Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 2x09 - "Project Daedalus"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Just more evidence that Discovery is TOS era featuring the kind of spackling and crown molding the era got when money could be spent to make it look spruced up.
The look or amount of money spent has nothing to do with why I don't think Discovery fits in the TOS era.
finally watched the episode and caught up with the thread.
it was okay, I guess. 7/0
it was okay, I guess. 7/0
From the same club we see Combat, the Atari 47,000 classic arcade machine.
Almost like that‘s where they got the idea in the first place...
And McCoy stole his look from Mr. Furley.
I'm gonna throw out a thing here, just because. It's all opinion, no fact, but maybe some hyperbole and a humorous barb here and there. Then again, maybe not.
I think the Burnham as Mary Sue thing is kinda silly. She is the lead, the star of the show. She is the Captain Kirk of Discovery. She could be in every scene and not be a Mary Sue, because she is the top-billed character.
A "Mary Sue" character is the one with no faults, all the answers, and always saves the day. (As I understand the definition, that is.)
Burnham has been almost literally the opposite of a "Mary Sue." Most every choice she has made since the first episode has caused destruction, mayhem, and death. I'm surprised that Lorca didn't airlock her early on.
She's damaged, much more than Spock, from trauma in her childhood. She wants to be perfect: a Vulcan daughter to Sarek, sister to Spock, Starfleet officer.
Truncating a much longer post, I'll end with this: An imperfect character cannot by definition be a Mary Sue.
I think the Burnham as Mary Sue thing is kinda silly. She is the lead, the star of the show. She is the Captain Kirk of Discovery. She could be in every scene and not be a Mary Sue, because she is the top-billed character.
A "Mary Sue" character is the one with no faults, all the answers, and always saves the day. (As I understand the definition, that is.)
Burnham has been almost literally the opposite of a "Mary Sue." Most every choice she has made since the first episode has caused destruction, mayhem, and death. I'm surprised that Lorca didn't airlock her early on.
She's damaged, much more than Spock, from trauma in her childhood. She wants to be perfect: a Vulcan daughter to Sarek, sister to Spock, Starfleet officer.
Truncating a much longer post, I'll end with this: An imperfect character cannot by definition be a Mary Sue.
I'm not concerned about ranking the episode against the entire franchise, just against the other episodes of this series. Later on if I want to rank all the episodes of the franchise together its position will be reevaluated in that context.
There's not some objective universal standard over all reviews across decades of time and changing values and perspectives. It's about how you feel about the episode right now.
That's not what being a Mary Sue means, and since she got her captain killed and was thrown in jail for mutiny, obviously that wasn't the case anyway. Plus, I'm pretty sure every lead character in Trek had a bunch of superlatives about them mentioned by other characters in exposition. That's par for the course.
Last edited:
There's two parts to the Mary Sue definition, and that's one of them, and probably the more important and more commonly mentioned part, so, yeah, that's not Burnham. Just for giggles, though, I'll mention the other part, which is a female character written as a way for the author to put themselves into the story. I'm not sure if *that* would apply to whomever came up with her character. Possibly, and if that was Bryan Fuller or Alex Kurtzman, it might be slightly funny to think about.
Please read my list above or just look at the litmus test. Just...stop it with this pointless debate. It's not a question of interpretation. Words have meanings. I'm just so tired of this "Mary Sue" BS. If it applies to Michael, it applies to all leads. Can we just get back to not using meaningless catchphrases in place of actual criticism? Thank you.
Yeah, so GR did the Mary Sue thing with Wesley, as we all know. But you can't argue that a lot of everything that Burnham has done has been wrong, causing much death and destruction. That's not a Mary Sue.There's two parts to the Mary Sue definition, and that's one of them, and probably the more important and more commonly mentioned part, so, yeah, that's not Burnham. Just for giggles, though, I'll mention the other part, which is a female character written as a way for the author to put themselves into the story. I'm not sure if *that* would apply to whomever came up with her character. Possibly, and if that was Bryan Fuller or Alex Kurtzman, it might be slightly funny to think about.
And McCoy stole his look from Mr. Furley.
(*Bugged-out eyes as I listen to post through the door and take it out of context*)
More like Mary Screw up. AMIRITE?Yeah, so GR did the Mary Sue thing with Wesley, as we all know. But you can't argue that a lot of everything that Burnham has done has been wrong, causing much death and destruction. That's not a Mary Sue.
She had to be saved on that asteroid in Brother or else she would have died -- and saved by a man, no less.Yeah, so GR did the Mary Sue thing with Wesley, as we all know. But you can't argue that a lot of everything that Burnham has done has been wrong, causing much death and destruction. That's not a Mary Sue.
I'm gonna throw out a thing here, just because. It's all opinion, no fact, but maybe some hyperbole and a humorous barb here and there. Then again, maybe not.
I think the Burnham as Mary Sue thing is kinda silly. She is the lead, the star of the show. She is the Captain Kirk of Discovery. She could be in every scene and not be a Mary Sue, because she is the top-billed character.
A "Mary Sue" character is the one with no faults, all the answers, and always saves the day. (As I understand the definition, that is.)
Burnham has been almost literally the opposite of a "Mary Sue." Most every choice she has made since the first episode has caused destruction, mayhem, and death. I'm surprised that Lorca didn't airlock her early on.
She's damaged, much more than Spock, from trauma in her childhood. She wants to be perfect: a Vulcan daughter to Sarek, sister to Spock, Starfleet officer.
Truncating a much longer post, I'll end with this: An imperfect character cannot by definition be a Mary Sue.
She's not a Mary Sue, she's not the greatest choice in the world of a main character either, scenes without her are often the best ones (Ariam and Tilly, Spock and Stamets)
Thats offended me as it was a huge step back in terms of presenting the strength of women on TV, Burnham should have saved herself in that example, pike saving the day was just to placate Alt-right manbabies
As The Sisko says 100 years later it's easy to be a saint on Paradise Earth.
Yep they can even become Presidents of major nations (cough, cough Trump).
Back to the show normal 'logic extremists' normally go through kolinahr, so does Spock join their ranks in ten years time?
Burnham is a xeno anthropologist she should know.
Its the Andorians and Vulcans that had real issues just 100 years prior.
I love how the Andorian and the Tellarite stand on opposite ends! They'll never really freakin' trust each other.
^Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.
Both sides have come a long way since the incident at P'Jem.
