I always pretend that Q was enforcing 30s movie rules on everyone.
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 3x01 - "That Hope Is You, Part 1"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
One could think that you try to implicate that racism or sexism is involved. And this could be true. But it also can be true that one person to be the centerpiece of multiple events of galactic to intergalactic proportion comes across as goofy and hard to believe. Of course this is not exclusive to Michael Burnham. But as long as the author dont contradicts himself I would give him the benefit of the doubt that it has nothing to do with gender and skincolor.
I don't think that this is going to be adressed at all. And thats ok for me. Depending on what kind of story they want to tell it would overcomplicate things to go into such detail. Its a little bit like: How cant the federation not know how breen look like when there must be at least some dead breen floating around earths orbit after the attac on starfleet headquarter. And dont get me started on Major Kira wearing that reen suit. But to keep the mystery they just skip over such things.
I wonder why they supposed the Discovery wasn't in the 32nd century when they did their ID scan near the end of the episode? I would imagine that the technology for IDing ships would've changed multiple times in a thousand years. They could've been right next door and the current tech might not be adjusted to pick up its signal.
I won't deny that I think that some combat in film and televisions is more realistic than others, but most actors and actresses invest in various forms of physical training that they can definitely draw upon. The funny thing is that I found Visitor to be more invested in making her character look like a dedicated fighter than Farrell, even though Farrell was the one who was interested in martial arts.
In real life, I would never assume that a woman was not stronger or more agile or more deadly than I. Which perhaps gets to a better point: who goes around evaluating whether or not they should be able to overpower women? Isn't the thought process a little problematic? I never see SMG as anything but fully invested in the character, physically or mentally, and I don't know why someone would obsess on whether her fighting is realistic.
Oh please. Again go actually watch some episodes of TOS. In the beginning it's ALL ABOUT JAMES T. KIRK. He saves the ship or the Federation on a weekly basis., and is the main driving force of the show. As the show progressed because of the popularity of the characters Spock also began to occasionally become the focus, but that wasn't until the second season.
The first season of TOS had 29 episodes.
And if you try and claim well okay Star Trek Discovery has had three seasons, again please. The season 3 premiere was the 30th episode of Star Trek Discovery.
Plus if you look at Season 2 of Discovery; It was more about Pike and Spock than Michael Burnham.
So yeah give me a break.
Last edited:
He really didn't save the Federation all that often, as that wasn't the point of the show. It had different priorities. TOS stories mostly had much smaller stakes, usually the survival of a landing party and/or the Enterprise.
Which is kinda the problem when comparing TOS and Discovery (or any of the pre-CBS spinoffs), we really don't get to see the crew in the smaller stakes situations very often, because of serialization and the end of everything type of storytelling the latter usually does. "The Best of Both Worlds" is some of the finest television ever in my book, but if that type of story was all TNG did, I would've gotten bored with it very quickly.
Heh, they originally had written that she was going to die on the ship, but the writers loved the character and actor so much they kept her alive.
True TOS was episodic television but in the first season alone:
James T. Kirk saves the Federation from Gary Mitchell - a God like being who will remake the universe and his image.
James T. Kirk saves the Federation again from Charlie X; a teenager with a power level similar to Gary Mitchell.
James T. Kirk saves the Federation from a Romulan invasion. (If the ship returned to romulan space with news of the encounter there would have been a new Federation/Romulan war.
James T. Kirk prevents an incident with the Gorn from becoming a full stale war.
James T. Kirk's actions prevent ultimately a second Klingon/Federation war.
James T. Kirk prevents the entire universe from 'winking out' by assisting the sane Lazarus in locking saint Lazarus in with the insane Lazarus in a 'corridor,' between universes.
James T Kirk restores the proper flow of time and thus prevents the Federation from never being formed due to the changes brought by an insane Doctor McCoy.
So yeah even for episodic television in the 1960s; 7 times out of 29 aired episodes in the first season, Kirk saved the entire universe or the Federation in some fashion.
I think you're really stretching "saving the Federation" for the purposes of the discussion. No matter how much power Mitchell had, there was no proof he could ever escape from Delta Vega. Same with Charlie Evans, there was no proof he could handle what a larger plate would've served up. He couldn't even handle Kirk and Spock flipping on a few additional consoles. A new Romulan war is a supposition by both sides, but there's no proof it would actually happen. The Metrons ultimately stopped Kirk from going to war against the Gorn. Kirk's actions didn't prevent a war with the Klingons, the Organians did. I suggest you rewatch the ending of "Errand of Mercy". Kirk did save the day in "The Alternative Factor". Kirk saves the day, but only after allowing McCoy to escape the Enterprise in "City...". So we'll call that a wash.
So it is one time he actually "saved everything" and one wash because of the events set in motion were ultimately his fault.
Does Burnham have any more right to rebuild the Federation than, say, Mirror Georgiou building an Empire in the 32nd century?
And Burnham says the Federation is more than just ships and warp drive. Yet if she somehow undoes the Burn to to rebuild the Federation, won't she just be proving herself wrong, and that it is indeed all about ships and warp drive?
And Burnham says the Federation is more than just ships and warp drive. Yet if she somehow undoes the Burn to to rebuild the Federation, won't she just be proving herself wrong, and that it is indeed all about ships and warp drive?
Does anyone really have any "right" to do anything? I do hope it ends up being a failure as I think a universe without the Federation is an interesting angle to explore.
It's not just about ships but the ships are important nevertheless.
I personally have absolutely no problem with Burnham being the center of the show. But I can understand pople who are more interested in seeing other characters getting more screentime.
Example:
Because I find the first episode of season three quite entertaining I started to rewatch some episodes I liked. One of the episodes was the "Harry Mudd groundhog day" episode. What I really whished for this episode was to focus more on Stamets. But instead of showing us more of him interacting with the crew and solving the problem the show spends, in my opinion, to much time with the Burnham/Ash romantic shenanigans. To be fair...this gives us some charakterization on Burnham and her problems with being socially akward and connecting to people, and thats fine. But at the same time most of what I got about Tyler is that he is just "guy". And Stamets being the person with the crucial ability to save the ship devolving to a background character throughout the episode.
So I kinda see where people are coming from although I don't find it big of a problem myself. And it got slightly better over time.
Example:
Because I find the first episode of season three quite entertaining I started to rewatch some episodes I liked. One of the episodes was the "Harry Mudd groundhog day" episode. What I really whished for this episode was to focus more on Stamets. But instead of showing us more of him interacting with the crew and solving the problem the show spends, in my opinion, to much time with the Burnham/Ash romantic shenanigans. To be fair...this gives us some charakterization on Burnham and her problems with being socially akward and connecting to people, and thats fine. But at the same time most of what I got about Tyler is that he is just "guy". And Stamets being the person with the crucial ability to save the ship devolving to a background character throughout the episode.
So I kinda see where people are coming from although I don't find it big of a problem myself. And it got slightly better over time.
With regard to the Gorn, The Metrons offered to destroy the ship for Kirk, but Kirk was the one who said; 'No, we could talk..."
And I love how you downplay the situation with Lazarus; The fact that sulu stated Mitchell's power was doubling day by day, meaning eventually he could probably travel anywhere he wanted and do anything he wanted just by force of will, etc.
Everyone's playing up Michael Burnham's contribution to any situation, but down playing every other series where the lead did something heroic or save the Federation by their actions.
So yeah why is Burnham saving the universe in the series? Because she's the lead character. That's what lead characters in Star Trek series do.
Archer saved both Earth from literal destruction as well as the Federation itself and allowed it to exist in the first place. There. Another example.
There's no hint that he can't survive without things like oxygen in the vacuum of space. Besides, how powerful was he really when a boulder did him in?
I actually agreed with you there. What more was needed to be said?
Yes. But there is the fact that every story orbits her saving the universe, again and again. Which is quite different from what came before. Some people actually like smaller, more intimate stories where the stakes aren't everything all the time.
Missed this one...
Did you miss the beginning of the episode, where Kirk was going to run down and destroy the Gorn ship for what happened on Cestus III? Dealing out frontier justice as he saw it. That would've more likely led to a Federation/Gorn war. It is only later that he comes to his senses.
That show is actually hard to watch. I take Discovery anytime over "earth exceptionalism the show".
once again i'm asking are you doomcock? cause you really sound like him lol
I think there's been a tendency to make Discovery 'bigger'- bigger stakes than we've seen in previous shows. Added to that is the fact that, yes, the protagonist is Michael - and the protagonist is usually the one who saves the day! It's pretty normal. I'd be surprised if she didn't.
And yeah, Kirk has also done his fair share of universe-saving - but because they're one offs, in between other stories, we don't notice it as much.
And yeah, Kirk has also done his fair share of universe-saving - but because they're one offs, in between other stories, we don't notice it as much.
I wonder how many of Kirk's 17 recorded temporal violations involved saving Earth or another planet. His last definitely did(Veridian IV being saved by his sacrifice).
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
