Ooooh, how I'd love to punch it. Dead or not, just...ram my fist into it.
I have the same urge. He looks like one of those "3 letter" guys in high school, acts like one too. The actor really pulled off "smug twat".
Whenever someone eats your lunch at work, Connolly is there.
Whenever someone cuts you off for the parking space you waited for at the mall, Connolly is there.
Whenever someone takes up two seats on the bus or train, Connolly is there.
Whenever someone farts in an elevator, Connolly is there.
That is how we remember him.
What do you call Connolly after he exploded?
Someone manspreading! Get it! His now spread a little all over the place. A finger to left. I femur to the right! and etc
I had thought the Connolly business was one of the show's lowpoints but I have come to see it as illuminating.
Speaking of lowpoints I understand the need for the Kelvan movie like action piece (lighten up after season one--attract Kelvan movie fans) but it bored me. I am much more interested in all aspects Michael's relationship with Sarek, Spock and Amanda as well as exploring what seemed like racism directed at Sarek because of his marriage to a human and adoption of one. The scenes with child Michael and Spock were my favorite part of 'Brother' along with Pike's introduction on the bridge.
I have a sense of humor (love Stamets sarcastic wit and Tilly) and I get that humor is a big part of people's responses here. I also get that people feel that way too much has been read into Connolly and some people's comments in this thread are partly a response to that.
Given all that there is no denying that Connolly seems to represent something to some of you that you hate. It was satisfying revenge to see a stand in for something you hate in people get killed. To me that's not a good look but it is human and as old as time. I'm sorry but that's what it sounds like here and in other posts where Connolly has been discussed.
But I am fascinated by that and how it relates to the themes of Discovery. The writers and producers have said that one of their concerns was if you extend a hand to people will they take it? (L'Rell takes it first with Cornwall and later with Michael and Tyler). I can't remember who on the Discovery creative team noted this but it was that some people feel that revenge is what they are going to get if they embrace that hand.
That's one of the reasons people fear change and loss of power (changing demographics, women's rights, LGBT rights). They worry revenge is what they are going to get and not the practice of progressive ideals of equality and tolerence and sometimes I wonder if there isn't some truth to that point of view. The writers and producers of Discovery believe that progressive politics are the way forward for Western Europe and the USA but they seem to be sophisticated enough to understand some of what drives reactionary forces and why it is important to understand that if you want to sucessfully counteract it.
In my opinion the glory of Discovery is that the producers and writers of Discovery have not only attempted to examine age old problems of the human condition that are as relevant as ever to today's society (tribalism, faith vs reason) but have also been willing to question the "good guys" (how well they have done any of this it is a fair question for debate but to me they have done it). If the Klingons are standing in for reactionary right wing forces than they are portrayed with some sympathy as partly misguided. If the Federation stands in for progressive politics and liberal democracy than they are portrayed as having the better perspective on how to live but not always as good as they think they are (thank you Michael she of her own mistakes for speaking out against the attempted genocide).
I liked that about season one and hope it continues in season two as they tackle the contentious issue of faith vs reason.
