There's no obligation for any of them. Saru is just a way better character. Most characters on the show are better Burnham.
It does improve as the show goes on and they pull back from being All Burnham All The Time.
Spoilers General Disco Chat Thread
- Thread starter Lord Garth
- Start date
There's no obligation for any of them. Saru is just a way better character. Most characters on the show are better Burnham.
It does improve as the show goes on and they pull back from being All Burnham All The Time.
Mileage will vary at this point.
I found it good from the get go. But, I also knew it was Burnham as the main character, not an ensemble piece, from the get go.
That's true. It's ok to have different opinions.
I also knew Burnham was the main character from the start... it just turned out that I think she's the worst character on the show and it hurts the show immensely by keeping her as the main character, especially when there are good characters there that could have much more focus.
A surprisingly difficult concept for many, it seems.
Different opinions again. I am struggling at this point to go "this hurts the show."
Like, how?
It's like me complaining TNG had too much Picard because I think he's a stiff, unlikable, character. There are things I still enjoy in the show, but Picard will not be one of them. Does Picard hurt the show?
Honest question because these things escape my grasp when a show is hurt, or damaged, or whatever colloquialism. It's not something I find easy to parse.
There are people today of course who say the movies and Picard are too much Dara and Picard. They became progressively popular. I recall magazine reviews and such in 1987 that disliked both characters.
Neither were stated to be the "main character" although of course the eyes usually follow the captain.
Neither were stated to be the "main character" although of course the eyes usually follow the captain.
Different opinions again. I am struggling at this point to go "this hurts the show."
Like, how?
It's like me complaining TNG had too much Picard because I think he's a stiff, unlikable, character. There are things I still enjoy in the show, but Picard will not be one of them. Does Picard hurt the show?
Honest question because these things escape my grasp when a show is hurt, or damaged, or whatever colloquialism. It's not something I find easy to parse.
Picard literally is TNG's main character since Patrick Stewart is the first actor listed in the credits.
I believe Roddenberry and Co stated before the first season that they didn't want a triumvirate leading the show like TOS, the focus would be on the whole crew.
Funny how that worked out.
Exactly! Some characters rose to the top.Funny how that worked out.
At first Data became my favorite, then later Picard.
Crosby said otherwise when she talked about leaving.
Remember the intended rotating series of engineers? The fact Worf was not considered a regular? I think they really intended it to not focus on anyone. Stewart was too strong a presence, Spiner too sympathetic a character, etc etc.
Unfortunately we now also know some of the producers thought women were second class citizens.
Let's be honest here that aside from Picard/Worf/Data, the TNG characters did not have defined personalities. At most they had 1-2 "quirks."
Riker: Would fuck anything that moved. Also played the trombone.
Geordi: A big dork who couldn't get anywhere with women.
Beverly: A mom and a doctor, and some unrequited thing with Picard (everything about her was defined by her job, or her relationship with men).
Deanna: Likes chocolate? Had a thing for Riker. Gets mind-raped by alien entities and falls for creepy guests of the week? I dunno.
Most of the TNG crew wasn’t nearly as well developed as people want to pretend.
I also find it interesting that of all of the shows, the TNG cast gets along the best with each other off camera, but had the least amount of chemistry with each other on camera.
I completely missed this: There is a Disco board game!
https://shop.wizkids.com/products/star-trek-discovery-black-alert
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/387566/star-trek-discovery-black-alert
https://shop.wizkids.com/products/star-trek-discovery-black-alert
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/387566/star-trek-discovery-black-alert
Thats not what defined Riker to me, but OK.
Yes, it's true most of the characters were not allowed to be really detailed but I also don't subscribe to your simplistic summaries.
I think it's arguable that Riker had an arc, since he was originally intended to be a hotshot man of action, to contrast with the stay-at-home Captain. But the two soon flipped as the writers realized how popular Picard was, which made Riker much more "domesticated" - something the show lampshaded by Best of Both Worlds.
That said, the arc was pretty much done by then. He had no real further evolution as a character.
In fact, to go one step further: Tim Lynch, a Trek reviewer in the '90s, speculated that Riker's role in "Pegasus" helped to set up why he still wouldn't be a Captain in the TNG Movies. Exact quote, "[Pegasus] set things up so Riker won't have to make excuses for not being a captain in the film series".
Riker's development was put on ice all the way up until Insurrection (rekindling his romantic relationship with Troi) and Nemesis (getting married and being promoted to Captain of the Titan).
Whatever happened to Tim Lynch? 10 minutes of Google distraction later...
The Usenet Deep Space Nine recapper who helped inspire modern TV criticism from 2018
Similar threads
