Perhaps you both missed the post where I said I’m done talking about this. If you feel the urgent need to continue this conversation, feel free to PM me.
Spoilers Star Trek: Lower Decks 3x01 - "Grounded"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Perhaps you both missed the post where I said I’m done talking about this. If you feel the urgent need to continue this conversation, feel free to PM me.
A solid start. I gave it a 7.
She just said there is some fun stuff with her and Ransom this season.Tell us everything you hear about upcoming stuff!
That and Tendi will be in love.
More Tendi!
She has ranked up before. She even comments in this episode "what are you going to do, demote and transfer me again?" This would imply she has held higher rank at some point prior to serving on the Cerritos.
But she got demoted back down to Ensign.
She's been ranked up before and been busted back down. I think she's a brilliant person and could have been a brilliant officer perhaps in the 23rd century, but by the 24th she's a disaster of an officer.
But a brilliant person. She is that.
Great opener.
I love the idea of Bozeman being a family friendly tourist trap. I was kinda hoping for Gavin to show up later on in the season at random, like the time traveling egg salad sandwich on The Orville. The Boimler logs were pretty funny.
I give it an 8/10. Might have gone for 9 or 10 if they had actually gotten Tim Russ or Kelsey Grammer for a cameo.
I love the idea of Bozeman being a family friendly tourist trap. I was kinda hoping for Gavin to show up later on in the season at random, like the time traveling egg salad sandwich on The Orville. The Boimler logs were pretty funny.
I give it an 8/10. Might have gone for 9 or 10 if they had actually gotten Tim Russ or Kelsey Grammer for a cameo.
Just want to agree with this here. A Mary Sue is by definition always depicted as being in the right. Michael's first episode is about her screwing up, losing her ersatz mother, and starting a war. That's not a Mary Sue.
* * *
Loved the Bozeman theme park, the part of me that believes in historical preservation just about had a heart attack at the idea that the entire town has been turned into a theme park and the T'Plana-Hath is now a children's slide.
Then I decided the theme park is probably just nearby and the actual historic Bozeman site is well-maintained by historical preservationists.
She's a cocky hothead who think she knows the right way in most situations. That's not a Mary Sue. That's a self-assured hothead who just happens to be female.
She also mentioned that in this crossover episode in SNW season 2, she kept breaking the props on the set; not knowing that most of the buttons and levers on the bridge are just cosmetic.
Sounds like something I would do.
Jack Quaid will also have his purple hair.
Grammer is a trekkie. Maybe he'll actually appear later this season.
He’s also a established voice actor playing Sideshow Bob.
I think she’s basically the stereotype of Captain Kirk. The break the rules, “I do what I want”, get the job done whatever the cost character that is out there in the public consciousness.
Like her Captain friend said in S1, at the Academy everyone thought she’d be the first one to get a command. I’d love them to explore her backstory and show what changed her.
His family owns the vineyard, they were probably hoping to get in on the family business.
Someone died because of waiting on a regulation.
Loved it. Wished it was a two-parter, though. 9.
Regarding the term "Mary Sue": I think too often, the term has been used to criticize efforts by Hollywood to have more female representation in entertainment. The problem is that a) certain genres are male dominated, based upon the "member-berries" (another over-used term) of fans of 1980s action/horror/sci-fi entertainment, while b) today's producers write so-called "strong, female characters" rather sloppily, conveniently ignoring the fact that there have been strong, female characters in the past. When you have these two opposing points-of-view, you get one side accusing the other of being sexist, which is insulting to both groups, IMO. Such arguments ignores the very possibility that a Mary Sue character can be written well, depending upon how it is done.
My opinion on Michael Burnham and Beckett Mariner is that there can be an argument that both characters are "Mary Sues", in that they are "competent" while connected to some form of "Starfleet royalty". At least, when they were introduced. Certainly, the producers behind those respective shows were pushing hard to have female leads that can attract the female demographics, for one reason or another. Thing is, though, each character, thanks to how those characters have been received by the audience, have gone through the deconstruction phase; Michael is set on a journey to find her own "voice", while Beckett has to learn that she isn't "special", in spite of her connections. And, it is because of their respective journeys that these character become "less Mary Sue", and more actual characters that one can tolerate, if not like. Personally, I like Beckett's character more because her friends are more than willing to "check her", than Michael's, who seem way to deferential to her at times. But, in the end, I can like them both for what they can bring to the table, as far as entertainment value.
Anyway, looking forward to the next episode of LD...
Regarding the term "Mary Sue": I think too often, the term has been used to criticize efforts by Hollywood to have more female representation in entertainment. The problem is that a) certain genres are male dominated, based upon the "member-berries" (another over-used term) of fans of 1980s action/horror/sci-fi entertainment, while b) today's producers write so-called "strong, female characters" rather sloppily, conveniently ignoring the fact that there have been strong, female characters in the past. When you have these two opposing points-of-view, you get one side accusing the other of being sexist, which is insulting to both groups, IMO. Such arguments ignores the very possibility that a Mary Sue character can be written well, depending upon how it is done.
My opinion on Michael Burnham and Beckett Mariner is that there can be an argument that both characters are "Mary Sues", in that they are "competent" while connected to some form of "Starfleet royalty". At least, when they were introduced. Certainly, the producers behind those respective shows were pushing hard to have female leads that can attract the female demographics, for one reason or another. Thing is, though, each character, thanks to how those characters have been received by the audience, have gone through the deconstruction phase; Michael is set on a journey to find her own "voice", while Beckett has to learn that she isn't "special", in spite of her connections. And, it is because of their respective journeys that these character become "less Mary Sue", and more actual characters that one can tolerate, if not like. Personally, I like Beckett's character more because her friends are more than willing to "check her", than Michael's, who seem way to deferential to her at times. But, in the end, I can like them both for what they can bring to the table, as far as entertainment value.
Anyway, looking forward to the next episode of LD...
could be. Wouldn’t be surprised if it was something that happened during the war.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
