Discovery 2x14 'Such Sweet Sorrow Part 2' [Spoilers Within]

GSPfan

I think Discovery will spend the season trying to get home to their time and ultimately abandon the ship there with the possibility that Burnham stays in the future. She is the only one who if she returned would mess with canon. The rest can all exist in the normal time line without anyone caring what they were doing.

IrishZeus

GSPfan wrote: »

I think Discovery will spend the season trying to get home to their time and ultimately abandon the ship there with the possibility that Burnham stays in the future. She is the only one who if she returned would mess with canon. The rest can all exist in the normal time line without anyone caring what they were doing.

Storyline is that Discovery went bang though - assumption that those on board died. Don’t see how they could then return to their current timeline?

AMKC

AMKC wrote: »

Why do you think Discovery will be ahead of the tech of the time there?

No one knows what the 33rd century will be like not even the the writers yet I would say. The Bajorians could be the prominent race now for all we know. Maybe they have something like the Federation was pr they are an Empire. One thing I do see they could use from being so far into the Future is that maybe some of the races from the Delta Quadrant that were on Voyager could appear.

I said that they can be. And Craft didn't think that Disco was quaint or old tech in the short

Star Trek is littered with more advanced civilisations no longer existing but in rumour and ruin. Not too much of a stretch to have a fallen/splintered/backward Federation.
It's been a show rumoured for years and has Rodenberry thoughts throughout, with Andromeda.

No one knows, that's what gives them free rein.

FutureGuy

GSPfan wrote: »

I think Discovery will spend the season trying to get home to their time and ultimately abandon the ship there with the possibility that Burnham stays in the future. She is the only one who if she returned would mess with canon. The rest can all exist in the normal time line without anyone caring what they were doing.

I still don’t get how people think she messes with canon?

liamtech

FutureGuy wrote: »

I still don’t get how people think she messes with canon?

I think the basic idea is that if Spock had a human adopted sister, who colored his early life so much, that it shaped his dealings with humanity, we would have heard something about it during either the TOS era, or the movies- some say that Sybok should also have been mentioned but in fairness he seemed to splinter away from Sarek earlier in their life - where as Michael basically spent her childhood with Spock, Amanda and Sarek

I dont mind as much as most - but i will say, i found it entirely unnecessary to have burnham as spocks adopted sister - she could have simply lived with them, but even that is unnecessary - it adds nothing to the story to have her in the family position she is in - thats what annoys me more than anything

Its kinda like suddenly hearing that kirk joined starfleet because he had an older brother who was a hero of the federation who saved them during some conflict, and with whom Kirk had a serious emotional bond with - ok - why??

Michael is a pointless ret-con - retcons that have a point are fine - this one doesnt, and is messing with a Trek Icon

EDIT: Here is a better example - imagine if we were suddenly introduced to Dr Soong and his HUMAN SON - Derek - who is emotionally autistic but his dad is utterly besotted with - then something horrible happens and Derek is killed - We then see doctor Soong heartbroken, but WAIT - he decides to create an artificial lifeform which will replace Derek - he devotes all of his life to making this AI/Android as similar to Derek as possible, in every way from his physical appearance to his use of perfect English with no contractions - i.e. a Data Origin story

I think many would be annoyed - and thats the case with Michael Burnham

OldMrBrennan83

FutureGuy wrote: »

I still don’t get how people think she messes with canon?

Same here. I think it all comes more from a general dislike of the character.

GSPfan

FutureGuy wrote: »

I still don’t get how people think she messes with canon?

It’s very unbelievable that Spock never ever mentioned her or she was never present at any event in his life, that’s why. It doesn’t break canon, but they just fixed the problem of her existence by sending her to the future and ordering everyone to never mention her again so why would they undo it.

It’s not just people thinking she messes with canon, it’s the writers and producers too.

OldMrBrennan83

GSPfan wrote: »

It’s very unbelievable that Spock never ever mentioned her or she was never present at any event in his life, that’s why. It doesn’t break canon, but they just fixed the problem of her existence by sending her to the future and ordering everyone to never mention her again so why would they undo it.

It’s not just people thinking she messes with canon, it’s the writers and producers too.

You'd swear we had a Spock specific show documenting his whole life right through from childhood to death.

GSPfan

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

You'd swear we had a Spock specific show documenting his whole life right through from childhood to death.

No, just hundreds of hours of multiple tv series and movies doing exactly that. He’s probably the most fleshed out character in the whole Star Trek universe.

GSPfan

IrishZeus wrote: »

Storyline is that Discovery went bang though - assumption that those on board died. Don’t see how they could then return to their current timeline?

If they return to the time they left they could claim they escaped the ships destruction and were adrift in space in escape pods or something like that. It’s hardly a stretch. Once the ship stays in the future and Burnham doesn’t return then no one will care.

Rawr

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Same here. I think it all comes more from a general dislike of the character.

I'd second that sentiment myself.
If I had liked Micheal more (or at all), I might have been more willing to wedge her into my own impression of Trek canon. But since I didn't she feels like an unwelcome element that has been rammed into canon in a way that is difficult to ignore or overlook. (Kind of like seeing Jar-Jar Binks in the remaster of Return of the Jedi)

It's also difficult to like a character who filled out so many squares on my Mary Sue Bingo-card. Hell, I would have won the jackpot if she had been 15 years old, like the infamous Lieutenant Mary Sue of TOS fan-fiction lore (where the name apparently comes from).

I really hope I don't get that close to winning Mary Sue bingo again with Star Trek. Got a few squares before with Weasley Crusher...but never this close before

Kermit.de.frog

May be an unpopular thought but why can't Star Trek just be Star Trek set in it's normal timeline?

Instead we have all this different timelines, jumping in and out of the future money making guff for the studios to get spin offs etc.

Star Trek as a show for me has been ruined a long time, a deshevelled mess set in a universe that makes no sense.


Let's be honest since after TNG Star Trek has been screwed up, at best poor and at worst vandalised.

But so too has every other show I guess.

As a stand alone show Discovery was just about ok.

You wouldn't go out of your way to watch it a second time though.

The final battle was EPIC in how boring it was btw, some feat!

What are you on about? Discovery is in prime universe, JJ trek does not exist.

DS9 was better than TNG

GSPfan

DS9 from season 3 onwards is my favourite all time Trek.

noodler

I thought the it was a very poor series.

It had me slightly more interested than the first one but I really hate the the majority of the characters and actors.

I would love to see no more of tilly, stameets and even burnam.

They cast both captains well in each season in fairness. I also thiguht Saru did a decent job.

Its the most uneven show ever, it feels so much hokier than any trek before it. Sickly sweet and corny at times.

Obviously the story lines were fairly garbage in both.

I'd be interested if they stuck with the enterprise solely or at least alot more but would be delighted to see the back of everything else.

AMKC

noodler wrote: »

I thought the it was a very poor series.

It had me slightly more interested than the first one but I really hate the the majority of the characters and actors.

I would love to see no more of tilly, stameets and even burnam.

They cast both captains well in each season in fairness. I also thiguht Saru did a decent job.

Its the most uneven show ever, it feels so much hokier than any trek before it. Sickly sweet and corny at times.

Obviously the story lines were fairly garbage in both.

I'd be interested if they stuck with the enterprise solely or at least alot more but would be delighted to see the back of everything else.

Strange you say you thought this was a poor series but it took TNG at least two seasons to get going and compared to that this has really only had one season. How about giving a show a change t find its feet first.

You say you hate most of the characters and actors but then say you thought Saru was good and that you would like to see more of Tilly, Burnham and Stamets when really they ewre the only characters we really knew. How could you hate the other ones when we never even knew them.

I disagree with all the story lines been garbage there was some good ones in both seasons so far.

IrishZeus

AMKC wrote: »

Strange you say you thought this was a poor series but it took TNG at least two seasons to get going and compared to that this has really only had one season. How about giving a show a change t find its feet first.

You say you hate most of the characters and actors but then say you thought Saru was good and that you would like to see more of Tilly, Burnham and Stamets when really they ewre the only characters we really knew. How could you hate the other ones when we never even knew them.

I disagree with all the story lines been garbage there was some good ones in both seasons so far.

He said see “no more” of them!

Inviere

A mess of a finale, to a mess of a season (in general). Glad to see the back of it sadly. I'll rewatch it in a few weeks time, but I suspect my opinion won't drastically change. There's too many glaring plot holes for me to get comfortable with the show. Pike & the Enterprise were the only good things about this season. There seems to be unanimous agreement that a Pike show would be a step in the right direction. It's telling really, that the majority want a Star Trek set on a regular starship, with a regular Captain, with regular adventures. Simple, easy to watch, well written tv - everything Discovery is not.

When we heard Discovery was originally set in the Prime Universe, many of us sighed with relief that it would be far more aligned with the Star Trek we knew & loved, as opposed to the flashy, soulless Star Trek we seen in the JJ reboots. For me anyway, Discovery is every bit as flashy, and almost as soulless as the JJ films.

TaurenDruid

Thing is, I can see where they're coming from and what they tried to do - I just think they reached too far and failed.

I'd rather they try something new, though, instead of just giving us "same old episodic Trek" - that worked in the early 90s, but it's no longer good enough. Even in the 90s, X-files and Buffy were giving us season arcs, and other shows since are written as series arcs.

Season 1 was - jarring. Strange, different Klingons compared to what we were used to. The whole "spore drive, we can go anywhere!" was just odd and a very obvious "We've made Superman invulnerable, now how do we challenge him..." problem. The Voq/Ash thing was just badly done. There *was* precedent, from TOS, for Klingons posing as humans, but this was a ham-fisted effort.

Season 2 was better, but still flawed. There are only so many plot-holes you can have before you've more hole than plot.

The characters are patchy - too few of them got any decent sort of character development over the two seasons, bar Burnham, Saru, and Stamets and the various captains, and the whole concentration on Deus Ex Burnham got wearying very quickly.

I'm hoping a clean break far-future S3 will give them the creative freedom to *not* have to concentrate on her so much - but I'm pretty sure they're only going to spend a little while in the future before coming back to the 23rd century.

liamtech

My perspective on Discovery S1 and S2 and the show as a whole

Season 1

Seems to be a minority view but i actually liked it? I felt it was decent, despite a few poor outings - the Klingon war engaged me, and i didnt really care about differences in aesthetics as being canon flaws - The mirror universe arc was my favorite part TBH

The last episode of season 1 was the weakest IMHO - very poor, and almost unbelievable

Season 2

Far weaker despite the inclusion of Pike, the enterprise and the highly popular ultra secret organization formerly known as section 31 - I was never really engaged by the Red Angel plot, although i was hoping it tied into something bigger and more interesting - If season one had 13/15 decent episodes, then i would score season 2 at 5/14 - a significant drop in the standard

Ive never trusted writers, and i never will. I can never forgive them for the death of control

I think they definitely, and intentionally messed us around quite a bit with the control arc, leading fans of the franchise down a path where the villain became more exciting - and engaging - then they bailed out and left many scratching their heads - unless this is the first part of some major multi season plot arc, then the writing was clearly meant to confuse and lead us off track - also FYI, i think a multi season arc involving control is a TERRIBLE idea and they need to genuinely avoid that and start fresh

HOW CAN DISCOVERY IMPROVE

Burnham - im not gonna rant about how they should kill her off, we are sensible enough to realize that is not going to happen - but she needs to be SIGNIFICANTLY de-centralized from the plot - She is a central character, but she needs to have episodes where she is clearly a side show to the rest of the cast

She also needs to be removed from having a personal connection to the main plot of the seasons as a whole - there is widespread agreement that she is a Mary Sue, so i really hope writers are paying serious attention to this, and alter the path of season 3 away from a 'BURNHAM IS THE KEY' plot

Finally we dont need any more of her damn back story - please - we get it - she is amazing - and now so is her family - brilliant thanks for that - i know the history of the most important character in ALL OF TREK (despite not knowing she existed 2 years ago) - move on

Individual Episode stories/Season arc - There are always ways to have a season where individual stories take place, while also contributing to a season arc - Enterprise season 3 attempted this and although many individual episodes were terrible, it did have several decent outings too - DS9 is another FANTASTIC example of an over all plot arc for many season - the dominion are coming - and yet it had TONNES OF SUPERB individual episodes

No more retcons - see this looks very obvious that jumping to the 32nd century is fine - but i still worry we will start running into characters we know, or know of - Burnhams DAD is always in the back of my head - PLEASE dont do this - just start fresh in the 32nd with everything new

Inviere

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I'd rather they try something new, though, instead of just giving us "same old episodic Trek" - that worked in the early 90s, but it's no longer good enough. Even in the 90s, X-files and Buffy were giving us season arcs, and other shows since are written as series arcs.

Unusually, the singular episodes of Discovery, form both season thus far, have been by far the high points. I don't know if that means we're all burned out by arcs and it was refreshing to have one short story to engage with, or that the arcs have been so badly bad, that they're having a flattering result on the more episodic based episodes?

I'm hoping a clean break far-future S3 will give them the creative freedom to *not* have to concentrate on her so much - but I'm pretty sure they're only going to spend a little while in the future before coming back to the 23rd century.

The cynic in me tells me that S3 will show the future as humanity and the Federation being gone, and Discovery will arrive to save the day somehow. Failing that, they won't be where they should have been (ala Season 1), and it's going to involve the "getting home" trope. I'm not confident, I'd love to be, but for me now, Discovery's foundations are way, way too shaky for it to stand with the giants like TNG and DS9.

The plot holes are not just holes, they're gaping fissures. A roll eyes moment watching the S2 finale was when Discovery picked up the 7th signal in the Beta Quadrant, some 50k light years away, on sensors. I mean seriously, that's straight outta the "How to do Trek for Dummies" book written by JJ Abrahms. Why did they proceed into the singularity just after they'd found out Control had been defeated? Utterly bizarre, no explanation offered. A magic door protecting Pike and the ship from an explosion that should have vaporised said door. Starfleet were monitoring the battle on sensors, they detected x particles while watching the battle, but never thought to send an entire fleet to help with the battle? That's only a few head scratchers from the final episode, the entire season is filled with them. There's only so many free passes one can offer...

flazio

As I'm understanding this, they are kept going to the future after "Leland" died so that no other being or race (E.g. The Borg) would be able to attempt what Control attempted here.

Inviere

flazio wrote: »

As I'm understanding this, they are kept going to the future after "Leland" died so that no other being or race (E.g. The Borg) would be able to attempt what Control attempted here.

That's fine, but was it acknowledged/mentioned on screen? It could have been as I spend a lot of time with Discovery trying to make sense of it.

LeinsterDub

Inviere wrote: »

That's fine, but was it acknowledged/mentioned on screen? It could have been as I spend a lot of time with Discovery trying to make sense of it.

Yes Spock more or less says it word for word

Inviere

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Yes Spoke more or less says it word for word

I obviously zoned out for that one. I still maintain the point, it's a disjointed mess on the whole.

LeinsterDub

Inviere wrote: »

The plot holes are not just holes, they're gaping fissures. A roll eyes moment watching the S2 finale was when Discovery picked up the 7th signal in the Beta Quadrant, some 50k light years away, on sensors.

Sensors have always been a plot device in trek . They work in whatever way is needed worked this way in trek in fact without magic subspace sensors everything would takes years to be detect

Inviere wrote: »

Why did they proceed into the singularity just after they'd found out Control had been defeated? Utterly bizarre, no explanation offered.

See above

Inviere wrote: »

A magic door protecting Pike and the ship from an explosion that should have vaporised said door.

The magic door was a bit silly but no more so than any technobabble

Inviere wrote: »

Starfleet were monitoring the battle on sensors, they detected x particles while watching the battle, but never thought to send an entire fleet to help with the battle?

Sensors have always been a plot device in trek . They work in whatever way is needed worked this way in trek in fact without magic subspace sensors everything would takes years to be detect

Goodshape

LeinsterDub wrote: »

[X] have always been a plot device in trek . They work in whatever way is needed

That stuff (and not just w/r/t sensors) can be fine and passable when it's used to wrap up a single episode's adventure before the credits roll and we forget all about it / start again next week, but when the plot devices are used to advance (or wrap up) an entire season's story arc, I think that's a different matter.

The more I think about this final episode the more it sours my entire perception of season two – which was hit and miss to begin with. There was so much that was questionable-at-best, like the red signals, the red angel, historical canon issues with Enterprise, Pike, and Spock being involved, section 31 being far too overt (regardless of canon I thought that was too much), the Kelpian race transforming overnight, time travel shinanigans, and so on. But hey – it's all part of a big story arc so we'll see where it goes!

In the end though, nothing actually made any real sense. The plot devices were just plot devices, the "explanations" felt so made up on the spot that I'd be confident they didn't have any plan about how to finish things when they started filming red bursts and angels and other nonsense.

In the end they just waved their hands, spouted some really bad technobabble, and literally said out-loud on screen that they'll never speak about any of this ever again, as a way to make it all "okay" in the canon timeline. Just awful writing.

And not to be a sci-fi gate-keeper or anything, but there was no science fiction here at all – just future-set fantasy and flashing lights. I think Fringe suffered from that exact same problem.


And like I said, as an unsatisfying ending to an otherwise decent 45 minutes of Trek, you can maybe forgive a lot of plot convenience. As the supposed glue that binds an entire series together... it's damn weak.


Really hope for more stand alone episodes next season. The writing just isn't strong enough otherwise.

Inviere

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Sensors have always been a plot device in trek . They work in whatever way is needed worked this way in trek in fact without magic subspace sensors everything would takes years to be detect

From TNG through to Enterprise, things like sensors may have been a plot device, but they've at least been consistent in terms of their abilities across the franchise. I don't think any iteration of Star Trek barring the JJ stuff, allows for the scanning of signals from half way across the galaxy in fairness. These are the precise reasons the JJ films came under fire, beaming people thousands of light years etc, and Discovery just falls into the exact same nonsense.

It's a minor quibble, but an avoidable one, and shortsighted on the part of e writers. TV shows tend to 'jump the shark' because the good guys get far too powerful after a while (SG1 kinda fell into this trap, though it took many years to happen). Yet here they are, setting a show pre-TOS, with abilities that make Starfleet too powerful, and that make the galaxy far too small.

The magic door was a bit silly but no more so than any technobabble

See above.

Optimus Prime

There is no consistency in this show with past Trek tv shows. The amount of stuff established in previous shows just thrown out the window when it suits is a joke. Discovery is a good SciFi show but a terrible Star Trek show.

I hope to god the Picard show resembles past series and ignores Discovery. Give me a TV show in the format of past Trek shows over this any day of the week. It’s not terrible don’t get me wrong , but it’s not a Good Star Trek, not even close.


Disclaimer - all my opinion of course.

GSPfan

Actually now that I think of it why didn’t they just set Discovery in the timeline after Voyager?

They literally could have maintained all the tech advances, they would have had to undo Burnhams Spock connection but that wouldn’t have mattered. They could have went to war with another species if needed instead of the Klingons, they could have explained section 31 as being brought out of the shadows, they could have had control as a bastardised S31 experiment version of borg tech designed to help the federation.

That would have avoided most of the problems with Discovery and we would of missed out on Pike and the new design of the Enterprise but those things were the best part of Discovery so the show kinda showed us the prequel show we should have got and ruined the prequel show we actually got.

I think they always planned a one season show based on the adventures of Michael Burnham, and they spent two seasons trying to undo that to turn it into a normal Trek show, but we are still getting the adventures of Michael Burnham.

TheValeyard

GSPfan wrote: »

Actually now that I think of it why didn’t they just set Discovery in the timeline after Voyager?

They literally could have maintained all the tech advances, they would have had to undo Burnhams Spock connection but that wouldn’t have mattered. They could have went to war with another species if needed instead of the Klingons, they could have explained section 31 as being brought out of the shadows, they could have had control as a bastardised S31 experiment version of borg tech designed to help the federation.

That could have been an excellent idea! Section31 became mainstream because of the need for it during the Dominion War. Desperate times, desperate measures.

A new warrior frontier species would also have worked. As would Spore drive tech. Would have made perfect sense.

GSPfan

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

That could have been an excellent idea! Section31 became mainstream because of the need for it during the Dominion War. Desperate times, desperate measures.

A new warrior frontier species would also have worked. As would Spore drive tech. Would have made perfect sense.

Picture this as an alternate Season 1 storyline....

Set in the year 2400 approximately. After Voyager is home and the Romulan home world has been consumed by the wormhole that spawned the Kelvin timeline.

The Shenzou is sent to investigate a Klingon ship in Federation space who has seemingly destroyed a few Federation ships. While on the mission Burnham twigs something is wrong with the whole thing and tries to take control of the Shenzou against a seemingly irrational Georgiou who is trying to destroy the Klingons. Burnham is arrested for mutiny and Georgiou destroys the Klingons which incites a war.

Skip forward to Burnham going to Discovery and pretty much everything that happens in the show happens again but Burnham slowly starts to realise certain people are seemingly trying to escalate the war with the Klingons.

Big reveal later in the season ...... The Terren Empire have infiltrated the Federation and replaced key figures in the hope to start a war in an overall plot to expand the Terren Empire into our universe.

Eventually Burnham redeems herself by exposing this and ending the war.

TheValeyard

GSPfan wrote: »

Picture this as an alternate Season 1 storyline....

Set in the year 2400 approximately. After Voyager is home and the Romulan home world has been consumed by the wormhole that spawned the Kelvin timeline.

The Shenzou is sent to investigate a Klingon ship in Federation space who has seemingly destroyed a few Federation ships. While on the mission Burnham twigs something is wrong with the whole thing and tries to take control of the Shenzou against a seemingly irrational Georgiou who is trying to destroy the Klingons. Burnham is arrested for mutiny and Georgiou destroys the Klingons which incites a war.

Skip forward to Burnham going to Discovery and pretty much everything that happens in the show happens again but Burnham slowly starts to realise certain people are seemingly trying to escalate the war with the Klingons.

Big reveal later in the season ...... The Terren Empire have infiltrated the Federation and replaced key figures in the hope to start a war in an overall plot to expand the Terren Empire into our universe.

Eventually Burnham redeems herself by exposing this and ending the war.

Good idea and could work, but by the 24th century the Klingon-Cardassion alliance has conquey most of the Terran Empire, excluding the Sol system.

GSPfan

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Good idea and could work, but by the 24th century the Klingon-Cardassion alliance has conquey most of the Terran Empire, excluding the Sol system.

Well then even better motivation as the Terren Empire tried to rebuild itself in our universe after being defeated and hunted down in their own.

Evade

Setting it post Voyager already would have had a pretty good lead in for something like the spore drive with the quantum slip stream and transwarp conduit tech Voyager brought back.


I wonder if we'll see any time ships in the 32nd century. Seem like they'd probably bring Discovery home if they were around.


If the next season is 14 episodes again splitting it 9 arc, 5 standalone(ish) might be nice. Opening, mid season, and ending arc 2 parters and alternate for the rest of the episodes.

Twenty Grand

Big fan of season 2, but totally disappointed by the finale.

The battle scene was completely meh. If they just had a "Shield Counter" that ticked from 100% to 0% and flashed a strobe light it would have had the same effect. Just seemed like a complete war of attrition with both sides static and firing at each other endlessly.
I know the shuttles were designed to add a bit of momentum, but they were forgettable, and Saru's sister (who up until last month was docile and servile) is now suddenly a fighter pilot??
The dialog was just people shouting "Shields down to X%!" over and over. Good tihng ol' Tilly was able to turn the magic shield boosting screw.
I did LOL when they jumped from a scene showing crew members being hurled around the Bridge, to Burnham and Spock having a quiet chat in the shuttle bay. The inertial dampers must be better down there.

Also, the torpedo scene was laughable.

"Someone has to close it from the inside"
"Uh, I dunno Admiral, I mean, I could just tie a piece of string to that handle and pull it from outside the door."

If she actually had to turn a wheel or do something fancy to close the door I would have understood, but, I mean, it was just a handle.

Finally if Control is able to heal, absorb phaser blasts, smash windows and break steel, then how does Giorgio survive a ten minute fist fight?
Why can't he just smash her in a second?

jasonb

Another thing about the magic blast door. I have to double check the episode again, but I'm pretty certain that the location of the torpedo in the deck of the Enterprise was a lot further forward than the edge of the crater damage left after it had exploded. Which you would expect, as the torpedo wouldn't just explode in one direction. But as Pike was behind the blast door right beside it, and he survived, then that doesn't match up, the section of the ship he'd been standing in was gone when you saw the Enterprise later.

And how did the Torpedo not just bounce off the shields? And why didn't they just transport the torpedo away?

Another question about shields. On the slow slide from 100% to nearly 0 and then back up to 40% after Tilly helped, there were numerous explosions inside the ship, and hull breaches etc. Isn't the whole point of shields to stop that stuff happening, shouldn't they absorb all that and, I don't know, *shield* the ship? I would have thought that we'd see hull breaches and explosions only after the shields have failed?

Evade

Shields don't fail uniformly, some sections can fail while others can be up.

Twenty Grand

jasonb wrote: »

Another question about shields. On the slow slide from 100% to nearly 0 and then back up to 40% after Tilly helped, there were numerous explosions inside the ship, and hull breaches etc. Isn't the whole point of shields to stop that stuff happening, shouldn't they absorb all that and, I don't know, *shield* the ship? I would have thought that we'd see hull breaches and explosions only after the shields have failed?

Evade wrote: »

Shields don't fail uniformly, some sections can fail while others can be up.

But there was a big hulabaloo when Leland transported inside in the 3 seconds they lowered the aft shields to let out the shuttle.

If they were failing intermittently, then he could have come over whenever.
Also, how did they transport Spock when the shields were still up?

Blazer

Well it certainly lived upto my expectation. As in being complete and utter rubbish.
Seriously what is the male/female ratio in Star..must be 90 to 10 in favour of female and all are them my god are overpowered.
From an ensign who have no regard for authority and is now a better engineer than the guy who actually designed the spore drive, to No1 who was a complete waste of a character.
The less said about Burham the better.
The Queen..ffs..
Giorgio was a great character but her scene fighting Control was absolutely farcical.
As for the space battle? Someone should explain to that space is 3 dimensional.
It basically reminded me of a transformer battle where it basically seems like a robot masturbation scene except it involved ships this time.
Without a doubt the worst space battle I've ever seen in any film/tv show ever!!!!! That takes skill in this day and age.

Stark

Blazer wrote: »

Well it certainly lived upto my expectation. As in being complete and utter rubbish.
Seriously what is the male/female ratio in Star..must be 90 to 10 in favour of female.

:rolleyes:

opus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The magic door was a bit silly but no more so than any technobabble

Just watched it & have to say I admired Pike's faith in the said magic door Won't even bother asking why they didn't just transport the admiral to the same side of the door as well.

flazio wrote: »

As I'm understanding this, they are kept going to the future after "Leland" died so that no other being or race (E.g. The Borg) would be able to attempt what Control attempted here.

Wondered about that myself, guess that explanation is reasonable.

The finale was ok I guess, looked like they saved some cash for an fx orgy in space. Strange that despite the mad rush to do stuff, they seemed to be plenty time to have a chat for several of the characters.

noodler

Stark wrote: »

:rolleyes:

I hope i won't be accused of being a misogynist for pointing out i think Burnham, Tilly and gergeou are extremely poor charactes/actors (at least in this instance in the case of Georgeo)

corkie

[wired] Where next for Star Trek: Discovery in season three? The clues are in the mystery shorts
Star Trek: Discovery's season two finale has left a lot of unanswered questions. But answers are hiding in plain sight


Some good theories based on ‘Calypso’, could we be looking at a show similar to 'Andromeda' as this site possibly suggests?

Rawr

noodler wrote: »

I hope i won't be accused of being a misogynist for pointing out i think Burnham, Tilly and gergeou are extremely poor charactes/actors (at least in this instance in the case of Georgeo)

To be honest it's a fair critique.

Tilly just broke my heart in S2, but I think that the actress herself was pretty good. She managed to pull off an endearing newcomer to Starfleet in S1. Alas the writers must have noticed that people liked her, and in a bafflingly stupid move they re-wrote her as a zany cartoon-character complete with prat-falls. My guess is that they somehow felt that Tilly's S1 fans would have wanted more of that...and I can't for the life me figure out why they would think that. For Tilly, I blame the writers..the acting was good when it was allowed to be.

Georgeo is an odd one. Micheal Yeoh is as "Captain Georgeo" was actually pretty good, and her dynamic with Micheal in the Pilot had the makings of a classic Star Trek Captian/First Officer pairing. Alas...the writing ruined that. As soon as she became "Evil Queen Geogeo The Merciless" then things went to hell. She chewed up the scenery so much that there were teethmarks everywhere. Not sure it she's played a villianess before..or if it is because the director hadn't the guts to properly direct someone with her high degree of fame. She can act, but again I might blame writing here with possibly poor direction choices for her acting.

As for Micheal....well I could go on and on....but my gut tells me that if they had maybe cast someone better at acting, her character might be more likeable. I've been meaning to seek out something else that Martin-Green has been in to see if her acting improves in other shows. This could again be down to bad directing/writing. However, Soniqua in Discovery does not appear to have much of an expressive range. For about 90-95% of her time in the show she wears an expression of constant shock. Other emotions appear as a slight varient of this shock. Sadness for example is mostly her looking down in shock and then sort of screaming...(in a wierd way). We got the odd smile here or there but the rest of the time she is very wooden. I get that they may have been casting her with the whole Vulcan childhood idea in mind, but feel that this was a poor casting choice, especially since Michael was intented to be the focus of the show. If we had gotten a better actress...you never know, Micheal may have actually become everyone's favourite Trek character.

pixelburp

noodler wrote: »

I hope i won't be accused of being a misogynist for pointing out i think Burnham, Tilly and gergeou are extremely poor charactes/actors (at least in this instance in the case of Georgeo)

Point away, that wasn't what the rolling of eyes was over IMO; rather it was the limp rant that there were 'too many wimmin', or at least that's how it read.

I don't agree with the point anyway: I've said it before but I think the problem with Tilly, such as it is, is that not all the writers know how to build her as a character. When the writing / writers gets her right she works, her enthusiasm and spark just the right balance of twee. I suspect some of the scriptwriters though just don't know how to find the measure - maybe just working off some bullet point list of what 'Tllly' is supposed to be - and you end up with more grating moments of slightly idiotic behaviour. Eccentric is exceedingly difficult to write, so i'm not convinced enough of the backroom staff actually know how to do it.

As to Burnham, I think Sonqua Martin-Green is a fine actor, and when called on has sold scenes pretty effectively but again, the writing lets her down given she has to be responsible for all plots and drama.

Goodshape

The problem is badly written characters.

And this:

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

Point away, that wasn't what the rolling of eyes was over IMO; rather it was the limp rant that there were 'too many wimmin', or at least that's how it read.

I don't agree with the point anyway: I've said it before but I think the problem with Tilly, such as it is, is that not all the writers know how to build her as a character. When the writing / writers gets her right she works, her enthusiasm and spark just the right balance of twee. I suspect some of the scriptwriters though just don't know how to find the measure - maybe just working off some bullet point list of what 'Tllly' is supposed to be - and you end up with more grating moments of slightly idiotic behaviour. Eccentric is exceedingly difficult to write, so i'm not convinced enough of the backroom staff actually know how to do it.

As to Burnham, I think Sonqua Martin-Green is a fine actor, and when called on has sold scenes pretty effectively but again, the writing lets her down given she has to be responsible for all plots and drama.

Hard to disagree with that. I loved Tilly in S1, and couldn't bare her in S2. Same with Michael, I never got the hate for her, but in S2 her development just went arseways. Captain Georgiou I liked, her Terran counterpart though? God no.

Goodshape wrote: »

And this:

I don't agree with that at all, certainly not when it comes to the discussions we have here. Some of the male characters are absolute tripe too, and the handling of their developments have been equally ruined by terrible, disjointed incoherent writing.

Throwing the misogyny card at anyone criticising the female characters is shutting down legitimate debate. For me, they're all good/great actresses, but the characters are the problem.

noodler

Yeah for balance I'll say that I think stameets and the doctor are awful characters.

Though I actually thought the doctor's new personality was interesting.

Leiland was just ok.

I do think the two captains and saru were high points though

Inviere

noodler wrote: »

Yeah for balance I'll say that I think stameets and the doctor are awful characters.

Though I actually thought the doctor's new personality was interesting.

Leiland was just ok.

I do think the two captains and saru were high points though

Stamets and the Doctor had potential in S1, but my god the writing for them went to absolute dog poo in S2.

Leiland was a generic bad guy, no substance whatsoever.

Outside of Lorca and Pike, I think Saru has been the best written in terms of development yeah. Spock was fairly well handled too.