• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Jason Isaacs VS Sonequa. Who Should Have Been The Series Lead? (Spoilers)

Some people seem keen on the Georgiou character as an alternative to the unlikeable characters we are presented with on STD. I could understand that. But I agree that Yeoh, as an actor, is weak. She certainly couldn't work as a compelling and charismatic series lead. It would be like 'Nicole Janeway' in the first version of Voyager;

But would they have done anything different in terms of writing Gerogiou if she was going to be a series lead?

As for Nicole Janweay in the clip it's not really fair to judge the actor based on Mulgrew's performance as it's likely the role would have been written diferently.
 
I am not sure if it is the actress' fault but Burnham is a very unlikeable character.

If this was 1988 she'd be sacked at the end of the season and replaced with one of the producers ex-girlfriends for season 2.
 
I am not sure if it is the actress' fault but Burnham is a very unlikeable character.

I'm still giving SM-G the benefit of the doubt. I think it's an impossible part: the human who is also a Vulcan who was traumatized by Klingons who mutinies against her captain before falling for a Klingon disguised as a human and being confronted with the doppleganger of her dead mentor while being betrayed by the man who rescued her from prison. I mean, how do you play *that*?

I've watched every episode and still have no idea what Burnham's temperament is supposed to be, or if it's supposed to have changed over the course of the season. And that, fundamentally, is missing from the scripts, IMO.
 
Some people seem keen on the Georgiou character as an alternative to the unlikeable characters we are presented with on STD. I could understand that. But I agree that Yeoh, as an actor, is weak. She certainly couldn't work as a compelling and charismatic series lead.
At this point your blatant misogyny is making you plainly delusional. Yeoh is insanely charismatic and her brief appearance as Captain Georgiou was really memorable. She was instantly believable as a legendary captain on par with Picard and Kirk in his prime (pun intended.)

Martin-Green is fine too, she doesn't have decades of experience like Isaacs and Yeoh, but she's doing great job. I find Michael to be a compelling character, who is occasionally hampered by bad writing. I hope the writing improves in the next season, and I'm looking forward seeing more adventures of Michael Burnham.
 
I'm still giving SM-G the benefit of the doubt. I think it's an impossible part: the human who is also a Vulcan who was traumatized by Klingons who mutinies against her captain before falling for a Klingon disguised as a human and being confronted with the doppleganger of her dead mentor while being betrayed by the man who rescued her from prison. I mean, how do you play *that*?
It is a problem with this show in general. They just shove so much events that should really be pivotal to the characters in such a fast pace that it is really impossible to really let any of it sink in. Stamets is suffering from similar plot overload.
 
Trek series have done well with weak leads in the past. Look at DS9. Avery Brooks is no slouch, but he is kind of a ham, and he was outacted by everyone on the series besides Terry Farrell. But he ended up working out just fine 90% of the time both because the writers had a solid grip on his character and they were willing to tell stories which didn't center around him.
 
At this point your blatant misogyny is making you plainly delusional. Yeoh is insanely charismatic and her brief appearance as Captain Georgiou was really memorable. She was instantly believable as a legendary captain on par with Picard and Kirk in his prime (pun intended.)

Martin-Green is fine too, she doesn't have decades of experience like Isaacs and Yeoh, but she's doing great job. I find Michael to be a compelling character, who is occasionally hampered by bad writing. I hope the writing improves in the next season, and I'm looking forward seeing more adventures of Michael Burnham.

LOL. What's delusional is your 'misogyny' nonsense. You're making her comparable to Kirk or Picard only after brief minutes of screentime? That's desperation on your part.

Yeoh's delivery in the premiere reminded me of 'Nicole Janeway'
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Look at how much better Mulgrew is in comparison. Now that is charisma.
 
Trek series have done well with weak leads in the past. Look at DS9. Avery Brooks is no slouch, but he is kind of a ham, and he was outacted by everyone on the series besides Terry Farrell. But he ended up working out just fine 90% of the time both because the writers had a solid grip on his character and they were willing to tell stories which didn't center around him.

Brooks, even in the early seasons, was a much stronger lead than what we're getting in Discovery.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Heck, Brooks was awesome in Emissary as well. He had me intrigued from his first tense confrontation with Picard.
 
Poorly written unsympathetic character and poor acting combined with the generally well written and extremely charismatic rest of the cast
She is overshadowed in every scene with Tilly, Saru, Lorca, Stamets, Evil Hitler Cannibal Georgia, good Georgia, half robot face girl, ect.
I’m sure she’s a wonderful person and actor but she’s underwhelming on this show
Rosario Dawson could have made the character work a lot better
Hopefully she can improve and the writing will also improve to enhance the characters likability
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top