Super Disapointed With The Burn Cause

[nic3636]

Is it can't deliver or failing to live up to expectations already built up?

Isn't that the same thing?

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

As I've said before, I was disappointed that the cause was only Su'Kal's tantrum. They could have used him as a sort of conduit where the tantrum gave some external species the opportunity to cause The Burn™ through him.

Even the other-dimensional squid thingy people from Picard maybe?

 

[fireproof78]

Isn't that the same thing?

To me, no.

 

[nic3636]

To me, no.

I guess I don't understand your question then, if you were asking it to me.

 

[Dukhat]

I thought it was a great and original premise. Because anything else (i.e. some bad guy from 130 years ago who did nothing else for the rest of that time; Burnham’s mom; Burnham herself; or any other reason that has to do with Burnham would have been far worse. The fact that it tied into Saru instead was far better.

 

[fireproof78]

I guess I don't understand your question then, if you were asking it to me.

More a general observation.

 

[DEWLine]

Frankly, I'm okay with what the production team decided upon. Not every disaster is the result of an Evil Plot. Or even a Well-Meaning Scheme Gone Awry.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think "Someone caused this to strike terror throughout the galaxy!" or "Someone caused this to destroy the Federation and start a galactic war!" and "They have to be hunted down!" would've been too '00s. Meaning it would've been the thing to do immediately Post-9/11. It's what I would've expected DSC to do if it were made during the Bush Era.

So I'm glad they didn't go down that route.

 

[nic3636]

I thought the cause of "The Burn" was underwhelming. I thought the season wasted too much time building it up only for it to be caused by an orphaned child. I thought story/arc management was an issue this season, though I think that's been a persisting issue with DISC period. In season two I felt the whole buildup about what caused the rift between Spock and Burnham was also disappointing. There's a habit of build up with weak payoff that seems to be regular for this series.

The Burn arc could've been resolved in the first half of the season and the second half could've been spent dealing with the Emerald Chain. I think that might have given both story arcs more time to breathe than entwining them to equally lackluster results.

This season had a lot of promise, and overall I liked it. I liked a lot of the new characters, really appreciated the Burnham-Book romance, and was glad they were giving the supporting cast more personality and things to do. I don't know if CBS owns these properties but I wish they had incorporated some aspects of the aborted Final Frontier animated series and the Federation series.

This is mostly opinion as well. I think the first half / second half format would have worked better, particularly since the two plot lines weren't really that connected to each other.

 

[fireproof78]

I think "Someone caused this to strike terror throughout the galaxy!" or "Someone caused this to destroy the Federation and start a galactic war!" and "They have to be hunted down!" would've been too '00s. Meaning it would've been the thing to do immediately Post-9/11. It's what I would've expected DSC to do if it were made during the Bush Era.

So I'm glad they didn't go down that route.

Yeah. I like that there is no villain behind the Burn.

 

[Dryson]

Yeah. I like that there is no villain behind the Burn.

I personally think that Michael Burnham is the vilian. After all her Mom did work for Section 31, that was by and large a rogue agency that did what-ever it wanted without being held accountable, such as going into the future, like Burnham's mother did.

Burnham is essentially a member of Section 31.

 

[fireproof78]

Definition of villain: a character whose evil actions or motives are important to the plot. (emphasis added).

 

[Dryson]

Definition of villain: a character whose evil actions or motives are important to the plot. (emphasis added).

Aren't the motives of Section 31 in keeping with evil or the actions of a small group of people being more important without worrying about the consequences for the rest of the entire galaxy based on said actions?

 

[fireproof78]

Aren't the motives of Section 31 in keeping with evil or the actions of a small group of people being more important without worrying about the consequences for the rest of the entire galaxy based on said actions?

And rather irrelevant to the Burn.

 

[Dryson]

And rather irrelevant to the Burn.

Are you certain about that?

 

[fireproof78]

Are you certain about that?

Yup.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I personally think that Michael Burnham is the vilian. After all her Mom did work for Section 31, that was by and large a rogue agency that did what-ever it wanted without being held accountable, such as going into the future, like Burnham's mother did.

Burnham is essentially a member of Section 31.

Nope

 

[Dryson]

Burnham's mom was Section 31 as was her father, thus making Michael Burnham, by extension Section 31 as well.

 

[fireproof78]

Kirk was in Starfleet so David Marcus was in Starfleet too by extension.

 

[Dryson]

Kirk was in Starfleet so David Marcus was in Starfleet too by extension.

Precisely, if you have parents in the real military, then you are considered a military dependent.

I think a better reason for the Burn would have been Romulan operatives planting small viruses in XB's who then plant the virus in numerous Starships they were serving on. At the appropriate time the Romulans press the button and all goes to hell.

No one would think of the Romulans trying to use AI to attack the Federation a second time.