I'll give you that Saru and Stamets have storylines. But after season 2 and 3 (where Stamets goes from being a arrogant prick to an arrogant person with redeemable qualities and Saru goes through an exploration of his identity as a Kelpian) who and what those character are is who they are to the end of the series. Same goes for Culber. After he comes back from the dead, Culber is that person. There's story about his relationship with Paul, but, once Culber goes through the Chief O'Brien all-good therapy that makes him ok for the next episode, Culber is the same person. For the most part, after a certain point, there's not an epiphany, moment of trauma, or revelation where these character grow or fundamentally change as people because of developments within a story
As for Detmer (and if we wanna throw in Owo) .. absolutely not. Who that character is when we meet her in episode 1 is who she is in the final episode.
I would argue that from season 3 on it's mostly the Michael and Book show.
That, in and of itselfy, opens a whole other can of worms as whether the resolution and explanation for "The Burn" was good writing and a satisfying conclusion. To me, it was indicative of how the Discovery writers could never allow a story to be about weird alien shit, and we learn something about the characters in how they react to the dilemmas those problems create.
Discovery, on the other hand, always had to devolve any mystery into a personal connection affecting the main characters. The leader of the Terran Emprier is Georgiou, the Red Angel is Michael and her mother, the source of The Burn is a Kelpian child that Saru has to connect with emotioanally, etc. And you see that in Section 31 where it just can't be a plot by the Terran Empire. It has to connect to Georgiou's family and child' crush.
Last edited:
