Aah I missed that - thanks
Spoilers Star Trek: Discovery 4x04 - "All Is Possible"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Aah I missed that - thanks
Still having to watch this on my computer screen because Paramount+ is randomly not working on my Roku stick.
I liked this episode. The part with Tilly on the planet was a classic Trek adventure. I like that they made Grey choose to dress themself more feminine looking, not shying away from non-cis themes. Then getting into the politics of planets regaining trust in the Federation, setting Michael up to be an emissary to lapsed Federation members. I didn't realize the President was supposed to be part human/Bajoran/Cardassian, that's a nice touch.
I liked this episode. The part with Tilly on the planet was a classic Trek adventure. I like that they made Grey choose to dress themself more feminine looking, not shying away from non-cis themes. Then getting into the politics of planets regaining trust in the Federation, setting Michael up to be an emissary to lapsed Federation members. I didn't realize the President was supposed to be part human/Bajoran/Cardassian, that's a nice touch.
It's like some people have never watched Star Trek.
That's fair. I actually mixed up the Kzinti crewmember with T'Ana for a moment so I was asking if the options for Kzinti avatars were limited, my mistake.
I don't know. I don't know why out of all the possible configurations, this is what we get. If you're going to be that reluctant to take the bubble wrap off the golden goose, then painfully safe and boring isn't a surprising outcome. I believe they've achieved a little more consistency this season, but unfortunately levelled off at average to below average .
As for tension - it's about as tense as a limp rubber band at the moment. I'm sure Gene would be delighted at the current absence of conflict within the crew.
This is why season 1 remains my "favourite" season simply because I could recognise an effort to try something different - obviously some of Fuller's vision still lingered. There were peaks and troughs and ultimately, it didn't work for me (in particular the finale). But there was some bloody ambition, at least.
S1 is my favorite too, but I disagree about this season. I prefer less action and more dialogue. And yes they have been safer, more structured, more procedural episodes so far but they have been engaging and enjoyable. There have been no bad episodes so far and a number of structural improvements such as:
- Making Burnham captain and Saru first officer (they are finally putting the right pieces into the right places)
- Gray out of Adira's body
- Improved pacing
- Maximizing screen time of their strongest acting talent
It's possible the home runs are coming later but for now I'm happy there aren't any strikes.
Last edited:
But she's a terrible captain...
A
Amaris
Guest
Mmm... kinda? Burnham has some Kirkish qualities, which I sincerely like in her. I think her heart's in the right place, too, but I think it's the way they're writing her that isn't working for me, and how people are written to react to her, but then that's the show in general for me right now. The cast is good as always, it's a solid cast, it's that the writing is the weakest side of the series, and for me is dragging it.
Which makes her just right.
A
Amaris
Guest
In the right hands? Ones that can capably flesh out her abilities while allowing for her flaws? Yes. In the hands of the current writers? I don't think so. I don't think the current writing staff is up to the challenge of writing a modern day James Kirk.
Good. I like Burnham with those qualities but explored far differently. If Burnham must be captain (
) then I appreciate the interaction potential with the president.
She seems to be doing alright.
A
Amaris
Guest
Sure, differently, but competently is important. Different good! Competent absolutely necessary, otherwise we get another Jonathan Archer (sorry ENT fans) written so inconsistently that it becomes exhausting just to watch. I've been feeling that way for some time now with DSC.Good. I like Burnham with those qualities but explored far differently. If Burnham must be captain (
Mileage will vary. I feel Burnham is competent enough, but my annoyance with her as captain, and the 32nd century is more of a strain than the inconsistent writing.
Burnham is "always right", the same way...
Kirk was "always right"
Picard was "always right" (in TNG)
Sisko was "always right"
Janeway was "always right"
Archer was "always right"
Pike will be "always right"
That's just how television operates. The show favors the star's point of view. The only Star Trek show to challenge this is Picard, where mistakes Picard made were foundational to that series' first season.
In SNW, we're not going to hear complaints about how Pike is "always right". And I was correct in my prediction that Burnham finally being promoted to Captain wouldn't stop certain segments from complaining about how she's "always right".
Kirk was "always right"
Picard was "always right" (in TNG)
Sisko was "always right"
Janeway was "always right"
Archer was "always right"
Pike will be "always right"
That's just how television operates. The show favors the star's point of view. The only Star Trek show to challenge this is Picard, where mistakes Picard made were foundational to that series' first season.
In SNW, we're not going to hear complaints about how Pike is "always right". And I was correct in my prediction that Burnham finally being promoted to Captain wouldn't stop certain segments from complaining about how she's "always right".
A
Amaris
Guest
The 32nd century is certainly weighing hard on my judgment, too, and that may be at the root of my discomfort with the series right now.
Except Picard, Sisko, Janeway, and Archer were very often wrong...
I mean seriously... How could you forget Picard causing the Borg to gain an interest in the Federation by ignoring Guinan warning him to take the Enterprise and run when Q tossed them to the border of Borg space...
Or Sisko's entire arc about fighting against being the profit to the detriment of Bajor...
I think it is too early to judge how well Burnham is working as a captain. I have generally liked the character, and unlike others, I think that The tension between her and her superiors in season 3 worked out well. Admittedly, I am disappointed with what I have seen so far. There have only been two episode that I would argue show Burnham flexing her captain muscles, one of them she freaks out constantly over the president's present rather. With shorter seasons and multiple plot lines in each episode, there will be few episodes to show how Burnham's leadership is manifest. But like I already wrote, it is early.
Archer got a lot wrong during his time as Captain of Enterprise and that doesn't even include any idiotic mistakes or lapses in judgment he made during the unseen Earth-Romulan War. That said, yeah, since he was the series lead Scott Bakula wasn't going to be consistently depicted as the one guy in the room who didn't know what the Hell was going on.
"Very often"? I don't think so. The examples you cite don't constitute "very often". You're using revisionist history to justify bashing Burnham. And you're operating under the assumption that I actually think Burnham is "always right". That's why I used quotations. Learn how to read between the lines. She royally fucked up in "Battle at the Binary Stars".
I've watched TV for 40 years. The show in question always favors the main character. Even in a show like Breaking Bad where what he's doing is legally wrong, the narrative wants you to take Walter White's side anyway. Or, if you haven't seen that series, then let's switch mediums and look at Bonnie & Clyde. You're on Bonnie and Clyde's side while you're watching that movie, even though what they're doing is breaking the law, because you're in it for the ride with them, as a viewer.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
