Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x02 - "Battle at the Binary Stars"

[Lakenheath 72]

The first two episodes just upended canon.

CHEKOV: Has there ever been a mutiny on a starship before?
SPOCK: Absolutely no record of such an occurrence, Ensign.
-"The Tholian Web"

I would love to see how the TPTB reconcile what happened in Discovery with what was stated in canon. And, I learned from an interview, that the third episode can be seen as a second pilot for the series, with us being introduced to the Discovery. Couldn't we have started with this episode, with us getting a summary of what transpired in the first two episodes?

 

[BeatleJWOL]

That death of Ensign Connor was staged so horrifically, it was really effective. They got you feeling that "promising young life tragically cut short" thing, with very little space to build to it.

I'm more struck by the conversation he has before that. Talking about how they're explorers, not soldiers.

Immediately blown out into space.

Kinda tells you what the Discovery writing crew thinks of fans clinging to Talky Trek, doesn't it? ;P

 

[Nerys Myk]

Also, someone forgot to pay the electric bill in the JAG office.

Tribunal was hungover. No bright lights.

 

[Amaris]

Tribunal was hungover. No bright lights.

Is... is that a beer?

 

[cooleddie74]

1. It is reclassified as never having actually happened once Burnham is exonerated and the official record is wiped clean.
2. Even TOS retconned itself when it mentioned just a handful of episodes later that Garth's crew mutinied and the incident contributed to his decaying mental state and physical injuries.

 

[Jayson1]

That death of Ensign Connor was staged so horrifically, it was really effective. They got you feeling that "promising young life tragically cut short" thing, with very little space to build to it.

I love Maulik Pancholy, seen for a few seconds as the Shenzhou doctor. I hope we get more of him in the flashbacks I assume we're getting down the line.

Is he the actor who played Jonthan on "30 Rock?" I got to admit I got a little excited when I saw him as well.

Jason

 

[CorporalClegg]

Speaking of JAG and to my point above about how it was weak sauce, Mac would've gotten the charge thrown out.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

Well, someone had to bring it up.

I did wonder how stupid the captain was when she took herself and Burnham onto a Klingon warship without additional support. I really hate it when script writers make the characters stupidier than a bag of bricks so as to move the plot forward.

 

[Nerys Myk]

CHEKOV: Has there ever been a mutiny on a starship before?
SPOCK: Absolutely no record of such an occurrence, Ensign.
-"The Tholian Web"

Except for that one time Spock took over the ship using falsified orders. And the time the entire crew beamed down to a planet. And the crew of Garth's ship.

 

[Sheep]

Yeah, it probably would have been better to air them both. I wonder if they thought the end of Ep. 2 was too conclusiony...like it could be viewed as a tv movie set in the Star Trek universe.

I'm not sure how it aired in different regions but there was a "this season on..." clip at the end that showed there was still a lot of story to be told which would contain major ramifications from the two parter. Seeing the stories unfold in the second episode ending with Burnham sentenced and going straight into the season segment would have drawn me in way more than a cliffhanger on a very mediocre opener.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

Well, someone had to bring it up.

I did wonder how stupid the captain was when she took herself and Burnham onto a Klingon warship without additional support. I really hate it when script writers make the characters stupidier than a bag of bricks so as to move the plot forward.

Sorry, but this is a dubious nitpick since in the entirety of TOS Kirk took himself and his two most important officers down to planets regularly when they didn't need to be there and often went down without red shirt support.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Well, someone had to bring it up.

I did wonder how stupid the captain was when she took herself and Burnham onto a Klingon warship without additional support. I really hate it when script writers make the characters stupidier than a bag of bricks so as to move the plot forward.

This is a franchise where landing party means "the senior staff".

 

[Sakonna]

The first two episodes just upended canon.

CHEKOV: Has there ever been a mutiny on a starship before?
SPOCK: Absolutely no record of such an occurrence, Ensign.
-"The Tholian Web"

I would love to see how the TPTB reconcile what happened in Discovery with what was stated in canon.

2. Even TOS retconned itself when it mentioned just a handful of episodes later that Garth's crew mutinied and the incident contributed to his decaying mental state and physical injuries.

Spock was also forgetting the mutiny on the Enterprise in "This Side Of Paradise" at the end of season 1.

And it sounds like Chekhov is asking about a whole crew mutinying. A single crewmember attempting mutiny doesn't really qualify.

I'm more struck by the conversation he has before that. Talking about how they're explorers, not soldiers.

Immediately blown out into space.

Kinda tells you what the Discovery writing crew thinks of fans clinging to Talky Trek, doesn't it? ;P

I don't read it that way -- I think it's supposed to increase the tragedy of Connor's loss, not invalidate his priorities.

Is he the actor who played Jonthan on "30 Rock?" I got to admit I got a little excited when I saw him as well.

He is!

 

[cooleddie74]

"A landing party of ten men just got wiped out by a giant hairy rock with sharp teeth. Let's send down the ship's captain, first officer, chief medical officer and the only guy who can fix the engines if the ship gets stuck in orbit."

 

[Amaris]

This is a franchise where landing party means "the senior staff".

Also known as the interesting people.

 

[Nerys Myk]

"A landing party of ten men just got wiped out by a giant hairy rock with sharp teeth. Let's send down the ship's captain, first officer, chief medical officer and the only guy who can fix the engines if the ship gets stuck in orbit."

What could go wrong?

 

[Noname Given]

The issue with the end wasn't just that she was given life, but that, in an a supposed enlightened society, her rights of due process where thinly adhered to--even for a military. [Serious this time.]

She had no JAG representative when she offered her plea. And she gave it to a judicial bored of flag officers and not in front of a proper court and panel of members.

And let's not forget, saying her actions started a war is BS. The only thing she did was defend herself. Georgiou and Admiral Numbnuts where actually far more responsible than she was. The only thing Burnham was guilty of was attacking a senior officer. (Even mutiny is a hard sell.)

- I agree that the 'starting a war' charge was BS
BUT
- In addition to assaulting the Captain - she was also clearly going against the Captain's clearly stated order that she would not fire first. Had Burnham been more successful with her attempt at a neck pinch and had the crew successfully carry out Burnham's order to fire - EVEN IF that 'defused' the situation and no one on the Fed side dies; Burnham would still have been rightfully charged and convicted of Mutiny.

 

[Smoked Salmon]

- I agree that the 'starting a war' charge was BS
BUT
- In addition to assaulting the Captain - she was also clearly going against the Captain's clearly stated order that she would not fire first. Had Burnham been more successful with her attempt at a neck pinch and had the crew successfully carry out Burnham's order to fire - EVEN IF that 'defused' the situation and no one on the Fed side dies; Burnham would still have been rightfully charged and convicted of Mutiny.

Yup. I had a real problem as well with the idea that her example from Vulcan history was a viable reason to disobey orders. It was 100 years since the Klingons were last encountered. What makes her think they still act the same way as then?

 

[Starbreaker]

I enjoyed both episodes. I think the second one was the better of the two.

The overwhelming negativity is enough to keep me away from talking about this show on message boards for the time being. I don't give a crap about Gene Roddenberry's legacy or 1966 aesthetics. I'm enjoying this new show and I'm going to do so on my own apparently.

 

[Jayson1]

I enjoyed both episodes. I think the second one was the better of the two.

The overwhelming negativity is enough to keep me away from talking about this show on message boards for the time being. I don't give a crap about Gene Roddenberry's legacy or 1966 aesthetics. I'm enjoying this new show and I'm going to do so on my own apparently.

But why would other people not liking it, impact the way you do like it? Isn't it fun to see other perspectives even if you don't agree with them?

Jason