Even mediocrity can be remembered, if it's superlatively stunning in its meaninglessness. Mr. Kim checks all those boxes.
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 1x15 - "Will You Take My Hand?"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Come on. They guy couldn't get a lock - either in his position on the bridge, or in his personal life. How can one forget that?
People keep using that example but I always took it that all charges were dropped because Kirk’s ends justified his means. But then tongue in cheek the president says one charge stands and your “punishment” is that you will be a captain of a starship which is what you were born to do. Kirk was basically being told SF felt like he was justified in what he did because hey, he’s James T. Kirk. I don’t take that as a legitimate judgment of guilty or a legitimate punishment. What happened to Burnham was a legitimate finding of guilty and the harshest repudiation SF can give someone.
I've pretty much succeeded, actually, until it was brought up again today.
Oh please Data was still making obtuse responses to the same colloquial phrases crewmembers used in Season 1 through Season 7 (I assume because soopme writer thought it was funny; the first two times maybe, the third, please.) Hell, even in the TNG films:
- Generations had his Emotion chip fused and unremovable/unreparable.
- By First Contact he could turn it off and on at will.
- In Insurrection I don't even believe it was mentioned.
- Same for Nemesis.
Bottom line: Data was essentially the same character the entire run. Yes, he met his creator, his 'mother', created a child, etc; but none of the events or actions really had an effect on or really changed or grew the character. He was basically the same character in 2002 that he was in 1987.
There's one BIG difference - unlike Garret Wang, Mary Wiseman can actually act, and has great comedic timing; and plays Tilly's various quirks quite well. I've also read that (unlike Garret Wang) she also showed up on time, prepared and ready to work when her name appeared on a call sheet.
Last edited:
She wasn't found guilty she plead guilty. There is a subtle difference
to a crime - mutiny - she didn't even commit. every law student could have told her that
Never served, not a lawyer, just some internet nobody.
What is the difference between what she did, and mutiny?
per definition, you need more than one person for mutiny
Nope 20 episodes where released as part of S1 of VOY on VHS in the UK.
Um... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Trek:_Voyager_episodes
And per Memory Alpha:
Emphasis mine.
So yes, while that's true, the series originated on UPN in the US with 16 episodes with the final four being held for season 2. If I recall correctly, UPN technically did this for at least the first three or four seasons, with four episodes being held back for each season. But the production didn't know this would be the case for season one, but planned accordingly going forward. Regardless of the fact, there were not 26 episodes for season one of Voyager.
Technically, it can also refer to any form of rebellion against a superior officer or authority figure.
by two or more people, yes
^^^
Yep. That said, Burnham could have and most likely was charged and convicted on:
- Assault of a superior officer.
-Failing to obey the orders of a superior officer.
-Insurrection.
-Conspiracy to incite mutiny.
- Dereliction of duty.
As defensive as I can get about DSC, I'll agree with you on that. It did eventually turn out to be a mainly plot-driven series, but it still feels a bit closer to DS9 in terms of characterization than VOY for me, mostly because I see the characters' reactions to the events around them, how they're shaped and changed by them, etc, even if I have to admit there are many among us here who don't feel about the matter.
All things considered, I generally prefer DSC's characterization to that of VOY/ENT, because the characters feel more dynamic to me. There's a reason why I often feel that Voyager is ultimately The Doctor & Seven Show, because the others were static characters at best and plot devices at worst; I'd rather get to know a character through their reactions and feelings about what happens to them than just being told about their hobbies and who their friends were at the Academy. And this is where DS9 excelled; a Sisko episode is as much about him as about family/fatherhood/religion, etc, but a Chakotay episode is ultimately about spiritualism (or more often, he's in focus because he can use pseudo-spiritualism as a plot device).
That being said, I do think that DSC's format as it stands now doesn't allow for the same character focus DS9 had (it doesn't even have "Character Name" episodes as of now). And that is the main reason I don't think the latter would ever lose its place as my personal Trek gold standard.
Mutiny fits onto a script better?
Besides its cooler to say the "mutineer" than the "insurectionist"
agreed, but that's sadly not what she has been convicted for
Sometimes they have to dumb things down for the audience. Looks like you're the only person in this thread who knew the difference, after all. "Mutiny" sounds better than dereliction of duty" or "insurrection" or "attempted mutiny."
Holy crap
Even though I'm very disappointed with Discovery as a whole so far, I still think it had a better first season than VOY and ENT in part due to the reasons you outlined. I don't know if I think the writing is better per se, but the quality of the actors is so much higher that they elevate what at times is pretty corny or unnatural dialogue. That coupled with the move-level direction and choreography make me at least interested enough in every episode not to want to turn it off midway through out of boredom. Although I sometimes do want to due to "headdesk" moments.
I'd partially disagree with this. As I said, the back end of Act 1 had a strong(er) character focus. Choose Your Pain was mostly about Lorca (in the A plot) and Saru (in the B plot). The B plot of Lethe was also about Lorca. Si Vic Pacem's A plot was basically once again about Saru.
Then Episode 9 happened - which was fantastic, but a big action piece, meaning no one got particular character focus other than Burnham. And in the whole of Act 2, basically the show was plot-focused, with no one other than Burnham and Ash getting any real character development. In some cases (Stamets) they came out of the whole experience severely lessened in my eyes.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Sticky
- Poll
