Michael Burnham in the Kelvin timline

Anyone who has been watching discovery is more aware of this character, many find her to be a polarizing one since she is a sarek family member although she was never mentioned in TOS or even this reboot.

For those that like or have any kind of opinion about Michael, would you have liked to see her in the Kelvin films? also how do you think she would have been handled in the kelvin movies as spock's sister.

 

It would have been incredibly weird for them to introduce the TOS crew and Spock's totally random human sister in 2009.

Hell, it was a weird choice in 2017. While I like Discovery (and the Sarek household stuff is my favourite part), it's a little like reading one of those fanfic self-insert stories.

As far as I'm concerned, she exists only in the Discoverse. That's not a knock on SMG or the Discovery writers, but whoever's idea she originally was and whoever keeps insisting Discovery is "prime universe" despite it having as much in common with TOS as Smallville does with Superboy.

 

I sort of disagree. Michael owns discovery and is the centre of everything even for a main character. she is so important to spock, sarek and amanda , in fact the last episode made her the key glue that holds sarek's family together. I just can't look at spock, amanda and sarek in the same way again because of michael, either in the reboot movies or in the prime time line. I really wished she was already mentioned or referenced in past trek even if it is the kelvin reboot.

I think she would have been a strong female lead in the reboot. uhura was strong yes but never fully able to escape her reputation as Spock's pet (girlfriend). Carol was kind of useless in into darkness, Jaylah was good but a little to late to the party in beyond.

I really just cant get michael out of my head anymore she has been so interwoven into the star trek mythos as a major part of the house of sarek.

Kelvin film could have benefited from her.

 

Her existing only in the discoverse reminds me of a fan theory that maybe she is not spock's sister since it makes no sense and was never mentioned ever in the trek mythos, but maybe she is the offspring child of kelvin's spock and uhura from a distant future of the kelvin timeline, who made her way to the discovery universe to the kelvin universe. it will make sense why she has such a connection to the house of sarek.

Also this theory wont be all that far fetched since Alex Kurtzman created both the kelvin universe and the discovery universe.
In fact in the last episode of discovery, sarek and amanda re-acted a deleted scene from the 2009 movie because it is the same writer.

 

I think it would have led to an awkward issue where Spock was dating someone that reminded him of his sister.

I came up with the idea that Burnham might be a powerful being from the future (perhaps a Red Angel), who used her powers to warp reality and insert herself into Spock's family history and then wiped her own memories. Hence no mention of her before Discovery.

But I don't think that works since she wouldn't exist in the Mirror Universe too.

 

there are no similarities to michael and uhura apart from their skin tone. uhura is very feminine and reserved. michael seems like a tomboy and is not reversed. uhura had better dating skills, I felt it was too soon Michael started dating Tyler who was a klingon in diguise .

the only awkward thing that would have been true is if spock and michael had romantic feelings as some fans suggested putting them in a back to the future scenario where marty's mum begins to fall in love with him but alex kurtzman has quashed that theory and has said spock and michael have no romantic feelings towards eachother.

I already said on the discovery board that if Michael is the red angel her mary sue characteristics would have gone through the roof.

 

Halle Berry as kelvinverse Captain Burnham

 

I think she isn't in the kelvin or more like, if they don't want to retcon her in this trek too it isn't illogical or inconsistent because it's very possible her parents never died here and she thus wasn't adopted by Sarek.
Spock certaintly doesn't seem to have the issues disco-Spock is having in the show (no red angel visions etc etc), he seemed to be an only child.

To be completely honest here, as much as I wasn't against Michael being his sister I prefer his old assumed backstory (thus the one used in the reboot) that he was the only child in Sarek's house. That makes more sense to me as it explains many things. Discovery is opening up many inconsistencies.
Definitely though, the idea he was completely oblivious about humans before meeting kirk&Co is really really silly to me.
People forget about Pike and also that Spock probably had a human family from his mom's side too. What about his human grandparents and cousins? Sarek is a messy idiot but the idea he asked his wife to give up about her humanity and her family for him is too much. There is no reason why Amanda's parents and family wouldn't be allowed to interact with her son ever.

In short, she's the protagonist.

Unless she were the protagonist in these movies too, it is unlikely Michael would have a bigger role than the female characters of this trek especially since she doesn't work on the same ship.
Uhura isn't the protagonist so of course her character doesn't get developed as one, but she's a strong female lead in her own merit and a tremendous upgrade compared to how tos treated Uhura and female characters in general.

Honestly, she's a stronger character than most of the secondary (she is one too) guys.
The problem is that the audience has the habit to hold female characters to double standards and thus the way their contribution to the plot is minimized or underrated is directly proportional to how overrated or overinflated guys are, both secondary and protagonists.
In beyond, Uhura is sidelined like many pointed up (better editing and Lin not cutting/reducing some scenes would've helped that tbh) but she still has a big role with the villain and face time with him that if she were a male character she would get more credit for that and there would be no question the character is a lead (and thus her prominence in posters is consistent with the movie). Even her role as Spock's girlfriend is always important even when she isn't even there. For a secondary character her role is pretty good. The only way you could improve that is by making the movies more an ensemble than the Kirk show, which would be a great idea honestly.

The protagonist is allowed to access to narrative elements that secondary characters aren't allowed to access to. Even in tos, the star was Kirk. Spock and McCoy both got more screentime than the others BECAUSE of their connection to Kirk. In these movies it's the same for Mccoy where he's mainly Kirk's friend, while Spock was elevated as co-protagonist (in the first two at least) so he has a life outside of his dynamic with Kirk (hence his relationship with Uhura)

So, do you believe Spock being with Uhura also leads to the awkward issue that he secretely wanted to fuck his mother?

Just because his sis and girlfriend are both black it doesn't mean they are the same or Spock perceives them as the same.
That's problematic and lame, and I'd sure hope the writers wouldn't avoid putting Michael in this trek JUST because fans gotta be like that.

Of course, maybe you totally meant she reminds him of Michael because for you they are the same character personality-vise, but as they obviously aren't we are left with the idea your comparison is entirely, or mostly, based on their physical appearance (and even that is a stretch because Zoe and Sonequa aren't exactly clones of each other..)
Would you have that thought if his girlfriend and sister were both white but like Uhura and Michael, they were different people? Think about it.

If after 3 movies you cannot understand or imagine why the guy (or anyone) would be attracted and fall for someone like Uhura, and watching discovery you don't see that both Uhura and Michael are their own characters with no more similarities than between Uhura and any female lead, then this is a whole different "issue".
Because, by now, you should have enough canon evidence to at least suggest you that what you said at the beginning isn't the case.

To answer your comment, the only ones who would find it an 'awkward issue' are those who are limited and biased against some characters or narrative elements by default, and who STILL can't accept Spock's feelings for Uhura hence, they need to rationalize them with lame crap because it's easier than simply watch the characters and their stories and thus understand them.
I say you shouldn't care about these people and neither should the writers.

 

Killed in the original Klingon attack that killed her parents. She existed, but was never part of Sarek's family. Just like in the original timeline.

 

Tbh, recently I started to have King Daniel Beyond's theory too. What with the creative team constantly saying they will explain why Spock/canon never mentioned her. After all, he didn't mention Sybok either so what the fuss is about? Spock is private and as he wasn't the protagonist in tos, we never got to see his story in detail. Do we really know much about the private life and families of Mccoy, Uhura and the others? It hardly is a Spock thing only.

But yeah, I wonder if Michael is an in-text retcon thus a character who is inserted in the story by altering the memories of the other characters and her own. Like Buffy' sister. The mirror reality wouldn't be an issue if Michael is still a real person. Her character is real. It's some of the memories that wouldn't be real.
Or they could say someone effectively changed the prime timeline going back to the past, though according to the time travel theory used in the reboot, this would make discovery another quantum reality. Or maybe Q or some other entity has the power to change existing timelines.
In that case, Kurtzman would be bold and do what he didn't dare to do in the reboot.
I guess, though, some fans would be happy because their 'restore the timeline' theories would finally make sense, for Discovery at least.

 

Michael would have been adopted post-Kelvin incident, so with the timeline shift it's likely that she may not have even crossed paths with Sarek in this universe. Heck, maybe she was with her parents on the Kelvin! My bet is she was never adopted, and thus was never Spock's sister. She may not have even gone into Starfleet.

 

There was no need for Michael in the Kelvin films. Also, there is nothing wrong with Michael being important to Sarek and his family. This is such an odd criticism that I cannot figure out.

This thread makes little to no sense.

 

If I was going to introduce the Kelvin Timeline version of Michael Burnham, in like a comic or novel, I would have have it be in a crossover where Discovery's Burnham met her. Nero's incursion causes the attack on Doctari Alpha to never happen so she grows up with both parents. I would try to make her later life as different as possible to Discovery Burnham's to contrast the two characters, so some ideas would be she is a civilian, is in a stable relationship, married and has kids. I'm imagining Sonequa playing her as just herself, as opposed to the more harder edged Burnham character:

I think it would be a fun inclusion in some sort-of media.

 

Sure, Ethan Peck is saying that Michael basically created tos Spock and she is foundamental in his development to become the guy we know in tos etc etc but, hyperboles aside, the kelvin version already shows/confirms/reminds us that Spock is his own person with an emotional development that would've happened no matter what because, perhaps, it's the natural evolution of his character. These movies only accelerated it.
Hence, he doesn't need to be Michael's brother to learn 'human' (he had his mom, Pike, working with humans at the Academy, a human girlfriend even..and HE IS half human, which is something many seem to forget or something) he'd always find his way.
I think giving Michael so much credit for making Spock get humans is as silly as those who want to to pretend Kirk basically was the only friend he ever had and the only human he interacted with and, basically, Spock cannot function as a person without him.
Most of the time, these ideas aren't even put in canon tbh but they only reflect a naive, limited, way people talk about the protagonist and their dynamics.


Though, to be honest I still don't undestand what Discovery's team really means (when they talk about Spock).
For one, it seems to me that there is a deep misuranderstanding of tos Spock for the most part, and many are forgetting that when we see him in tos, when he met kirk&Co, he hadn't resolved his issues AT ALL. He needed several years to find peace and accept his human side and feelings so I dunno why they keep making it seems that discovery will create his character as if the final, ultimate, result is the first episodes of tos. As if, after discovery, he will be a issues-free character whose evolution was complete.
I think, rather, what discovery can do is trying to explain why he was so troubled in tos and why he was on denial, let's be honest, about his human side and he pretended to be a vulcan stereotype.
Again, in tos - in context of that story - it took him time to understand his human side and accept his feelings as a good thing and not a bad one.
So I can't see how Discovery, if it really is a prequel of THAT Spock, can resolve his arc NOW when the guy we see in tos hadn't resolved it yet, the opposite.

 

I'm remembering the Smallville mirror universe episodes, where Lionel Luther found baby Kal El instead of Jonathan Kent.

I guess they could do some fun stuff with a Kelvin Universe Michael Burnham being raised by Alexander Marcus as Carol's dark mirror, who was fully on board with her father's Section 31 plans to make war with the Klingon Empire.

 

Just like there was misunderstanding of Spock's arc in the Kelvin Trek, I think there is misunderstanding of how Spock was in TOS and how DSC will lead in to it.

 

Kurtzman, as you said, created both the Kelvin movies and the TV show. When he says "prime universe" because it's possible that "Prime" means his Kelvin era, not 60s-90s Trek. Because they're effectively his creation. Adding in the "25% different to the other shows legalese" jump ropes and hurdles and it only makes more sense. It's never been in TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY.

Michael's lineage with Uhura also makes no sense not because it's an example of both "small universe syndrome" and "fanservice shipping". The contrivance doesn't feel right. Trek has and can do much better, and it's at the point where I increasingly agree with people who say hardcore fans don't make the best of production staff because of small universe syndrome concerns. But I digress.

 

One has to wonder... in the Kelvin Universe, do Sarek, Amanda and Michael acknowledge Sybok's presence? I feel bad for the guy in DISCO... they act like he doesn't even exist