Look, I'm not trying to get in a pissing contest. But you regularly feel the need, in a completely neutral discussion, to add that one sentence to the end of your posts that really isn't necessary other than to remind everyone reading that "DSC just hasn't grabbed me yet" or "not much about the show is interesting otherwise" or whatever. I don't see people who like the show needlessly adding a closing sentence to 75% of their posts, regardless of topic, saying "but the show is totally awesome and has me hooked!" It seems needless and tacked on and very frequent. I think that's all I'm trying to say.
He's not rogue. He's carrying out what seems to be a top secret Starfleet mission, and they've apparently given him a lot of flexibility to act.
It happens to be pretty much what I think about Discovery with respect to every element of it other than the performers themselves and some of the CG. Well, except that I like it less than he does.
I'm sure Lorca is genuinely dedicated to completing his mission, but I am also sure that he would willingly violate whatever regulations he chooses to, in the process. Based on what little we have seen of Lorca so far, I see someone who has absolutely no moral or ethical precepts whatsoever. He's ruthless like no Starfleet captain we have ever seen. So I'd have to say that Lorca is a bad guy. He may THINK he's the good guy, but when all is said and done, I don't care what he thinks. I believe that, whether it be in fiction or in reality, there is genuine good and evil in the universe...and Lorca is not the former. At least Sisko had the good sense to feel guilty about what he'd done in "In the Pale Moonlight". Guilt is probably a foreign concept to Lorca. If one were to ask "Is there anything Lorca would not do?", I'm not so sure there'd be an answer...Lorca is like the Vic Mackey of the Trek universe.
I'm not so sure. Right now, I'm just kinda waiting around hoping it doesn't end up a giant waste of my time. "Context is for Kings" was better than the first two, but that wasn't exactly a high bar to clear. Discovery just hasn't grabbed me yet. Not much there of interest so far.
I'm hanging in to see Wilson's Harry Mudd. Because he was the most interesting thing in the last two or three trailers.
Yes, I'm very curious as well what he'll do with the character. Hopefully he'll give him a larger-than-life over-the-top quality. Might be a good balance to the more serious, pseudo-realistic characters on the show.
I get Lorca. He's been let off the leash by the powers that be to solve their problems by any means necessary. If he screws it up, they disavow any knowledge and sweep him under the rug. If he makes it work, he's a hero. Lorca sees himself on a noble quest to win a war, and he believes he will find the answer. However, he sees no boundaries. Everything and anything is in play, no matter the ethical consequences. He'll do anything, and kill anyone, to accomplish his goal. This is a character with real teeth, and I love him to death.
Yep, this is exactly what I meant. All this is complete conjecture. You could be right about him, but it would be just a lucky guess.
Lorca sabatoged the relay. His eyes were damaged when the beacon lit up. He wanted the war because he thinks the Klingons are a growing threat, and he wanted the freedom and resources to conduct his wacky(illegal) experiments without oversight. He has connections to or is part of Starfleet intelligence (the black badge kind). When Mudd does appear, it won't be as a nuscience, as in TOS, but a "gets his hands dirty for Starfleet/Lorca" kind of relationship. Source: hints, implications, and the Force.
I'm just playing off an archetype, as have so many writers through the ages. That's what we do. He fits the path of Colonel Kurtz, and even William Kidd. Tools of the powers that be, until they aren't convenient anymore. We'll see what happens.