Spoilers Missing Scene from Season 1 Finale

[Search4]

I'm really torn about this show since IMHO the finale with the Klingon war did not feel earned. L'Rell simply was not believable based on what we have seen.

Hence a guess at a missing scene - Admiral Cornwell via holo-skype to L'Rell.

L'Rell: Ah, my old captive, now in hiding.

Admiral: Not hiding, planning. Listen carefully. Thanks to the Mirror Universe, we know how to destroy Q'onos. We can do it at any time.

L'Rell: Nonsense, you (insult) wouldn't know a threat if it bit you in the neck.

Admiral: This is our simulation of what will happen to the Klingon home world with only one hydro bomb. (Shows).

L'Rell: Nonsense. Humans don't have the capacity for that level of destruction. We have tasted your blood--

Admiral: Humans invented a concept known as "Mutually Assured Destruction". We had this on our own planet between nations. It kept the peace. But know this - Starfleet will not fire first. However, if the Klingon fleet attacks Earth we will send dozens of ships including Discovery to Q'onos. They will all have these weapons. The Klingon homeworld will die.

L'Rell: (shocked) You would not.

Admiral: You have met the Terran. We are not that different. We have already planted one such bomb. As a gesture of good faith Mary Sue will give you the trigger. Use it to convince your people to stop the attack on my home. Or you can be assured of your destruction.

(episode goes on).

 

[KennyB]

I'll agree it felt a bit rushed, but then I realized the war wasn't really the focus. It was about Burnham and the Federation redeeming themselves and finding a peaceful way.........but I'll admit, I was all geared up for some PEW PEW! I envisioned a huge fleet engagement. I get it now, but was a bit "meh" to start with.

 

[shakham]

Is this real?

This scene might have helped partly as it would explain why they should stop the earth attack. Right now the way I see it, there was no reason to stop attacking the federation, bomb or not.

A token explosion would have been a more convincing show of force than an iPad with a button. Maybe destroy part of Kronos, or a Klingon moon or something.

 

[Kane_Steel]

As much as your scene might have helped, I really don't want more Cornwell and L'Rell screentime. They make my eyes burn.

Hopefully there are better characters next season.

 

[KennyB]

Is this real?

This scene might have helped partly as it would explain why they should stop the earth attack. Right now the way I see it, there was no reason to stop attacking the federation, bomb or not.

A token explosion would have been a more convincing show of force than an iPad with a button. Maybe destroy part of Kronos, or a Klingon moon or something.

L'rell cut a deal for her freedom and a way to seize power. It enabled her to unify the houses which was her goal. Her end..........withdraw from Federation space. As a Klingon she honored the deal.

 

[Mudd]

A decent actor cast as the ship's commander and any indication at all that the producers have a clue how to approach next season in a more competent fashion would be reason enough for me to sample the show again next year.

Jayne Brooks would fit my definition of the former. I've enjoyed Cornwall the few times I've seen her on this show.

Of course, hearing that the current showrunners and Goldsman had moved on would be big step upward.

 

[Jadeb]

Jayne Brooks would fit my definition of the former. I've enjoyed Cornwall the few times I've seen her on this show.

I liked her too, but her character's ruined now.

 

[cbl1]

I don’t see fit as addition conversation with Cornwell. I see the additional conversation happening with Ash convincing her to do the right thing. I beleive he is only one that could convince her to do what she did and that makes it believable. Him saying he would stay by her side if ended the war.

 

[Hythlodeus]

there is just not enough desk in this universe for my head

 

[cbl1]

I look forward to seeing Cornwall completely loose it and be sent to the psycho ward as we all expect. She started to break this season.

 

[Michael]

I liked her too, but her character's ruined now.

I agree, she was a cool character up until the last two episodes this season. This show has a unique ability to create likable, cool characters, only to completely undermine what's cool about them in a scene or two. Happened most prominently with Lorca, but to some extent with Stamets (no real mourning for Culber) and Saru (“Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum”) as well. Cornwell is only the latest victim of this.

 

[Hythlodeus]

no real mourning for Culber

what is 'real' mourning by your definition?

 

[Mudd]

I liked her too, but her character's ruined now.

No. Her character participated in a really bad decision that was fortunately derailed.

BTW, you know that she didn't have to give in to the Discovery crew's defiance. The Starfleet catspaw, Captain Emperor, had the detonator.

The notion that on Star Trek only morally upright, unshaded, uncompromised characters can be featured as part of the regular cast is irredeemably juvenile and a bar to any kind of adult writing or drama. Lorca was that, until he was revealed to be an easily solved jigsaw piece in Trek's old line, pat, black-and-white melodrama. You want to talk about a character ruined, talk about Teh Evul Doppleganger Captain.

Hell, Discovery's captain is not going to be the series lead. Her being a problematic fit for the crew would make for a little needed friction.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

Hell, Discovery's captain is not going to be the series lead. Her being a problematic fit for the crew would make for a little needed friction.

Captain Stephanie Jellico.

 

[Mudd]

Captain Stephanie Jellico.

Yeah, people went nuts for Jellico, who was really presented as just a truculent dumbass, simply because he created a little uncustomary tension among the regular characters. That was, at least, novel.

 

[Ovation]

The notion that on Star Trek only morally upright, unshaded, uncompromised characters can be featured as part of the regular cast is irredeemably juvenile and a bar to any kind of adult writing or drama.

As much as I disagree with your overall opinion of DSC, this is an excellent point and speaks to my one significant disappointment with the show—making Lorca MU rather than the conflicted character he appeared to be.

 

[Michael]

what is 'real' mourning by your definition?

Well, I'm talking in the context of a TV show, of course. In reality people grief in all kinds of different ways, I'm not disputing that. But in the confines of a TV show you kind of have to show your character's pain when you want to say that the loss of a person means something to them. The way it was presented in the show (with Stamets basically shrugging the whole thing off) tells me that the writers didn't take Culber's death and his relationship to Stamets seriously enough. They can promise all they want that it's going to make sense or that it's going to be addressed — the season is over and it's clear now that the writers didn't really know how to handle that character's demise.

 

[Jadeb]

No. Her character participated in a really bad decision that was fortunately derailed.

BTW, you know that she didn't have to give in to the Discovery crew's defiance. The Starfleet catspaw, Captain Emperor, had the detonator.

The notion that on Star Trek only morally upright, unshaded, uncompromised characters can be featured as part of the regular cast is irredeemably juvenile and a bar to any kind of adult writing or drama. Lorca was that, until he was revealed to be an easily solved jigsaw piece in Trek's old line, pat, black-and-white melodrama. You want to talk about a character ruined, talk about Teh Evul Doppleganger Captain.

Hell, Discovery's captain is not going to be the series lead. Her being a problematic fit for the crew would make for a little needed friction.

You'll find no bigger fan of Lorca, pre-revelation, than me. I don't mind that the admiral made a bad call. Maybe she could have even seen virtue in Lorca's approach. That could have been interesting, had she actually made her case and stood by it. Instead, she's talked down by Starfleet's first mutineer in about 30 seconds, in a plot point that existed so that Michael could Show Her the Star Trek Way. At that point, it became clear the writers had no real interest in this character, other than as a plot beat. She's not competent or capable or smart enough to consider alternative strategies independently; she's just the latest in Trek's long line of idiot admirals, and thank goodness Michael is there to save us from her.

Admittedly, I was bummed because I had hoped she might be the new captain. But her character took a big nosedive in the last third of the season.

 

[Hythlodeus]

In reality people grief in all kinds of different ways, I'm not disputing that. But in the confines of a TV show you kind of have to show your character's pain

which I think they did in that scene with Stamets and Tyler

 

[Nyotarules]

Missing scene -
Setting Starfleet Academy, Cadet Tilly wakes up after a night indulging in Orion herbs with Cadet Gaila and Cadet Uhura
'Ladies, I just had the most amazing dream!'
Uhura - 'I told you both, stop bringing boys to the room and smoking weed!'
Gaila whispering under bed- 'Gary, Gary Mitchell, you still there'?