Just to chime in about ENT, I'm among those who had become simply saturated with increasingly dissatisfying Trek altogether by then. I'd lost interest in VOY after its second season, only dropping in periodically to see if enough had changed for me to get into it (nope). I was underwhelmed by Insurrection and wholly disappointed by Nemesis.
I remember the night "Broken Bow" premiered. I had gone to a Chinese restaurant with my brother and they had it playing on a TV in the room where we were eating. I took casual note of a Klingon running through a cornfield. It felt surreal for the first time in so long to be so detached from Trek that I wasn't even bothering to stay home and tune into at least the pilot. I never bothered to watch a single episode during its four years. Not because I'd even heard anything bad about it; no one complained to me about the acting or the budget or any of the things cited as its key shortcomings. Rather, no one I knew even watched it at all, because they were as burnt out on Trek as I had become.
A couple years ago, I finally went back and streamed my way through the entire series. Turned out I actually kinda liked it. I have two strong complaints about it, though. One is how truly embarrassing it was to watch the frequent and entirely awkward attempts to infuse the show with sex, whether beaming Hoshi out of her uniform or the constant decontamination room rubdowns, etc. It was pretty uncomfortable to watch, in large part because it felt palpably uncomfortable and insulting to everyone involved in filming those scenes.
My other key complaint were the episodes that weren't about telling stories using Star Trek, but instead telling stories about Star Trek. For instance, the Augment three-parter, or that insipid two-parter positing the entirely convoluted attempt to reconcile Klingon makeup changes. "Regeneration" worked better, but it was still unnecessary and existed only to remind fans how much we loved First Contact.
Having said that, I genuinely enjoyed the ensemble and would gladly have kept watching more episodes about those characters. T'Pol grew a lot, but I also appreciated how being around her helped the others grow. That was different from what we'd seen before with Spock, Data, and Seven; they were all expected to learn to become human, but no one ever made any attempt to explore what it was like to become Vulcan or an android or a Borg. Archer, Tucker, and Sato to varying degrees, however, did come to better understand and even appreciate Vulcan ways. I liked that.
But above all, there was one thing I truly loved about ENT, and that was the kindness and generosity of Archer and his crew. Wherever they went, whoever they met, their first impulse was to find out if there was some way they could be helpful. Contrast that with VOY, where for seven years the constant refrain was, "We can't be helping all you poor people!" The Enterprise was still in the Alpha Quadrant, yes, but she was still farther away from Earth than any humans had ever been. They may as well have been in the Delta Quadrant for all the difficulty that parting with resources could have posed to them. Still, Archer never hesitated to open his hand and his door. He's still the single most consistently compassionate Starfleet captain I've seen, and I will always admire that about him.
Yes, he did some dubious and even appalling things in the third season. Those were dire circumstances, and I will at least give them credit for giving him an entire episode later to finally confront the guilt and shame he had stomached to get through those moments. He worked to resist becoming hardened by his experiences with the Xindi. In that respect, it was more of an earned kind of growth and tolerance than we saw of the others, for whom it was just written into the series bibles that they embraced everyone else by default.
Actually I can appreciate that perspective, Janeway spent most of the first two seasons trying to make sure the Kazon and Vidiians didn't take tech and/or body parts from the ship and crew to further their fairly nasty plans. (The Kazon clearly would have enslaved or destroyed the Ocampa, and the Vidiians would have ramped up organ harvesting with new federation devices they would have weaponized.) But Janeway did show compassion, even if she did not share tech. There are episodes involving responding to distress calls and a very touching one in in which the Captain teaches Seven about 'random acts of kindness'. (Which I believe is the only time I can find that phrase listed in Trek Canon.)
Withholding from the Kazon and Vidiians was the right choice for Captain Janeway to make in those situations. But there were other instances throughout the series where it wasn't as obviously dangerous and the Voyager crew still took the attitude that there wasn't anything all those poor Delta Quadrant people could possibly have had to offer that would have been worth an exchange. In particular, I remember one scene where Neelix made a truly cringeworthy defense about how if they helped these poor people, they'd be besieged by all the other poor people in the Quadrant. There was something really off-putting about the whole thing.
She wasn't cuddly, though. Archer was much more willing to be compassionate. And lack of enjoyment with Enterprise has nothing to do with that quality. i find it endearing. I also find Bakula very wanting in the ability to express. I used to think it was just because it wasn't quantum leap until he appeared on Chuck and did Men of a Certain Age (with Andre Braugher, a personal favorite from Homicide Life in the Street). And man I almost stopped watching Chuck. And I loved that show. (I only later found out how much Robert Duncan McNeil was involved.) The only thing I can compare this to is footage I've seen of Geneviève Bujold. I think if there had be a more charismatic actor in the characters spot it might have gotten me over the hump where I could honestly say I'd ever try watching it again. I've tried. After the third try I shredded all the disks and burned the boxes.
I had actually had the opposite reaction to Broken Bow. I thought (and still do) thing that other that decontamination scenes (the bane of season 1 ent) the premier was fairly enjoyable. It did feel like a rerun of encounter at farpoint at times, though with Soval and the Vulcans being in the Q role. (feeling like a disingenuous retooling of Vulcans, though I know you feel this was a natural reveal and progression).
I don't even care about ENT or Disco now. I just want to talk about how amazing Andre Braugher was on Homicide and how brilliant that show was. The fact he didn't have an entire shelf of Emmy's invalidates the entire awards system.
You made some excellent points Travis but I did not see Archer and Phlox as helping others and full of kindness in the episode Dear Doctor in which they encountered an alien species dying of a genetic anomally, found a cure, and refused to give it to them because there was another humanoid species on planet not affected by the genetic anomally and if all the others died off then they could be the dominant group on the planet.
You made some excellent points Travis but I did not see Archer and Phlox as helping others and full of kindness in the episode Dear Doctor in which they encountered an alien species dying of a genetic anomally, found a cure, and refused to give it to them because there was another humanoid species on planet not affected by the genetic anomally and if all the others died off then they could be the dominant group on the planet.
That episode you cite with Neelix making that cold hearted quote is actually the VERY SAME episode (Day of Honor) I mentioned above where Janeway teaches Seven about Random Acts of Kindness, AND where they save the Cataati by helping them generate their fuel again. Janeway plays a powerful role trying to teach Seven about kindness and plays an instrumental role in getting Seven to help the very people who want her dead since she was once Borg. I'm not a big Seven booster, but it was a really good ep for her growth and Janeways compassionate attempts to bring her along and recover from being Borg.
And Braugher was brilliant in Homicide -- even his portrayal of the stroke was something unreal (in a good way.). If I could get past how depressed I feel at the end with Kyle Secors character I would watch and rewatch again and again... but I have to really have my internal stones alligned to take that wild ride at the end. (The 'afterlife' scene doesn't bother me as much for some reason.) I will sometimes break out the crossover eps so I can see the Law and Order folks pair up with them. I'm hoping he does another dramatic series, however, that I can give a care about. Him on 99 probably works for the show, but just not my cup of tea. Thief wasn't bad but only 6 eps.
I also find Bakula very wanting in the ability to express. I used to think it was just because it wasn't quantum leap until he appeared on Chuck and did Men of a Certain Age (with Andre Braugher, a personal favorite from Homicide Life in the Street). And man I almost stopped watching Chuck. And I loved that show.
I realize I'm taking us even farther down the off-topic rabbit hole here, but I feel compelled to voice my personal view that Bakula as Stephen Bartowski was *perfection*. It took me quite a while to appreciate him as Archer, but as Chuck's dad he just perfectly combined the sort of crazy/offbeat/genius father we'd been expecting with the understated intelligence and caginess of Orion.
Aces, Charles. Aces.
It felt like as he underplayed Archer, he overplayed the Chuck role, was a caricature not a person. Was hard even to get worked up about how the character left.
I even rewatched some of it recently after getting the blu ray sets for all 5 seasons and I have to consciously not forward scan past his appearances.
Sorry to disrupt the Ent discussion, quick question on the event: will community awards open up when the galaxy phase begins? And does the solo reward table remain unchanged? I'm tempted to cash out once I've got Cornwell basically.
Sorry to disrupt the Ent discussion, quick question on the event: will community awards open up when the galaxy phase begins? And does the solo reward table remain unchanged? I'm tempted to cash out once I've got Cornwell basically.
Yes and yes. Threshold and ranked rewards will remain the same, and community rewards begin when the Galaxy part does.
I liked Archer because he felt like a real person. He was someone who was working hard as a pilot and as a warp theorist on his dad's engine.
He wasn't ready to be a captain on NX-01 but nobody really was ready for that.
The most down to Earth captain who solved problems through grit and determination and not by reversing polaron beam or by giving monologues about morality while he was armed with the most powerful ship in the quadrant.
Sorry to disrupt the Ent discussion, quick question on the event: will community awards open up when the galaxy phase begins? And does the solo reward table remain unchanged? I'm tempted to cash out once I've got Cornwell basically.
Yes and yes. Threshold and ranked rewards will remain the same, and community rewards begin when the Galaxy part does.
Thanks! Also just saw the info in Starfleet Comms, so apologies for not digging before asking.
I liked Archer because he felt like a real person. He was someone who was working hard as a pilot and as a warp theorist on his dad's engine.
He wasn't ready to be a captain on NX-01 but nobody really was ready for that.
The most down to Earth captain who solved problems through grit and determination and not by reversing polaron beam or by giving monologues about morality while he was armed with the most powerful ship in the quadrant.
I liked Archer because he felt like a real person. He was someone who was working hard as a pilot and as a warp theorist on his dad's engine.
He wasn't ready to be a captain on NX-01 but nobody really was ready for that.
The most down to Earth captain who solved problems through grit and determination and not by reversing polaron beam or by giving monologues about morality while he was armed with the most powerful ship in the quadrant.
Very well said.
I must agree with this. Despite the flaws of Enterprise I really did like Archer, and this explanation pretty much says it all.
I think this event highlights a fundamental flaw and that is bar Cornwell and Culber there is no one else decent enough to cover the MED seats - now that is fine for people who have both. But what about the people who don't - Culber is a legendary and he isn't in portal drops nor in any packs. So there are more missions for MED, which whilst it's nice to have the variety, we also don't have a lot of options out there if Cornwell is already assigned to another mission. Half of my "best choices" didn't even have MED as a skill.
In fact i make it 3 missions out of 6 require MED and ok whilst you have 2 spare missions (1 of them being a 5 seater) make choices rather limited even if you have both bonus crew characters.
EDIT:
Really what should have been is either the new green character should have had MED as a primary skill or a new blue character with MED (whether as primary, secondary or even tertiary) was additionally added to the threshold rewards. But I guess that would mean dropping or reducing the number of Burnham's wouldn't it. I know it is hard to please everyone but I do question the thinking behind these events at times.
[was on Sabbatical/Hiatus] Currently a trialist at Galaxy SquadronSTAY SAFE and KBO
I think this event highlights a fundamental flaw and that is bar Cornwell and Culber there is no one else decent enough to cover the MED seats - now that is fine for people who have both. But what about the people who don't - Culber is a legendary and he isn't in portal drops nor in any packs. So there are more missions for MED, which whilst it's nice to have the variety, we also don't have a lot of options out there if Cornwell is already assigned to another mission. Half of my "best choices" didn't even have MED as a skill.
In fact i make it 3 missions out of 6 require MED and ok whilst you have 2 spare missions (1 of them being a 5 seater) make choices rather limited even if you have both bonus crew characters.
EDIT:
Really what should have been is either the new green character should have had MED as a primary skill or a new blue character with MED (whether as primary, secondary or even tertiary) was additionally added to the threshold rewards. But I guess that would mean dropping or reducing the number of Burnham's wouldn't it. I know it is hard to please everyone but I do question the thinking behind these events at times.
It does help quite a bit if the leader on your squadron shares their Cornwell.
You made some excellent points Travis but I did not see Archer and Phlox as helping others and full of kindness in the episode Dear Doctor in which they encountered an alien species dying of a genetic anomally, found a cure, and refused to give it to them because there was another humanoid species on planet not affected by the genetic anomally and if all the others died off then they could be the dominant group on the planet.
You'll get no argument or defense from me about that one. There haven't been many episodes of the canon that have really angered me, but that was one of them. It wasn't even a valid philosophical debate, withholding help that would have staved off genocide because it looks like evolution will shift things in a few centuries anyway. Even the Ferengi would have been appalled by those "ethics".
That episode would have upset me at any point, but coming so early in the first season really put the show behind the 8 ball for me for awhile. Thankfully, they didn't do anything that egregious again until Archer hijacked that ship in the Delphic Expanse. And at least that I could understand, and he and the crew had the decency to be demonstrably upset by it even though he went through with it anyway.
I liked Archer because he felt like a real person. He was someone who was working hard as a pilot and as a warp theorist on his dad's engine.
He wasn't ready to be a captain on NX-01 but nobody really was ready for that.
The most down to Earth captain who solved problems through grit and determination and not by reversing polaron beam or by giving monologues about morality while he was armed with the most powerful ship in the quadrant.
Also, he had a dog. And not just any dog. He had a beagle. I still love that. Water polo was an odd favorite sport, though. But still, beagle!
That episode you cite with Neelix making that cold hearted quote is actually the VERY SAME episode (Day of Honor) I mentioned above where Janeway teaches Seven about Random Acts of Kindness, AND where they save the Cataati by helping them generate their fuel again. Janeway plays a powerful role trying to teach Seven about kindness and plays an instrumental role in getting Seven to help the very people who want her dead since she was once Borg. I'm not a big Seven booster, but it was a really good ep for her growth and Janeways compassionate attempts to bring her along and recover from being Borg.
The way it played to me was that Neelix's "Can't start feeding the homeless" bit was the default policy and was emphasized in that episode for the purpose of making the "lesson" appear more poignant. "It's good to do nice things for people, Seven. It's even better when everyone knows what an inconvenience it is for you to do anything for anyone, but when we need something for a change, it's cool."
That said, I will also grant that, while I found that whole arc clumsy at best (and obviously, I felt it went farther than that), I did actually appreciate the subplot about Seven and the Borg survivors. That was a genuinely compelling scenario, in large part because it was so easy to sympathize with everyone. It's not even that Seven had voluntarily joined up with the Borg and switched sides later in life. She'd been abducted as a child and all of her will suppressed, reducing her to literally just a drone without any autonomy or agency. Can someone who had endured all that even be asked to atone for things she could do nothing to stop? There is a lot of blood on the Borg's collective hands, but is there truly any blood on any one Borg's hands, except the Queen? Those were thoughtful questions.
I had already quit watching VOY by time they introduced Seven of Nine. As I went back a few years ago and streamed through the series, I saw how obviously imbalanced the writing of the show became, emphasizing her over just about everyone else in any given episode. I can easily understand why that rankled everyone from fans to her cast mates, who found themselves marginalized on a show they started. But I will also say that time and again, I felt Jeri Ryan elevated a lot of material. It's not easy to convey complexity while having to maintain a default demeanor that's so terse, but she did it week after week. She often was able to find an emotional sincerity to a scene simply through a subtle change in her facial expression or shift in her tone or body language that called more attention to whatever she was reacting to than a soliloquy would have done. I don't think she gets enough credit for that work.
And Braugher was brilliant in Homicide -- even his portrayal of the stroke was something unreal (in a good way.). If I could get past how depressed I feel at the end with Kyle Secors character I would watch and rewatch again and again... but I have to really have my internal stones alligned to take that wild ride at the end. (The 'afterlife' scene doesn't bother me as much for some reason.) I will sometimes break out the crossover eps so I can see the Law and Order folks pair up with them. I'm hoping he does another dramatic series, however, that I can give a care about. Him on 99 probably works for the show, but just not my cup of tea. Thief wasn't bad but only 6 eps.
Tim Bayliss is a fascinating character for me, because I saw a lot of myself in him. Sometimes it was nice to see myself reflected that way. Sometimes it disturbed me, when he went in a direction that it hadn't occurred to me to go myself, and it made me question whether I could, or how far I could go if I did. I can't think of a Trek counterpart to Bayliss; at least, not one who had a comparable journey and to whom I related so personally.
Also, I loved the L&O crossovers if only because it was so fun to watch Munch and Briscoe together. Richard Belzer and Jerry Orbach had terrific chemistry.
That's the thing, initially Voyager helped the first ship in Day of Honor without hesitation. The problem began to get hot when 1) More ships showed up needing more material than Voyager could produce (or thought it could produce on its own and 2) They declared that they wanted Seven as a revenge prize.
It's very reminiscent of the DS9 Episode Sanctuary in that respect, though I find Day of Honor an end that made all the parties a lot happier.
Putting it into context that you were out before Voyager had cleared Kazon space makes some sense. Really Voyager never really met anyone agreeable until the third season, that was actually in trouble. Unless you count Jetrel. (Usually is was some crew running awry of another culture, anomaly, etc and needing rescued from said culture, if it wasn't the two hostile forces -- and despite the Great Luke Skii's song What's Up Spock, it wasn't just Harry Kim needing rescued.)
Once you have race-nations not bent on domination or harvesting, there are many instances where aid is rendered.
And I think Neelix should not usually be the citation for what was normal. His misinterpretations that had to be corrected by command staff is longer than the list of recipes he experimented with.
Putting it into context that you were out before Voyager had cleared Kazon space makes some sense. Really Voyager never really met anyone agreeable until the third season, that was actually in trouble.
During the original run, yes, I bailed at the end of the second season. But in 2015, I went through and streamed the series in its entirety so I have seen it all, in order, and relatively recently at that.
It was something that I was aware of while I was going through VOY, but it didn't really strike me how bothersome it should have felt for me until I followed it with ENT and saw the default generosity of Archer, who greeted everyone with. "Hi, I'm Captain Archer of the Enterprise. Is there something we can do for you? How can we be of assistance? Would you like fries with that?" Periodically, someone would say things like, "Uh, Captain, you do know we only have, like, three of those, right?" and he'd say, "Yeah, but we can get by on two, and this is a nice thing to do. It'll be fine."
And to be honest, I don't know that if I hadn't gone through VOY just before starting ENT that this would have resonated as strongly with me as it did. I realize original viewers did follow straight from one to the next, but they did it over the course of nine years, whereas I did it in a couple of months. That kind of concentration of viewing can draw one's attention to things that have a way of passing by on a weekly basis without registering the same way.
And yes, people screw up every day. But many many peoples screw ups are simply a stray bad thought. Not everyone commits actions that send them up the river, or result in unnecessary death. This constant idea that Discovery is 'real' because of their dysfunctional behavior, makes it seem like people like I listed above AREN'T REAL and DON'T EXIST. And I say that is an insult to them, and just as unrealistic a world view.
I love the either or false equivalence in your statement. Sure there are lots of great "heroes" as you put it, but I don't generally consider someone just doing their job heroic. I grew up in a military family and the fact of the mater is most people in the military are not spending their lives at grave risk being shot at. For every heroic solider facing that there are many more working in offices, doing logistics, science etc. And if they are officers they are more than compensated for it. When you factor in free housing, free healthcare for life if you serve 20 years, and what is basically a $2 million annuity around 45 when you retire and get a sweet contracting gig to go along with your retirement checks, I'm just not seeing anything particularly heroic about that. Meanwhile enlisted soldiers in combat units almost never make it to retirement and, are paid less. Joining an organization doesn't make anyone a hero by default. Doing something heroic makes you a hero.
I also think that seeing someone screw up and redeem themselves doesn't really detract from people that generally get it right. I do think it makes for a more interesting basis for a TV show. Redemption stories have been valued by virtually every culture for a long time for a reason.
Now I realize that I have probably just written the most unpopular post of all time, but it is actually what I happen to think and I'm not uncomfortable saying it.
You stated Disco is more 'real' because of it. That means those who aren't are thus less real. As you stated the ones in other Treks are less real because Disco is more real. Theres equivalency but nothing false to it.
Just because there are logistics folks out there does not detract from those who do well and go above and beyond and don't do so on some redemption journey. They do it because they are good people.
So while Disco may not take away from that, your statement clearly does as does your expressions of disdain for that element of prior Treks.
I do not live in a black and white world. I can appreciate shades of gray and like the other star trek series for what they were and still like that this one is going in a different direction.
I personally identify with people who have made big mistakes and been given a second chance. I've been given plenty of them along the way. I've been expelled from boarding school only to return the next semester and over the course of the next two years earn the respect of faculty and end up having the headmaster personally write me a letter of recommendation for college and tell my parents that he was proud of the person I'd become. I spent a decade with undiagnosed narcolepsy that turned me into a living zombie and caused me to fail 26 classes as an undergrad. After I was properly diagnosed and my brain started working properly again, I was readmitted and graduated. Now I've been accepted into a graduate program and will have a professional career when I'm finished in a year or two. The first setback happened to me because I deserved it. The other one was just bad luck. But I am glad that there were people willing to see that I had potential and give me another chance. Me getting those chances doesn't hurt others that didn't face the struggles that I've had. It doesn't make those people less real. But those experiences shaped who I am as a person and made me into a better one.
Second chances, which the writers have stated was the theme of the season, are compelling. People who face hardship, whether it's because of something they did or not, learn from the experience, and become better people as a result are something I find inspiring and are stories that are worth telling.
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
A life sentence followed by 6 months in prison followed by a temporary wartime reprieve is no consequences?
I am a fan of showing mercy and compassion to others, even when they might not deserve it. That's the whole point of giving someone a second chance.
Those 'supposed' consequences never stuck. It's like a parent that threatens punishment and doesn't actually ENFORCE said punishment. A quick summary of Disco off the top of my head: Mutiny = rewarded, Murder = rewarded, Insubordination in a Federation setting = rewarded, Kidnapping and using sentient beings for Humanities' gain = rewarded, Threatening to commit planetary genocide = rewarded. These are not all Burnhams' actions, but the show as a whole is portrayed as 'realistic,' until you consider what should/would actually happen to someone whom commits such actions. Btw, I loved your previous post, but there's a huge difference: Your plight includes things out of your control. Our 'beloved' STD cast MADE choices on their own accord.
You made some excellent points Travis but I did not see Archer and Phlox as helping others and full of kindness in the episode Dear Doctor in which they encountered an alien species dying of a genetic anomally, found a cure, and refused to give it to them because there was another humanoid species on planet not affected by the genetic anomally and if all the others died off then they could be the dominant group on the planet.
That was 99% Phlox if I recall correctly.
Plus, Prime Directive. Even if they did not know it yet......
Wesley should be dead on Rubicon III
And Sarjenko and her race should be extinct, as well.
All per the Prime Directive.
Scott
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
And yes, people screw up every day. But many many peoples screw ups are simply a stray bad thought. Not everyone commits actions that send them up the river, or result in unnecessary death. This constant idea that Discovery is 'real' because of their dysfunctional behavior, makes it seem like people like I listed above AREN'T REAL and DON'T EXIST. And I say that is an insult to them, and just as unrealistic a world view.
I love the either or false equivalence in your statement. Sure there are lots of great "heroes" as you put it, but I don't generally consider someone just doing their job heroic. I grew up in a military family and the fact of the mater is most people in the military are not spending their lives at grave risk being shot at. For every heroic solider facing that there are many more working in offices, doing logistics, science etc. And if they are officers they are more than compensated for it. When you factor in free housing, free healthcare for life if you serve 20 years, and what is basically a $2 million annuity around 45 when you retire and get a sweet contracting gig to go along with your retirement checks, I'm just not seeing anything particularly heroic about that. Meanwhile enlisted soldiers in combat units almost never make it to retirement and, are paid less. Joining an organization doesn't make anyone a hero by default. Doing something heroic makes you a hero.
I also think that seeing someone screw up and redeem themselves doesn't really detract from people that generally get it right. I do think it makes for a more interesting basis for a TV show. Redemption stories have been valued by virtually every culture for a long time for a reason.
Now I realize that I have probably just written the most unpopular post of all time, but it is actually what I happen to think and I'm not uncomfortable saying it.
You stated Disco is more 'real' because of it. That means those who aren't are thus less real. As you stated the ones in other Treks are less real because Disco is more real. Theres equivalency but nothing false to it.
Just because there are logistics folks out there does not detract from those who do well and go above and beyond and don't do so on some redemption journey. They do it because they are good people.
So while Disco may not take away from that, your statement clearly does as does your expressions of disdain for that element of prior Treks.
I do not live in a black and white world. I can appreciate shades of gray and like the other star trek series for what they were and still like that this one is going in a different direction.
I personally identify with people who have made big mistakes and been given a second chance. I've been given plenty of them along the way. I've been expelled from boarding school only to return the next semester and over the course of the next two years earn the respect of faculty and end up having the headmaster personally write me a letter of recommendation for college and tell my parents that he was proud of the person I'd become. I spent a decade with undiagnosed narcolepsy that turned me into a living zombie and caused me to fail 26 classes as an undergrad. After I was properly diagnosed and my brain started working properly again, I was readmitted and graduated. Now I've been accepted into a graduate program and will have a professional career when I'm finished in a year or two. The first setback happened to me because I deserved it. The other one was just bad luck. But I am glad that there were people willing to see that I had potential and give me another chance. Me getting those chances doesn't hurt others that didn't face the struggles that I've had. It doesn't make those people less real. But those experiences shaped who I am as a person and made me into a better one.
Second chances, which the writers have stated was the theme of the season, are compelling. People who face hardship, whether it's because of something they did or not, learn from the experience, and become better people as a result are something I find inspiring and are stories that are worth telling.
Did you kill people when ordered to not and have full means not to? You talk of grey and matters of degree and look past the depths of which this fall occurs followed by what has occurred since. There's no redemption if you don't change to good. And things turning out ok is just ends justifying the means. Your personal redemption sounds like you had to change and not do things that would be considered not-good. I see Burnham and Discovery in general NOT making that change. The occasional good act hasn't been enough to establish a pattern when other acts get in there too.
And if there are degrees, then quantity A having MORE of something means it has more of that quantity, thus quantity B has less of that quantity as A. I know you missed some school, but that's just simple maths.
If you say, hey, this is real TOO, thus bringing it to some level of equal footing that people of both types exist, I'll give you that. But that's NOT what you said. Because it feels like your more life experience, it is MORE real, and thus folks who don't share your life experience are then LESS.
That's not black and white -- that's using language to quantify your levels of grey.
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
A life sentence followed by 6 months in prison followed by a temporary wartime reprieve is no consequences?
I am a fan of showing mercy and compassion to others, even when they might not deserve it. That's the whole point of giving someone a second chance.
So, she's going back to serve the rest of her time when?
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
A life sentence followed by 6 months in prison followed by a temporary wartime reprieve is no consequences?
I am a fan of showing mercy and compassion to others, even when they might not deserve it. That's the whole point of giving someone a second chance.
So, she's going back to serve the rest of her time when?
After the war?
Scott
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
A life sentence followed by 6 months in prison followed by a temporary wartime reprieve is no consequences?
I am a fan of showing mercy and compassion to others, even when they might not deserve it. That's the whole point of giving someone a second chance.
So, she's going back to serve the rest of her time when?
After the war?
Scott
Well that did happen in 48 hours and the Blues Brothers.
Lol and isn't the war technically over -- more to a cold detente until the Organian incident?
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
A life sentence followed by 6 months in prison followed by a temporary wartime reprieve is no consequences?
I am a fan of showing mercy and compassion to others, even when they might not deserve it. That's the whole point of giving someone a second chance.
So, she's going back to serve the rest of her time when?
After the war?
Scott
Well that did happen in 48 hours and the Blues Brothers.
Lol and isn't the war technically over -- more to a cold detente until the Organian incident?
Keep in mind I have only seen a few minutes of the show on You Tube. {Battles and such.}
War is over now?
Scott
"The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
Except for the part where Burhnams' mistakes have little-to-no consequences. Just like the murderer whom is freely allowed to stroll the hallways of the ship. The show is about making mistakes without accountability: A lot like how the world is today...
I can understand Burnham's choices meeting with the punishment they did - she got her shot under unique circumstances, and did enough with it not to be tossed back.
What I don't understand:
Is the basic morality of a show that has Harry Mudd running around murdering people over and over and over again and then without so much as a slap on the wrist and sends him off with his father-in-law. "But continuity!" you'll say, to which I'll reply with "then don't take Mudd's murderous psychopathy up to level 11."
Or, for that matter, of the show that has the Mirror Empress feasting on Kelpiens, murdering subordinates at will, and then being saved by Burnham and set loose upon the galaxy by the Federation. This is an objectively evil character, who we know full well is off to go do more evil, and basically it's all handwaved away with a "but Michelle Yeoh is awesome!" which, while true, is insufficient.
More than anything else, that's where Discovery loses me. It's not just that it laughs at and undermines basic Federation ethics, it's that at its core it isn't a show grounded in any kind of morality. Actions are divorced from consequences, evil does just fine thank you kindly, and the heroes of the show are more than comfortable aiding and abetting the whole process on those days where they aren't actively setting it in motion.
There are all kinds of shows with anti-heroes and protagonists just as dark as the villains. But Trek, in its flawed, sometimes hypocritical, often anvillicious way is a show that has always had an element of morality play to it. It's always been aspirational. And for a particular spin-off to fail there is a pretty basic betrayal of what the entire franchise has been about.
Comments
That was 99% Phlox if I recall correctly.
That episode you cite with Neelix making that cold hearted quote is actually the VERY SAME episode (Day of Honor) I mentioned above where Janeway teaches Seven about Random Acts of Kindness, AND where they save the Cataati by helping them generate their fuel again. Janeway plays a powerful role trying to teach Seven about kindness and plays an instrumental role in getting Seven to help the very people who want her dead since she was once Borg. I'm not a big Seven booster, but it was a really good ep for her growth and Janeways compassionate attempts to bring her along and recover from being Borg.
And Braugher was brilliant in Homicide -- even his portrayal of the stroke was something unreal (in a good way.). If I could get past how depressed I feel at the end with Kyle Secors character I would watch and rewatch again and again... but I have to really have my internal stones alligned to take that wild ride at the end. (The 'afterlife' scene doesn't bother me as much for some reason.) I will sometimes break out the crossover eps so I can see the Law and Order folks pair up with them. I'm hoping he does another dramatic series, however, that I can give a care about. Him on 99 probably works for the show, but just not my cup of tea. Thief wasn't bad but only 6 eps.
It felt like as he underplayed Archer, he overplayed the Chuck role, was a caricature not a person. Was hard even to get worked up about how the character left.
I even rewatched some of it recently after getting the blu ray sets for all 5 seasons and I have to consciously not forward scan past his appearances.
Yes and yes. Threshold and ranked rewards will remain the same, and community rewards begin when the Galaxy part does.
He wasn't ready to be a captain on NX-01 but nobody really was ready for that.
The most down to Earth captain who solved problems through grit and determination and not by reversing polaron beam or by giving monologues about morality while he was armed with the most powerful ship in the quadrant.
Thanks! Also just saw the info in Starfleet Comms, so apologies for not digging before asking.
Very well said.
I must agree with this. Despite the flaws of Enterprise I really did like Archer, and this explanation pretty much says it all.
In fact i make it 3 missions out of 6 require MED and ok whilst you have 2 spare missions (1 of them being a 5 seater) make choices rather limited even if you have both bonus crew characters.
EDIT:
Really what should have been is either the new green character should have had MED as a primary skill or a new blue character with MED (whether as primary, secondary or even tertiary) was additionally added to the threshold rewards. But I guess that would mean dropping or reducing the number of Burnham's wouldn't it. I know it is hard to please everyone but I do question the thinking behind these events at times.
It does help quite a bit if the leader on your squadron shares their Cornwell.
Problem is I'm a squad leader so don't have that option.
You'll get no argument or defense from me about that one. There haven't been many episodes of the canon that have really angered me, but that was one of them. It wasn't even a valid philosophical debate, withholding help that would have staved off genocide because it looks like evolution will shift things in a few centuries anyway. Even the Ferengi would have been appalled by those "ethics".
That episode would have upset me at any point, but coming so early in the first season really put the show behind the 8 ball for me for awhile. Thankfully, they didn't do anything that egregious again until Archer hijacked that ship in the Delphic Expanse. And at least that I could understand, and he and the crew had the decency to be demonstrably upset by it even though he went through with it anyway.
Also, he had a dog. And not just any dog. He had a beagle. I still love that. Water polo was an odd favorite sport, though. But still, beagle!
The way it played to me was that Neelix's "Can't start feeding the homeless" bit was the default policy and was emphasized in that episode for the purpose of making the "lesson" appear more poignant. "It's good to do nice things for people, Seven. It's even better when everyone knows what an inconvenience it is for you to do anything for anyone, but when we need something for a change, it's cool."
That said, I will also grant that, while I found that whole arc clumsy at best (and obviously, I felt it went farther than that), I did actually appreciate the subplot about Seven and the Borg survivors. That was a genuinely compelling scenario, in large part because it was so easy to sympathize with everyone. It's not even that Seven had voluntarily joined up with the Borg and switched sides later in life. She'd been abducted as a child and all of her will suppressed, reducing her to literally just a drone without any autonomy or agency. Can someone who had endured all that even be asked to atone for things she could do nothing to stop? There is a lot of blood on the Borg's collective hands, but is there truly any blood on any one Borg's hands, except the Queen? Those were thoughtful questions.
I had already quit watching VOY by time they introduced Seven of Nine. As I went back a few years ago and streamed through the series, I saw how obviously imbalanced the writing of the show became, emphasizing her over just about everyone else in any given episode. I can easily understand why that rankled everyone from fans to her cast mates, who found themselves marginalized on a show they started. But I will also say that time and again, I felt Jeri Ryan elevated a lot of material. It's not easy to convey complexity while having to maintain a default demeanor that's so terse, but she did it week after week. She often was able to find an emotional sincerity to a scene simply through a subtle change in her facial expression or shift in her tone or body language that called more attention to whatever she was reacting to than a soliloquy would have done. I don't think she gets enough credit for that work.
Tim Bayliss is a fascinating character for me, because I saw a lot of myself in him. Sometimes it was nice to see myself reflected that way. Sometimes it disturbed me, when he went in a direction that it hadn't occurred to me to go myself, and it made me question whether I could, or how far I could go if I did. I can't think of a Trek counterpart to Bayliss; at least, not one who had a comparable journey and to whom I related so personally.
Also, I loved the L&O crossovers if only because it was so fun to watch Munch and Briscoe together. Richard Belzer and Jerry Orbach had terrific chemistry.
It's very reminiscent of the DS9 Episode Sanctuary in that respect, though I find Day of Honor an end that made all the parties a lot happier.
Putting it into context that you were out before Voyager had cleared Kazon space makes some sense. Really Voyager never really met anyone agreeable until the third season, that was actually in trouble. Unless you count Jetrel. (Usually is was some crew running awry of another culture, anomaly, etc and needing rescued from said culture, if it wasn't the two hostile forces -- and despite the Great Luke Skii's song What's Up Spock, it wasn't just Harry Kim needing rescued.)
Once you have race-nations not bent on domination or harvesting, there are many instances where aid is rendered.
And I think Neelix should not usually be the citation for what was normal. His misinterpretations that had to be corrected by command staff is longer than the list of recipes he experimented with.
During the original run, yes, I bailed at the end of the second season. But in 2015, I went through and streamed the series in its entirety so I have seen it all, in order, and relatively recently at that.
It was something that I was aware of while I was going through VOY, but it didn't really strike me how bothersome it should have felt for me until I followed it with ENT and saw the default generosity of Archer, who greeted everyone with. "Hi, I'm Captain Archer of the Enterprise. Is there something we can do for you? How can we be of assistance? Would you like fries with that?" Periodically, someone would say things like, "Uh, Captain, you do know we only have, like, three of those, right?" and he'd say, "Yeah, but we can get by on two, and this is a nice thing to do. It'll be fine."
And to be honest, I don't know that if I hadn't gone through VOY just before starting ENT that this would have resonated as strongly with me as it did. I realize original viewers did follow straight from one to the next, but they did it over the course of nine years, whereas I did it in a couple of months. That kind of concentration of viewing can draw one's attention to things that have a way of passing by on a weekly basis without registering the same way.
I do not live in a black and white world. I can appreciate shades of gray and like the other star trek series for what they were and still like that this one is going in a different direction.
I personally identify with people who have made big mistakes and been given a second chance. I've been given plenty of them along the way. I've been expelled from boarding school only to return the next semester and over the course of the next two years earn the respect of faculty and end up having the headmaster personally write me a letter of recommendation for college and tell my parents that he was proud of the person I'd become. I spent a decade with undiagnosed narcolepsy that turned me into a living zombie and caused me to fail 26 classes as an undergrad. After I was properly diagnosed and my brain started working properly again, I was readmitted and graduated. Now I've been accepted into a graduate program and will have a professional career when I'm finished in a year or two. The first setback happened to me because I deserved it. The other one was just bad luck. But I am glad that there were people willing to see that I had potential and give me another chance. Me getting those chances doesn't hurt others that didn't face the struggles that I've had. It doesn't make those people less real. But those experiences shaped who I am as a person and made me into a better one.
Second chances, which the writers have stated was the theme of the season, are compelling. People who face hardship, whether it's because of something they did or not, learn from the experience, and become better people as a result are something I find inspiring and are stories that are worth telling.
A life sentence followed by 6 months in prison followed by a temporary wartime reprieve is no consequences?
I am a fan of showing mercy and compassion to others, even when they might not deserve it. That's the whole point of giving someone a second chance.
Plus, Prime Directive. Even if they did not know it yet......
Wesley should be dead on Rubicon III
And Sarjenko and her race should be extinct, as well.
All per the Prime Directive.
Scott
Did you kill people when ordered to not and have full means not to? You talk of grey and matters of degree and look past the depths of which this fall occurs followed by what has occurred since. There's no redemption if you don't change to good. And things turning out ok is just ends justifying the means. Your personal redemption sounds like you had to change and not do things that would be considered not-good. I see Burnham and Discovery in general NOT making that change. The occasional good act hasn't been enough to establish a pattern when other acts get in there too.
And if there are degrees, then quantity A having MORE of something means it has more of that quantity, thus quantity B has less of that quantity as A. I know you missed some school, but that's just simple maths.
If you say, hey, this is real TOO, thus bringing it to some level of equal footing that people of both types exist, I'll give you that. But that's NOT what you said. Because it feels like your more life experience, it is MORE real, and thus folks who don't share your life experience are then LESS.
That's not black and white -- that's using language to quantify your levels of grey.
So, she's going back to serve the rest of her time when?
After the war?
Scott
Well that did happen in 48 hours and the Blues Brothers.
Lol and isn't the war technically over -- more to a cold detente until the Organian incident?
Keep in mind I have only seen a few minutes of the show on You Tube. {Battles and such.}
Scott
I can understand Burnham's choices meeting with the punishment they did - she got her shot under unique circumstances, and did enough with it not to be tossed back.
What I don't understand:
Or, for that matter, of the show that has the Mirror Empress feasting on Kelpiens, murdering subordinates at will, and then being saved by Burnham and set loose upon the galaxy by the Federation. This is an objectively evil character, who we know full well is off to go do more evil, and basically it's all handwaved away with a "but Michelle Yeoh is awesome!" which, while true, is insufficient.
More than anything else, that's where Discovery loses me. It's not just that it laughs at and undermines basic Federation ethics, it's that at its core it isn't a show grounded in any kind of morality. Actions are divorced from consequences, evil does just fine thank you kindly, and the heroes of the show are more than comfortable aiding and abetting the whole process on those days where they aren't actively setting it in motion.
There are all kinds of shows with anti-heroes and protagonists just as dark as the villains. But Trek, in its flawed, sometimes hypocritical, often anvillicious way is a show that has always had an element of morality play to it. It's always been aspirational. And for a particular spin-off to fail there is a pretty basic betrayal of what the entire franchise has been about.