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

[Agony_Boothb]

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.

Oh geeze I have plenty of issues with drone strikes and other real world incidents of war crimes and torture. But we aren't talking about a real world situation, it's fiction. I liked seeing someone who was portrayed as a villain get his comeuppance and a reason to have a vendetta against Lorc It's like asking if John Mclain should have allowed Hans gruber to fall his to his death in die hard. In the movie that scene is fucking cool. Obviously in the real world I would expect John Mclain to arrest Hans so he could have his day in court.

 

[King Bob!]

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.

And I agree with you, except in one instance. Star Trek. I think Star Trek should strive to show us things can be done the right way. That we don't always have to break the laws of decency to win.

When I was growing up, the TOS gang were imperfect, but they still came across as heroic. With Discovery, they seemed to have ditched that to do what every other genre drama does.

I guess that's what people want, but it doesn't sit well with me that there is no longer a place for Star Trek's optimism.

Everyone's mileage may vary.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

For those who look down on Lorca for leaving Harry behind (and NOT killing him), I wonder how they feel about this little nugget from ST III:

"I...have HAD...enough of YOU!"

Why is it right for Kirk to KILL Kruge, but not right for Lorca to simply leave Harry behind and NOT kill him?

 

[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 pretends that wasn't an act of pure immorality that leaves us to immediately question the character or Lorca.

Edit: sorry, double-posted this

 

[Rahul]

For those who look down on Lorca for leaving Harry behind (and NOT killing him), I wonder how they feel about this little nugget from ST III:

"I...have HAD...enough of YOU!"

Why is it right for Kirk to KILL Kruge, but not right for Lorca to simply leave Harry behind and NOT kill him?

Kirk and Kruge were actively fighting at this point, and Kruge wanted to take Kirk with him to fall to death. Mudd didn't attack Lorca.

 

[King Bob!]

For those who look down on Lorca for leaving Harry behind (and NOT killing him), I wonder how they feel about this little nugget from ST III:

"I...have HAD...enough of YOU!"

Why is it right for Kirk to KILL Kruge, but not right for Lorca to simply leave Harry behind and NOT kill him?

You mean after Kruge killed his son, and Kirk still tried to save him?

 

[Mr Awe]

Or perhaps we're just simply responding to the criticisms with our own passionate points of view? No one's trying to shut anyone down, disagreement is a two way street. If you have a criticism, be prepared to defend it.

This. Well said.

And, I'll just add that I think both overzealous gushers and monotone haters become repetitious and boring fairly quickly. Being able to fairly assess the good and the bad is the most interesting.

 

[The Habs Fan]

And I agree with you, except in one instance. Star Trek. I think Star Trek should strive to show us things can be done the right way. That we don't always have to break the laws of decency to win.

When I was growing up, the TOS gang were imperfect, but they still came across as heroic. With Discovery, they seemed to have ditched that to do what every other genre drama does.

I guess that's what people want, but it doesn't sit well with me that there is no longer a place for Star Trek's optimism.

Everyone's mileage may vary.

Everyone has a different idea as to what Star Trek is. There is no right or wrong answer. What is wrong is insisting that Star Trek is something when it clearly has been proven in past series that it's not (I'm not saying you're doing this, but some people are). Star Trek has had main characters do worse things than Lorca. It has had episodes that equal the dark and grittiness we are seeing so far.

 

[Rahul]

This. Well said.

And, I'll just add that I think both overzealous gushers and monotone haters become repetitious and boring fairly quickly. Being able fairly assess the good and the bad is the most interesting.

"The good": Most of Discovery (except the klingon re-design).

"The bad": Lorca's behaviour this episode (past and present).
(IMO)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

It's easy to claim the moral high ground and demand Lorca take Harry along. But for those who'd gone through the torture that Lorca had, it would probably be more difficult. There's not one of us who would be thinking clearly after going through that.

Can't say I blame Lorca for being just a little bit pissed at Harry at that point.

 

[indranee]

And I agree with you, except in one instance. Star Trek. I think Star Trek should strive to show us things can be done the right way. That we don't always have to break the laws of decency to win.

When I was growing up, the TOS gang were imperfect, but they still came across as heroic. With Discovery, they seemed to have ditched that to do what every other genre drama does.

I guess that's what people want, but it doesn't sit well with me that there is no longer a place for Star Trek's optimism.

Everyone's mileage may vary.

Oh I realize that, but I also feel that the writers are setting these characters up (especially Lorca, but also to a lesser extent Saru, Michael, AND Stamets) as literally moral question marks that will HAVE to be addressed sooner or later. Some of us hope sooner than later, but I don't mind waiting a bit longer for the character arcs to resolve. Maybe it's because I am a Niner and I'm used to waiting... who knows. I'm going to give the writers the benefit of the doubt here.

Btw, it's been really nice talking to you guys! Feels like old times in the Enterprise forum when we talked about Season 3 stuff, especially Archer's actions in Anomaly. Woo hoo! Trek is back and I for one am loving the experience.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

Everyone has a different idea as to what Star Trek is. There is no right or wrong answer. What is wrong is insisting that Star Trek is something when it clearly has been proven in past series that it's not (I'm not saying you're doing this, but some people are). Star Trek has had main characters do worse things than Lorca. It has had episodes that equal the dark and grittiness we are seeing so far.

Yeah it's probably been mentioned earlier but Sisko was complicit in a political assassination to drag an entire civilization into a war. At this point, Lorca is small potatoes.

 

[The Habs Fan]

And Lorca didn't leave Harry behind "just because". He was working with the Klingons and couldn't be trusted. Seems like a good enough reason.

 

[Mr Awe]

Face value (that is not projecting a scenario we don't know for sure), it was morally wrong for Lorca to leave Mudd to torture and certain death. There is no justification.

Do you really want to attempt an escape from a prison WITH a collaborator?! That's not the road to success.

"I know you're working with our enemies but, shoot, want to join us in our prison escape? Here's all the details!"

That would've been moronic.

 

[King Bob!]

Do you really want to attempt an escape from a prison WITH a collaborator?! That's not the road to success.

"I know you're working with our enemies but, shoot, want to join us in our prison escape? Here's all the details!"

That would've been moronic.

Lorca could have left the cell door open, and told Harry to find his own way off.

"And if you follow us, I'll shoot you."

 

[Rahul]

It's easy to claim the moral high ground and demand Lorca take Harry along. But for those who'd gone through the torture that Lorca had, it would probably be more difficult. There's not one of us who would be thinking clearly after going through that.

Can't say I blame Lorca for being just a little bit pissed at Harry at that point.

That's why I'm more annoyed at the episode itself:
Had it shown Lorca in a situation of distress and mistrust, maybe even panick, I could have understand his decision better and excuse it. But as it was, him being portrayed as still his normal self, and following on his gut decision, it was just wrong.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Lorca could have left the cell door open, and told Harry to find his own way off.

THAT would have been an excellent way to get Harry killed.

 

[Rahul]

And Lorca didn't leave Harry behind "just because". He was working with the Klingons and couldn't be trusted. Seems like a good enough reason.

Do you really want to attempt an escape from a prison WITH a collaborator?! That's not the road to success.

"I know you're working with our enemies but, shoot, want to join us in our prison escape? Here's all the details!"

That would've been moronic.

You guys keep throwing the word "collaborator" around. I don't think you know what a collaborator is.

Hint: Someone willing to sell out his fellow inmates to evade torture and death ISN'T "collaboration". Not in the sense of treason.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

I also find it odd that people expect Lorca to be a paragon of virtue. He is not the first Starfleet officer in Trek history to be kind of an asshole.

 

[King Bob!]

THAT would have been an excellent way to get Harry killed.

But it would've put Mudd's fate in his own hands.