i'm usually don't give a damn either but that scene was indeed a tad rich
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x14 - "Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
I do not BLINDLY defend the show. I explain my reasons for defense where called for, as I have, for example with the BLAST door and why Pike didn't immediately do everything anyone here could think of to save Admiral Cornwell. That does not follow any definition of BLINDLY defending I have ever heard of.
Why did I not point that out? 1. There are plenty of other people who appear gain joy by pointing out things they can't stand about the show and will readily do so at the drop of a hat, so I rarely if ever have to follow suit. 2. I find it more fun explaining how the things I like work, as opposed to the opposite. What's wrong with that?
Last edited:
It'd be really odd if she was killed there, because she hasn't really done anything for the whole series. I'd suspected she was being introduced as a character who could be transferred over to the Pike show as the Enteprise's Security Chief, but since they don't seem to have any plans to do such a show right now - along with the fact she's apparently been taken into the future with Discovery - her entire existence will have been bizarre if it wasn't setting her up to do something in season 3. Behind-the-scenes stuff with the actor explains it.
Not gonna read 75 pages of hatersgonnahate and fans trying to defend what they love when they shouldn't have to....
So, my few cents...
Overall, amazing episode. The SFX were on point. D7's for the effing win.
I really enjoyed this entire season's overall plot, with some little things that bugged me here and there. Explaining why we never hear about Disco, sporedrive and Burnham makes sense in the writing itself, but it seems to easy a fix really.
1 hour and 5 minutes..... was too long. Many scenes were to dragged out. We did NOT need that many minutes of Michael jumping back, it derailed the pacing. Cornwell's presence on the bridge kept bugging me because she wasn't doing anything or adding any dialogue. It only made sense untill her sacrifice (meaning they included many shots of her on the bridge to make sure we knew she was there) but her sacfrifice didn't make me feel anything really. Which is kinda sad, because I actually really enjoyed her character. The S31 'fix'.... I dunno.
All in all, great season. Not Star Trek's best overall, but it had some of the most amazing character moments in Star Trek for me, some amazing SFX and a storyline I was interested me all the way through.
So, my few cents...
Overall, amazing episode. The SFX were on point. D7's for the effing win.
I really enjoyed this entire season's overall plot, with some little things that bugged me here and there. Explaining why we never hear about Disco, sporedrive and Burnham makes sense in the writing itself, but it seems to easy a fix really.
1 hour and 5 minutes..... was too long. Many scenes were to dragged out. We did NOT need that many minutes of Michael jumping back, it derailed the pacing. Cornwell's presence on the bridge kept bugging me because she wasn't doing anything or adding any dialogue. It only made sense untill her sacrifice (meaning they included many shots of her on the bridge to make sure we knew she was there) but her sacfrifice didn't make me feel anything really. Which is kinda sad, because I actually really enjoyed her character. The S31 'fix'.... I dunno.
All in all, great season. Not Star Trek's best overall, but it had some of the most amazing character moments in Star Trek for me, some amazing SFX and a storyline I was interested me all the way through.
Yet you then go on to be critical of the episode. Did you ever think there are many people here who aren't "haters" but are just being critical like you are?
You, too, huh?
why? is this some sort of church with proper doctrine?
They asked me for my opinion, I gave it. I think it's important to be critical and not blindly accept faults even with things you enjoy. People need to realise you can like something, but also think 'you know what, that was shit and it was a bad creative decision'. At least in my view. However Your Mileage May Vary.
I don't find your reasoning in this instance sound, at all. I think you're grabbing at straws to defend a weak plot point and refusing to criticise it because of your aforementioned distate to do such things because apparently everyone else does it. Like I said in the very thread, I enjoyed the episode immensely, but the torpedo scene was a bugbear for me this episode. It's an example of what discovery does badly and that is sometimes ignore logic for coolness. The Enterprise spewing 200 fighters out of its butt would be another.
They really need to change that sign. Trek has taken all my money for years.
***
I thought the time jumps were cool. Then I remembered they said they only had enough power for one jump. Whoops.
While I agree with you about the blast door scene and figure it was just there for dramatic license, unless he's attacking you personally, just let him do his thing and defend the scene. No one is forcing anyone to read it or reply.
They really need to change that sign. Trek has taken all my money for years.
Trek actually encouraged me to steal money from my parents once when I was a teen. It was so I could buy the USS Voyager playmates toy.
Once again I feel the need to point out that there were multiple blast doors in the area of the torpedo. It's in the dialogue. Only one didn't come down to protect the ship as ordered remotely. That's why Cornwell and Number One had to go down there to try to fix the problem. If the last door was closed and did its job, the damage would be mitigated. That's what they said. It was the whole PLOT POINT. They took some dramatic license in allowing Pike to be right there and be able to see the explosion, absolutely. But it wasn't just one door.
got no prob with this post - a single yes, however ...
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
