as she did not even realize that someone else was right in their midst.

I thought It was a very telling moment and a cool one at that!

I really enjoyed Tilly's goofy moments. She is soooo annoying it's actually cute and endearing in a way!.. hahaha.

Tilly is a plant!... as in part of Lorca's inner circle I think. Not just to watch over Michael but to try to "push her buttons" and provide assessments of her for Lorca. 

2 hours ago, KimberStormer said:

I don't see her as a Mary Sue either, I don't even believe in Mary Sues....

I'm no expert in Mary Sues, but Saru is most definitely a Safety Sally.

Michael and Lorca are Danger Dans.

Edited October 2, 2017 by CanadaPhil

[mrspidey]

18 hours ago, CanadaPhil said:

I like the idea of this dark win at all costs captain. We sure are a long way from 80's Jeeve's The Butler tooting on a flute.

This series will definitely tread in territory not seen in ST before. 

Exept for DS9 where Sisko contaminated an entire planet with a bio-weapon just because he was holding a grudge. 

[CanadaPhil]

1 hour ago, mrspidey said:

Exept for DS9 where Sisko contaminated an entire planet with a bio-weapon just because he was holding a grudge. 

Ebert must have gotten on Siskle's nerves that episode. 

[DarkRaichu]

9 hours ago, Helena Dax said:

Loved Stamet's face when Suru said Michael was the smartest Starfleet officer he had ever known and Lorca said to Stamet: "He knows you". I want to like Stamet, but he seems to be an ass.  The way he spoke to Lorca and about Lorca was very disrespectful, considering they aren't personal friends (at least, I didn't get that vibe). It isn't like McCoy and Kirk, or Trip and Archer, who were old friends. 

Per Stamet, Starfleet/Lorca co-opted his research project for the war and forced him to split from his research partner (the one in NCC Glenn) to speed up their research.  Why should he like Lorca?

[Helena Dax]

12 minutes ago, DarkRaichu said:

Per Stamet, Starfleet/Lorca co-opted his research project for the war and forced him to split from his research partner (the one in NCC Glenn) to speed up their research.  Why should he like Lorca?

He doesn't have to like him, but someone who talks shit about his captain and questions his authority can be dangerous for the ship. And it's not like he was nice to Michael either. I'm not saying he's a bad guy; he probably isn't. But I don't like him yet. 

[paigow]

34 minutes ago, DarkRaichu said:

Per Stamet, Starfleet/Lorca co-opted his research project for the war and forced him to split from his research partner (the one in NCC Glenn) to speed up their research.  Why should he like Lorca?

He probably met Dr. Carol Marcus....another scientist that does not really trust Starfleet.

[CanadaPhil]

10 minutes ago, Helena Dax said:

He doesn't have to like him, but someone who talks shit about his captain and questions his authority can be dangerous for the ship. ....

And Commander Landry and the now deceased Black/Red shirt sure took notice of him talking smack during the shuttle ride. 

[paigow]

2 hours ago, mrspidey said:

Exept for DS9 where Sisko contaminated an entire planet with a bio-weapon just because he was holding a grudge. 

You referring to Maquis settlement?...The Les Miz Gambit to force surrender of mutineer Eddington...

[starri]

Is it a little too obvious that Discovery's registry is NCC-1031?

[CaptainTightpants]

Has Starfleet seriously never had a mutineer before Michael? Because based on what a bunch of blowhards this current bunch is I'm having a very hard time finding that to be plausible. 

Also, why in any world would you cast Jason Isaacs and then make him use a flat American accent instead of his natural British one? Fail!

[CanadaPhil]

16 minutes ago, starri said:

Is it a little too obvious that Discovery's registry is NCC-1031?

"Sokath... his eyes open"!

[paigow]

46 minutes ago, CaptainTightpants said:

Also, why in any world would you cast Jason Isaacs and then make him use a flat American accent instead of his natural British one? Fail!

So nobody confuses him with Picard....

[DarkRaichu]

2 hours ago, Helena Dax said:

He doesn't have to like him, but someone who talks shit about his captain and questions his authority can be dangerous for the ship. And it's not like he was nice to Michael either. I'm not saying he's a bad guy; he probably isn't. But I don't like him yet. 

If Lorca found that disturbing he would have removed Stamet by now.  Lorca seemed to be the type that tolerates bratty behaviors as long as his crews obey his orders and get their shit done, hence Michael ;)

 

Also, I was surprised Saru was made 1st officer.  He is either going to get killed or demoted to make room for Michael.  

[Kromm]

On 10/1/2017 at 9:01 PM, marinw said:

The first act felt very Battlestar Galactica.

Shouldn’t the Away Team be wearing Hazmat suits?

Captain Lorca freaks me out for some reason. I suspect Michael may mutiny again. Maybe that's her thing.

Nice reference to Amanda and maybe Spock.

What's with "maybe"? Unless you think Sarek and Amanda had another kid (note I said "Sarek AND Amanda", since I know Sarek did).

As for Lorca, I think they're going very Heart of Darkness with him. He's definitely a freakshow, and he's certainly lying to Micheal.

Edited October 3, 2017 by Kromm

[Kromm]

16 hours ago, cambridgeguy said:

Lorca was pretty much reciting the Section 31 mission statement so that might ultimately provide the in-universe reason for why no one has ever mentioned Burnham and friends - whatever they do will get buried.

Well we know they have to fail. Since you know... there's no Supertransporter in the time period after this show (and there were certainly times they could have used one). Although that does make me a little confused about the little demo we saw. What the hell was that?

[DarkRaichu]

1 hour ago, Kromm said:

Well we know they have to fail. Since you know... there's no Supertransporter in the time period after this show (and there were certainly times they could have used one). Although that does make me a little confused about the little demo we saw. What the hell was that?

Or maybe they keep the tech for themselves so their agents can move quickly between star systems to minimize the number of agents needed to cover the entire quadrant

[kokapetl]

Wasn’t Michael’s mutiny more like attempted mutiny, and didn’t it last for about 30 seconds? Why does everyone know who she is, and why do they blame her for a war she actually failed to start?

Everyone on this show needs a good long lecture from Captain Picard. The use of convict labour and whole life sentences aren’t really permissible today in most western countries (aside from America). It’s supposed to be normal in the enlightened future? Q should show up and put these people on trial. 

I like my Star Trek optimistic. 

[dwmarch]

My favorite Voyager episode is "Equinox" where Voyager discovers that the USS Equinox, a much smaller Starfleet ship in more desperate circumstances, has been propelling itself across the Delta Quadrant by fueling the engine with subspace creatures that poop anti-matter when lit on fire. This plot reminded me of that.

I appreciated that Michael's break-in did not go unnoticed. A "breath scan" is an absurdly stupid means of locking a door. Current biometrics are more sophisticated than that. There would be so many ways to secure that secret lab against intrustion so I'm glad they hung a lampshade on it by saying the captain basically let her get away with it.

Did anyone else find themselves thinking the lead scientist on Discovery was gay? If so, kudos to the writers for not spelling it out by having his friend on the other ship be his lover. I would hope that by the 24th century someone being gay would be utterly unremarkable and no one would care.

I did raise an eyebrow at "if we throw you in the brig someone's going to get killed". A ship that big can't hold four prisoners separately? They all have to be housed together in the same cell? They all have to eat in the same mess hall as the ship's officers? Okay, the ship was obviously built for work and not comfort but no one thought about logistics when putting this thing together? I hope when we see the dedication plaque it establishes that the Discovery was built at the Dafuq Fleet Yards and commissioned by Admiral Don Geevasheet.

Also "you in the shadows!" THERE'S A FUCKING FLASHLIGHT IN YOUR HAND!

Not only that, they could have technobabbled that the accident on the other ship was scrambling the sensors but all they said was that the lab they wanted into was shielded. So anywhere else on the ship they should have been able to use tricorders to tell that there was a Klingon and a big nasty space creature lurking rather than doing all their scouting with the Mk. One Eyeball.

That black insignia was cool and the Discovery logo was also interesting but damn, Discovery is one ugly ship. It does kind of follow the design lineage of the Vengeance over in the JJ Verse though. That was also a Section 31 vessel that was up to no good (because the Klingons are coming) and it also had a weird ring-like saucer.

[kokapetl]

27 minutes ago, dwmarch said:

My favorite Voyager episode is "Equinox" where Voyager discovers that the USS Equinox, a much smaller Starfleet ship in more desperate circumstances, has been propelling itself across the Delta Quadrant by fueling the engine with subspace creatures that poop anti-matter when lit on fire. This plot reminded me of that.

I appreciated that Michael's break-in did not go unnoticed. A "breath scan" is an absurdly stupid means of locking a door. Current biometrics are more sophisticated than that. There would be so many ways to secure that secret lab against intrustion so I'm glad they hung a lampshade on it by saying the captain basically let her get away with it.

Did anyone else find themselves thinking the lead scientist on Discovery was gay? If so, kudos to the writers for not spelling it out by having his friend on the other ship be his lover. I would hope that by the 24th century someone being gay would be utterly unremarkable and no one would care.

I did raise an eyebrow at "if we throw you in the brig someone's going to get killed". A ship that big can't hold four prisoners separately? They all have to be housed together in the same cell? They all have to eat in the same mess hall as the ship's officers? Okay, the ship was obviously built for work and not comfort but no one thought about logistics when putting this thing together? I hope when we see the dedication plaque it establishes that the Discovery was built at the Dafuq Fleet Yards and commissioned by Admiral Don Geevasheet.

Also "you in the shadows!" THERE'S A FUCKING FLASHLIGHT IN YOUR HAND!

Not only that, they could have technobabbled that the accident on the other ship was scrambling the sensors but all they said was that the lab they wanted into was shielded. So anywhere else on the ship they should have been able to use tricorders to tell that there was a Klingon and a big nasty space creature lurking rather than doing all their scouting with the Mk. One Eyeball.

That black insignia was cool and the Discovery logo was also interesting but damn, Discovery is one ugly ship. It does kind of follow the design lineage of the Vengeance over in the JJ Verse though. That was also a Section 31 vessel that was up to no good (because the Klingons are coming) and it also had a weird ring-like saucer.

Just imagine the constant sound of people exhaling to open doors. 

[starri]

55 minutes ago, dwmarch said:

Did anyone else find themselves thinking the lead scientist on Discovery was gay?

He is.

[Miles]

4 hours ago, dwmarch said:

Did anyone else find themselves thinking the lead scientist on Discovery was gay? If so, kudos to the writers for not spelling it out by having his friend on the other ship be his lover. I would hope that by the 24th century someone being gay would be utterly unremarkable and no one would care.

I don't know why you would give the writers kudos for that. At least if he was supposed to be in a relationship with the other scientist that was some pussying out of the highest order on their part, as he refered to him always just as his "friend".

4 hours ago, dwmarch said:

Not only that, they could have technobabbled that the accident on the other ship was scrambling the sensors but all they said was that the lab they wanted into was shielded. So anywhere else on the ship they should have been able to use tricorders to tell that there was a Klingon and a big nasty space creature lurking rather than doing all their scouting with the Mk. One Eyeball.

They could have also beamed just outside of the lab...

[Ely]

Aaah, this is why I come to this board. I knew someone else was bringing up the question if Michael was a Mary Sue! This episode made me a little nervous about that. Personally, I think it could go either way. She's not when it comes to her background but then again being constantly referred to as the best and the brightest and OMG and then her jump into the shuttle... I'm not so sure. Then again, she is the main character so of course she needs to be a winner and it's hard to find a balance between that and flawed. They gave her acceptable non-flaws. She did what she did for the greater good and it went wrong. She's a little off when it comes to emotions but it's ok because she was raised by Vulcans and trauma-stuff. I'm willing to go with it because the nuanced acting of SMG seems to save it. We'll see how it works out.

I liked the cadet eventhough she's a bit over the top. She did bring some much needed comic relief and I think pairing her up with Michael is a great decision. I liked, as others have pointed out, that she seems to keep her shit together in the field. But I hope they keep her nervousness and fangirling around Michael down to a minimum. I just cannot see someone on starfleet being so openly insecure. It's like she's some highschool girl. 

The captain's intriguing eventhough I like my starfleet captains to be the moral compass and non-shady. I guess we're not doing that anymore. That's so 90s, huh.

I also appreciate the Klingon sush-ing the others. That was fun.

[Charlesman]

Heh, it's like the writers are intentionally trying to get a rise from my nit picking. Michael specifically brings up their Geneva conventions ban on biological weapons in her reasoning. Yet last week she said nothing about booby trapping corpses (specifically banned in Article 6). The writers are just lazy or trolling me personally. 

[starri]

3 hours ago, Miles said:

I don't know why you would give the writers kudos for that. At least if he was supposed to be in a relationship with the other scientist that was some pussying out of the highest order on their part, as he refered to him always just as his "friend".

Spoiler

He has a partner/boyfriend/spouse that we will meet. It just wasn’t that guy. 

Edited October 3, 2017 by starri

[Miles]

The Discovery is run by Section 31 and Section 31 is the successor organisation of the NSA: https://moviecode.tumblr.com/post/165963223040/star-trek-discovery-s01e03-has-michael-burnham

 

46 minutes ago, starri said:

  Hide contents

He has a partner/boyfriend/spouse that we will meet. It just wasn’t that guy. 

Well that's good to know. Maybe we can get the writers kudos then, or not. We'll see.

[Pindrop]

I don't understand why this is called Star Trek? If they had no intention of making a Star Trek series, they should have called it BSG or The Expanse, or SGU or something with a more fitting tone than Star Trek. 

Regardless, this was actually quite interesting, certainly more so than the first two. 

[tennisgurl]

This was an improvement on the first two episodes (which were essentially a long prequel) and it does feel a bit more like Star Trek. Still darker and more morally complicated than the TOS era we saw in the 60s, but its not like the other series were all cheerfulness and light (mostly looking at DS9, which also dealt with themes of war and moral ambiguity from our heroes), and if they find a way to have a serialized story with some stand alone Planet of the Week episodes, I think they might have something here. 

Michael is alright, but I still haven't really connected with her yet. I like the idea that she has to redeem herself in the eyes of herself and Star Fleet, but I hope she can find a balance between her upbeat but attempted Vulcan from the first episode, and the bitter angry person now. We do finally meet the rest of the cast, and I think theres promise here. Tory of BSG seems cool as the Head of Security (lets hope it goes better for her than for the last female Head of Security, poor, misused Tasha Yar), if a bit sketchy, Anthony Rapp as the curmudgeonly guy on the crew, the perky new comer, and the nervous alien guy is back, and I still like him. I enjoyed all his scenes with Michael and how he seems less angry with her, and more sad that he cant trust her any more. The new captain seems very morally questionable, but I dont think he is a full on villain. 

I totally think this has something to do with Section 31, and the Captain is either a member or affiliated with him. I know Section 31 is controversial in some Trek circles, but I always thought it was a decent idea, that there is this sketchy organization that works behind the scenes to shoot metaphorical puppies in the name of the ideals of the Federation. I dont exactly root for them, but I think its logical that these guys would exist in such a massive government as the Federation. I find characters who do morally gray or even dark things in the name of the greater good to be fascinating. 

The retcon with Michael being raised by Spock is certainty questionable, but this isn't exactly the first time that Spock has forgotten to mention family members. Sybok anyone? "Oh that crazy Vulcan who went and started a cult and is trying to steal starships to find God? He`s actually my brother. Did I not mention that?" 

"Did that Klingon just shush you?" was the line of the episode for me.  

[Frozendiva]

8 hours ago, Pindrop said:

I don't understand why this is called Star Trek? If they had no intention of making a Star Trek series, they should have called it BSG or The Expanse, or SGU or something with a more fitting tone than Star Trek. 

Regardless, this was actually quite interesting, certainly more so than the first two. 

I had a great deal of fun commenting on SGU.

[Joimiaroxeu]

Quote

As for Lorca, I think they're going very Heart of Darkness with him. He's definitely a freakshow, and he's certainly lying to Micheal.

Thank you! I was definitely getting an Apocalypse Now vibe about this but it seems like he has some real authority. Do we know yet whether he's operating on official guidance and approval or whether he's gone rogue? I hope it's the latter because otherwise this premise is still too dark for my tastes.

ETA: I see posters mentioning this Section 31 thing but I haven't watched all the iterations of ST and had no idea what that reference meant. Hope I'm not going to have to study up on ST canon and history to understand this show.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Joimiaroxeu

[MissLucas]

4 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

ETA: I see posters mentioning this Section 31 thing but I haven't watched all the iterations of ST and had no idea what that reference meant. Hope I'm not going to have to study up on ST canon and history to understand this show.

AFAIK Section 31 are Starfleet's officially non-existing black ops. They've made a couple of appearances in various ST iterations but are so secret that hardly anyone knows about them. If you ever wondered how Starfleet managed to keep its squeaky clean image intact and never got its hands dirty - Section 31 is the answer.

[CanadaPhil]

I don't recall any posters commenting in any great detail on Lorca's little curio collection (I mean besides Kitty Kat and the Tribble)

I am assuming we were supposed to infer that Discovery is conducting unsanctioned experiments and vivisections on alien lifeforms?

Or did Lorca just happen to come across an already deceased Gorn in his travels along with whatever the hell those one or two partially dissected critters on the lab tables were??

I suppose that would all be very Section 31-ish though.... on as it happens... NCC-1031!

I just luv that reg. number!

Haha.

Edited October 5, 2017 by CanadaPhil

[supposebly]

So, after all three, I'm thinking this isn't terrible. I'm not sure it's good but I wasn't bored. Which is a lot more than what I can say about many Trek episodes of any kind. Well, maybe not DS9, that didn't bore me most of the time.

[ottoDbusdriver]

On 10/3/2017 at 4:43 AM, Kokapetl said:

Just imagine the constant sound of people exhaling to open doors. 

Don't have to imagine -- they did it in the movie 'Alien: Resurrection'.  I thought it was stupid then too.

[starri]

It's a real thing, though.

[paigow]

On 10/4/2017 at 9:04 PM, CanadaPhil said:

Or did Lorca just happen to come across an already deceased Gorn in his travels 

 

Lorca arranged the settlement of Cestus 3, captured the first Gorn scout that investigated, then decided not to tell anyone so the outpost would be destroyed and Kirk would make first contact...10 years later...

[Nanrad]

On 10/2/2017 at 0:09 PM, KimberStormer said:

I don't see her as a Mary Sue either, I don't even believe in Mary Sues.  I do think she doesn't understand what her own flaws are.  Which is probably true of all of us, and interesting!  But it doesn't make me like her.

If she was "right" to want to shoot first at the Klingons then I don't want to watch this show.  If I want to be told how violence is the solution to every problem, I can just go literally anywhere on the Internet.  I am watching under the assumption that she and Lorca are both wrong, because this is Star Trek.

Eh...I don't get the impression that that is what this show is saying. Even then, you can't talk yourself out of every situation and come to a peaceful conclusion. Using a non violent example, I work in customer service, I reason with customers all day--explain stuff in excruciating detail if need be, but once their minds are made up, they're going to argue regardless of explain why x happened and no matter how nice you are. I know Lorca has plans, but my point remains.

[Chaos Theory]

I hate the word Mary-Sue and think it is overly used when audience just don't like a character and resent that the writers do.   I interpretation is that Michelle is exceptionally smart even for a human and mixed that in with a lifetime of Vulcan logic and you have a genius on you hands.  It's  a human mix of vulcan logic and human instinct however she is also deeply flawed in that the same vulcans that raised her were unable to see to her emotional needs so she is emotionally stunted and when she saw the klingons she reacted almost like a child would.  

Further note:  The new science ship and Captain are hella sketchy.   

Dumb question because it is probably way to early but is the Cadet that Michael roomed with someone we know.  Like maybe Janeway.  I mean its way too freakin early for that right?   When she said she was going to be captain someday I thought "this is someone we know right?"  Or was that just a stupid line that I am missing.  

Quote

I don't understand why this is called Star Trek? If they had no intention of making a Star Trek series, they should have called it BSG or The Expanse, or SGU or something with a more fitting tone than Star Trek. 

DS9 was quite dark and episodic at times.   I also think DS9 was the best written of the Trek.   Unpopular opinion yes but it dealt quite well with war and terrorism  

Edited February 5, 2018 by Chaos Theory

[legaleagle53]

2 minutes ago, Chaos Theory said:

I hate the word Mary-Sue and think it is overly used when audience just don't like a character and resent that the writers do.   I interpretation is that Michelle is exceptionally smart even for a human and mixed that in with a lifetime of Vulcan logic and you have a genius on you hands.  It's  a human mix of vulcan logic and human instinct however she is also deeply flawed in that the same vulcans that raised her were unable to see to her emotional needs so she is emotionally stunted and when she saw the klingons she reacted almost like a child would.  

Further note:  The new science ship and Captain are hella sketchy.   

Dumb question because it is probably way to early but is the Cadet that Michael roomed with someone we know.  Like maybe Janeway.  I mean its way too freakin early for that right?   When she said she was going to be captain someday I thought "this is someone we know right?"  Or was that just a stupid line that I am missing.  

You're a century too early for it to be Janeway.  This show is set only ten years before the original series.

[statsgirl]

4 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

DS9 was quite dark and episodic at times.   I also think DS9 was the best written of the Trek.   Unpopular opinion yes but it dealt quite well with war and terrorism  

I think I remember one of the EPs saying that this series was most like DS9.

The original Star Trek was elevator pitched as "wagon train in the stars".  (For those too young, Wagon Train was an old western (1957- 1965) where a wagon train travelled across countries to different towns telling mostly isolated stories them).  TNG was much the same, as was Voyager.  DS9 was the only Star Trek with a storyline that connected the episodes and told a contiguous story.  It began with Cisco losing his wife in the war and meeting the prophets; it ended with the end of the war with the Dominion and Cisco in a new relationship and accepting his role with the prophets.

In that sense, Discovery is following the same path, starting with a war and ending ....? (DS9 is also my favourite Star Trek.)

[John Potts]

So - what caused the pilot to come untethered? And did she just die?

I like Captain Lorca! Then again, I think Capt Jellico was one of the best Captains.

Shouldn't they be wearing space suits to investigate a ship that was destroyed mysteriously? It's not like they didn't have the time flying there and we know from the pilot that such suits exist!

Did Michael believe that to refuse the Captain's request was a test? It's not like Trek doesn't do the character test for its officers.

OK - the Spore Drive is pure Treknobabble. I knew it was coming, but it's still complete bollocks.

Also liked Commander Saru. Respectful but clearly wary, which seems right.

Why did the Klingon shush them? Didn't he want them dead? In fact, if they made noise, it might draw the creature away from him. Was he just suicidal? I guess "eaten by a targ(?)" might qualify as a "worthy" death.

Starfleet Security once more proves to be utterly incompetent in protecting their SuperSecrit tech. At least that's in keeping with canon!

On ‎02‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 5:46 AM, Miles said:

So why does everybody think Michael is responsible for the Klingon war and the destroyed ships? Her mutiny had absolutely no baring on how things played out.

I know! It wasn't the mutiny that started the war. It was, however, a result of her supreme confidence in her own rectitude that made things worse. She may have good ideas, but she needs to be kept on a leash. Stop boosting her ego!

On ‎02‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 5:26 AM, ottoDbusdriver said:

Thought it was odd that the Discovery retrieved the shuttle, and kind of forgot to retrieve the pilot.

Me too! She can't have been that far behind, and Lorca stressed how much they needed people on ship.

On ‎03‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 1:03 AM, CaptainTightpants said:

Has Starfleet seriously never had a mutineer before Michael? Because based on what a bunch of blowhards this current bunch is I'm having a very hard time finding that to be plausible. 

ITA. Given the number of times removing the Captain was a plot point in both TOS and TNG, it seems unbelievable there aren't more mutineers in Starfleet.

On ‎02‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 3:41 AM, CanadaPhil said:

Off hand I cannot recall another example in ST where a main crew member was depicted with a permanent physical injury?

Geordi LaForge (OK, not an injury, but a congenital disability)?

On ‎02‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 8:11 PM, CanadaPhil said:

The way she exclaimed "You in the shadows.. come out" was all large and in charge as the saying goes. 

I couldn't help thinking of this.

Finally, because it has to be said: Hello to Jason Isaacs (I will be amazed if anyone gets this reference)!

[SVNBob]

On 10/3/2017 at 8:33 AM, Ely said:

I just cannot see someone on starfleet being so openly insecure.

Just over 2 years later...but two words for you:

Reg.  Barclay.

[Tachi Rocinante]

This episode was a little better.  Until the last scene.  Jeez.

[ketose]

This episode didn't deny Star Trek history as much as the previous ones. I think the writing and direction were poor, which made it confusing as to Burnham being shunned for starting the war (not really) or for being the first Starfleet mutineer (true). I can buy technology that is superior but unstable. TNG had phased cloaks and types of transporters that were superior but were either deadly or high-risk. The spore drive would definitely fall into that category.

 

On 10/1/2017 at 9:01 PM, marinw said:

The first act felt very Battlestar Galactica.

Shouldn’t the Away Team be wearing Hazmat suits?

Trek has a tradition of the "sensors" being able to tell if the environment is going to be dangerous. It's there to keep the actors from having to be in space suits every time they go anywhere.

 

On 10/1/2017 at 10:01 PM, TV Anonymous said:

Wow, this show is quite dark, both in story-telling and in cinematography. I know that our knowledge about the universe, our understanding of technology, our own values and our ability to create cinematic experience have advanced quite significantly since 1966, but I feel the in-universe technology, culture and lifestyle differ quite a bit with Star Trek: TOS, never mind that this show is set only 10 years prior and they are in the same continuum.

There is no reason I can understand why this show couldn't be set after Voyager unless they really are plagiarizing Axanar.

 

On 10/2/2017 at 12:28 AM, paigow said:

Voyager had living plasma...Neelix infected it with his moldy cheese spores...No other Federation ship had any type of organic propulsion / fuel.

The gel packs ran the computer system on Voyager, but the propulsion was good old warp drive. I think the idea was that "brain" tissue was doing the processing instead of isolinear chips.

 

On 10/2/2017 at 2:41 PM, Peace 47 said:

To my mind, Star Trek is a soap opera.  So all this stuff about Amanda reading to Michael and Sarek and Amanda being her foster parents (interesting that Michael didn't say adoptive parents, but foster ....) is just par for the soapy course.

Anyway, the Star Trek saga has been going on for decades just like a soap, and so of course creators are going to shoehorn in estranged parents, long-lost siblings and secret spouses over time (all of which have been done for Spock even before DIS came along, all to Kirk's surprise every single time).  Does it make perfect sense?  Maybe (if the one thing Spock doesn't talk about is his family), or maybe not.  But the soapiness doesn't really bother me.

The soap opera thing is not wrong. There was Kirk, whose family who were supposedly all killed in "The Conscience of the King" except that they weren't in later Trek. Then there was his brother who was killed (William Shatner with a pencil mustache) in "Operation - Annihilate!" And, of course, they invented the "double with evil goatee" in "Mirror, Mirror."

 

On 10/4/2017 at 2:34 PM, MissLucas said:

AFAIK Section 31 are Starfleet's officially non-existing black ops. They've made a couple of appearances in various ST iterations but are so secret that hardly anyone knows about them. If you ever wondered how Starfleet managed to keep its squeaky clean image intact and never got its hands dirty - Section 31 is the answer.

Section 31 was created during Deep Space 9. Both took place after Gene Roddenberry's death. The "Roddenberry box" was a term describing restrictions he put on writers that prevented the exploration of human interpersonal conflicts, prejudice and malice that were supposedly purged by the 23rd century. I consider it slightly lazy writing and it proposes that society can't exist without "bad cops" and conspiracies, and the people who believe they can are just deluding themselves.

[rmontro]

On 10/2/2017 at 12:28 AM, paigow said:

Saru is going to die...or make a career ending mistake...unless this show is about Ensign Burnham...

Oh, I hope not.  He's probably the most interesting character at this point.  

Is there some sort of canonical history for these spores?  If I understood correctly, they're trying to create some sort of spore drive to fly the ship with.  Is there a reference to anything like this on the previous Star Trek shows?