it's not something they would want to overuse, and Calypso suggests that it will become a major plot point later on.
Spoilers The bait, the lure, the self-destruct
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
And here I thought this thread was going to be all about a certain poster with a Spock helmet....
I believe he is no longer of the body.
After re-watching the episode, I think it would definitely make sense for Burnham to want to remove herself from the timeline (apart from the wider mission) to allow Spock as normal of a childhood as possible for a little boy who has enough obstacles in front of him already, and so he could receive all the love Amanda wanted to give him.
But in the adjusted timeline, each DSC crew member would still potentially be living their lives independent of one another (for the most part, anyway), just like the crew of the Time Ship from VOY's "Year of Hell" episodes after that ship was destroyed. Burnham included.
To further support the idea that DSC's unique capabilities are the key to this, I cite the Mirror Universe, where we know that life goes on as usual in the Terran Empire - no galactic threat, but also no spore ships, because the only 2 spore-driven ships they had were destroyed. So there was no vehicle to import the galactic threat.
Without knowing that Discovery would receive a 3rd season, I believe the writers might have written in the components for the finale within the Red Angel plotline, and there's no reason to think that that plotline has to wrap up this season. DSC (and Burnham) can live for another season or more, but this might loom for some time to come. Time will tell.
But in the adjusted timeline, each DSC crew member would still potentially be living their lives independent of one another (for the most part, anyway), just like the crew of the Time Ship from VOY's "Year of Hell" episodes after that ship was destroyed. Burnham included.
To further support the idea that DSC's unique capabilities are the key to this, I cite the Mirror Universe, where we know that life goes on as usual in the Terran Empire - no galactic threat, but also no spore ships, because the only 2 spore-driven ships they had were destroyed. So there was no vehicle to import the galactic threat.
Without knowing that Discovery would receive a 3rd season, I believe the writers might have written in the components for the finale within the Red Angel plotline, and there's no reason to think that that plotline has to wrap up this season. DSC (and Burnham) can live for another season or more, but this might loom for some time to come. Time will tell.
Last edited:
Just because it wasn't on screen, doesn't mean it wasn't thought about by someone. Regardless the ethics make it nearly impossible to consider. The risk is high, millions of babies were conceived and born in those 9 months, etc.
There is no way they were thinking this show would end after season 2.
.
I love wishful thinking. It's adorable.
I've been a fan for 40 years, and that certainly isn't my experience. Sorry to hear that you can't find a way to enjoy something you're supposedly a fan of.
So basically continue being a Trek fanas life of a Trekkie is full of disappointments...
I've been a fan for 40 years, and that certainly isn't my experience. Sorry to hear that you can't find a way to enjoy something you're supposedly a fan of.
That's pretty much a no-duh statement. No responsible writer says, "I'll come up with a plotline IF they give me another season." You can't approach studio execs in the first place seeking a 3rd season and say you have no plotline - but they should shell out the money for it. The plotline has to come before the approval, since it's not exclusively a matter of ratings and subscriptions. And since the ratings & subscriptions weren't guaranteed, he had to have something for them to say yes or no to.
I appreciate that Kurtzman, as a responsible writer, thought ahead with season 3 (and probably seasons 4 & 5) while also working in an exit strategy in case it wasn't to go beyond season 2 (before everything was given the go-ahead). Hopefully we'll get to see what he already has in-mind for many seasons to come.
I agree, and this thread bolsters that idea.
The idea that she is a fine main character? Yes, she is. The idea that people complaining about the character through investing inordinate amounts of time on ever greater and more absurd fantasies to justify removing the character really need to step away from their computers and find a new hobby, yes again.
It has only a little to do with Burnham, and more to do with where Discovery and the spore-drive fit into the wider ST lore. There are tons of speculation threads going on, so I don't know why you target this particular one with so much vitriol, but you might want to take your own advice.
Well both seasons have been constantly pushing plot forward, and even despite the fact that season 1 was about a war there was very little time devoted to showing the actual battling occur. I remember seeing complaints about that, and it's odd to see comments like this alongside them, about the same set of episodes. When was the brainless shoot-em-up? I can only think of 2 episodes with elements that could be described that way - the first battle with the Klingons and the last battle on the emperor's ship in the MU. And nothing so far from S2.
It seems like you're going into it with a preconceived idea that you're supposed to shut your brain off. Just because there is "action and noise" doesn't mean it's brainless. Absolutely every season of every iteration of Star Trek since the 60s has been full of action and noise.
I might be the only person in all of the timelines (all of them; I've checked) that squees in fangirlish joy whenever Archer gets mentioned in other incarnations of Trek.Heh...
I hope somebody just mentions Daniels name once this season.
Even if it's just some off-the-cuff remark about how Captain Archer use to claim that he talked to a guy from the future.
I don’t “squee” (I never “squee”
) but ENT is my third favourite Trek series (after TOS and DSC—weird, I guess, being “an older fan” in his 50s 
) and I’m always happy when it gets a nod.
I shall never stop squeeing! You should've seen me when Kirk and co. saved the universe with the power of Sabotage in Beyond - and when they kept referencing ENT, too.I don’t “squee” (I never “squee”
Oh I’m not saying it’s always bad, tng era was very good, jjverse decent, even STD is passable with lots of beer. But seeing how MCU is on top of the world now, and being nothing just 10 years ago, just reminds me how much better Star Trek could be with right leadership in charge.
I am thoroughly sick of the MCU, to be perfectly honest. Most of it just seems like something spat out by a computer. Give me any version of Trek any time. I don't want to watch something that appeals to the lowest common denominator, which is one of the reasons these things are so damn popular. Hard pass.
