Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x05 - "Choose Your Pain"

[Rahul]

I think Isaacs is doing an absolute wonderful job with the material he has been given. At the same time, the material is so one-note that it is maddening. For me, the vast majority of the problems this show has starts in the writers room. Which is a shame considering they had eighteen months to put together a coherent story with rich characters.

Given that the tardigrade was supposed to be one of the bridge officers of the Discovery until recently, and as such his entire monster-subplot being a late-term addition, I DO think a lot of the scripts were completely re-done and cobbled together up until the last minute. Which would explain a lot.

He killed his own crew, and skated away. Not sure there could be a bigger betrayal.

You got me there. I already forgot about that. What an asshole.

 

[indranee]

He killed his own crew, and skated away. Not sure there could be a bigger betrayal.



I think Isaacs is doing an absolute wonderful job with the material he has been given. At the same time, the material is so one-note that it is maddening. For me, the vast majority of the problems this show has starts in the writers room. Which is a shame considering they had eighteen months to put together a coherent story with rich characters.

I think the problem lies in the fact that the writers are being deliberate assholes by giving us only tidbits at a time. They tell us Lorca left his crew to die and didn't go down with his ship, but they don't tell us exactly WHAT happened other than what Lorca admitted to. How do we know what he says was the real story or what was in his head? To me, his refusal to get treatment for his eyes (and thus leaving himself openly vulnerable to torture and pain) is a personal penance he observes. They do the same thing with Saru and his treatment of the tardigrade (though he redeems himself by the end of the episode).

I think also the issue lies in the arcing storyline and the writers' unwillingness to resolve characters's personal arcs in the accepted episodic nature of Trek. I think some of us have issues with that timeframe... we need the resolution here and NOW.

From what I am getting, that ain't gonna happen with DSC.

 

[Rahul]

No I'm making assumptions about a fictional character based on my impressions of how he has been written. You are the one who is making sweeping statements about the morality of other posters based on a discussion about a character from a television show.

Nothing i saw of Mudd makes me want to give him the benefit of the doubt, to me he's not a redeemable or sympathetic character as yet. Maybe this will change with his subsequent appearances maybe it won't. It's just an opinion that I have currently. No need to get bent out of shape over it.

Mudd is a complety duchebag, and in no way sympathetic.

Luckily, character traits don't decide wether human rights apply to you or not.

 

[Rahul]

I think the problem lies in the fact that the writers are being deliberate assholes by giving us only tidbits at a time. They tell us Lorca left his crew to die and didn't go down with his ship, but they don't tell us exactly WHAT happened other than what Lorca admitted to. How do we know what he says was the real story or what was in his head? To me, his refusal to get treatment for his eyes (and thus leaving himself openly vulnerable to torture and pain) is a personal penance he observes. They do the same thing with Saru and his treatment of the tardigrade (though he redeems himself by the end of the episode).

I think also the issue lies in the arcing storyline and the writers' unwillingness to resolve characters's personal arcs in the accepted episodic nature of Trek. I think some of us have issues with that timeframe... we need the resolution here and NOW.

From what I am getting, that ain't gonna happen with DSC.

See: That's the difference between the Lorca-subplot and the Tardigrade-subplot. The latter was way better handeled.

Hell, I would have been okay if they decided to NOT release the creature at this point. It was, after all, a major advantage in a galaxy-spanning war. But the difference is: This issue was ADRESSED. Properly. We had all the facts on the table and different characters voicing different opinions on how to proceed. I would have been okay if the characters came to different conclusions than me, because I was able to understand their reasoning.

Lorca's story so far seems mostly lazy. They wanted to give him an 'edge', but clearly didn't spent enough time and consideration into it, and went way too far into the "villain protagonist"-role. But without realising it and following it to it's logical conclusions.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Muss is a complety duchebag, and in no way sympathetic.

Luckily, character traits don't decide wether human rights apply to you or not.

If we were talking about a real world situation I would agree with you, but this is a tv show and I don't take it as seriously as that. What happened to mudd is no different than any other movie or television show where the villain gets some sort of comeuppance. It's a dramatic conceit to tell whatever story the writers want to tell.

 

[indranee]

See: That's the difference between the Lorca-subplot and the Tardigrade-subplot. The latter was way better handeled.

Hell, I would have been okay if they decided to NOT release the creature at this point. It was, after all, a major advantage in a galaxy-spanning war. But the difference is: This issue was ADRESSED. Properly. We had all the facts on the table and different characters voicing different opinions on how to proceed. I would have been okay if the characters came to different conclusions than me, because I was able to understand their reasoning.

Lorca's story so far seems mostly lazy. They wanted to give him an 'edge', but clearly didn't spent enough time and consideration into it, and went way too far into the "villain protagonist"-role. But without realising it.

No, it wasn't addressed properly, Rahul. It was addressed IMMEDIATELY.

That's the difference and the point I'm trying to make. Lorca's "problem" is one they don't WANT to address right now. And I understand your and other poster's problem with that. I identified it because in my heart I'd have liked that, as well. But I'm willing to wait to see what they do.... in real life, problems like that don't have episodic resolution either. DS9 NEVER addressed ITPM, really. It addressed it in other ways and down the line... but never directly and immediately.

Frankly, if Lorca IS made irredeemable, I don't see him surviving the show. But I'm willing to wait and see before I pass judgment on a character that is functionally (and script-wise) brilliant in making us HAVE this conversation/debate. I don't mind that at all.

Do you see that?

 

[Rahul]

If we were talking about a real world situation I would agree with you, but this is a tv show and I don't take it as seriously as that. What happened to mudd is no different than any other movie or television show where the villain gets some sort of comeuppance. It's a dramatic conceit to tell whatever story the writers want to tell.

The problem is: It wasn't "dramatic irony", or Mudd accidentally shoveling his own grave.

No. It was a deliberate action, by a supposed "hero" character, to expose an asshole character to torture and death. The relationship between "crime" and "punishment" is WAY off the rails in this respect.

That shuttle pilot didn't deserve to die either. And he wasn't even a douche. But it wasn't one of our main characters that directly decided for him to die. That's the difference.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Why do you assume that Harry will die?

He hadn't been tortured up to that point. No reason to assume he will be now.

As he said, the Klingons were using him to get intel out of fellow prisoners. And there will always be more prisoners for Harry to trick.

 

[Rahul]

No, it wasn't addressed properly, Rahul. It was addressed IMMEDIATELY.

That's the difference and the point I'm trying to make. Lorca's "problem" is one they don't WANT to address right now. And I understand your and other poster's problem with that. I identified it because in my heart I'd have liked that, as well. But I'm willing to wait to see what they do.... in real life, problems like that don't have episodic resolution either. DS9 NEVER addressed ITPM, really. It addressed it in other ways and down the line... but never directly and immediately.

Frankly, if Lorca IS made irredeemable, I don't see him surviving the show. But I'm willing to wait and see before I pass judgment on a character that is functionally (and script-wise) brilliant in making us HAVE this conversation/debate. I don't mind that at all.

Do you see that?

There have been other shows on television, where one of the main characters turned out to be evil and later betrays the other characters. It usually is better handeled than here.

 

[cooleddie74]

Mudd is a complety duchebag, and in no way sympathetic.

Luckily, character traits don't decide wether human rights apply to you or not.

Nice to know that Harry doesn't change much if at all over the ensuing ten-plus years. He's just as douchey in 2267 as he is in 2256.

 

[BillJ]

If we were talking about a real world situation I would agree with you, but this is a tv show and I don't take it as seriously as that. What happened to mudd is no different than any other movie or television show where the villain gets some sort of comeuppance. It's a dramatic conceit to tell whatever story the writers want to tell.

The problem being that when Hollywood continues to feed us that kind of thinking, it begins to seep in and change the way we think on a macro level. That's why most people have no issues with drone strikes that kill civilians. Because the ends justify the means. And hunting down brown religious zealots has overridden our sense of justice and humanity.

 

[Refuge]

^ Why do you assume that Harry will die?

He hadn't been tortured up to that point. No reason to assume he will be now.

As he said, the Klingons were using him to get intel out of fellow prisoners. And there will always be more prisoners for Harry to trick.

No much of a life.. kind of validates that he would want to escape from that. If Lorca had freed him, Mudd wouldn't have betrayed him, so there was not reason for Lorca to leave him behind other than out of spite.

 

[Rahul]

^ Why do you assume that Harry will die?

He hadn't been tortured up to that point. No reason to assume he will be now.

As he said, the Klingons were using him to get intel out of fellow prisoners. And there will always be more prisoners for Harry to trick.

Look! All those Korean War POW's, that went on to Noth Korean television and read from a paper how evil America is! They don't look like they were tortured!

Surely there is no reason to assume they will be. Just leave them in the hands of North Korea. They probably deserved it anyway, because they talked shit about Amerika on tape.

 

[Mr Awe]

I'm all for dark scifi, even dark Trek, but for me it only works when you at least have some kind of character to root for.

I'm rooting for Stamets, Michael, Tilly, and, yes, Saru. Actually, I like Saru. He cares about the crew, but has an alien way of viewing/sensing things. His different perspective can be really valuable, as we saw in this episode.

These people seem like good people who are placed in a tough situation.

I'm fascinated by Lorca. I want to learn more about him.

For me, there are plenty of characters to root for, and even Lorca, I'm interested in.

 

[indranee]

The problem is: It wasn't "dramatic irony", or Mudd accidentally shoveling his own grave.

No. It was a deliberate action, by a supposed "hero" character, to expose an asshole character to torture and death. The relationship between "crime" and "punishment" is WAY off the rails in this respect.

That shuttle pilot didn't deserve to die either. And he wasn't even a douche. But it wasn't one of our main characters that directly decided for him to die. That's the difference.

Well, you could say that the shuttle pilot died because he was directly in the line of fire whereas Lorca was "hiding" behind the entrance. So Lorca let the shuttle pilot "take it", right?

I still don't get why Mudd's story (which hasn't completely been revealed as far as DSC goes, aside from the fact that he becomes an interstellar menace at some point) can't be seen as an ongoing DRAMATIC plot point. I mean, supposedly Lorca brought him back and threw him in the brig, what then? I would rather it be this way and then see what happens because now Mudd has a clear vendetta against Lorca... and I am willing to see where THAT goes.

There are times I feel that viewers (esp we Trekkies) have such a territorial hold on the characterization that the writers just can't win in terms of the dramatic graph.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Well, you could say that the shuttle pilot died because he was directly in the line of fire whereas Lorca was "hiding" behind the entrance. So Lorca let the shuttle pilot "take it", right?

I doubt it. Lorca was their objective, so obviously he was taken alive. The pilot was killed so there would be no witnesses. Indeed, there's really no reason for the Klingons NOT to kill the pilot, is there? Especially since the pilot fought back, so he was regarded as a legitimate target.

If Lorca had freed him, Mudd wouldn't have betrayed him

We know Harry well enough by now to realize that he will always betray someone if given the opportunity. Hell, we knew that just from this one episode, let alone all of his other appearances.

Harry is no more trustworthy than Garak. And possibly a lot less.

@Rahul: IIRC, Harry specifically said that he wasn't tortured. And that is probably the only believable thing he said. If he had been tortured, he would have pointed this out to Lorca, and probably used it to garner sympathy.

 

[BillJ]

I'm rooting for Stamets, Michael, Tilly, and, yes, Saru. Actually, I like Saru. He cares about the crew, but has an alien way of viewing/sensing things. His different perspective can be really valuable, as we saw in this episode.

Saru disappointed me when he wanted to keep torturing the creature to save Lorca.

I still don't get why Mudd's story (which hasn't completely been revealed as far as DSC goes, aside from the fact that he becomes an interstellar menace at some point) can't be seen as an ongoing DRAMATIC plot point. I mean, supposedly Lorca brought him back and threw him in the brig, what then? I would rather it be this way and then see what happens because now Mudd has a clear vendetta against Lorca... and I am willing to see where THAT goes.

It was written that way so Mudd would want revenge. But that doesn't change the fact that it was weak writing, and reflected badly on Lorca as a Starfleet captain.

Lorca still could have left Mudd behind in the hangar bay when the craft they took was only a two-seater. Mudd is still left, still pissed, and still left with the Klingons. But Lorca looks less like a douche.

 

[indranee]

The problem being that when Hollywood continues to feed us that kind of thinking, it begins to seep in and change the way we think on a macro level. That's why most people have no issues with drone strikes that kill civilians. Because the ends justify the means. And hunting down brown religious zealots has overridden our sense of justice and humanity.

Of course you have a point there, but as a writer I can't be held in that kind of a creative prison. It's just not fair. Everybody does this. Not just Hollywood, btw. ALL writers write what they want to write. Erecting socio-moral fences does nothing better than stifle creativity. While I understand the dilemma, it's not something I am comfortable with.

 

[Rahul]

Well, you could say that the shuttle pilot died because he was directly in the line of fire whereas Lorca was "hiding" behind the entrance. So Lorca let the shuttle pilot "take it", right?

I still don't get why Mudd's story (which hasn't completely been revealed as far as DSC goes, aside from the fact that he becomes an interstellar menace at some point) can't be seen as an ongoing DRAMATIC plot point. I mean, supposedly Lorca brought him back and threw him in the brig, what then? I would rather it be this way and then see what happens because now Mudd has a clear vendetta against Lorca... and I am willing to see where THAT goes.

There are times I feel that viewers (esp we Trekkies) have such a territorial hold on the characterization that the writers just can't win in terms of the dramatic graph.

Here is the thing, though: It could have been handeled in a thousand better ways that made more sense.

Say he takes Mudd with them, and then they get to the shuttle bay, and see the ship has only two seats. I would have been completely fine had Lorca chosen to leave Mudd behind in this situation. It would have had the same end result, Mudd left behind and feel betrayed. But Lorca's action would have made sense, to choose Tyler over Mudd in this situation, when he could save only one.

As it was, Lorca decided to leave him behind just 'cause, because he was a dick earlier, and the show pretendsthat wasn't an act of pure immorality that leaves us to immediately question the character or Lorca.

 

[Mr Awe]

As do many fans of Discovery. Just read the discussions of the war crimes and cruelty committed by the show's protagonists.

Way to oversimplify and generalize! Woot!

What I've actually seen instead is a detailed discussion about the ethical dilemma of what to do in difficult situations. I don't think anyone has said, awesome he left Mudd behind! It was more like, given the situation of facing a tough escape, it was justifiable. Of course, everyone will draw the line in a different place.

But, that's a far cry from Discovery fans being pro crimes and cruelty. That sort of callous accusation isn't helpful.