What was your impression of Season 2 overall?

That would have worked fine but it looks like they had already committed for the show to jump into the future, it would also have explained how the probe coming back still happened when Control was defeated in the present so it shouldnt exist in the future any more, they could just ignore it of course but as I said at the time I get the feeling its going to be resolved in S3 with Control being defeated in the present but then being taken to the future by the Discovery itself, or alternatively Control and the AI from the future being two completely different things all along.

After all Georgiou has to have a way to come back so she can be in her own show, looks like she wont return to the present until the end of Disco S3 as well as filming on the S31 show doesnt start until the filming of Disco S3 is finished.

Time travel can get very messy plot wise if you arent careful, 12 Monkeys did it very well indeed but it has to be mapped and thought out properly before you even start filming, the issues in the writers room on Discovery S1&2 pretty much cocked that up from the start.

 

Burnham had really a lot of teary eyed scenes. Of all the characters she acts the most outwardly emotional. She definitely had the most overemotional scenes. So I really wonder why they gave her the Vulcan upbringing background? It just seems weird in hindsight. I thought they gave her this background because they thought having a human character who acts more like a Vulcan would be interesting to explore. But they didn't really make use of this. The only thing her background was seemingly good for was some additional family drama, like what happened with her birth family wasn't already enough drama, and an excuse for adding Spock, Sarek and Amanda for at least some episodes to the cast.

 

The thing about Burnham is that she was raised as a Vulcan without being one herself; she's a failed experiment and a testament to what a shitty father Sarek was. He didn't count for the obstacle of humans being psychologically incapable of suppressing their emotions to the same degree as Vulcans do. Burnham behaves exactly like a human raised as a Vulcan should: she still has her emotions but she never learned to process them in any way other than outright suppressing them. So they just sit there, fuming and boiling under the lid, as emotional pressure is building up until something eventually causes her to melt down. Then it starts anew, over and over again. At least in Season 2 she's starting to learn they're ultimately better out than in, even if she still can't quite express them naturally.

 

I think this is a reasonable read, but I don't understand why the showrunners would think this a good idea for their lead character.

Truth be told, I think the big tears would be there regardless of whether or not Burnham was Sarek's ward. That sort of highly emotional storytelling is on point for the times.

 

I find the background to be highly prescient because it fails Burnham on a number of levels, reflecting that humans are not Vulcans, and Burnham's own journey to own her humanity, rather than push it down.

I'll preface the following that I have been studying human psychology for over ten years, and practicing counseling, and attachment theory for a couple of years. This is not meant as bragging (though it might come across that way) but as the lens by which I filter Burnham, her character and her journey.

One of the thing that I like about Star Trek is that it doesn't try to force characters to act against their nature per se. I am reminded of a TNG episode were a child suffers loss and decides to emulate Data and become emotionless. Except, that's not healthy. The child needed to process, to experience those emotions.

I don't think Michael got to do that to its fullness, because, for Vulcans, such emotions will overwhelm and destroy them. So, they taught her what they knew-the Vulcan way. Except, that way did not allow her to process the trauma in a healthy way. So, she buried it, and the dysfunction comes out in her relationship with Spock.

A human who acts like a Vulcan is not fully human. So, it would be a struggle. And I think Michael reflects that struggle decently well (not perfectly, mind).

 

She works for me as a lead character, but I'll have to admit that it mostly comes from me finding her very relatable. There's much in her personality and backstory that resonates with me on a personal level and I can see much of myself in her, for better or worse.

 

honestly, this part of her character feels like vestigial material from an earlier version of the show and a conflict only really present in the pilot and even then pretty clumsily handled. i suppose you could say, her experiences in season one took her past that conflict. it's not earned in any way, but the character seems to have evolved past that, even if the writing doesn't support it.

 

You are likely right. I remember that scene in 1x02 when she first came onboard of the USS Shenzhou in that flashback. She acted totally like a Vulcan. Also her hairstyle and clothes were Vulcan like. But then in the presence it all had practically already disappeared. There was not much Vulcaness left. Maybe they planned at first to show her journey to humanness in flashbacks, but they got rid of that. I read they initally wanted to show the whole Shenzhou part of the first two episodes during the whole first season in smaller parts in flashbacks, but then decided to start the series with them and show them at once in two episodes. If they would have stuck to their old plan, there might have been time to show more of past Vulcan like Burnham, too.

 

the pilot episodes feel like they could've been a season (or a series) in themselves. but the pilot is definitely built around the conflict between her rational and emotional sides, to fire on the klingons or trust her captain?

unfortunately, the show doesn't land on which action represents which part of her character and doesn't decide whether the character was right, wrong, or somewhere in the middle. the character cops to making a bad choice in defying georgiou, but the story tells us she was right all along. and series in general decides to forget almost all of this conflict by the time we get to the mirror universe, with a little hand wave at the end of season one where we're shown a parallel noble defiance in "will you take my hand?" that just further muddies the water on where the show stood on michael's conflict, actions, and the outcome of those actions.

 

I have no doubt that many will find that highly disconcerting in a story, but good grief did that resonate as such a real-world type of response, with that ambiguity.

 

if i thought it was deliberate, i'd commend the show for exactly that.

 

I'll comment on it regardless. I don't need it to be deliberate to recognize how it impacts me.

I mean, Star Wars was not deliberately made as a blockbuster film. It just was.

 

I really like Season two a great deal. I think in many ways it is superior to season 1.

 

Emotion is fine, just not when it's fed to us with the subtlety of a sledgehammer in every single episode by the painfully over-acting Martin-Green. And it's not just pain she over-acts in, I never want to see another one of her "waking up gasping from shock/for breath".

The main issue though, as that EC Henry video puts so perfectly, is that none of the emotional moments on the show are earned. They're on fast forward. Maybe instead of spending four pointless episodes in the Mirror Universe less than 10 episodes into a new series, they could have developed some new characters and got us to actually get to know them.

Maybe season 3 we'll find out anything about Bryce and Rhys, and less about the useless, terrible at her job Nhan.

Great post. Agree 100%.

It couldn't get much worse than season 1.

 

Yes, yes it could.

 

Just finished season 2 and I have to say I enjoyed it more than I did the first season. That's not to say I thought the first season was bad, just that the second season felt more like the Star Trek I was looking to see. I still think the show has been too focused on Michael Burnham, as opposed to a more ensemble show that I'd prefer, but the second season did work to give more background and screen time to others on the crew. It was interesting (to me) that when Captain Pike asked the crew to introduce themselves, how few of the names I actually knew after watching them for a full season. I loved Captain Pike and he's become one of my top 3 Starfleet captains. And I loved the way Enterprise was portrayed. For me it was the perfect way to show the classic bridge in a way that was true to the original but had enough newness to not make it feel "old". That's in line with what I'd expected Discovery to look like (I still feel that Discovery looked so different and more technologically superior to what we'd seen before that it didn't fit well for a prequel). But I'd totally watch a show with Pike and the Enterprise leading up to the original series if they could get Anson Mount, Ethan Peck and Rebecca Romjin.

As for Discovery, I'll happily watch more, even though the show could safely conclude now. But seeing Discovery explore the future could be fun too, if done well. I think there's certainly room for more stories with that crew. And it would be good to see Saru officially as Captain (although I'm not sure who'd promote him). And was Georgiou still on Discovery when it went to the future? If so, how will that fit with the new Section 31 show? Will it be set in the future? Will she somehow return to the past? Did she somehow escape before the ship went through the wormhole?

 

I've forwarded your suggestion to the writers and they've assured me that we can look forward to a season long arc about Michael's toenail fungus. You're welcome!

 

I had a weird reaction to Season 2. For as much as I hated the mess Season 1 made of continuity and the Klingons and all, it had more episodes that I enjoyed or thought were at least fun than Season 2. But...Season 2 went a long way toward addressing problems I had with the first season--and I feel obligated to try to meet the show halfway. So it didn't annoy me as much as Season 1 did. Then there was the Pike, Number One etc. factor. Despite misgivings I LOVED Anson Mount's Captain Pike. I would gladly watch a Pike series, and likely handwave aside continuity problems to get it. I liked the Ba'ul, but disliked the episode they were in. I found the whole Red Angel plot to be tiresome. At least the Terran Empire part of Season 1 was FUN.
Ultimately, Season 3 is set to do what I thought Discovery should have done in the first place, move it out of a contentious continuity/canon Hot Zone and give it a chance to reinvent Trek without screwing up establish elements. Thanks to Season 2's efforts to readdress issues that the first season created, I can and will watch Season 3 with fresh eyes and without a chip on my shoulder, which is an amazing relief, I must confess.

 

I like a season that makes you want to see more. I am really curious as to what will happen in season 3! I can't imagine. Will it be a dystopian future where Disco will be the only haven of technology? Will Disco be considered a relic from the past? Will it be something else entirely?

 

I thought it was a vast improvement. I enjoyed season one, but there are some real glaring issues in there for me. Season 2 is where the show should have pitched itself from the beginning - new but familiar. Yes, we can still see the twists a mile off and there's still a tendency to write for shock instead of story reasons, but there's real progression there. A sensational performance from Mount anchors the whole season, so his absence will need to be compensated for.