Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x10 - "The Red Angel"

[Alan Roi]

But the bigger problem is - none of the main arc makes any sense anymore. The hypothethis that the red angel is connected to Burnham is completely unconvincing, since it already appeared during WWII to save some humans, and to Spock alone. But the main issue is that a majority of plot-twists feel like complete ass-pulls, because nothing is set up or resolved - literally every idea is both introduced and executed immediately. It doesn't help that this show has absolutely no rules for time-travel - remember, this is supposed to be in sync with the Kelvin movies, where the "grandfather paradox" doesn't exist, because time-travel creates alternate timelines. And I do hate the return of the magic timeballs.

.

Some things I ask myself:

Do the events that occur in linear time have to occur in the same linear time-line of the the time traveler, since they are traveling through time both forward and back yesterday could be tomorrow and next tuesday the day after that for a time traveler?

How long did it take for the time traveler to get the hang of the technology? What are its limitations?

Is there only one time traveler or multiple time travelers wearing the suit at different points from when it was invented? Mom first, Michael Second, someone else third etc.

Do all methods of time travel create new timelines or does the effect vary depending on which kind of time travel tech or method one uses?

 

[Alan Roi]

"You are gay. My version of you was bisexual. And we did a lot of the sex. And with you too"-scene was probably the most immature scene I have ever seen on Star Trek. Ever.

About 90% of anything that had to do with Q was significantly more immature than that particular scene, which was merely an pg discussion about sex between partners in different universes.

Now compare that to when Q wanted Janeway to have his baby...

 

[fireproof78]

scene was probably the most immature scene I have ever seen on Star Trek.

Oh, wait, you're serious?

 

[Alan Roi]

Oh, wait, you're serious?

IMO, pretty much everything under the What I didn't like is

 

[Doc Mugatu]

Carmel's Mudd had no problems threatening the lives of the entire crew of the Enterprise on multiple occasions as long as he could get away with his hide intact.

Threatening is one thing. Killing indiscriminately and in high volume is way different makes for a different type of character. Redefining the character in a TOS prequel series rewrites TOS. I am not a fan of that in either principle or practice. This is why I truly wished they would have gone completely original with Discovery.

Regardless of that, and having grown up with Carmel's Mudd, after the 3 eps of Wilson's, I consider his performance definitive.

Definitive? No. Though I like Star Trek Discovery it is far from perfect and this is one area I believe it falls down badly. They needlessly retconned Harry Mudd and altered how the future will perceive two TOS episodes as a result. That is effectively rewriting them. Carmel was first to define Mudd and that was in accordance with how the original creators authored him. It's having Greedo shoot first all over again.

 

[Doc Mugatu]

Maybe that's who we might get for the Discovery next year. Captain Harcourt Fenton Mudd!

More like "Harcourt Fenton Mudd, Double naught Agent of Section-31"

 

[Alan Roi]

Carmel was first to define Mudd and that was in accordance with how the original creators authored him. It's having Greedo shoot first all over again.

No, because Lucas was rewriting a character in the *same freaking movie* he originally appeared in to retroactively soften him and undermine his character arc. In the exact same movie he reedited to make more appealing to 3 year olds.

Carmel's Harry Mudd has no character arc in his episodes. He's the same vaudvillian comedy villain in both. What Rains interpretation does is add depth and fills in backstory much as Craig's version of Bond has to the character of 007.

And going the 'original authors' route deny's many peoples view that Christopher Reeves and Kevin Conroy portrayed the definitive performances of Superman and Batman, even though their particular interpretations are by no means devoted tp the exact characterization as the original author's intended or even how the original actors who portrayed the characters played them in live action.

 

[Alan Roi]

More like "Harcourt Fenton Mudd, Double naught Agent of Section-31"

One can only wish for an ending to this season of Trek that is as perfect as the ending of Super was for its narrative.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Star Trek Discovery ends with a looooooooooong camera pullack to reveal a soundstage and they walk off "the ship" and we see they're on some giant space station.

 

[Alan Roi]

Lewis Wilson really set the tone for Batman.
View attachment 8743

By deliberately riffing off batman's prime influence, The Spider, Master of Men on his Batsleeves, such as leaving his 'mark' on the foreheads of his victims that wouldn't be revisited again until Batman V Superman?

 

[Alan Roi]

"Who Killed Captain Kirk?"

My money is on that halfbreed first officer of his.

 

[NewHeavensNewEarth]

Now Disco is telling us that time travel is so readily available that it created an arms race to weaponize it without any regard to the existential crisis.

It wouldn't be Star Trek if there wasn't a lot of time travel going on. Including paradoxes. If it hadn't happened through the Red Angel, it would've come about through Discovery itself - which has been established to be able to travel through time as well as space. Some people were already complaining that time travel hadn't been explored enough for a ship that could do it as one of its essential functions.

I still think there's merit to the idea of exploring time in the way that starships explore space, especially if other species WILL do it for themselves. (Sorry, Temporal Accords.) Most likely, S31 started the temporal race, the Klingons got wind of it, allowed their own time tech to be stolen so they could trace it to S31's project, then attacked.

As for Control, that's probably Moriarty, escaped after being innocently uploaded from his storage device after the salvage operation when Enterprise-D crashed.

 

[nutshell]

For those who didn’t like the funeral scene because Airiam was a minor character, don’t you think that scene was actually to show us that her crew and friends are hurting? I don’t think we were meant to feel a swell of emotion for Airiam herself, but for this crew that is finally becoming a “family.”

 

[Awesome Possum]

For those who didn’t like the funeral scene because Airiam was a minor character, don’t you think that scene was actually to show us that her crew and friends are hurting? I don’t think we were meant to feel a swell of emotion for Airiam herself, but for this crew that is finally becoming a “family.”

A lot of that seems to be focused on the bridge crew being pretty close, something that's been implied a bit with Tilly being friends with most of them. The scene with the new officer taking Airiam's spot really showed that.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Intent and effectiveness are not the same thing.

 

[Nerys Myk]

My money is on that halfbreed first officer of his.

Dude has priors and anger issues.

 

[Lord Garth]

Dude has priors and anger issues.

 

[Doc Mugatu]

And going the 'original authors' route deny's many peoples view that Christopher Reeves and Kevin Conroy portrayed the definitive performances of Superman and Batman, even though their particular interpretations are by no means devoted tp the exact characterization as the original author's intended or even how the original actors who portrayed the characters played them in live action.

No. The above you reference are various reboots not sequels or prequels where we are speaking of the same character. That's why I said if this Harry Mudd turns out to be an Alt-Universe doppleganger then fine. It is also why I go along with Quinto's Spock being so different and out of character of the prime universe Spock (he is alt-universe). Even in your example Brandon Routh's Superman was soundly rejected as a continuation of Christopher Reeves.

 

[fireproof78]

No. The above you reference are various reboots not sequels or prequels where we are speaking of the same character. That's why I said if this Harry Mudd turns out to be an Alt-Universe doppleganger then fine. It is also why I go along with Quinto's Spock being so different and out of character of the prime universe Spock (he is alt-universe). Even in your example Brandon Routh's Superman was soundly rejected as a continuation of Christopher Reeves.

There's a built-in reason for Mr. Mudd. Not sure what the issue is.

 

[Roald]

About 90% of anything that had to do with Q was significantly more immature than that particular scene, which was merely an pg discussion about sex between partners in different universes.

Now compare that to when Q wanted Janeway to have his baby...

I think MU-Georgiou was actually trying to bring Stamets and Culber back together, in her own way. I must be honest, I didn’t like the scene either... but, I do think it was meant to show that Georgiou is actually trying to do help these guys out...