![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
4thofelevenIs it a bad sign when the best parts of this show are the episodes that largely ignore its premise? Like, just give me more standalone episodes, ignore the spore drive and the Klingons and whatever.
In episode seven, we get a fun little time loop episode; it's not the best one Star Trek's done, but it works. Mudd is entertaining for the first time in the character's existence, we get some character growth for Burnham, and we get some idea of what's going on with Stamets.
There are a few quibbles – the episode can't seem to decide if its a serious story, like TNG's “Cause and Effect”, or a time-travel romp like Voyager's “Relativity”, and tries to split the difference in a rather unsatisfying way, so on the one hand, we get Mudd killing Lorca over and over played for laughs, but on the other, we have Burnham and Tyler's agonising deaths. It doesn't quite work, and the episode isn't as careful about keeping the loops identical, which ruins something of the point of doing this sort of story – there's no consistency about when Burnham and Tyler arrive at the bridge, for example, even without Stamets or Mudd's interference, which makes it harder to buy into the inevitability of Mudd's success.
(It was nice to learn that Lorca's collection of 'the most dangerous weapons' did at least consist of something other than blades...)
The ending was rather TOS-like, in both the good and the bad. The good; I loved the interpretation of Stella Mudd and her wonderfully vivid outfit, along with her father's suit-slash-robe combination. But in many ways, it felt like the sort of TOS episode where everyone's laughing on the bridge and we're meant to ignore the horrible things leading up to it - “The Changeling” or the like. It's part of the episode's confused tone – we're meant to be laughing at that scamp Mudd, not be horrified at his mass-murdering campaign of vengeance culminating in attempted treason.
If nothing else, Lorca just lost a lot of points on the Hard Men scoreboard.
Another thing; it would have been nice to see Burnham start to settle into Discovery, not just be told in her personal log. Remember back in episode three, where everyone was all “Michael Burnham? The mutineer who personally murdered everyone who's died in the war and deserves only scorn for the rest of her life?” No? Neither does anyone else, apparently!
But I am quibbling, I enjoyed the episode, and it was nice to see a stock Star Trek plot done in this way. Having it be from the point of view of someone unaware of the loop was interesting, and Mudd's tactics reminded me of a video game player constantly reloading to get a perfect score. We've all been there, right? *mutters incoherently about X-Com hit percentages*
In episode eight... we're back to 'wait and see if I hate it' territory.
Now look, I'll be honest, for most of the episode, I was loving it. The opening got across the stakes of the war in a way that we haven't seen before, we got our first strange new world since the pilot, the aliens were appropriately alien, and the tension between the needs of the Federation and the rights of the aliens not to be drawn into a foreign conflict was an interesting take on the usual Prime Directive story. Even the Klingons this week seemed a cut above the unusual – probably because they got to speak English more, and Kol growls a lot more when he speaks, so his dialogue sounds more natural.
And then.
We get yet another pointless death of a female character. Now, it's possible this is a fake-out. As I said, I’m in wait and see mode. But I'm not going to be happy at all if the admiral's dead, both because it eliminates an interesting character and cuts short an interesting storyline again in favour of “Klingons are all backstabbing bastards.”
(I suppose we are learning why the house of spys and saboteurs aren't heard from in later series – they're not very good at it. Like, dude – at least escort your 'prisoner' at gunpoint when making your escape rather than wandering side by side chatting. L'Rell's lucky the other Klingons didn't just shoot them both on sight.)
We get a total character assassination of Saru. For most of the episode, it's unclear what's going on, how much influence he's under, what the nature of the native aliens is. But by the end, we're at a situation where his actions are going to have to be basically swept under the rug for it to be at all plausible for him to remain onboard, let alone first officer. Yes, yes, every Star Trek character's had their moments of alien possession or whatever, but generally it's pretty clear they weren't acting of their own volition at the end. Besides, the other shows aren't as heavily serialised. I see no coherent way to deal with the fallout of this episode that leaves Saru as a usable character.
Finally, we get yet another iteration of Discovery's most loathsome theme – that anyone calling for peace or harmony is a naïve fool who won't survive in the real world of Hard Men. We saw it before, in “Battle at the Binary Suns”, where anyone who didn't believe the Klingons were mindless brutes who only understand violence was portrayed as wasting their time and generally ending up dead. Now we get it again, with the episode's ending seemingly playing the title straight, with the Pahvans – despite having access to Saru's knowledge of the war and the Klingons – being too ignorant to understand the Klingons aren't interested in peace and Discovery having to act to save the stupid liberals from themselves.
Now, again, there might be a twist in part two. It's possible the Pahvans will end up playing the Organian role. But at the moment, I'm skeptical, and the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Oh, and unrelated – the new Klingon birds of prey are really just Centauri fighters, yes?
In episode seven, we get a fun little time loop episode; it's not the best one Star Trek's done, but it works. Mudd is entertaining for the first time in the character's existence, we get some character growth for Burnham, and we get some idea of what's going on with Stamets.
There are a few quibbles – the episode can't seem to decide if its a serious story, like TNG's “Cause and Effect”, or a time-travel romp like Voyager's “Relativity”, and tries to split the difference in a rather unsatisfying way, so on the one hand, we get Mudd killing Lorca over and over played for laughs, but on the other, we have Burnham and Tyler's agonising deaths. It doesn't quite work, and the episode isn't as careful about keeping the loops identical, which ruins something of the point of doing this sort of story – there's no consistency about when Burnham and Tyler arrive at the bridge, for example, even without Stamets or Mudd's interference, which makes it harder to buy into the inevitability of Mudd's success.
(It was nice to learn that Lorca's collection of 'the most dangerous weapons' did at least consist of something other than blades...)
The ending was rather TOS-like, in both the good and the bad. The good; I loved the interpretation of Stella Mudd and her wonderfully vivid outfit, along with her father's suit-slash-robe combination. But in many ways, it felt like the sort of TOS episode where everyone's laughing on the bridge and we're meant to ignore the horrible things leading up to it - “The Changeling” or the like. It's part of the episode's confused tone – we're meant to be laughing at that scamp Mudd, not be horrified at his mass-murdering campaign of vengeance culminating in attempted treason.
If nothing else, Lorca just lost a lot of points on the Hard Men scoreboard.
Another thing; it would have been nice to see Burnham start to settle into Discovery, not just be told in her personal log. Remember back in episode three, where everyone was all “Michael Burnham? The mutineer who personally murdered everyone who's died in the war and deserves only scorn for the rest of her life?” No? Neither does anyone else, apparently!
But I am quibbling, I enjoyed the episode, and it was nice to see a stock Star Trek plot done in this way. Having it be from the point of view of someone unaware of the loop was interesting, and Mudd's tactics reminded me of a video game player constantly reloading to get a perfect score. We've all been there, right? *mutters incoherently about X-Com hit percentages*
In episode eight... we're back to 'wait and see if I hate it' territory.
Now look, I'll be honest, for most of the episode, I was loving it. The opening got across the stakes of the war in a way that we haven't seen before, we got our first strange new world since the pilot, the aliens were appropriately alien, and the tension between the needs of the Federation and the rights of the aliens not to be drawn into a foreign conflict was an interesting take on the usual Prime Directive story. Even the Klingons this week seemed a cut above the unusual – probably because they got to speak English more, and Kol growls a lot more when he speaks, so his dialogue sounds more natural.
And then.
We get yet another pointless death of a female character. Now, it's possible this is a fake-out. As I said, I’m in wait and see mode. But I'm not going to be happy at all if the admiral's dead, both because it eliminates an interesting character and cuts short an interesting storyline again in favour of “Klingons are all backstabbing bastards.”
(I suppose we are learning why the house of spys and saboteurs aren't heard from in later series – they're not very good at it. Like, dude – at least escort your 'prisoner' at gunpoint when making your escape rather than wandering side by side chatting. L'Rell's lucky the other Klingons didn't just shoot them both on sight.)
We get a total character assassination of Saru. For most of the episode, it's unclear what's going on, how much influence he's under, what the nature of the native aliens is. But by the end, we're at a situation where his actions are going to have to be basically swept under the rug for it to be at all plausible for him to remain onboard, let alone first officer. Yes, yes, every Star Trek character's had their moments of alien possession or whatever, but generally it's pretty clear they weren't acting of their own volition at the end. Besides, the other shows aren't as heavily serialised. I see no coherent way to deal with the fallout of this episode that leaves Saru as a usable character.
Finally, we get yet another iteration of Discovery's most loathsome theme – that anyone calling for peace or harmony is a naïve fool who won't survive in the real world of Hard Men. We saw it before, in “Battle at the Binary Suns”, where anyone who didn't believe the Klingons were mindless brutes who only understand violence was portrayed as wasting their time and generally ending up dead. Now we get it again, with the episode's ending seemingly playing the title straight, with the Pahvans – despite having access to Saru's knowledge of the war and the Klingons – being too ignorant to understand the Klingons aren't interested in peace and Discovery having to act to save the stupid liberals from themselves.
Now, again, there might be a twist in part two. It's possible the Pahvans will end up playing the Organian role. But at the moment, I'm skeptical, and the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Oh, and unrelated – the new Klingon birds of prey are really just Centauri fighters, yes?
no subject
on 2017-11-10 06:51 am (UTC)Yes, you are almost word-by-word saying what
I love this show and I'll stick with it, but this theme is grating and, I think, damaging on several levels.
(Michael Burnham and Tilly remain the sun and moon of my tv-watching life, though.)
no subject
on 2017-11-10 07:05 am (UTC)But in practice, all we've seen so far is a bunch of different monsters growling at each other, and every time one of them looks like they're willing to deal with the Federation, they turn out to be lying.