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

[DaveyNY]

Because it plays like fan fiction.



I'd rather it actually make sense within the context of the story being told up to that point. Instead of getting a one episode infodump about something that hadn't been in play up to that point. Then, SURPRISE!!!

After a season-and-a-half, these guys still don't seem to know how to set up or execute a season arc.

Or perhaps you're being just a tad to particular, based on how you would have done it?
(which you didn't)
Seems a nice twist to me, I prefer the Mom, to the RA being Michael.
(which was waaay to obvious and fanwanky IMO)
It would also have given the detractors another tidbit of "Mary sue" incitement to complain about.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Because it plays like fan fiction.

Again I'll ask "how so?".

I'd rather it actually make sense within the context of the story being told up to that point. Instead of getting a one episode infodump about something that hadn't been in play up to that point. Then, SURPRISE!!!

Why doesn't it make sense? Each episode provided more info about the RA's identity and motivation. That's how serialized fiction works, yes? New clues that add to the final solution to the problem.

 

[fireproof78]

Good grief, dramatic parenting reveals are fan fiction now? Move over, Darth Vader!

 

[Nerys Myk]

Good grief, dramatic parenting reveals are fan fiction now? Move over, Darth Vader!

ESB is total fan fiction.

 

[eschaton]

Good grief, dramatic parenting reveals are fan fiction now? Move over, Darth Vader!

As we talked about in another thread, Star Wars is a very different franchise than Trek. It's basically high fantasy in space, complete with wizards, cool sword fights, royalty, and the whole concept of "destiny" being woven into the series. As such, the "small universe" focus on a very limited cast of characters makes some sense - because they mostly have the magic space powers which elevate them above the normie peasants. In contrast, the world of Star Trek is egalitarian, meritocratic, free-will materialism, so strongly "heroic" style arcs just don't work well.

IMHO there are basically two suitable ways to use characters in a Trek story without it turning into fanfic. One is to go the TOS route - put characters into a scenario which happened due to factors outside of their own agency, and see how they react. The other is to build stories rooted in the characters themselves, but with appropriately modest and personal stakes. Things tend to pass the fanfic event horizon if you begin contorting the plot - and even worse the entire universe - for no other reason than to give your favored character greater focus.

 

[fireproof78]

As we talked about in another thread, Star Wars is a very different franchise than Trek. It's basically high fantasy in space, complete with wizards, cool sword fights, royalty, and the whole concept of "destiny" being woven into the series. As such, the "small universe" focus on a very limited cast of characters makes some sense - because they mostly have the magic space powers which elevate them above the normie peasants. In contrast, the world of Star Trek is egalitarian, meritocratic, free-will materialism, so strongly "heroic" style arcs just don't work well.

IMHO there are basically two suitable ways to use characters in a Trek story without it turning into fanfic. One is to go the TOS route - put characters into a scenario which happened due to factors outside of their own agency, and see how they react. The other is to build stories rooted in the characters themselves, but with appropriately modest and personal stakes. Things tend to pass the fanfic event horizon if you begin contorting the plot - and even worse the entire universe - for no other reason than to give your favored character greater focus.

With respect, this has nothing to due with universe or story building to my mind. If dramatic parental unveilings fall under fan fiction territory then I guess most of the fiction I have enjoyed in my life is fan fiction...that's the part that doesn't make sense to me. This isn't a Star Wars thing. It's a trope, a well worn trope, but a trope nonetheless. But, I don't see how that makes it "fan fiction" when many of the Red Angel appearances have revolved around Burnham or her family.

Forgive my frustration but it's a leap, at least to me, that puts this in fan fiction territory.

 

[DaveyNY]

ESB is total fan fiction.

Yes, apparently since May of 1980, creators of Science Fiction Tales are no longer allowed to 'lead-on', 'fool' or 'surprise' anyone who wishes to observe the creation of said stories.

 

[SG-17]

I, on the other hand, hope to never hear another mention of the Temporal Cold War.

Kor

Its the only fun part of Enterprise.

 

[eschaton]

With respect, this has nothing to due with universe or story building to my mind. If dramatic parental unveilings fall under fan fiction territory then I guess most of the fiction I have enjoyed in my life is fan fiction...that's the part that doesn't make sense to me. This isn't a Star Wars thing. It's a trope, a well worn trope, but a trope nonetheless. But, I don't see how that makes it "fan fiction" when many of the Red Angel appearances have revolved around Burnham or her family.

I mean, I didn't say it, but I think I understand what @BillJ is saying.

I mean I was one of the people who guessed the reveal. So it didn't come out of nowhere for me. At the same time, it kinda stretches credulity and contributes to "small quadrant syndrome" - something which was a big issue in the first season, but which they mostly avoided up until now.

Michael has been at the fulcrum of so many events already. She was adopted by Sarek and raised alongside Spock. She was considered "the first mutineer" in Starfleet. She served with Georgiou, one of the most accomplished captains in Starfleet during her time period. She was considered the first "mutineer" in Starfleet history. She was blamed for starting the Klingon War, even if that wasn't the case. She personally killed T'Kumva, the spiritual head of the Klingon movement toward war. She later served on the most advanced ship in Starfleet, with a magic drive which can travel to any point in space or time in any universe. She managed to contribute to the death of Kol, who was the closest thing the Klingons had to a leader after T'Kumva's death. She went to the MU, where the doppelganger of her dead commanding officer was supreme ruler. She fell in love with a mutilated Klingon sleeper agent who tried to kill her. Her commanding officer was secretly from the MU himself, and also in love with her. And then she somehow, singlehandedly, managed to resolve the Klingon War. All of this happened in the first season!

This season, they've mostly avoided all of that. Micheal's story has been wrapped up almost entirely with Spock, which was appropriately scaled given he was established as a part of her family. But the latest twist is a step back in that direction, because it suggests once again the entire universe really does revolve around her - that she's not just trying to feel her way through a threat to the whole galaxy, but that it's intimately wrapped up in her character. I think this is a very bad direction for a Trek show to go, because the more epic/jumped up the characters seem - the more you find they're connected to everything that goes on - the more it makes the backing setting seem like a tiny afterthought.

 

[fireproof78]

So, they've mostly avoided it, save for one brief moment, and that equals bad? Or, at least fan fiction?

I appreciate the thorough write ups, but my major point of confusion is why dramatic family reveals equal fan fiction now?

Yes, Michael has been at the center of everything. I'll not deny that, though it's negativity will vary as she is the main character. Sorry, I think that comes with the territory of her being in the thick of events. Certainly is the case in most shows I watch. But, this season has gone on differently, and I don't think it indicates a step back.

 

[Longinus]

I really don't understand the angst about the mum reveal. It was already clear that the RA was connected to Michael somehow. This was a good way to do it. It is not destiny, this is not about Michael being super special, it is just that the RA is someone who has a personal connection to her.

 

[BillJ]

It plays like they didn't have a plan. As soon as they started info dumping in the episode, they telegraphed who it was. Which there wasn't a crumb of evidence for prior to that.

 

[Longinus]

It plays like they didn't have a plan. As soon as they started info dumping in the episode, they telegraphed who it was. Which there wasn't a crumb of evidence for prior to that.

Well, foreshadowing is tricky. Too much, and your surprise reveal is ruined as everyone guesses it, too little, and people complain that the plot twist came out of nowhere. It works well enough for me. I am more worried about how they wrap up this mess.

 

[KennyB]

It plays like they didn't have a plan. As soon as they started info dumping in the episode, they telegraphed who it was. Which there wasn't a crumb of evidence for prior to that.

Wait......I was still confused when the mask came off........how did they telegraph it again, for us slow folks?

 

[Longinus]

Wait......I was still confused when the mask came off........how did they telegraph it again, for us slow folks?

Burnham's parent's, who are no longer around, were working on a time-travel suit that requires massive amount of energy, near a supernova, which produces massive amounts of energy.

 

[T'Bonz]

Hell, I didn't guess it was Mom. And it didn't bother me that it was. I want to see where this will go from here. It's kind of hard to judge without seeing what happens in the next couple of eps.

 

[gblews]

I don't get why Spock thought he'd get charged for killing an officer here when this plan was approved by the superior officers as part of the mission. A plan that Burnham was part of thinking up and carrying out. He'd face questioning but with everything as part of the approved plan and on mission it seemed a funny line.

I think Spock thought he might be held responsible for Burnham's death (if she died) because though the others planned to rescue Burnham before she died Spock's plan was to prevent that rescue and allow Burnham to die.

The concept of "forcing the Red Angel's hand" still makes no sense, though. So long as everyone assumed the RA was future!Burnham, the only reasonable assumption was that the RA knew the details of what had happened (in her past) to present!Burnham... including the plan, the safety precautions, any actual danger faced, the outcome, and so forth. She would know whether she had been rescued or not, and how. There would be no way to surprise future!Burnham, and indeed if there were a way to surprise her, the whole plan would make no sense from the get-go, as it depended on future!Burnham knowing that her life was at stake.

And yet, it also seemingly depended on her not knowing, at least enough for the trap to be effective. Because if she knew about the trap, why would she walk into it voluntarily rather than trying to evade it? And if she did walk into it voluntarily... then that would obviously be a cooperative act, so why not just skip the whole "trap" part and merely arrange with present!Burnham to have her future self meet them and explain what was going on?

They had essentially already done that. Present Burnham knew that all Discovery wanted was to talk to the RA yet that didn't stop future Burnham from doing what she was doing. Thus they rightly concluded that other methods of stopping the RA had to be employed.

I also think you're missing the fact that all future Burnham would know of the plan was that no rescue for Burnham was forthcoming and that Burnham's survival was dependent upon the RA entering the trap and saving Burnham. That is why Spock's plan was so much more important and appropriate for the mission than the rescue plan.

Spock's plan left almost nothing to chance and gave the RA only one choice; rescue her past self or cease to exist.

Further, the fact that Spock told Burnham that he might kill her, was even more incentive for future Burnham to willingly enter the trap in order to save herself. Actually makes perfect sense if you think it through.

 

[lawman]

It's a trope, a well worn trope

So you acknowledge this, and to you this is somehow better than calling it fanfic? That's exactly what (bad) fanfic does... it takes familiar tropes, and tries to work them one more time.

It was already clear that the RA was connected to Michael somehow.

It was? How? It had communicated with Spock to rescue her as a child, and happened to appear when she was trapped on the asteroid, and otherwise nothing it did had anything to do with her. Spock's assertion that it did seemed like a huge and unwarranted intuitive leap.

 

[gblews]

It was? How? It had communicated with Spock to rescue her as a child, and happened to appear when she was trapped on the asteroid, and otherwise nothing it did had anything to do with her. Spock's assertion that it did seemed like a huge and unwarranted intuitive leap.

It was stated in the previous episode that “scans” had shown that the RA “was” Burnham. In tonight’s episode Culber tlls Burnham that her and her mother had similarities on a mitochondrial level. There was no question that there was a very close connection between Burnham and the RA.

 

[Maurice]

Anyway, netiquette tip: "TL;DR" is something authors get to say about their own writing, usually by way of introducing a short summary. It's self-effacing. Kind of the digital version of "I'm worried these pants make me look fat." Saying it about someone else's post (or pants) is just rude.

I realize I'm late replaying to this but... what? How can you say "Too Long; Didn't Read" about your own writing?