Star Trek Discovery. [SPOILERS WITHIN]

There's a difference between crying because you're being tortured and crying because Ensign Tilly jumped six ranks to first officer. Burnham cries like she's contractually obligated to do so.

It takes away from the emotional impact when every episode a character is crying. Those moments should be reserved for special moments within a series.

Discovery is notorious for unearned emotional moments, so I guess it doesn't matter if characters cry a lot. None of it rings true.

point of order... she jumped no more than two ranks as no one on the main bridge crew is above Lieutenant and none is specified to be command qualified.
but yeah... burnham really needs a wider range of emotional responses, or at least less dramatic ones.

Crying on DISCO is like a laugh track on a sitcom. It’s there to signal to the audience the emotion the writers want them to feel.

The jokes are funny if we tell them they’re funny by using a laugh track.

Discovery is an emotional rollercoaster that touches on the heart of humanity if we have the characters crying a lot.

Then the audience knows what we are trying to get at.

I was thinking something similar about the "weep track"

And really it isn't so much something new as just super blatant.

Watch TOS, and it's all in the music and lighting. More subtle-but also arguably more effective because of that subtlety-to have a lonesome violin note or noir styled shadow shift conveying the sorrow.

Meh, we'll just look back at bawling in DISCO like go-go boots on TOS, or girl pompadours on DS9.
Every show is a product of its times.

It's kind of a deep take too when you figure Michael has only really been embracing emotions for a few years.

Psychologically the character doesn't (and shouldn't) have a fully developed emotional vocabulary with which to express intense feelings.

What took Spock decades would naturally take Michael a couple years. We were told--not shown, told--over and over how special she is. When are we just going to accept it?

Stan Gable and Betty Childs, technically Lewis Skolnick raped her. Kind of dark for a feel good comedy.

Don't forget the teardrop from Picard when he was assimilated.

It's okay in movie morality, 'cause she liked it.

See also American Pie, where I still maintain that the best sequel they could make now would be one where Jim is running for some political office and is undone by the scandal leaking out of how he tried to broadcast Nadia naked to the internet without her knowledge.

Arguably, having been trained in repression she has weaker mental guard rails against emotional extremes once she is indulging her emotions, she learned repression rather than moderation as a child.

From a production standpoint, it looks like they dropped the whole "Burnham is a human raised as a Vulcan" thing as soon as they could and played to (what they feel are) SMG's strengths.

Fuller dumping the Michael character in the laps of these writers is like a 3 Michelin star chef prepping an elaborate main before abruptly handing it off to the kitchen junior with only half the recipe scribbled on the back of a napkin. Of course they don't know what the fuck they're doing.

It's a damn shame; no doubt whatever Fuller had in mind would have been a hell of a lot more interesting and compelling than the botched mess we ended up with.

(90's era fanboy)
Deep Space Nine is shit.
It's going to be cancelled any day now.
Ron Moore doesn't know his ass from his elbow.

Since Skolnick was part of the repressed under-class, anything he does against the people who previously wielded unchecked social power is acceptable. Stan Gable and Betty Childs should just check their privilege and listen to Nerd-American voices.

(All joking aside, it was wrong that Skolnick basically raped Betty Childs. It's wrong now and it was wrong then.)

Not even close. ISB and RDM has DS9 figured out by the third season and had already introduced the dominion. They proved themselves early on. Kurtzman is a hack writer and a one trick pony. Like Abrams, he sets up a mystery box and writes action scenes and creates set pieces with each action scene leading to the next set piece. Then they fill in the gaps with whatever “story” the farted out while taking a shit. There’s zero thought put into it, it’s just, “wouldn’t it be cool if we did this?” Then they get the CGI team to build the rest while occasionally looking at Memory Alpha for fan service. Oh and they use a generic script bot to do the rest. That’s it, that’s their formula. RDM and ISB had to do actual work.

Take it easy on the kid. He's a survivor.

Clearly, JJ Abrams and Alex Kurtzman sexually assaulted him at some point.

With that exact hand position.

We like to think of it as pleasing the ladies, but it can traumatise young men.

IDIC can mean Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations, but it could also be a statement of what Abrams wanted to do to FF's rusty starfish.

Solid counter argument.

Apparently Fullers original idea was for Season 1 of Discovery to start off as it did with Burnhams mutiny, and then focus lots on the Klingon war. Discovery would be more of a research ship with a bunch of different experiments like the spore drive going on on board. The end of the season would have featured them going to a mirror universe (just not THE mirror universe) where Burnham didn't mutiny, the war didn't start, and they'd all learn a valuable lesson about upholding Federation ideals.

Discovery nominated for a GLAAD award.

https://trekmovie.com/2021/01/28/star-trek-discovery-nominated-for-glaad-award/

What is your response to this?

Or this?