I'd say bit player, considering she only appeared in eight episodes over the course of two-and-a-half seasons.
"Burnham’s choice...affects Starfleet, affects the Federation; it affects the entire universe..."
- Thread starter Mudd
- Start date
I'd say bit player, considering she only appeared in eight episodes over the course of two-and-a-half seasons.
So, you're telling me that the Borg had no chance of destroying the Federation in BOBW or FC?! Or that the Dominion had no chance in DS9? Holy cow!
Your point is right on. Even when it's not a sequel, we know the Federation isn't going to lose. The real question is what happens to the characters that we are following. We don't know their outcomes even in a prequel.
Before judging, let's the see context of how she's brought back. Right now we just don't know. Premature to say you don't like how she's brought back when we haven't seen it yet.
Like it or not, she's brought back by Lorca because of somekind of skill she has. That much is in the episode three trailer.
There's not enough info in the trailer to "like it or not" yet. You don't even know the reason she is brought back, much less whether it makes sense given the context of the next episode.
We need to wait and see before we can judge it. Apologies for introducing logic and common sense into this thread!
How likable is she now that she
murdered that Klingon in cold blood when she could have just stunned him?
(mutiny, lying to her crew, murder).
On TOS, she'd have been the nutjob badguy.
Last edited:
^Probably explains why Spock never mentions her, she gets disowned by the peace loving Vulcans.
The ones who exterminate Klingons on sight?
I really, really hope they don't go in that direction, and I'm assuming they won't. That would call into question Sarek's responsibility for the war and gets into a whole other level of violation of a female character that I hope they avoid entirely.
Also, I'd be no more interested in a lead who lacks free agency. Kinda critical for your main character.
G
Gonzo
Guest
In truth it was never a choice, the choice had already been made by T'Kuvma. who set everything up.
Burnham could have potentially weakened his position if she had triggered a fight before the other Klingons had arrived but that's her own fault, she should have just headbutted the Captain instead of relying on a weak nerve pinch.
Burnham did choose to set the phaser to kill before she shot him, by this time the damage was already done as soon as all of the houses left for Qo'nos, events now had a momentum all of its own.
Some damage could have been mitigated if they had just destroyed the whole ship by transporting lots of warheads, the uncertainty over T'Kuvmas whereabouts and failure to show up at Qo'nos could have made the Klingons think twice but its too late now.
Burnham could have potentially weakened his position if she had triggered a fight before the other Klingons had arrived but that's her own fault, she should have just headbutted the Captain instead of relying on a weak nerve pinch.
Burnham did choose to set the phaser to kill before she shot him, by this time the damage was already done as soon as all of the houses left for Qo'nos, events now had a momentum all of its own.
Some damage could have been mitigated if they had just destroyed the whole ship by transporting lots of warheads, the uncertainty over T'Kuvmas whereabouts and failure to show up at Qo'nos could have made the Klingons think twice but its too late now.
But that's what putting a Katra in someone else's head does.
We know this from Archer, McCoy, and Picard.
That still doesn't exculpate Burnham for her actions.
G
Gonzo
Guest
Its this uncertainty that makes some think Reboot, I am not bothered either way.
Later they can claim that when they said it was prime timeline it really was, until that day and that situation changed everything, which seems to be the premise of the show.
She was never meant to do those things and was supposed to carry on aboard the Shenzou which was never destroyed and a Captain Georgiou who never died.
Instead she ended up on the Discovery.
In the end we may find out that its not what happened on that day that changed everything but its actually something she will do in the future.
But, I don't think Burnham did it (Killed T'Kuvma) because she's inherently 'evil/bloodthirsty' - she did it in the heat of passion. She had an extreme emotional reaction to she effectively her 'mother' killed in front of her and killed the one who did it. I also think she immediately realized what a HUGE mistake it was - and that why at the hearing she even says "...I'm the enemy.." <--- She's not try to hide from the responsibility or shift the blame for all the actions that put her in this situation. She knows what she did and how wrong it all was.
For myself, I don't see the character as irredeemable and I think the story IS what she does to finally deal with the consequences of what she did; and how she regains her 'Humanity'. YMMV.
I disagree. We are seeing new species on this show and hearing of places that Kirk and Picard don't mention. The Federation could lose it's frontier or more than a few member worlds permanently to the Klingons and still survive (DS9 saw the Federation give up planets to the Cardassians in a peace treaty).
This is why I think it would have been better to have the ship fire on the Klingons. That could be chalked up as one impulsive, emotional mistake. Having her commit mutiny, then get a second chance, only to commit murder for no real reason (while disregarding the plan her mentor died for!) calls into question Burnham's very nature as a character. That's a series of terrible choices that, at the very least, makes her unsuitable to be anywhere near the bridge of a starship.
In television today you don't need to redeem anyone, you just need interesting characters. Whose redeeming Tony Soprano or Walter White or even Hank moody and Don Draper?
Maybe they won't. Though I'd find it funny if Kirk and the Enterprise showed up at the end and defeated Burnham, so that the whole series was an inversion of a typical TOS episode.
That said, I'm not really interested in a Trek that abandons all the traditional Trek values. If I wanted Tony Soprano, I'd watch the Sopranos.
I'm already bummed about what they did with the Vulcans. Kinda casts the prejudice in Balance of Terror in a new light, if the Vulcans are well established to be that brutal and ruthless. Very Romulan.
Similar threads
