Discovery 1x05 – "Choose Your Pain" [** SPOILERS **]

AMKC

PhiloCypher wrote: »

The spore drive thing has never bothered me either from a canon perspective or the way they've explained it , I know it's got something to do with quantum entanglement and that's good enough for me. I don't need Geordie La Forge spouting technobabble nonsense to get me on board every new bit of technology.

You do realise they have used the Discovery's warp drive at least once before this episode (possibly more , I'd have to rewatch them), they warped away after the Spore drive had dropped them too close to a star in the last episode.

On the episode itself , I really liked it , unlike previous episodes all the, presumably, core group got some good scenes . I like that they jumped ahead a few weeks to reveal the Discovery had been busy putting Klingons on the defensive with their hit n run tactics and that this had pushed the Tardigrade to its limit . I had thought that they would drag out the concerns for the Tardigrades welfare till the mid season break but I'm glad it came to a head in this episode, if only so people stop moaning about how uncaring and unstarfleet the crew are. With the Tardigrade freed will Stamets be used as the navigator or is that a line that even Lorca won't cross (he's been ordered to stand down at any rate so maybe it won't be an issue ). On Lorca, it was quite the revelation to me that the Discovery is his second command since the Battle of the Binaries and that he sacrificed his crew rather then allow to them to be tortured , eaten or used for propaganda, but I guess it's what has him so driven to bring the battle to the enemy . On a side note was great to hear the klingon captain speaking english , hopefully we'll be seeing more of her and Klingons speaking English in general.

Wasn't overly bothered by the cursing so long as they don't overdo it and have them dropping f-bombs left and right .

You do realise they have used the Discovery's warp drive at least once before this episode (possibly more , I'd have to rewatch them), they warped away after the Spore drive had dropped them too close to a star in the last episode.

Yes I do know that and have watched all them episodes so have seen that.

I also liked this episode. I am not a fan of Saru because of how he thinks Micheal is dangerous. How is she dangerous? she tried to stop the war from happening but her captain who was supposed to have served with her for 7 years was ignorant and would not listen to her.
I was not a fan of LT Stamets either but that has changed after what he did in this episode he showed he was not afraid to put his life on the line to save his crew very Spock like in his actions.
Not a fan of the coursing in it we are supposed to be over things like that by that time.
I like Lorca's back storey no wonder he is so angry and determined and nice to have a new character in the show.
I was also a little confused at the end and looked at it a few times but think it either has something to do with the mirror universe or the future.

Inviere

Optimus Prime wrote: »

It’s so stupid and opposing to pretty much everything we’ve learned from Star Trek in 60 years.

I thought the same originally, but then....

ancuncha

AMKC wrote: »

I also liked this episode. I am not a fan of Saru because of how he thinks Micheal is dangerous. How is she dangerous? she tried to stop the war from happening but her captain who was supposed to have served with her for 7 years was ignorant and would not listen to her.
I was not a fan of LT Stamets either but that has changed after what he did in this episode he showed he was not afraid to put his life on the line to save his crew very Spock like in his actions.
Not a fan of the coursing in it we are supposed to be over things like that by that time.
I like Lorca's back storey no wonder he is so angry and determined and nice to have a new character in the show.
I was also a little confused at the end and looked at it a few times but think it either has something to do with the mirror universe or the future.

I don't like Saru that much, but he is right that Michael is dangerous.
She is full of the starfleet arrogance the Klingons hate. (i don't like the character and thats cool, just you tend to feel more for the main character in a series)
She brought up her concerns with her old captain and when she didn't get the answer she wanted, she knocks her out and tries to do what she thought anyways.
The relationship was very close between them, yet she knocks her out, who does that to someone their supposed to respect?

What would happen if she fired first?
IMO
If Klingon ship destroyed/disabled, starfleet attacked a relgious type figure = War

If starfleet ship destroyed/disabled, Klingons would see starfleet as weak = War

(mabey i overthink this lol)

somuj

O'Brien said 'bollox' in DS9 and nobody had a problem with it . . .

Evade

Inviere wrote: »

I thought the same originally, but then....

But they're the villains.

Inviere

Evade wrote: »

But they're the villains.

It's a Starfleet crew who believe the ends justify the means, some had an issue with it, some didn't, exactly the same here.

Evade

Inviere wrote: »

It's a Starfleet crew who believe the ends justify the means, some had an issue with it, some didn't, exactly the same here.

Yes, and that's why they're the bad guys. Having the main cast believing the ends justify the means is pretty antithetical to Star Treks usual message.

Inviere

Evade wrote: »

Yes, and that's why they're the bad guys. Having the main cast believing the ends justify the means is pretty antithetical to Star Treks usual message.

I think TV has matured way past having basic good guys & bad guys at this stage. Even Voyager was touching on that years ago.

Inviere

^^ Heck even TNG touched upon this 25 years ago with I Borg.

Evade

Inviere wrote: »

I think TV has matured way past having basic good guys & bad guys at this stage. Even Voyager was touching on that years ago.

Shades of grey and moral questions are fine but "how much torture is acceptable?" is going a little to dark for Star Trek.

The_Valeyard

Evade wrote: »

Shades of grey and moral questions are fine but "how much torture is acceptable?" is going a little to dark for Star Trek.

Its been done before

DS9: The Pale Moonlight. Trick the Romulans into war, leading to the deaths of millions

PhiloCypher

Evade wrote: »

Shades of grey and moral questions are fine but "how much torture is acceptable?" is going a little to dark for Star Trek.

Is that in itself not a moral question worth asking ? Tbh I think people's main issue is it may turn out to be a season long question and not neatly resolved in one episode.

Evade

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Its been done before

DS9: The Pale Moonlighy. Trick the Romulans into war, leading to the deaths of millions

To prevent the deaths of hundreds of billions, including Romulans, and that nearly broke Sisko. I said before that STD is trying to jump into the war parts of DS9 without previously having shown the characters being regular Starfleet officers and I think that's why it doesn't work as well.

Evade

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Is that in itself not a moral question worth asking ? Tbh I think people's main issue is it may turn out to be a season long question and not neatly resolved in one episode.

I'm pretty sure none is a good answer. We could ask how much slavery, which it could be argued the tardigrade was, is acceptable too. You might find the answer is the same as the torture one.

Greyjoy

A decent episode but felt too much like a rehash of the previous episode - the race against time to get the spore drive working only this time it was to rescue the captain and not the mining colony.

Goodshape

It's been my impression that the crew are following orders, with stated reservations in most cases, and Lorca is the one with the questionable morals and ethics.

It's not a situation people (i.e. the crew of Discovery) are happy with. Given any hint of an option they do refuse orders where it conflicts with their ethics, e.g. the doctor refusing to cause further harm to the tardigrade; as a doctor that is his privilege (and Lorca does not even attempt to argue), with Stamets it's a case of follow orders or be dismissed.


Lorca is dangerous. I don't think that's sustainable (I think we'll see more push-back from the crew) and I don't see it as a reflection of the entire federation. The rarity of mutiny or even insubordination on a Starfleet ship has been made very clear to us. That doesn't mean Lorca's actions are normal or accepted.

Inviere

Evade wrote: »

I'm pretty sure none is a good answer. We could ask how much slavery, which it could be argued the tardigrade was, is acceptable too. You might find the answer is the same as the torture one.

What about the Mk 1 EMH's being used to mine ore? None of this is new to Star Trek, and I'd consider myself fairly well appraised of canon having been watching Star Trek for 20 years. You make out like it's a mirror universe ship & crew, with them all complicit torturing a sentient being. They weren't all complicit. Some went to extreme lengths to change the order of things, which is, by definition, Star Trek.

pixelburp

Evade wrote: »

Yes, and that's why they're the bad guys. Having the main cast believing the ends justify the means is pretty antithetical to Star Treks usual message.

But is it the main cast? The only callousness came from Saru really, and I think that was over compensation in his part while trying to play captain for a spell. Everyone else in the cast were on Burnham's side once the animals sentience was confirmed. Lorca is obviously an other matter, but that seems to be the point - never once has he been made appear the hero, or sympathetic antihero even.

1hnr79jr65

Spear wrote: »

Anyone else reckon Ash Tyler is a setup and a double agent?

Potential future episode spoiler:

Edit: seems my cynicism is confirmed by some casting info.

The Klingon captain bleed green when Lorca shot bulkhead beside her, i reckon she is part romulan based on what she said about spies.

Also in previous episode Voq was tolk he would have to give up everything to get into position of power. What if Tyler is Voq who is genetically reconstructed to appear human and given Tylers "life" to inflitrate Discovery to learn about the spore drive and potentially steal it ? Ala Arne Darvin from original series.

MOH

Also Starring LeVar Burton wrote: »

This was my favourite episode so far - it did a good job developing the core characters a bit more and finally introduced the final series regular in Ash Tyler

"Hello? This is Clem Fandango. Can you hear me, Lorca?"


Thought it was solid enough, although it did occur to me that launching the tardigrade into space was based on an assumption that might have backfired massively, and led to an awkward conversation:

"Your job is to find a way to end the tardigrade's suffering."
- "No problem, Saru. I fired it out an airlock. It's not suffering any more."
*Saru's threat ganglia go into overdrive*

Inviere

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

Also in previous episode Voq was tolk he would have to give up everything to get into position of power. What if Tyler is Voq who is genetically reconstructed to appear human and given Tylers "life" to inflitrate Discovery to learn about the spore drive and potentially steal it ? Ala Arne Darvin from original series.

Very interesting theory! Hmm...

Johnny Storm

When the two lads were brushing their teeth, were they wearing Star Fleet-issue jammies? if so did the jammies have mini comm badges on them? I cant imagine that being very comforable :eek:

PhiloCypher

Evade wrote: »

To prevent the deaths of hundreds of billions, including Romulans, and that nearly broke Sisko. I said before that STD is trying to jump into the war parts of DS9 without previously having shown the characters being regular Starfleet officers and I think that's why it doesn't work as well.

While I agree it would have been nice to have been given a baseline for these characters before the war started * , if they were dead set on setting up the conflict /cold war with the klingons I'm glad they are getting it out of the way early so that we get to see the fallout, something we never got to see after DS9's Dominion war other then in the books. Setting up the conflict and stalemate we see in TOS early in the show's run will also allow the Discovery to actually become a ship of discovery again (with occasional TOS style run ins with the Klingons of course) which would surely make everyone happy.

* perhaps a good compromise would be a lower decks style episode showing what the crew was like before the Battle of the Binaries , before Lorca took command.

PhiloCypher

Evade wrote: »

I'm pretty sure none is a good answer. We could ask how much slavery, which it could be argued the tardigrade was, is acceptable too. You might find the answer is the same as the torture one.

You could say the answer to any of the moral questions Star Trek has posed over its 50 year history were obvious to any rational person, should they not have posed them because the answer was obvious to some or even most ?

Evade

Inviere wrote: »

What about the Mk 1 EMH's being used to mine ore?

That's a good point and calls back to the Measure of a Man as to what constitutes a sentient life form which some or all of the EMHs might be. Maybe that could have been explored if this was post Nemesis.

Inviere wrote: »

You make out like it's a mirror universe ship & crew

Personal speculation but just in case

or maybe just a captain.

Inviere wrote: »

with them all complicit torturing a sentient being. They weren't all complicit. Some went to extreme lengths to change the order of things, which is, by definition, Star Trek.

I was only following orders is a bad excuse and didn't help the crew of the Equinox.

Evade

PhiloCypher wrote: »

You could say the answer to any of the moral questions Star Trek has posed over its 50 year history were obvious to any rational person, should they not have posed them because the answer was obvious to some or even most ?

Torture and slavery are easy ones but Siskos trolley problem of bringing the Romulans into the Dominion War, not so easy and that's what I want more of.

brainfreeze

Evade wrote: »

Yes, and that's why they're the bad guys. Having the main cast believing the ends justify the means is pretty antithetical to Star Treks usual message.

Someone else mentioned the pale moonlight, but that is still "the ends justify the means" even if it nearly broke Sisko. He was sending millions of romulans to their deaths based on a lie, to save potentially billions.

Doctor Bashir was going to sabotage the federation war effort so the Dominion would win, because in his mind saving lives under dominion rule was better than prolonging an unwinnable war. That's the end justifies the means. On the plus side, the same writer would go onto explore this theme more in depth with BSG a few years later, with the creation of Gaius Baltar.

Most controversially, the Federation won the war by withholding a cure to a biological weapon created and already deployed by their own rouge intelligence wing (Section 31). Now you could say Section 31 are the bad guys and do not represent star fleet, however star fleet didn't give the founders the cure once they had it. The Star Fleet Council actively decided not to, choosing genocide instead to win the war. That's the end justifies the means. It was Odo, a changling, that brought peace to the alpha quadrant, not Star Fleet.

These are all themes that have been explored before in Trek, so although Discovery is different from say the philosophy of the TOS, it's certainly not alien to the Star Trek we saw in the 90s. I think it's still an important (and realistic) theme to explore, that when under pressure, Star Fleet becomes just as bad as the rest of them. That's apart of Trek lore now, so it would be weird for Discovery to erase it.

“Let me tell you something about humans, nephew. They’re a wonderful, friendly people—as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon"

All the above aside, I believe Discovery maybe a section 31 ship.

server down

Evade wrote: »

Shades of grey and moral questions are fine but "how much torture is acceptable?" is going a little to dark for Star Trek.

They pretty much stopped when they realised the issue. Well, after one more jump. Then the human took over.

The end justifying the means is often a staple of Star Trek. The premise of what is possibly the best TOS episode, The City on the Edge of Forever, is in fact based on that utilitarian dilemma. I wont go into the specific dilemma but it is a big one.

In Wrath of Khan Spock says:

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

to which Kirk replies:

"Or the One"

Later in the movies they keep coming back to utilitarian philosophy to neither confirm nor deny its logic. Its clearly a grey area.

Goodshape

server down wrote: »

In Wrath of Khan Spock says:

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

to which Kirk replies:

"Or the One"

And in Search for Spock, Kirk takes it upon himself to hijack a starship, travel to a forbidden planet, risk his life, his ship, and his bridge crew, to rescue just one person.

"Because the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many."


It's almost as though people aren't 100% perfect 100% of the time.

James Brown

I'm beginning to really like it. I suppose if you go in expecting the usual Mormons in Space it's different, so possibly disappointing.
I'm glad they ditched the creature.
The Klingon war raged for years so I can't see any other main story for some time.