One of the defining characteristics of the Paul Stamets character has been that he’s a spectacular snot, an arrogant jerk with poor people skills, whom people mostly only put up with because he’s so brilliant. Over the course of his experiences with the spore drive, the tragic death and difficult resurrection of his partner, and his sort-of adoption of Adira, he’s mellowed considerably over the three-plus seasons of the show.
So this week, we get a lovely reminder of what an asshole he used to be by bringing in a new one: Shawn Doyle as Ruon Tarka, a scientists from Risa who’s brought to Discovery to work with Stamets, Saru, and Jett Reno.
Yes, while neither Mary Wiseman nor Blu del Barrio are in this episode, Tig Notaro is, and she’s been elevated to opening-credits status, which is very much a good thing. Reno’s status has been unclear this season, but it looks like she’s still Discovery’s chief engineer.
Buy the Book
Sisters of the Forsaken Stars
Reno is involved in a project supervised by Saru and run by Stamets and Tarka. Two Starfleet ships (one of which, delightfully, is the U.S.S. Janeway) are examining the DMA, and suddenly it disappears, only to reappear a thousand light-years away.
This confirms that the DMA is not a natural phenomenon, but rather an artificial one. Up until now, the DMA has been treated like a hurricane or a rogue pulsar or some other disastrous occurrence that isn’t really in anybody’s control. Now that they know it’s a construct, the entire attitude of everyone involved changes. (It actually reminded me rather nastily of the events of September 2001. When the first plane crashed into the World Trade Center, it was a horrible accident. When the second plane crashed, suddenly it was an attack. That sea change is very much on display among the characters here.)
Tarka is trying to create a small-scale model of the DMA, but he lacks the power necessary to do it. Discovery does have the power—up to a point. They’re also in the middle of a rescue operation, as the DMA is now threatening an asteroid that used to belong to the Emerald Chain and which has a few thousand people on it. Discovery is leading the evac efforts (mainly because they got there first), and one of the reasons why Tarka can’t quite have full power for his simulation (as well as the containment field necessary to keep everyone safe) is because transporter power is needed for the evac.
Which raises the question, why do this there and then? Why not do it on another ship that isn’t in the middle of a rescue mission? Or wait until the rescue mission is over to do the test? Why the rush?
That plot hiccup aside, I love the fact that they subvert the usual clichés by having Saru cut off the power when he says he has to instead of letting it go too long because the hero’s got to get the thing done regardless of consequences. Reno’s comment afterward is epic: “That is the closest you’ve come to killing us all, and that’s really saying something.”
I also like that Saru has to play the role of the only grownup in the room, since if Stamets and Tarka were left to their own devices, they’d gleefully blow Discovery up if it meant another scrap of data.
He’s in charge because Burnham and Book are left to rescue the prisoners, who are the titular “Examples.” There are a half-dozen prisoners who are locked away behind a force field that stops communications and transporters. The prison staff is long gone, and the magistrate evinces no interest in lifting a finger to help the prisoners survive, so it’s left to Burnham and Book to mount a rescue. The rescue itself is fun—Sonequa Martin-Green and David Ajala have magnificent chemistry, and the brains-and-brawn teaming up they do here mixed in with lots of banter is likely how they behaved during Burnham’s year in the future before Discovery showed up between “That Hope is You” and “Far from Home.” (This is where I plug my dear friend and colleague Una McCormack’s excellent Discovery novel Wonderlands, which chronicles that year.)
The Examples are all imprisoned for life, even though the quality of their infractions vary wildly. These remnants of the Emerald Chain apparently believe in a one-size-fits-all style of justice. The prisoners are reluctant to go at first, thinking it’s some kind of trap that will make their lives worse, but Burnham is willing to grant them asylum. This entire plot is right out of a gaming scenario, with various traps that Book and Burnham have to navigate, but it’s exciting and entertaining, for all that I can sometimes hear the dice rolling. (For starters, Burnham totally had to make a saving throw versus charisma to convince the examples to come along with her…)
Only one prisoner doesn’t go, and he’s the only one for whom there’s an argument that he deserves to be imprisoned for life: played by Michael Grayeyes, he’s committed murder, and he would prefer to take his chances with the DMA—though he doesn’t reveal this until he knows for sure that the other prisoners are safe on board Discovery. His last act is to confess to the Discovery crew what he did. It’s a strong performance by Grayeyes, but what I like in particular is the effect it has on Book. He can’t bear the notion of leaving anyone behind to be killed by the same thing that wiped out his homeworld. But Burnham can’t force him to leave, either.
My favorite scenes in this episode, though, are those involving Culber. He has done an amazing job as ship’s counselor, but that leaves the question of who counsels the counselor. That’s left to the delightfully blunt Kovich, a welcome return by David Cronenberg. Remembering how direct Kovich was with Georgiou, Culber asks for similar directness in helping him out. Kovich reminds Culber that he’s suffering tremendous trauma himself, having come back from the dead and all.
We also see Culber and Stamets together, which has been rare this season, as Stamets both bitches to his partner and also expresses concern for his mental health. It’s the first time we’ve seen Culber really be vulnerable in a while, and Wilson Cruz plays it beautifully, showing the broken person behind the helpful façade that he presents to his patients. I hope we get more of this—I know that both of them have different roles on the ship, but Stamets and Culber are such a great couple, the best and sweetest of the three couples in the cast, and we need more of them. (Nothing against Burnham and Book, who are a delight, or Adira and Gray, who are fabulous, but we’ve gotten lots of those four and I want more of Stamets and Culber, dagnabbit. The teeth-brushing scene in “Choose Your Pain” remains one of the loveliest and most romantic scenes in Trek’s five-plus decades, and we need more of that, please and thank you.
We also get several reminders of the greater Trek universe, starting with Tarka’s homeworld. One of the fun things about him being from Risa is that it’s a planet of hedonists (as we saw way back in DS9’s “Let He Who is Without Sin…”), and so he’s kind of a weirdo on his own world, which is likely why he’s such a dick.
Once it’s clear that the DMA is artificial, there is discussion as to where it might have come from. Vance specifically cites the Metrons (who pit Kirk and a Gorn against each other in the original series’ “Arena”), the Nacene (who yanked a mess of ships, including both Voyager and Equinox, into the Delta Quadrant), remnants of the Iconians (introduced in TNG’s “Contagion,” and who were established as possibly still being around in the “Gateways” novel crossover, so that’s a nice touch), and the Q-Continuum (introduced in TNG’s “Encounter at Farpoint,” and to be seen again soon in the second season of Picard), though Vance says that there’s been no contact with the Q in six hundred years (and one wonders if that’s some manner of preview of that upcoming Picard season or just the Discovery producers washing their hands of using the Q entirely…).
Plus, in a really nice touch, Stamets and Reno are looking at a three-dimensional star map, which is full of familiar names: Denobula, Ni’Var, Tellar, Andoria, Deneva, Wolf 359, Calder, Barradas, Tagus, Qualor, Argelius, Nelvana, etc. Oh, and Earth. In an even nicer touch, we see a bunch of starbases. One is Starbase 10, established in the original series’ “The Deadly Years” as being near Romulan space, and on the map it’s proximate to Calder, Nelvana, and Barradas, all worlds established as near Romulan territory; another is Starbase 1, near Earth. Although, I’m greatly disappointed that neither Tarka nor Stamets mention the Bajoran wormhole when discussing artificial wormholes…
Part of me is disappointed that the DMA is artificial, just because it’s yet another big bad threatening the galaxy, and we’ve been down that road way too much in the Secret Hideout era of Trek. On the other hand, we don’t know everything yet, and there are still lots of possibilities as to the true purpose behind it. After all, the Burn wasn’t an attack or a natural phenomenon, but a child’s temper tantrum. So I’m waiting and seeing, and hoping that it’s something a bit more interesting than a super-weapon…
Keith R.A. DeCandido is one of the many author guests at DisCon III, the 79th World Science Fiction Convention, this weekend at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C. Click here for his full schedule.
Building a little bit on my theory from last week that it was in fact still a wormhole, and that the Vulcan conclusions were a red herring (and discarding the bit involving the Abronians – the disaster that displaced them was a supernova) – If you were looking for an alternative method of faster than light travel during the burn, and you had a rich cultural history intertwined with the stable wormhole in your backyard, you might try to manufacture a wormhole with a mobile endpoint, which would ideally allow you to travel wherever you like, but, you might end up with pah-wraiths in the mix, either as an intentional part of your design/control mechanism/power source, as an individual act of religious retribution, or as a unintentional byproduct of tearing a path through the “celestial temple” dimension. Still conflicted on whether the president is simply a well studied leader or if she’s been blessed with psychic powers.
I bet the people of Kweijan are alive in there (as well as others – something like the nexus realm), and that the final stakes of the season include extracting everyone inside the wormhole before it collapses. Our madame president – I bet she’s been inside it. From episode 1: “We are learning from the mistakes of the past, developing new technologies to reduce our collective dependence on dilithium and continuing to rebuild the Federation and Starfleet.” What if they’re under the false pretense that it somehow requires sentient offerings to stay or rather, become “stable?” Or perhaps, the collected entities are physical vessels for invasion…
Getting way ahead of myself here, but oh baby, I want The Sisko back, and wouldn’t this be an interesting tie in to the rumored DS9 continuation talks?
There were parts of this I liked a lot, and parts that were more iffy. The prison plot worked pretty well; I do like that the show seems to be focusing more on character drama than action now. I didn’t much care for the design of the prison, though; I’m sick of TV prisons having these tiny, empty cells with no beds or facilities of any kind. Also, the physics of the chain of asteroids tethered together made no sense, nor did the FX of them being “pushed into the sun.”
Culber’s subplot was quite good. I don’t think it really sank in for me until now just how good an actor Wilson Cruz is, and why he’s become such a core player now. I also changed my mind about David Croenenberg; I said last week that I found his acting unremarkable, but he did a very good job here.
I don’t buy the idea that the anomaly jumping across space proves it must be artificial, because the Barzan Wormhole did the same thing in TNG: “The Chase.” So that plot point wasn’t sold very well. As for the business with Tarka, I agree, it made no sense that that had to happen on Discovery in the middle of a rescue mission, instead of back at HQ. Tarka himself is clearly being set up for a recurring role, and there’s something ominous about him. I suspect either he’ll turn out to be connected to the DMA already or will get so obsessed with it that he’ll become dangerous.
On the other hand, it seems they’re slowly establishing Zora/the Sphere consciousness as more of a presence, so I wonder if maybe that’s setup for revealing some connection between the DMA and whatever intelligence created the Sphere.
I have to disagree with Keith — the star map was not well done at all. It was clearly just based on the Star Charts map with a token attempt to make it look 3D-ish, but it didn’t represent the actual 3D positions of the stars well, and the places named were all far too close to Earth to be plausible as an overview of the 32nd-century Federation.
Interesting to get mentions of the Metrons and the Nacene, and particularly the revelation that the Iconians aren’t extinct. But there are so many other advanced races that weren’t mentioned, like the Organians and the Douwd. Also no mention of the Borg. On the other hand, though, it would’ve been nice if Vance’s list had included a few advanced civilizations we hadn’t already heard of. It’s implausible that the Federation encountered no new ones in some 7-8 centuries.
Somebody refresh my memory — did Reno say that Tilly had been gone three days? It’s for my chronology.
Oh, and Keith, it’s Michael Greyeyes, not Grayeyes.
I’m not sure I agree with Keith that Tarka is unusual for a Risian. He seems to be driven as much by passion and pleasure as any Risian, but it’s his passion for science and his pleasure at solving problems. Note how he encouraged Saru to embrace his anger and enjoy the emotional release. That’s very Risian. It’s a good insight — just because the Risians are a sexually open people doesn’t mean their sexuality is the only thing they’re uninhibited and passionate about.
By the way, I just realized that the species from the asteroid colony, the Akaali, were introduced in Enterprise: “Civilization” (still three episodes away in Keith’s ENT rewatch) as a pre-industrial people. It’s been over a thousand years since then, though, so now they’re an established starfaring power. Nice to see such an acknowledgement of the passage of time. Too many of the familiar species we’ve seen have undergone very little change over all that time.
@2 – “I can just picture Tilly’s face as she learns we got sucked into a wormhole three days after she left.” – Jett Reno
This was a great episode – probably the best so far this season. I loved that we didn’t get cliched perfect solutions to any of the plotlines this week. Burnham couldn’t save everyone, Stamets & co couldn’t solve the mystery of the DMA, and Culber still isn’t right.
One choice was absolutely awful though – the ending lecture that Burnham gives to the (former) station commander. It was entirely appropriate to say something about how the former prisoners had claimed asylum, and to remind the dude that the Federation just saved their asses. But to rub in the guy’s face he is now a powerless refugee? SMG’s delivery was also dripping with contempt. It was punching down at a powerless guy. I don’t even feel like he was a nasty getting his comeuppance, he was just a dude who was socialized in a culture with a very different idea of justice. Given IDIC and all, Michael was way out of line here – though we were apparently supposed to root for her.
@4/kkozoriz: Thanks!
@5/Karl Zimmerman: I’m not sure it was punching down so much as reminding the guy that he no longer had the privilege and superiority he was asserting. He had been the oppressor, but now he was in the same boat as the people he’d oppressed. I don’t think it’s punching down to point that out to him. “A different idea of justice?” Condemning people to life in prison for jaywalking and littering? Screw that. That’s not different, it’s just cruel. Just ask Wesley Crusher.
After all, why are you assuming that refugees are powerless? This is the Federation. They take care of people in need. Being a refugee is nothing to be ashamed of.
There have been lots of cultures across Earth’s history with fucked-up ideas about justice. Hammurabi’s code is famous as the first legal system, but there were lots of awful elements we don’t remember now (like a father being able to demand if his son struck him his hands be chopped off). That did not make the people in that culture inherently more evil – even the magistrates whose job it was to enforce the law – it just meant they were socialized in what we would consider an unjust system. Just like someone white who was born in the U.S. South in say 1820 would probably consider slavery not only unobjectionable, but good.
My point here is the system of justice depicted is bad, but we have no reason to believe it is bad because of the leader who we saw onscreen in this episode. Indeed, the idea that “injustice” just is caused by bad people being at the top is the kind of moral simplification which really obscures how to make change happen.
@7/Karl Zimmerman: “Just like someone white who was born in the U.S. South in say 1820 would probably consider slavery not only unobjectionable, but good.”
Which doesn’t make it “punching down” if you tell a plantation owner that he can’t keep his slaves anymore. It’s grotesque to equate the loss of unfair advantage with being disadvantaged.
“we have no reason to believe it is bad because of the leader who we saw onscreen in this episode.”
I think his imperious attitude in that scene, trying to boss the captain around on her own ship, was meant to be that reason, to show us by shorthand that he was an entitled jackass rather than a decent guy stuck with an unfair system.
I actually thought that allowing that crew member take part in the evacuation would lead to some character development but of course the show concentrated on Burnham. Hilarious.
@9/Mark: The show didn’t concentrate on Burnham. It concentrated on Burnham, Book, Culber, Stamets, Reno, and the guest characters Tarka, Felix, and Kovich. It didn’t concentrate on Rhys because he’s supporting cast, but the attention was spread widely among the main cast and the primary guests.
Why are people so upset that the lead character of this show is treated like the lead character of this show?
@6 – “This is the Federation. They take care of people in need. “
Tell that to the Romulans on Picard. Or the people on Sarjenka’s planet. Or the ones that Worf’s brother was trying to save.
“Just ask Wesley Crusher.”
Sorry, but ignorance of the law is not an excuse. It was on the Edo planet. It was their law that was supported by the population. Sending down landing parties into unknown situations is just stupid, especially when you include non-essential personnel.
“Why are people so upset that the lead character of this show is treated like the lead character of this show?”
Perhaps because we’ve seen this character seen as the savior of the Federation for starting and then ending the Klingon war, saving the galaxy as the Red Angel and being told outright that she was the hope for saving the future Federation and then doing it when nobody in the future could even come close to solving The Burn.
Sure, Kirk was in command when V’Ger showed up but he didn’t solve the problem without the help of his crew. Spock did the mind meld and Decker sacrificed himself to remove the threat.
Kirk never would have gotten the whale probe to bugger off without Spock calculating the time travel equations, Sulu and Scotty procuring the plexiglass and Chekov and Uhura getting the high energy photons (Which were just gamma rays of the type produced by matter/anti-matter reactions as well as in nuclear reactors, but we won’t mention that).
Sure, Kirk was in charge but he wasn’t shown as being so indispensable as Burnham is. Just recently we saw Burnham pilot the work bee because she was “the best person for it”. Kirk didn’t insist on piloting the shuttle in The Immunity Syndrome, for one example.
I’m surprised there has been no mention of the scar on the back of Tarak’s neck. I remember a TNG episode. . .
One issue with Burnham has been their treating her like a tortured superhero and Chosen One, and Star Trek typically isn’t a good fit for those things. Just like with Sisko gradually becoming Space Jesus over the course of Deep Space 9 and ending with him wrasslin’ Space Satan in a fire cave, it’s all a bit much. Heightened even more now by Discovery’s tendency for melodrama.
@13/rancor: As with many of the other criticisms I hear about Burnham, I think that’s unfairly applying an outdated set of assumptions from seasons 1-2 to how she’s been written in seasons 3-4. Season 3 established that she is neither a superhero nor chosen, but is simply “a responsibility junkie,” a person who’s compelled to try to solve other people’s problems, even if it means biting off more than she can chew. But she’s definitely not being portrayed as the only one who can do it. As I said, last season Burnham only did part of the work in finding the answers to the Burn; it was Stamets, Tilly, and Reno who took it the rest of the way, and Saru who finally resolved the threat by getting through to Su’Kal. And defeating the Chain was a team effort of the rest of the crew, with a number of them besides Burnham getting to have hero moments (notably Owosekun in getting to the nacelle). And so far this season, the stories have spread the attention around pretty well.
Not to mention that Burnham isn’t a solo act. We tend to see her in stories where she’s part of a duo, defined by her relationship with another character — with Book, with Saru, with her mother, with President Rillak, with Georgiou last season, etc. Her successes are often largely her partners’ successes, things she couldn’t have done by herself.
The Magistrate was snotty from jump, with his comment about how the law abiding citizens were waiting for a rescue.
—Keith R.A. DeCandido
@15/krad: Good point. The Magistrate fully intended to leave those people to die, no matter how trivial their crimes, and didn’t want to help Starfleet save them.
I find myself reminded of all the people in 2015 who complained about all the things that Rey did even though the same things and more were done by Luke Skywalker in 1977…………….
—Keith R.A. DeCandido
The title of this one could have been “No one ends up completely happy” and you know what? I’m here for that. Book isn’t happy because one guy didn’t get saved, Burnham isn’t happy because book isn’t happy, Stamets and Culber are beautifully broken together (I mean that in the best way)- about the only guy who ends up happy is Rhys. I know Chris and I have disagreed but the writers really are trying to flesh out the support characters- Rhys and his history, Bryce and parasailing, etc.
Which leads me into a quick tangent- a lot of people complain that Burnham is everywhere- we’ll for the first time we have a show that really does have a lead. SMG as Burnham is the show more so that the other captains. It’s just how the show is structured. As far as the other big complaint about her- she’s too emotional- I like that. Because of how the previous shows were broadcast, the characters had a magic reset button between episodes so if Laforge got Brainwashed or Riker got kidnapped or Beverly has a torrid love affair with a ghost, the next week they’re back to the status quo ante. Burnham has had a hell of a run- season 1 (the Klingon war) bled right into season 2 (the control crisis) lead right into season 3 (the future jump). She SHOULD be emotional. In fact the emotional intelligence of the show is one of the selling points. But she’s emotional and playing off someone so well be it Spock, Pike, Tyler, Book, her mother, even Stamets She’s not Captain Marvel, she’s just a good series lead
Changing gears again, I do agree with our intrepid recapper- why exactly do we have to model a wormhole in the middle of a rescue operation that WILL be over in four hours one way or another. Saru should have told Stamets and Tarka to go drink a raktajino and come back later, not indulged in the almost blowing up the ship nonsense. It was the one thing that didn’t work for me- it wasn’t that the B-plot was bad, it’s that the B-plot had a major logic flaw. What next- the cook wants to try a new soufflé recipe in combat? I would’ve saved that plot line to play against a less urgent A-story.
My hope is that the DMA reveals a new opponent at the end of this season, sort of how “The Jem Hadar” (DS9 2×26) ended the season and introduced a new bad guy. Guess we’ll see in a couple of month
Solid episode. I know I often feel ambivalent about the series but it often keeps me entertained in the moment, while not necessarily being something I want to rewatch once it’s done (or the mystery of each season-long arc is revealed).
I think the Borg weren’t name-called so the fate and status of this popular villain is left ambiguous.
Sweet call out to Janeway and Voyager.
The magistrate was just asking for comeuppance by Burnham. He was the “baddie” of the episode by shear smugness so Burnham lecturing him was a crowd-pleasing moment.
I think after witnessing it in action after a few episodes, or at least with this particular episode, I’m not that impressed with the expensive VR wall that was added to this season’s production. It’s obviously a flat soundstage surrounded by a simulated projection. They might as well be on el cheapo Planet Hell from TNG-era. But at least often that soundstage was atmospheric. Here, they could have at least added some fog or something. And add some mounds or little hills to the set so it’s not so obviously the flat soundstage they’re occupying. It even sounded like they were on a soundstage. Where’s the sound mixer to add in fake wind or some semblance of being in the outdoors rather than a closed set? This series has a big multimillion dollar budget after all!
One of my favorite scenes to date happened right at the end. I’m not usually okay with moralizing from the command chair, but hell… that’s not what this was. Whoever that head of state thought he was, he was wrong. I mean, he supported a draconian and terroristic system of crime and punishment, and was far more imperious than grateful. I know that people are still on the fence about the Federation, and Starfleet, by extension, but it was so satisfying to see him try to walk onto her bridge and demand that the people he wanted left for dead be locked up. The look on her face was priceless. She exhibited such restraint and such self-possession. Her ‘gentle’ reminder was just flawlessly delivered. The writing was great. The performance by SMG knocked me over, and I had to think about it a couple of times. At first, I thought the look on her face was deliberately bad-bitchy. Now I kind of think that it was the sort of human kindness that people exhibit who have been through something that threatened to strip away their dignity and humanity. She made her point so elegantly, with such savoir-faire that it didn’t sound like a rebuke, so much as a good captain taking the opportunity to lay a hard truth on someone who might be receptive to it, precisely because of how it was delivered. in a way, we have all been through something that threatened everything from our identities, quality of life, right through to our lives and the lives of our loved ones, and the message that she conveyed so expertly to that colonial administrator made so much sense: people should find a way to seek solace in being kind, and loving, and empathetic. Not as a karmic deposit, or because it’s a thing that we are compelled to because of external pressures, but because we have a chance to make it better. And I have never been more sanguine about anything than I am about the absolute rightness of Michael Burnham’s place on that bridge. She is everything a Starship Captain needs to be, and she bears it well and honorably.
Much like last week, I really enjoyed this. The pace is slower and less action-y. Even the Book/Burnham action pieces weren’t over the top. Just more fun like how their year together probably was. Their dynamic is great.
So glad to see Keith and others raise my main objection: WHY DO YOU NEED TO DO THIS TEST RIGHT FUCKING NOW? The rescue was fairly quick, a few hours. Just wait. Chill out and do it then. That whole plot could have been its own episode, and doing it during the evacuation was unnecessary drama.
On that note, why is Statmets being such a single minded dick? He’s always a gruff asshole, but his obsession with solving the DMA basically alone makes no sense. He was cheesed about the Vulcans helping. Now he has a real foil in the Risan. I know he’s a egomaniac. His whole thing with Book and the spore drive. Plus, he’s 900 years behind in his field. Of course he feels like he has to prove himself. But he doesn’t even seem to want help from his own crew.
As for the Risan, elsewhere it has been pointed out the neck thing is likely a reference to Emerald Chain torture/slave tech we saw last year in that mining facility. He’s got a very distinct personality. Sort of Sherlock, Iron Man, Dr. House snarky smartest guy in the room. I don’t want him to be a baddie. I also realized Aurreilo he’s been in contact with is the Ken Mitchell character, Osyraas former lover. The name meant nothing to me when Stamets first said it.
I missed Adira and Gray a little. Not until after. When it hit me they were MIA this week. The preview for next week shows at least Gray is back, so yay!
Kovich with Culber was good. I like that Kovich was a busy guy who made time for Culber, but he kept beating around the bush.
Not a fan of the anomaly being purposeful, though it may not be a weapon per se. The worst case scenario is a reset button, where it is all unspooled back out, Kwejian and all. Not sure what outcome would be best.
Hm….speaking of re-watch value, I tend to glom onto the character stuff and how they bounce off each other; the plot driven stuff is less memorable. Though the really best stuff will blend the two together seemlessly. Tt seems to me Discovery does have a fair amount of rewatch value in the character moments (at least this season) and less so on the plot and story elements.
I forgot one thing. When Burnham said “Let’s go save some lives,” that was super cringey. Just bad dialogue.
@18/MikeKelm: “I know Chris and I have disagreed but the writers really are trying to flesh out the support characters- Rhys and his history, Bryce and parasailing, etc.”
I don’t disagree with this, although I wish they’d give us more than just tidbits about their hobbies and how those help them do their jobs. We got some good stuff with the awkward family dinner scene last season and Detmer’s PTSD — we need more like that.
“for the first time we have a show that really does have a lead. SMG as Burnham is the show more so that the other captains. It’s just how the show is structured.”
Not the first time, since TOS/TAS centered on Kirk to the same degree. And the fact that the other current live-action show is titled Picard is kind of a giveaway. Audiences just got used to the more ensemble-ish nature of TNG, DS9, and VGR, though ENT reverted more to a TOS-style focus on its three leads.
@19/garreth: “I think after witnessing it in action after a few episodes, or at least with this particular episode, I’m not that impressed with the expensive VR wall that was added to this season’s production. It’s obviously a flat soundstage surrounded by a simulated projection.”
Yeah, they still need to improve their skills at using the new technology. Hopefully they’ll get better with practice.
@21/WTBA: “The worst case scenario is a reset button, where it is all unspooled back out, Kwejian and all.”
That seems unlikely. We saw Kwejian get torn apart by the tidal stresses. It wasn’t just gently sucked in, it was violently pulverized. Nobody could’ve survived that.
WTBA – I totally agree about “Let’s go save some lives!” It’s something a teenager would say. Which of course is how Burnham always comes across.
About Stamets, I see him as very insecure. He’s still threatened by Book’s being able to also pilot the spore drive, and now here’s somebody else who can do part of his job! OMG maybe they’ll fire me, he’s thinking. I think his only two places of safety are his work and Culber, and he already lost Culber once. He does have the ability to be a bigger person, as we see with his “adoption” of Adira and his working well with Tarka after all, but you’d always have to be on eggshells around him.
Can I just say the DMA seems pretty obvious to me a “Planet Killer”.
This season re-positions Discovery to be about…discovery…as in the original series.
They chose one of the great existential threats of ToS to be the big baddie. And it’s perfect. All we need now is a guilt ridden character to ride up the gut of this thing and try and kill it.
The Raisa scientist…will he turn out to be it’s creator? Is it one of his experiments run amok?
Stat tuned
Same callout as most of you – why was there a pressing need to conduct a dangerous and energy-intensive scientific experiment on a starship in the middle of a rescue mission, instead of in a purpose-built facility with a dedicated energy supply and all the safeguards you’d need when generating an artificial wormhole – like putting it somewhere out of the way of any populated systems? Did neither of them stop to consider that maybe the reason why the DMA is roaming the galaxy chaotically might be because whoever created it couldn’t control it, and that perhaps they should take more care in creating one of their own? The “guest scientist conducts experiments on board the ship that go awry” plot is a well-trodden one, TNG did it all the time, but the stakes here were not just that the ship and crew might be destroyed, but that over a thousand refugees’ lives were also at risk at the same time.
The prison break storyline was good, a nice way to get Burnham and Book back into that fun partners-in-crime mode. I do wish we’d seen more of Burnham’s initial year in the 32nd century, but I’ll make a note to pick up Una McCormack’s book. A nice callback to that Enterprise episode too, which I didn’t catch until Christopher mentioned it – and I’m always appreciative of when these new Secret Hideout shows bring back past aliens and use Michael Westmore’s original makeup designs instead of completely revamping them. It shows care and attention to their setting and universe.
@27/CNash: There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with revamping an alien makeup. It worked pretty well for the Klingons from 1979 onward. And the revamped Andorians in Enterprise were an improvement on the original design. If it was okay for Michael Westmore to redesign Fred Phillips’s makeups, then it’s not wrong for Neville Page or whoever to redesign Westmore’s. Reimagining an artistic design is not lack of care or attention, it’s a creative choice.
It’s interesting that we’re getting a mix of “traditional” makeup designs, like Rillak’s Cardassian/Bajoran look and the Akaali here, and reimagined ones like the background Ferengi we’ve glimpsed. I would guess that the logic of keeping the Akaali design was the same as it was in the original — if you have a lot of guest stars of a given species, it saves time and money to give them a simple makeup.
Most of the makeup revisions have been fine with the notable exceptions of the Discovery Klingons and the later series Tellarites. The only change I would have made on the Andorians would be to keep their ears covered by their hair.
Netfool22 – “They chose one of the great existential threats of ToS to be the big baddie. And it’s perfect. All we need now is a guilt ridden character to ride up the gut of this thing and try and kill it. “
Damn, but I like Booker!
The best makeup revision of all time was the Andorians in Enterprise. I loved their movable antennae. One of the biggest giggles I’ve had in all of Star Trek was the shot where Shram’s antennae are seen wiggling on top of Archer’s head.
I read a rumor that they’re going to mess with the Ferengi next in this series, and I am NOT all right with that.
@30/Ditchwitch: “I read a rumor that they’re going to mess with the Ferengi next in this series, and I am NOT all right with that.”
If you mean update the makeup, that’s already been seen in episode 2. It looks okay to me — still recognizably Ferengi, just with some added textures.
@17. Uh, well, that’s precisely why I didn’t like those new movies. They were a rehash. Another Chosen One on another desert planet and a giant weapon and a cave vision and an evil wizard… zzzzzzzz. But at least Star Wars is the place to tell those kinds of stories.
One last note – Q and the Wormhole Aliens go toe to toe in some extended universe stuff, and out of the known Trek species that are capable of creating a wormhole, the one that was conspicuously absent from dialogue in that bar scene is the one species known for… creating the only known stable wormhole. A sweet little trapped flame entity who just wants to go home, and offers you the galaxy in exchange for freedom, if you just build the gateway through their realm… You being the ambitious but altruistic president in the making, taking the offer, gaining foresight… An orb could be one helluva power source and control device…
The absence of a mention of the Bajoran wormhole is interesting to me, but it’s most likely an oversight.
I’ve enjoyed the season, but the last couple of episodes feel like they are too compact- and some of the impact is blunted by the episodes being too busy.
I’m intrigued by the scar on Tarka’s neck in the last scene. A mark of previous infestation by a Bluegill Parasite, perhaps? Or maybe the place where a Borg implant was removed?
Random musings. Mostly piggybacking on what others have already said, with some dissent.
“Let’s go save some lives”. Seriously? Who let George Lucas in to write dialogue?
I really dig Saru. No matter the situation, he always seems to adapt and hit just the right note of moderation, surrounded as he is by nothing but radicals with their own agendas, and he does it in a way that even if there’s initial disagreement, ultimately bridges are formed. I suspect he would make a remarkable politician.
I realized after watching this that there was no sign of Adira and Gray. And I also realized I didn’t miss them a bit. Nothing against the characters, I just don’t think they’ve been given anything notable to do since, well, ever, other than be angsty about each other. And there’s plenty of that to go around in this series, LOL.
I like the fact that the writers added a twist to the Stamets/Tarka rivalry. The easy way to do this would have been to maintain the competitive snarkiness between the two of them for the entire episode, but instead they turn into allies because of their passion for the science they are exploring. I thought it was very well done, and acted.
As for Book, I totally get why psychologically he would be in a weird place because, hey, I can’t exactly channel the feeling of losing my entire planet and family right before my eyes, but at some point I was like enough already with this BS about having to save the murderer, against his will. To the credit of this series, our heroes have been staunch defenders of agency and self-determination, and in this case Book seems to think it’s his province to take that away from this man because, well, just because. Compared to his self-centered brooding, the gravitas of the prisoner himself was eloquent and powerful.
I was okay with Burnham’s firm but even-handed dressing down of the station commander, but I wouldn’t compare that to Wesley Crusher’s death sentence for breaking the law at all. Justice and morality are not universal truths. What passes for justice and honor and morality to a Klingon, for example, is much different than to a human, and it always bugs me when I read comments that do a lot of moralizing about how “wrong” other species are in the Trek universe because they don’t define sins and virtues in the same way we do. Of course, this episode made it easy, because everyone except the one who killed someone was in the joint for something clearly minor. But look at the history of this planet. Slavery, racism, sexism, etc. We consider ourselves so enlightened because we’re working on those things we consider unust. But as we sit here today, there may be someone off in the distance looking at us, marveling at how primitive and immoral and backwards we still are. And they may know a lot of things that we don’t. I’m no Bible thumper, but I love Job 38: whether you believe in God or not, the lesson of that chapter is to remember that no matter how much we know, we are not all-knowing.
I don’t honestly see the problem with the “Let’s go save some lives” line. I mean, they’re going to…go…save…some lives? Like, that’s what they’re doing. What are they supposed to say in this context?
@37 Well, it’s not as snappy as, “Let’s go steal some souls from the Grim Reaper”, but other than that….
@37. How about a simple “Let’s go.” Not at all original but not all cheesy either. Or better yet, say nothing and show them saving lives. Visual medium and all that.
@37 The line sounds so unnatural. And it’s unnecessary. She’s not saying it for the crew’s benefit. They know where they are heading. She’s not saying for the audience. We also know where they are heading. It’s purely perfomative. Maybe they thought it sounded cool. Just her usual “Let’s fly” would have been fine. Or just have her say “Black Alert” and cut to the next scene. We know they are jumping there. We don’t have to see the jump every time. I like Burnham very much, but these types of lines make me see what her detractors talk about with the whispering or overemoting.
On that note, see the Captains log from a few episodes ago. Rather than talking normally, like picard would, she was emoting the shit out of it. Who is that for?! A log is basically audio paperwork for someone at HQ. Just say what you need to and get on with it. Not everything is a stage soliloquy.
@36/fullyfunctional: “I wouldn’t compare that to Wesley Crusher’s death sentence for breaking the law at all.”
The principle is identical: The exact same extreme punishment is handed down for every crime, no matter how minor, as an example to frighten others out of committing crimes. The only difference is the severity of the punishment, life imprisonment vs. death; otherwise it’s precisely the same premise.
“Justice and morality are not universal truths.”
That’s mistakenly assuming that everything is purely about abstract belief. It’s not about that. Some things objectively don’t work as advertised. Clinging to the belief that something works when it provably doesn’t is not a valid individual choice; it’s just being wrong. Scaring people with the threat of harsh punishments does not actually prevent crime; statistics show that the homicide rate is actually higher in states or countries that have the death penalty. So it’s objectively, provably wrong to believe that capital punishment or other harsh methods are effective as deterrents. It’s placing ideology over reality. A rational person would change one’s beliefs and policies to fit the objective facts, to find a method that actually works rather than just pretending things work according to their preconceptions. Ignoring the facts to cling to an ideology is irrational and counterproductive.
Even aside from that, imposing the exact same extreme penalty for every act of lawbreaking, no matter how tiny, is a blunt instrument that’s bound to be unfair because it fails to take mitigating circumstances into account, and removes productive members from society for one-time infractions, which is bound to hurt the society as a whole far more than it would help by allegedly deterring crime, if it actually did so. It’s like treating a paper cut or a sprained ankle by amputating the limb. It’s not a valid alternative, because it just wouldn’t work. It would do far more harm than good for everyone involved.
@40/WTBA: “A log is basically audio paperwork for someone at HQ.”
In theory, yes, but in practice, log entries have always been used as dramatic narration for the audience’s benefit. That goes clear back to TOS. They usually made a distinction between official logs and personal logs, which could get more emotional, but not always.
So why does Kirk get to be an overdramatic ham but Burnham doesn’t? I’m so sick of the double standard. Going back decades, fans have always condemned the newest version of Trek for doing the exact same things they excuse in earlier incarnations of Trek. It’s so hypocritical.
@40 very well put. Perhaps SMG is being directed that way but it’s beginning to get really distracting. The other mannerism that should be a drinking game when observed is when she’s speaking to someone oh so meaningfully in a personal setting, she does this thing with her neck like she’s trying to take it out of joint, and she looks at the person almost with a side eye. I think it’s supposed to be an affecting mannerism but for me it’s just another shot of tequila.
I realize my criticisms about this series and its characters tend to be minor. I like the series a lot. I really appreciate that this site exists. Aside from the excellent work by the contributors and those on these boards, it’s is a good place to pick nits for whatever they might be worth
@43/44 I rarely notice those things with any characters on any show. The fact it stood out to me is saying something. I really don’t feel Burnham is an issue most of the time. It’s just part of the character. But that log stood out. Maybe because it was near the beginning of the episode.
As for logs generally, I was thinking Picard, who (as with TNG) was like an office manager doing a perfunctory update most of the time. I can’t say I know Kirk’s logs enough to say.
@41 – We didn’t see much of the Emerald Chain but the Edo society seemed to be working perfectly well with their legal system. And doesn’t the Prime Directive give them the right to run their planet as they see fit? Should Starfleet feel free to ignore the law on the planets that they visit if they don’t agree with the laws that the inhabitants have freely put in place? Using Burnham’s solution, what’s to prevent Starfleet from offering asylum to prisoners on the planets where they deem the legal system to be out of sync with the Federation’s?
Bein in Starfleet doesn’t give you the moral authority to decide how other planets lead their lives. And if you’re on their planets, particularly when you show up uninvited, like it or not, you’re subject to their laws. Imagine if a ship from a country on present day Earth showing up at a port in the US of A and deciding to free all the prisoners on death row. Most of the countries on the planet have banned the death penalty. Would they not have the moral right to do so?
@43 – Man, I’d be incomprehensible if I made a drinking game out of this show – maybe I am either way.
Everyone watching this show knows deep down that Burnham exhibits an unprecedented ratio of time spent crying on screen vs. time spent composed – close second would be Troi, but as an empathic ship’s counselor who was repeatedly subject to traumatizing events and literally couldn’t help but feel everything all the time, Sirtis’ performance absolutely fit the bill. Burnham is not an empath, nor a counselor, but a ranking officer in a galactic military force – a position which demands more composure than we see in any given episode. I’m not saying she doesn’t have it when it counts, but that’s a relatively minor portion of each episode.
It feels like you’re watching an actor in the throes of a cymbalta commercial montage when she’s on screen – one minute she’s even, then she’s acting like her mother died in every other scene (which yes, she’s actually lost an absurd number of mother figures at this point), and then she’s smiling and weeping like she just finished watching an inspiring animal rescue video in which the puppy barely made it but now it’s ok and running around, although still blind. It’s a real rollercoaster of extremes that rarely feels appropriate to context, and it absolutely bleeds into everything she does, including Captain’s logs.
@41 – “So why does Kirk get to be an overdramatic ham but Burnham doesn’t? I’m so sick of the double standard. Going back decades, fans have always condemned the newest version of Trek for doing the exact same things they excuse in earlier incarnations of Trek. It’s so hypocritical.”
Perhaps it’s because over half a century has passed in our world and Shatner’s overacting would be just as out of place today? Just like Shatner would be out of place if he acted in TOS like he was in a 1920 silent movie.
We’re supposed to accept improved set design, EFX and the rest but acting should be like it was in the 1960’s?
@47 – Yes! ToS could be a bit like a soap, but those were the times. On screen drama has grown more complex, as have viewer expectations. While some might lament that fact, I’m not sure if this show fits in the standard box of any era – maybe 2005, when Hollywood hadn’t yet found a way to walk the line between new realism and overdoing it?
At least Burnham seems to pick her spots for over-emoting these days. And it’s usually more about empathy than self-pity. Can’t remember now if it was season 1 or 2, but I remember a long string of episodes where the only expressions we saw from her were furrowed brows or weepiness.
I still much prefer her to Sisko, who could be just plain weird. I remember occasions watching him burst out in a smile or scowl for no apparent reason and I’d actually rewind to see what I missed, only to find I missed nothing, LOL
I can’t speak for other fans, but the moments of hammy overacting from William Shatner and Avery Brooks were among my least favorite things about those respective series. Fun to make fun of it now. Less so for me when I’m engaged with an episode on first viewing and have this big ham served to me out of nowhere. Throws me out of the story every time.
@50 – Avery Brooks is a unique dude, brought some interesting idiosyncrasies to the character, never really took me out of it, just thought it made him interesting and sometimes unpredictable to watch – felt like there was a lot going on just under the surface. Out of the Captain’s performances we’ve had, I’d put him just under Stewart on the whole, but I think he often performed at the same level. I’d be as thrilled to see him again as I was to see Data in Picard.
@50. I didn’t get unique. I got hyperventilating and shouty. But for the most part, he was cool and measured, and I enjoyed his performance.
I guess it’s just personal preference. On the Shatner side of things, I know it’s a meme (ugh), but I could do without ever hearing anymore scream the name Khan again.
@52 – Yeah, Kirk is 1000% Shatner, the good and the bad, the nuance and the not so nuanced. I was pretty sure it was Brooks’ angry side that you were referencing – he definitely walked a fine line between evoking a fragile restraint of strong emotion and overselling it.
@51. All good points, I guess as rancor noted, much of this is personal preference. Shatner never really bothered me in the least. Despite how good DS9 was on the whole, Brooks almost single-handedly made it difficult for me to get through it. In fact, the more I think about him, the more I want to retract my mild criticisms of SMG as Burnham. She’s all good.
Fully functional/43 – What you refer to as “the thing with her neck” is what I call Burnham’s “coy head tilt.” The reason it bothers me is that it’s a motion that women, especially models and actresses, traditionally have made to emphasize their vulnerability. It’s supposed to be sexy. But for a Starfleet officer raised on Vulcan however-many centuries from now, it seems very much out of place. I do think she mostly does it in more intimate scenes, but it just strikes me as a behavior that the character shouldn’t be so comfortable with. I’m the farthest thing from a TV expert, but wouldn’t sharper directing deal with that kind of thing?
Transceiver/46 – OMG you’re right, I can absolutely hear SMG narrating that puppy video.
Sure, Shatner wasn’t the best actor in the world, but he was the right person for the role, and how much acting can you do anyway when every third episode turns up some godlike being ruining people’s lives, or your personality gets split into an all-good half and an all-bad half, or a giant hand appears in front of your spaceship?
@55/Ditchwitch: Huh? A head tilt can convey a number of different things, like curiosity, puzzlement, or skepticism. I actually tilted my head just now in confusion at reading your post. It’s hardly an exclusively “sexy” gesture.
As for William Shatner, he’s a fine actor in the theatrical, Shakespearean style he was trained in, a style that had to be large to reach the back rows of the theater. In his generation, it was still common, but over time, as more actors grew up working primarily in film and television, acting styles evolved to become smaller and more naturalistic. But that doesn’t make the older style bad, just different.
Really, though, if you look at Shatner’s work pre-Trek and up through Trek season 1, his acting style was usually quite relaxed and naturalistic. It started to get bigger and broader as TOS went on, and I suspect that might have something to do with the tinnitus he suffered due to an on-set explosion coming too close. It’s hard to modulate your performance when there’s a constant loud ringing in your ears.
@56 – Nimoy suffer the same accident that give him tinnitus on Arena. He didn’t get more shouty. I just put it down to Shatner looking for more attention to be given to him. “Hey, look at the shouty guy”. And Shatner wasn’t nearly as hammy on T. J. Hooker. It’s primarily a Trek thing for him.
Don’t get me wrong, I love Shatner too. It’s those certain moments — really only maybe a handful of episodes, just as with Avery Brooks — that throw me out of the story. I don’t think any of the Star Trek cast members are bad actors, including SMG. She’s good. It’s just some of the lines they give her…
@58/rancor: “It’s those certain moments — really only maybe a handful of episodes, just as with Avery Brooks — that throw me out of the story.”
That’s the problem with the public image of Shatner, though. Those few extreme moments are taken out of context and represented as his default. It started with impressionists like Rick Overton and Kevin Pollak who did comedy Shatner impressions based on those extremes. The public often has a tendency to let comedians’ impressions of famous people distort or displace their memory of the real thing. I’m guilty of this myself; when I think of Richard Nixon, what I hear in my head is closer to Rich Little’s or Billy West’s Nixon caricatures than the actual president’s voice.
I just think we should try not to judge people only for their worst moments. We all have them, after all.
@59. Who said anything about judging people only for their worst moments? I didn’t, and I don’t think anyone else here, suggested anything of the sort.
It’s not a zero-sum game. We can pick out moments and analyze them as we see fit. I like this about their performance, I don’t like that about the writing, and so on. And as for what pop culture and impressionists do with it is their business. I don’t care either way.
Seems you’re bringing a lot of baggage to this discussion, probably from other more annoying, less nuanced parts of the internet and fandom, so I’m just gonna politely shrug and wander away now.
Happy Holidays, all.
@60/rancor: If you’ll review the thread above, my comments were prompted by Ditchwitch in comment #55 saying “Shatner wasn’t the best actor in the world.” So I wasn’t bringing in “baggage,” it’s just that there are more than two people participating in this discussion.
In thinking about Book’s distaste for not saving the prisoner, I think I figured out the point. Here’s this guy who CAN be saved, but chooses not to be. While Book’s loved ones DIDN’T get a choice. While the dialogue makes it seem Book just doesn’t want to leave him, I can see underneath it all, he probably thinks the guy is selfish for not living.
@62/WTBA: I don’t think that’s it at all. Book isn’t judging Felix, he’s judging himself. He feels guilty that he didn’t realize what the warnings signs meant at Kwejian. Far from believing his loved ones didn’t get a choice, he believes that they had a chance at survival that he failed to notice and act upon. He believes (probably wrongly) that he’s to blame for not saving them when he had the chance. So he can’t stand to let himself fail to save someone else, or even worse, to choose not to save them.
“Let’s go save some lives” is how many inspiring talks and meetings end. Not life and death, but I’ve been in a lot of these meetings. You cover the goals you want to achieve. You discuss the methods. And the main speaker often finishes with a similar line. “Let’s log those sales.” “Lets help those customers” “Lets go save some lives.”
It doesn’t sound cheesy to me at all. It sounds like how many leaders talk in those situations.
@64/costumer: I’m reminded of Leverage, where the tradition is for the team leader to end the heist/con planning session with “Let’s go steal a [plot-appropriate reference].”
@64/costumer: Exactly. To me, if you’re leading a group of people in doing something terribly important and somewhat challenging (like, for example, saving lives), it makes sense to make them feel all pumped up and heroic before sending them off. “Let’s save some lives!” is exactly that kind of a line. And no, it’s not something that, for example, Captain Picard would say, but Burnham isn’t Picard, so it would be pretty weird if their dialogue were interchangeable.
At this point, I kind of feel like this series has gotten a reputation for “cringey” dialogue and so everything that people see on screen gets filtered through that context, even though I only really found the dialogue to be particularly bad in the second season (“Yum yum.” **shudder**).
@66/Queen_Iacomina: “And no, it’s not something that, for example, Captain Picard would say”
Isn’t it? Picard’s closing line in the TNG pilot episode was “Let’s see what’s out there.” That strikes me as being in pretty much the same spirit.
Also, Kirk’s closing line in “Amok Time” was “Let’s go mind the store.”
@65 I WAS trying to do that at #38….but not very memorably it seems…
@64: I guess I’m consistent then, because I find sales meeting sloganeering to be just as cringey and meaningless.
It’s always nice to spend more time with Stamets and Culber, and I really liked the presence of Tarka. Much like what’s been happening with the Orions, it’s nice to get a potential recurring Risian character into the mix, giving us an insight into that particular culture. And Tarka has good potential to spice up some conflict down the road.
And the prison plot really worked for me, for a couple of reasons: one was obviously the prisoner played by Michael Grayeyes. A poignant, tragic story of a man aware of his past violent actions, and who’s willing to endure the consequences. I can see how this would affect Book in the midst of his own grieving process. It really gave the episode a dramatic weight.
The other reason was the portrayal of this particular Emerald Chain justice system. This one hit too close to home for me. I’ve spent the last three years seeing my country regress the equivalent of decades. All because Bolsonaro got elected, thanks to a toxic right-wing political movement that fully embraces the one-size-fits-all brand of criminal justice and Floyd-style executions. So when I see characters jailed for stealing bread to feed their children, I’m all for Burnham interefering and stepping on the Magistrate’s authority – PD guidelines be damned (assuming they apply at all).