Series and Sonequa Martin Green Win Saturn Awards
- Thread starter MvRojo
- Start date
If I hear another SMG speech
Now, she is a good actress, can be very good. In The Walking Dead she was incredible. But something is very off with her performance in STD. Maybe she is overacting, not sure. Sometimes you look at a performance and it feels natural. Doug Jones, Jason Isaacs, Mary Wiseman, their performances were on the spot, you could believe them. SMG was overdoing it, I didn't buy it.
If I hear another SMG speech
Now, she is a good actress, can be very good. In The Walking Dead she was incredible. But something is very off with her performance in STD. Maybe she is overacting, not sure. Sometimes you look at a performance and it feels natural. Doug Jones, Jason Isaacs, Mary Wiseman, their performances were on the spot, you could believe them. SMG was overdoing it, I didn't buy it.
Some of it is writing. They give her these speeches or moments were she is suppose to be insightful or have a deeper understanding than other people but she lacks Picard's gravitas or KIrks charm or Sisko's intensity or Janeway's casual humor and ability to relate to people. She really fails IMO when they do this. I think her strength actually would be in playing more of asshole to people with a dark sense of humor. Not exactly what people expect from a Trek lead. I wish the show would shift it's main emphasis to Tilly,Saru or Stamets. I predict the actress who plays TIlly is going to be the true breakout star of the show who will have the most post-Discovery success. She is funny and non-traditional hot and has range because I have seen her on "Baskets" and it's a completely different type of character than Tilly.
Jason
I hope the speeches sailed off with the showrunners. She turns in a good performance in Lethe or Wolf Inside because she doesn't have to monologue.
Not me. With Lorca gone she is my favorite character with Stamets and Saru a close second. Maybe Georgiou if she counts as a regular.
Jason
I feel pretty much the same way.
To fully accept her performance, it's necessary to concede the name "Micheal" was very deliberate. That is Quis ut Deus? Of course "God" is meant to be taken in the abstract with "Star Trek" being the stand-in. I think Fuller's intent to ask the question "Who is like Star Trek?" -- or more literally -- What is Star Trek? I believe his initial conception of the series was intended to be blowback against the It's not real Star Trek rhetoric.
I think Alice played a role in this as well, as AAIW is really a collection of stories -episodes- and lacks any central narrative, despite the overall theme of bringing order and logic and reasoning to the chaotic absurd. Disco did just the opposite, it brought a cohesive singular story plot to a franchise that is most known for focusing on logic reason and also being strictly episodic. Just one example showing Star Trek can be many things. I could go on about Stamets here, but he's off-topic and I've digressed enough.
In order to do this, though, Fuller needed a personification of Star Trek. And the obvious choice was Spock, punctuated by the fact that his defining trademark literally envokes God. So back to the question: Who is like God? How about a sibling? But Fuller takes it one step further and makes the sibling a black human woman -- the visual polar opposite and blatant juxtaposition. (One that harkens directly back to Last Battlefield, the oft-touted most Trekesque episode of all.) So now we have the defining question: Who is like God/Spock/Star Trek, but not like Him at all? And we see this right away. Micheal, so desperate to be Vulcan, like Spock (or Sarek I suppose) ends up committing one of the most un-Star Trek acts in the history of the franchise, only to, in the end, finish her arch by going full Picard.
SMGs performance catalogs all the incremental steps in between. She basically starts off playing someone playing a Vulcan and playing it badly. Micheal ultimately realizes that She is Star Trek [or Starfleet/Fed if you'd prefer]. And so is Tilly, and Stamets, and Kyla and so on. And, as Micheal becomes more comfortable with her surroundings and fellow crew, SMG seeming becomes more comfortable on set and more open with her fellow cast members. She does this through A LOT of body language. Speaking of, pay attention to how she emotes in the early episodes. It's not like someone trying to do an impersonation of Nimoy but more like how a young child might mime its parents.
And on top of all that, she adds the extra layers. For example, she throws in tones of the intensely morbid curiosity someone might depict Alice in a stage performance. Similarly, she shines with the deliberate and unwavering intent of Micheal's journey through Dante's Inferno during the Mirror episodes.
I could go on, but I don't want to go full tl;dr. The point is, it's easy to be dismissive, but I encourage everyone to stand back and look and things objectively and try and see what the Saturn people saw.
I think Alice played a role in this as well, as AAIW is really a collection of stories -episodes- and lacks any central narrative, despite the overall theme of bringing order and logic and reasoning to the chaotic absurd. Disco did just the opposite, it brought a cohesive singular story plot to a franchise that is most known for focusing on logic reason and also being strictly episodic. Just one example showing Star Trek can be many things. I could go on about Stamets here, but he's off-topic and I've digressed enough.
In order to do this, though, Fuller needed a personification of Star Trek. And the obvious choice was Spock, punctuated by the fact that his defining trademark literally envokes God. So back to the question: Who is like God? How about a sibling? But Fuller takes it one step further and makes the sibling a black human woman -- the visual polar opposite and blatant juxtaposition. (One that harkens directly back to Last Battlefield, the oft-touted most Trekesque episode of all.) So now we have the defining question: Who is like God/Spock/Star Trek, but not like Him at all? And we see this right away. Micheal, so desperate to be Vulcan, like Spock (or Sarek I suppose) ends up committing one of the most un-Star Trek acts in the history of the franchise, only to, in the end, finish her arch by going full Picard.
SMGs performance catalogs all the incremental steps in between. She basically starts off playing someone playing a Vulcan and playing it badly. Micheal ultimately realizes that She is Star Trek [or Starfleet/Fed if you'd prefer]. And so is Tilly, and Stamets, and Kyla and so on. And, as Micheal becomes more comfortable with her surroundings and fellow crew, SMG seeming becomes more comfortable on set and more open with her fellow cast members. She does this through A LOT of body language. Speaking of, pay attention to how she emotes in the early episodes. It's not like someone trying to do an impersonation of Nimoy but more like how a young child might mime its parents.
And on top of all that, she adds the extra layers. For example, she throws in tones of the intensely morbid curiosity someone might depict Alice in a stage performance. Similarly, she shines with the deliberate and unwavering intent of Micheal's journey through Dante's Inferno during the Mirror episodes.
I could go on, but I don't want to go full tl;dr. The point is, it's easy to be dismissive, but I encourage everyone to stand back and look and things objectively and try and see what the Saturn people saw.
Who doesn't like Tilly?!?!?
I gave STD Season one 4 out of 10
She is responsible for at-least 2 of those 4 points
I have to disagree, this is Cringe for me. If they want to be like that, go do the Orville, this is Star Trek.. a different standard is supposed to be in play here. It's just not for me. I hope they do a new series set after VOY> As for STD I can see it's appeal for some, but honestly at least with the Orville, I know what to expect with their dialogue. This tho? made me feel like there was less of a TREK feel to it. The dialogue in the TREK movies wasn't this crude, and yet it was exciting and could be edgy in a different way, Wrath of Khan is a prime example.
Expressing excitement is "crude"????
Yes, it made it feel like there are actually real human beings speaking, and not just stilted cardboard cutouts of characters, IMO.
Probably just as much as FOX paid for the awards The Orville won, but maybe not as much as AMC paid for all those Better Call Saul AND Walking Dead wins.
I find the use of ‘Cringe’ as a proper noun to be cringe. No one likes the smell of wannabe 4-channers in the morning.
Who doesn't like Tilly?!?!?
I gave STD Season one 4 out of 10
She is responsible for at-least 2 of those 4 points
Honestly, this is why I’d never make it in Starfleet.
Because I’d do this all the time, not be sorry, and fill the whole damn ship to capacity with refugees and orphans. Those MU Kelpians? Smuggled into Jeffries tubes.
So evidently, I kinda liked that moment.
Also like: giant adorable space tardigrades.
Cannot stand her. Utter, insufferable drip.
"Why is Fucking cool" more crude than dumbass or double dumbass to you, or Hell, Son of a Bitch or Dam or Dammit Jim, or Shit or Bullshit or Freakasaurus or Ugly Bags of mostly Water or Spoonheads or Cardies or Troll?
Jason
Grow up