So, so many aspects of the show seem like they can be explained this way...
What would you like to see change for season 2?
- Thread starter eschaton
- Start date
Yeah. I know she's a redhead with plastic shit glued on her face.
Like what? Seriously, she is a nobody.
Give the Klingons some hair.
Characterizations and character actions that make sense. Don’t put the Mirror Universe Emperor in the captain’s chair; don’t be stupid enough to let her go, etc.
Bring back Prime Lorca.
Make Burnham a better character.
Characterizations and character actions that make sense. Don’t put the Mirror Universe Emperor in the captain’s chair; don’t be stupid enough to let her go, etc.
Bring back Prime Lorca.
Make Burnham a better character.
Seriously dude? What do we know about Detmer from her (largely silent) presence onscreen, other than she was pissed at Burnham at the beginning of the show? We know nothing about her family, her interests, her past beyond the first episode, etc. Her MU counterpart gets far, far more lines in a single episode than PU Kayla gets over the remainder of the series.
As for Enterprise, even Maywether, who people (rightly) deride for being treated like furniture, got a whole episode dedicated to his family, and a love interest in the penultimate episode. They might not have done much with it that was interesting, but they did try to develop him. And he was perhaps the worst developed Berman-era Trek character.
Last edited:
As opposed to 7 of 9, who was a blonde with plastic shit glued to her face...and hands...and other areas.
On-screen episode titles. Star Trek has them, in all previous incarnations. It still should.
1. Other characters should get more attention. Saru, Tilly and Stamets are more interesting that Burnham. Shame the show was almost entirely about her. She's not bad, but not nearly enough interesting to center the sow around her.
2. More away missions . They finally have the budget to show cool alien planets (like sleazy Qo'noS city). They could spend budget on this instead of endless space battles.
3. More "start trek stuff", more since stuff. Episodes where they run into a problem and try to figure out what's going on.
2. More away missions . They finally have the budget to show cool alien planets (like sleazy Qo'noS city). They could spend budget on this instead of endless space battles.
3. More "start trek stuff", more since stuff. Episodes where they run into a problem and try to figure out what's going on.
I'm glad someone questioned the assertion that Detmer was a well known character - or at least better known that ensign Kim from VOY. It really seemed that Ceridwen was relying on head cannon (not to pile on as Ceridwen already admitted as much). The only things I know about her is that she has an eye implant, is a lieutenant, and occasionally pushes the spore drive button - other than that, I got nothing.
What about after the first season? Not exactly a fair comparison.
I didn't make the assertion.
It was an observation.
Generally, what I am seeing lamented about DISCO and comparing it to other Trek's is the fact that we know how all the other shows ended, how the characters grow and the like. But, DISCO has to have every character fully developed from Episode 1 going forward or it fails.
At least, that's how it seems to me.
Slow down. I think the pacing in DSC was way too fast. Lengthen the episodes if necessary to give us time to breathe.
Does she? I'll have to look more carefully next rewatch. I thought it was Ariam doing the spore drive thing all the time.
Well, I don't think anyone is making that case. Is it possible that you're being a little too sensitive to show criticism? Take it from an ENT fan, being the defender of a series is an arduous task. Others may disparage DSC and it's hard to hear, especially if you're a devoted fan. If there's one lesson I learned from ENT's four season run, it's that you just have to sit back and enjoy the ride as long as you can.
Correct me if I'm wrong. For some reason that's what my minds eye sees
It is true that it's not fair to consider an entire seven-season (or four season, in the case of Enterprise) run against one modern-day short season. That said in general past Trek (DS9 excepted) was not known for stunning levels of character development. Thus even if you can say that Discovery is doing no worse than older Trek, that's a very low bar.
I mean, let's look at more "modern" non-Trek genre television:
- I'm watching nuBSG for the first time right now, which is widely considered to be the show which started the modern grimdark Sci-fi thing. By the end of the miniseries and the 13 episodes of the first season, all of the main characters were very well fleshed out in terms of where they were starting out from.
- Game of Thrones, as I noted, had a main cast of 19 in the first season, and gave all of them some development.
- Altered Carbon did a good job as a "protagonist-focused" show fleshing out the main character and several of the supporting characters over only 10 episodes.
- Even The Expanse - which is much more of a plot-focused show, and less character-driven - generally did a better job with its character arcs than Discovery, and certainly portrayed most of the main cast as living, breathing individuals caught in a complicated solar system.
Last edited:
I like Discovery and all, but Agents of SHIELD is killer in their character development. The time and care they spent crafting their characters have had huge payoffs, while also servicing the overall plot that also has twists and surprises. BUT, the first season of AoS is definitely not great, and they spent twice as many episodes than Discovery stumbling through their story....BUT the slow burning whatever first season's character development paid off in the second season. I don't really feel like we're going to get payoff from the nothings that were set up in DSC season 1, but I am sure hoping that maybe they can get it right from the start of season 2.
We knew a ton of stuff about Seven, but what do we know about Detmer.. is that her name??
Similar threads
