How will season 2 end?

[eschaton]

Nope, it will be wrapped up before the end of episode 14. We won't be wondering about Spock's fate or any such thing between seasons. There will be a cliffhanger leading into the next season, but it will be to set up the next storyline, not to resolve the current one. I think that's pretty clear considering the recent comments from PaleyFest, especially Anthony Rapp's quotes here and here.

I'm not saying that Spock's death will be the cliffhanger. I'm saying that if their plan is to basically reboot the show at the end of the season via time travel - to have Burnham go back in time to when she viewed the supernova as a child and use the "power of a supernova" to make the timeline right (something which was directly hinted at last episode) then killing Spock the episode before would make thematic sense. It would help to cut her off emotionally from her timeline, making her more apt to reset things. It would also trigger an amazing "WTF" freakout in fandom, which would raise the visibility of the show. People would be wondering if they were pressing the reset button or just making Discovery a whole new timeline, and tune in next week to find out.

Basically kill Spock at the end of episode 14, and then have the last episode deal with "fixing" the timeline and Discovery's likely jump into the future.

 

[pst]

Basically kill Spock at the end of episode 14, and then have the last episode deal with "fixing" the timeline and Discovery's likely jump into the future.

i'm kind of feeling this. i just don't think the show is brave enough to do something like this.

with all the talk about how the end of the season will give us a satisfying connection to and explain the relationship with TOS, i have a feeling they're going to die on their "it's the the prime universe and always has been" hill.

 

[zar]

I'm not saying that Spock's death will be the cliffhanger. I'm saying that if their plan is to basically reboot the show at the end of the season via time travel - to have Burnham go back in time to when she viewed the supernova as a child and use the "power of a supernova" to make the timeline right (something which was directly hinted at last episode) then killing Spock the episode before would make thematic sense. It would help to cut her off emotionally from her timeline, making her more apt to reset things. It would also trigger an amazing "WTF" freakout in fandom, which would raise the visibility of the show. People would be wondering if they were pressing the reset button or just making Discovery a whole new timeline, and tune in next week to find out.

Basically kill Spock at the end of episode 14, and then have the last episode deal with "fixing" the timeline and Discovery's likely jump into the future.

No wonder I was confused, you're talking about episode 14 but you mean the second last episode. This season actually has only 14 episodes. But if they were doing this to spark debate and raise visibility, it seems counterproductive to do it in the second last episode and have it resolved in just 1 week. Why not kill Spock in the first episode?

Anyway, this is all just a mental exercise based on a big and very weak "if". The entire concept of the main character is her being raised by Vulcans, Sonequa herself remains quite invested in that idea and there is every indication that she will remain in season 3. There is basically no chance of this happening.

 

[BillJ]

If they hit the reset button, I think the interesting question will be "why"? Would they really be doing something like this to placate a few angry internet blowhards, or have they seen some erosion in subscribers/subscribers watching the show? Or is it just a creative decision that some things just don't work and they need to be changed moving forward?

Hoping it is the latter.

 

[Vger23]

I can see how a minor re-set might be necessary. At present, they have a number of characters who really were designed to fit the narrative and arc of the first season, but really don't fit in anymore.

Stamets was the "spore drive guy," but the spore drive has taken a back seat and Stamets has been virtually useless this season. In fact, Culber has had a far better arc than Stamets.
Tyler had a very specific role/arc in S1, and was virtually unrecoverable for S2...but they kind of shoehorned him in anyway
L'Rell is the same story...good character...but seems unnaturally forced into the overall narrative.
Even Tilley seems to not really fit the go-forward creative plans
We know Pike and Spock are probably done at the end of this season as well...

It's too bad, because I love all the characters and the actors that play them, but it really seems as though they were specifically designed for Season 1. There has been little-to-nothing for them in S2. Heck, Amanda has had more to do in S2 than Stamets.

I could see them carrying on with Burnham, Tilly, Saru and Captain Annual...with some smaller stuff for Detmer, Owo, Linus, etc mixed in like TOS used to do with Sulu, Chekov, etc.

I just hope it's not "Star Trek Voyager" redux with the ship being flung into the 74th century and no way home or whatever.

 

[Nyotarules]

As soon as it became clear that Spock and Michael would begin their arc at odds, it seemed any satisfying story would have them reconcile. And yet a reconciliation which would fail to explain why Spock never mentioned Burnham, per Kurtzman's promise that somehow this season would explain her absence in TOS (unnecessary, in my opinion, but that ship's sailed). So either something happens to wipe Spock's relationship with Michael away, or she ends up sometime else. That's what I hypothesized at the start of the season, alongside with the crew time-hopping to the future while Discovery waits for them, and I guess we'll see if I was as right about that as I was about Zora being the Red Angel.

I just hope it's not some kind of reset that wipes away all of the relationships and stories we've had with this crew.

Spock never mentions his family unless he needs to, so there is no in universe reason to fix or explain this.

Canon and the fanatical adherence to it, is probably what i hate most about Star Trek

In the beginning GR created the Federation and the Alpha quadrant..... Star Trek 1:1

Remember there has also been some cryptic comment that "we will find out why there are no Kelpiens in Starfleet this season."

This might be because of something that happens the episode after tonight's (it's another Bo Yeon Kim & Erika Lippoldt episode - which suggests a return to Kaminar). But it might also be because a timeline reset basically undoes what Discovery did to help the Kelpiens earlier in the season.

I hope not! What next, why there were never any Australians in Starfleet or Germans, or people from the Solomon Islands? The Federation has thousands of species as members, not everyone would want to join or they might be serving elsewhere or on the USS Never been seen on screen starship or starbase

 

[BillJ]

Spock never mentions his family unless he needs to, so there is no in universe reason to fix or explain this.

She is noticeably absent from Sarek's breakdown in "Sarek", she is also noticeably absent from "Yesteryear". Which can't be Spock hiding his family as it is a snapshot of his home life at age seven.

 

[fireproof78]

She is noticeably absent from Sarek's breakdown in "Sarek", she is also noticeably absent from "Yesteryear". Which can't be Spock hiding his family as it is a snapshot of his home life at age seven.

Picard also reported attending the wedding of "Sarek's son." There is a lot in his life that has not been shown.

 

[BillJ]

Picard also reported attending the wedding of "Sarek's son." There is a lot in his life that has not been shown.

That couldn't have been Spock? I imagine they were holding the Spock namedrop for Lenard during the breakdown scene.

 

[fireproof78]

That couldn't have been Spock? I imagine they were holding the Spock namedrop for Lenard during the breakdown scene.

Yes, but apparently it was unremarkable as no one else mentioned it. That family of Sarek can sure keep secrets.

 

[BillJ]

Yes, but apparently it was unremarkable as no one else mentioned it.

Who else did we see during the time when Picard would've been a Lieutenant in the 2330's and the episode "Sarek" that would've mentioned Spock got married?

 

[fireproof78]

Who else did we see during the time when Picard would've been a Lieutenant in the 2330's and the episode "Sarek" that would've mentioned Spock got married?

Perin and Sarek. I mean, shouldn't it have been apart of Sarek's breakdown?

 

[BillJ]

Perin and Sarek. I mean, shouldn't it have been apart of Sarek's breakdown?

Why? It wasn't his wife. Sometimes in-laws have no real emotional connection to the spouses of their children. I've barely seen my Dad in thirty years. The last time he saw my wife was when we were dating, which was twenty-seven years ago.

 

[fireproof78]

Why? It wasn't his wife. Sometimes in-laws have no real emotional connection to the spouses of their children. I've barely seen my Dad in thirty years. The last time he saw my wife was when we were dating, which was twenty-seven years ago.

I guess my experience is different then...I would have expected it to at least warrant a mention by someone in the family.

 

[BillJ]

I guess my experience is different then...I would have expected it to at least warrant a mention by someone in the family.

I'm not sure what would cause Perrin to bring up Spock's wife. The episode really wasn't about Spock.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm not sure what would cause Perrin to bring up Spock's wife. The episode really wasn't about Spock.

I see no reason for it to be never mentioned again is all.

 

[BillJ]

I see no reason for it to be never mentioned again is all.

Post-Spock's wedding, we saw Spock for an episode ("Unification II") and Sarek for two ("Sarek", "Unification I"). Not much time to go into the family details.

 

[drt]

My father's a Senior Manufacturing Engineer. Have you ever seen the commercials where senior citizens tap on something and say "Help! I've fallen and I can't get up!"? He was part of the team that designed those. Late-20th Century technology. So I don't have a hard time believing Section 31 can have TNG-style communicators in the 23rd Century. It's not this super-advanced thing. It's just the style of choice in the 24th Century, whereas in the 23rd Century, Starfleet preferred flip phones, except for a brief spell in the 2270s where they used wrist-watches. The Reliant was behind the times and refused to let go of them.

The big communicators also have the universal translators in them - I can see where the Section 31 badges are simpler short range devices.

 

[donners22]

why there were never any Australians in Starfleet

We can at least make a case to claim Nella Darren...

 

[Cyrus]

That couldn't have been Spock? I imagine they were holding the Spock namedrop for Lenard during the breakdown scene.

Then Sybok got married? Or did he die in ST5? Don’t remember as I have done my best to forget that movie.