Mar 30

Perpetual Infinity


Well that was an episode wasn't it .

Burnham needs a hundred hours of professional conduct training.


Dr. Burnham was the best part of the episode. Really liked her conversation with Pike.


Putting a time limit on things and making the limit never matter was sloppy writing imo.


Leland is the bad guy finally.


Ash comes through. Yeah!?!


Discovery needs that advanced technologies of lock and ringers for their doors.

Mar 30

Yeah love that highly advanced civilization where privacy doesn't exist either personally in your own quarters or militarily in areas where restricted activities are being carried out. Time limits add urgency and tension you don't need to have a one second left on the clock or 99 percent of an action done to make use of the tension of the situation.

We got our answers, the writing team are sloppy where science is concerned and showed it big time when it came to the identification of the suit occupant they just couldn't seem to decide how the identity was being made if it was neural scan or DNA or what. That they finally decided on mitochondrial DNA which is identical in all females of a family line is weak . It actually makes me feel disappointed in everyone involved in the determination, they have been portrayed as really smart and in this they look stupid .

Mar 30Edited: Mar 30

I heard them mention the time at least three times. The last was Stamets on Esoff IV saying they had 43 minutes left towards the end of the ep before Leland came down.

Mar 30Edited: Mar 30

So...yeah I didn’t know if I should respond but I guess I will as I will be the only defender here. Or maybe not defender but counterpoint to why I actually enjoyed this episode. Maybe not as much as the previous three but I enjoyed it while agreeing on some points.


So here is my cranky pants to your cranky pants.


The points I agree with that first of all were avoidable is yes the DNA and (previously bio-neural) dialogue. If Michael doesn’t somehow end up having had her signature planted or been in the suit and this is just it, I agree. They could have said the file had been damaged but it is very close to Michael’s. Unless they come back to it with an aha it was 100% because X, this was an avoidable gaff. I’m not positive they won’t come back because it was so certain but again they may have been overly ambitious as a knee jerk reaction to the open secret of Voq Tyler last year and even Lorca. (Which honestly I’m not at all certain I would have guessed if I wasn’t an internet person. Yes I’m dense and mostly just sit back and enjoy stories. After all I feel like there are terrible holes throughout GOT and still enjoy it).



And I agree with “how does the suit work”. It seems to have capabilities beyond time travel. I get she is tethered to the suit, probably due to this DNA stranding it’s coded with, but how she moves through Space easily and in broad ranges I don’t know. It’s honestly something I can live with because I’m me, but I get how it would be a sore spot with people. I’m actually surprised I haven’t heard more about that on boards. I would think it’s some quantam thing built in. But yeah.



I have no problem with Burnham’s story as compared to what happened in the attack. She was 10 years old, terrified and stuck in a closet only hearing the very loud scary Klingons, definitely the death of her father and a whole lot of ransacking. Hours apparently before the Klingons left. I can easily believe she imagined and reimagined for years what went on. I do feel like AI Leland made up seeing her body because he was totally trying to motivate Tyler and Georgiou.


I was a little sorry to skip over Burnham’s reaction to hearing what she saw on Essof was real. Her total child like confusion was a bravura performance I thought and one of the real moments of empathy I experienced in the episode. It’s such an important IMO moment that shows the enormity of this event and informs all her actions throughout.


I thought it was totally in keeping to give her the logs because she would have fought for them tooth and nail. And I think Spock at the very least knew that. I’ve no doubt he also had a copy. Though also Burnham seems perfectly capable of this job and maybe even incapable of ignoring mission pertinent info even through the personal enormity of them.


Re: Leland ...I guess I don’t know that these are nano probes. I guess they are. I simply haven’t heard any of that stated. I do hope this isn’t a borg thing. Seems like different desires out comes between the Borg and AI. The Borg would end if they had no more life to assimilate. But I have little patience with borg, and some people want it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


The 950 years ..... I can’t help but think of Calypso. Why she’s tethered there I have no idea but it’s sure the same era as the short trek Calypso.


Re: red signals. I wonder if NOW that she has no time crystal she does for some reason create the signals. Why I don’t know. But it’s a thought I had. One of those time things where some would say well why didn’t she know that. Well because until she talked to Pike in this jump she hasn’t done it. I also don’t think she k wow ALL things in ALL futures about ALL people. She knows about those impacted by Control and Michael.


Re: Time as a living thing. 1) I feel like this is along the ideas presented of Time people going a little nuts 2) in Voyager that guy that went Ahab with time trying to get his wife back and said something similar. Tom even days to Chakotay “the guy thinks time is out to get him” or something like that. Call back? 3) there is, don’t you think, a fatalistic idea many people have that time wears you down, time changes through life, we already ascribe our perception of time as changeable, as in dragging or going to fast. I think if you were constantly jumping, especially with goals you aren’t achieving like getting your family back or stopping AI and total destruction, you’d really lose some ability to see it as anything but an enemy. As someone facing some mid-age issues, it does seem to start looking liking a foe against your desires and wishes. I can’t blame her for describing it this way. I don’t think Dr. Burnham is evil but I’m not entirely sure she’s completely all there either. She’s like some mythological character doomed to fling herself through time over and over and never engage in life.


I personally love that Spock comes to Burnham and understands how it is she MUST See her mother aside from mission information and that she deserves answers to questions and offers to go with her to Pike to plead her case. I don’t think Pike sends her, I think Spock negotiates for it, leveraging his relationship with Pike to getting him to do it. But I love Spock and Burnham. They are like my entirely favorite thing about the whole season so for me this was a scene that was important but maybe a lot of people found uninteresting.


OK my big big big cranky pants with your cranky pants, is Dr. Burnham’s so called erraticness. She didn’t want to see Michael because she has probably invested a lot of energy and time and thought into distancing herself from Michael because it’s too painful because she can’t get back to her because she she failed in saving her family. She has done the best she could by Michael, visiting her in the past but who knows when that stopped, when that became too hard. It is no surprise to me at all the first time she sees Michael when she can actually converse with her she tries to continue that. This isn’t “just” “my child has been missing for two years and I found them again.” This is “I cannot get back to my child ever. I see her. I see her death. I see her sorrows. I see her triumphs and I cannot share in them. And I am tethered 900 years in the future and she is dead in all possibilities that exist to me.” At this point she is still trying to wall Michael out. It’s not a radical, it’s how she has learned to deal with the situation. Yeah, she’s a little nuts and she’s trying to hang on to what rationality she has to solve the control situation,as she sees it, for good or for ill. The next time she sees Michael, Michael breaks through to her. Maybe she regrets that she hung onto that wall and lost that opportunity to speak to Michael as her child. As a living human being. We have certainly all come away from a conversation that we’ve had that we regret what we did and given the chance go back and respond differently or go back and apologize or go back and be ready to talk. I don’t see this as a radical behavior or nonsensical. To me this is just human behavior. Is she manipulative? I suppose in a way but I don’t think she’s manipulating Michael. I think she’s just giving in to her emotions. This was my biggest grievance here. I think maybe the other points informed your perceptions of these scenes but I watched this with someone who is a fierce mother and who has a difficult relationship with her teen daughter and I can can tell you she related to all of this exceptionally deeply.



(PS I thought her seeing those things were accomplished by going there and using those little camera drones. But whatevs. This is me. I’m willing to let this go. I understand if you cannot).


And I’m just going to say my favorite scene was the last scene. I’m no widely read scholar. Maybe someone has written it better. I loved it. I needed to hear it. Maybe that’s why. I loved this whole scene. I love how he comes in and for once Michael doesn’t try to pull herself together like we’ve been seeing her do every time he enters and she is emotional. Usually she pulls herself up and tries to speak to him like she’s normal but here she’s not even trying. She’s just devastated. And he just goes in and start doing something behind her (which of course we know what) and delivers these truisms as you say to her and basically says it’s up to us. He lets her know she’s not being hung out to dry. He’s letting her know maybe her mother didn’t have all the answers. That maybe they can do something in the here and now and they will try. And mostly that he’s going to help her. He’s not leaving her. I guess maybe he didn’t say it well enough but I thought it was a very Spock moment said in a very Spock way. And I also thought it was a very supportive loving moment that closed off the circle of their mending bridges. Maybe it was too hokey. But it wasn’t for me. I love it.


I have grave concerns about how you’ll receive the rest of the season too. For me while not my favorite episode (though I do not tend to think of this season in terms of favorite episodes but favorite scenes. So probably my favorite episodes is the one with the most favorite scenes.) I still enjoyed it. I’m kind of glad that I’m one of those who lets time travel stories just go and I look at the drama and scenes and relationships (Did this in VOY too) since according to people who like think about time travel for a living say no one gets it right and really really hate Back to the Future because they say it made us time travel dumb. I feel a little bit like a neophyte but, I guess I’m still very entertained. But also I definitely see most of your points. (Except for Dr. Burnham’s being erratic. I totally think she earned all her reactions and also played her role amazingly. )

Mar 31

Sorry to interrupt because there's lots of food for thought in your post, Karen, but since both you and G&V mentioned that there's no explanation for how Dr. B could travel through both time and space in the Red Suit. If the writers had adhered in any way to Einstein's view of the universe in which space and time are essentially interwoven with one another (in fact, physicists refer to "spacetime" as one word), there would be no problem. Well, except that the exact nature of that travel would have to have been worked out.


BTW, Newton's laws of motion have to do with physical bodies. Now, now, Tilly and Saru, let's not get testy. ;)

@pauladz I’m really pretty ok with it. I just think one good line of techno babble about that would have been Useful.

Karen, I love your explanation for why Michael's story about what happened on Doctari Prime differs a little from what we see in this episode. We've all done this with our own memories, perhaps especially with our traumatic memories. I'm still interested in this line from Leland (even though he can't be trusted) about Dr. Burnham's body and am wondering if we are going to see the timeline "reset" a little bit.


I said I was numb to the final conversation between Michael Burnham and Dr. Burnham, but really I was probably deaf to it. I was so consumed by not knowing the rules of the story that I could barely even pay attention to the content of their conversation. I really like your explication of it and I'm looking forward to being able to enjoy it when I binge the season again over the summer.


I also was thinking about favorite and least-favorite episodes of the season because, of course, we are rapidly approaching our wrap-up episode and will want to have that discussion. I like your idea about thinking of it in terms of scenes rather than episodes, and so I think we'll add that to our list. And although I was really cranky about not knowing the rules, I'm actually not sure this is my least-favorite episode of the season so far.

Load more replies

Working my way through the podcast, here are some of my thoughts.


The question of how the suit travels through space is a great one. We went from scientists have a theory that unknown intelligence jumpstarts technology development among different alien species to they have a time suit. Ummm..... what?


The stakes, imo: Dr. Burnham is trying to break the paradox of Contol gets sphere data and becomes self aware. So far nothing that has happened has changed that. There are some paradoxes being ignored so far. I guess we wait and find out.


Leland is more likable because, even though he's evil, he has clarity of purpose which projects strength, that humans find appealing. This is same reason Gergiou seems less interesting as the season goes on, no purpose and less mystery about her.


I agree what is missing is the fun. Way too fixated on Burnham, Burnham, Burnham. Bridge crew gets nothing to do which is sad.

Great point about Leland. The word I’d use to describe him previously is “wishy washy”. That is gone. I disagree Georgious is less interesting! I have loved her more subtle character the last two episodes. She has improved to me. I actually feel like she’s growing something close to a conscience. And I particularly love that Dr. Burnham called her on her bluff that she does not care about Michael. Odddly I’ve actually grown to love Burnham who I just liked previously. Why am I always so opposite of everyone!!? Lol.

Load more replies

I'm guessing that as part of defeating Control Dr. Burnham ends up back in time where she was, no suit present and things turn out as Burnham remembers.

Oh that’s possible. Sad too. But it’s not like her fate was very kind either way.

On the time limit.

Spock walks in with downloaded mission logs. 841 of them. Burnham takes them to look at while they wait for Dr. Burnham to regain consciousness. At an average length of 1 min that's 14 hrs of logs to watch. At 3 min length its 42 hrs of logs. Why did a time limit kick in when Dr. Burnham woke up?


I think the podcast understates Tlyers choice not to transmit data in this episode a little bit. He deliberately chose not to try and steal the data, which is the real turning point for his character as a Section 31 agent. His dramatic message was extremely silly.


What about rest of the crew on Section 31 ships? Don't save any of them I guess.

Haha, yeah, maybe everyone else has already been injected with the nanoprobes, too?

@Daniel Falch I think they forgot to installs those at the same time they were forgetting to install door locks.

Apr 1Edited: Apr 1

OK OK, I'm back to the suit again. I watched City on the Edge of Forever again last night (watched a bunch of TOS actually and I want to do a thread on some things I thought of while doing so in comparison to Discovery coverage in general). What strikes me is Spock's comments on one theory of time (which apparently is the foundation of this story and true).


SPOCK: There is a theory. There could be some logic to the belief that time is fluid, like a river, with currents, eddies, backwash. KIRK: And the same currents that swept McCoy to a certain time and place might sweep us there, too.


If one thinks about this, there are also currents like rip tides, which are deceptive and pull you away. (Forgive me if I don't get current/tide/water theory right but some of this is just my watching water observation and some just on the bits I know). Like you can get close, you can see, you can get near and then be yanked away.


The suit was in development. Yet to be tested. Not "perfected". Plus I do believe there is another factor involved, that we just do not know yet and I reaaaaally wonder if it is connected to Calypso. At any rate, Dr. Burnham is yanked away from her intended destination, which she had to have programmed as she intended to go back one hour, and tethered to a specific time, to which she is always pulled.


In some regards, I think she is throwing herself at the "present" time because that is one of the whorls of currents the suit can get to or near, over and over, but cannot exactly land. I think the reason she could interact was the whole containment trap. Otherwise, it was almost like (in my simple mind. Remember I'm no scientist or writer) she was interphasic in some regards. Without being held *out* of the suit, she couldn't interact at all, except with Spock (and I would suppose, if he was involved with Michael all her life instead of the last year, probably Stamets).


I suppose too, that because we are always talking about "time space" (and this is simply not new to Trek, whether or not it is a thing) is this maybe a feature of the suit that is a by-product, not an intended feature. And the more she used the suit the more she figured out how to move both in time and time space. Isn't that kind of the nature of some wormholes? (thinking of the micro wormhole in that VOY episode where they contact the Romulan in the Alpha Quadrant but then find out not only is he 70000 light years away in space but 20 years different in time). So these little wormholes she makes can be both time and space traveled. I personally, depending on how this season is resolved, think it would be a great short trek to spend some time with mama Burnham in learning the suit.


Hmmm. I may be getting way from my "time currents/fluid time" original point but I don't have ocean experience, but I used to spend a lot of time in my youth Zoning out at creeks and rivers and one thing I noticed, especially along the edges, are not only to currents and eddies and such sweep into an area and carry things there, sometimes you can watch debris circle and circle and circle a spot but not ever (seemingly) get carried to the center. Is this suit handling time like that? Can Dr. Burnham get near but rarely exactly to areas? Is this how she appeared so late to Burnham in her death instead of moments before?


OK that is probably way too much effort and thought into this, but ...... I actually can accept all the vagaries around the suit and Dr. Burnham's efforts when I think about this current, fluid time theory Spock talked about in CotEoF. (oh and one last thing. It kind of makes sense to me that small, non-structured Spock could receive a message more easily than adult, trying to make all things in his mind fit logically and it messes him up Spock. Children are just so much less complicated and accepting in a lot of ways as opposed to we adults -see above mental stream of analytic consciousness- at looking past all the extraneous details and explanations to the point. :D )



Karen, this is how I spent much of my summer when we were dealing with the philosophy and physics of time and alien metaphors about time for the Gene Wolfe novel The Fifth Head of Cerberus for The Gene Wolfe Literary Podcast. I'm still mostly just rocking back and forth and mumbling to myself.


Apr 1

I'm just now starting to listen to the podcast, but I thought this DSC episode was ever so slightly better than the last one. Maybe it's because I've given up on anything making sense. So, when Culber is again the only medical staff or they triple-down on the Burnham DNA confusion or there's yet another randomly cobbled together plan that's immediately, absolutely agreed upon to be the most streamlined, least dangerous and highest chance of success plan possible... Well, the confusion barely registers. The constant sound of "But, why?" echoing in my brain has been reduced to background noise, I suppose.


I'm unfamiliar with her other work, but I did think Sonja Sohn gave a good performance as Burnham's mother. So, there's that.


There's a lot of problematic stuff though. I guess mystery nanobots can be used to create invincible cyborgs now. Timesuits that can navigate both space and time can now be cobbled together by a couple of independent scientists with black market parts.


More significant are the unexplained character inconsistencies, which were on display again. Burnham's mom seemed super motivated to keep up a stony facade, until she didn't. Spock's been a jerk to his sister this season, until he wasn't. Georgiou was a cartoonish and evil character, until they decided she wasn't. Culber was ready to sever all human connection, until a quick talk with Cornwell changed his mind. I'm all for character evolution, but there should be some kind of long-form arc or violent catalyst to the changes if the viewer is going to accept them. On Discovery, traits and motivations are just thrown up on the screen, whenever the writers like and we're left being unable to connect with what's going on. It's part of why most of the characters on the show seem so wafer thin to many of us.


And how about Michael? Again, I felt like the show did her character no favors. She amounts to nothing but crazy extremes at this point. Too often, it seems like she's either condescending to someone or lecturing or yelling - or she's a puddle of tears with her mouth agape. As the plotlines for the show almost entirely run through her, and they insist on a breakneck pace of epic tragedies as the basis for the story, this character is in danger of becoming nothing but a collection of tics. The miseries continue to pile up both for Burnham and the viewer. At the very least, it has me wondering where the joy and fun is in all this.



I do not understand why characters have to maintain exactly the same facade 100% of the time. What kind of arc would that be? Spock has been IMO, incrementally bringing himself under control over 5 episodes and by the Red Angel, they made a breakthrough, (beautifully I thought) and reached the place where they could listen to each other. He literally said in their fight "until you admit that you take responsibility for everything, even things not in your control we cannot begin again" (or words to that effect) and in the Red Angel, that is exactly what she realized she did that he was right and she says "you are right, I do this" and he also then compromised (in what to him was obviously unnecessary but he could see it would ease her suffering) and accepted her apology. And since then he has had her back. That is character growth and relationship growth. And Burnham's mom wasn't just not talking to her. SHe's spent an awful lot of time and heartache attempting to fix things (sound familiar?) and is tethered to a future so far ahead that Michael really is dead because Gabrielle is stuck there. Just because maybe she regretted she kept Michael at arms length that first meeting or that Michael's presence that second time got to her, and the emotions broke, the wall broke, that doesn't make her inconsistent either. As far as Michael goes, I guess these last few episodes she has IMO earned the right to be emotional. People make fun of her tragic background and complain about wild character developments in her life, but I'd like them to list all of Ben Sisko's pretty epically unordinary profile and start with being a minor deity. I don't know. I just think they are handling character development really well. I really love all these relationships. I really don't need seven seasons of slow character arcs to see a character develop. It actually makes me nuts when it takes months (or years) for a character to really grow. Sometimes I wonder if I am watching a completely different show than other people. I don't understand how I view things so differently.

Apr 1

@Karen Chuplis In fairness to myself, I didn't say I wanted characters to never change. I merely want the change they undergo to make sense to me in the realm of typical human responses I see in real life. By way of an example, one cannot just yell at a person or tell them they *MUST* see they're wrong and expect them to regularly capitulate and reverse course. Burnham regularly has this power over people on the show and it's bonkers.


I could go on. I don't know why Stamets went from desperately wanting Culber to putting him off. I don't know why Culber seems to have dropped back into normalcy so easily. I don't know why Dr. Burnham went from utterly committed to keeping her guard up to suddenly being an open book. I don't know why Leland suddenly became contrite to Michael and let her punch him for something it didn't seem in his established character to take the blame for. I don't know why Georgiou went from bloodthirsty to cuddly. I don't know why Naan didn't hold a grudge for nobody caring she was suffocating. I don't know why Spock snapped out of his mumbly fugue or why he has softened toward Michael so dramatically.


Could any or all of these things happen in the randomness of life? Yes! The problem is that each and every one of these was an unexpected reversal and we as viewers have to back-fill the reasons they happened from our own speculations. There didn't seem to be justification for them presented to us in the actual story. As far as the mostly good Michael-Spock relationship evolution goes, the best guess I can make as to why it eventually happened is that it was episode eight and it was past time for Spock to start contributing something to the season. That's pretty weak as far as character motivations go.


Blame my attention span, possibly. If subtle cues or deft explanations for these dangling character motivations were given on the show and I missed them, I guess it's my loss.

@Greg I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to make it seem like YOU must see it my way. I’m sorry if it came across that way. That’s why I said I don’t understand how I see things so differently from others. I don’t find a single character acting oddly or out of the blue in any of the ways you mention. And it’s not like I’m not somewhat picky. I’m used to analyzing as an actor and maybe that makes me perceive it differently. Although I watch with a friend who is a non-Trekkie and she also perceived these characters and relationships similarly. I’m just sad I guess. I think they’ve all had such beautiful arch’s and I wish everyone could see them that way. But I absolutely did not mean you had to. Im sorry if it came across that way.

Load more replies

Content warning…


Ever since the appearance of Burnham's mother, I have been really bothered by the "rape question" about Burnham's memories. As you guys mentioned in the podcast, maybe they will come around to explain the discrepancy between the memories and what was shown this week. I hope so, because if the rape of her parents just turns out to be a "mistaken" childhood memory, that's the last thing we need in our culture right now.


This season coincides with the advent of the MeToo movement, and American culture is already deeply suspicious of rape claims, even though (as far as I understand) all credible research indicates that rapes are vastly underreported and almost never falsely so. Yet the idea that false rape accusations are routine is pervasive thanks to a few high-profile cases that always get sensationalized.


I'd hate for a liberal cultural institution like Star Trek to, however indirectly, contribute to this narrative with a cheap "oh man, I thought it was rape but it wasn't" story just to play on the audience's emotions for a few months.



Yes. This bothers me, as well. From a storytelling perspective, soldiers raping Dr. Burnham was aligned with one of the themes of the first season: that war is awful and that people suffer horribly but are also encourage to be horrible people. Now as the show wants to move on from that theme, we don't want that detail around any more, I guess?

@G.L. McDorman As I recall we all assumed that. I believe she said "they took hours". Frankly, I did NOT get that until I read and listened to a lot of people naming it. I thought "I guess I am naive". But I suppose they didn't correct that so it is? I don't know. I feel like *we* the fan base gave it that. But her saying "it took hours" was Michael hearing the Klingons tearing the place apart. Frankly, maybe I am still naive. Maybe this is another case of writers being purposefully vague. I don't know.

@Karen Chuplis True! Part of the reason this has been on my mind at all is thanks to Glenn's conscientious reminders this season about that part of Michael's recollection. I probably wouldn't have been thinking about the issue if I didn't listen to the podcast :)

Load more replies

On a lighter note, I'm 100% unbothered by the space/time travelling capabilities of the suit. It never even occurred to me to question how a time-travelling suit would also allow you to travel arbitrarily through space. I guess I just intuitively figured that travelling through space is "relatively" (har) much easier than through time, so if you can manage the harder one you can probably easily manage the former.


The thing I really don't get about the suit is the transporting of that whole church from Earth to Terralysium. I never quite picked up from the episode that Terralysium was Dr Burnham's "home base" but instead took her mention of it to be saying that she was definitely the one that had transported the people from WW3 to the Beta Quadrant. Even with pretty generous technological assumptions, I don't see how the suit could do that.

Was thinking about that tonight. What if she has, like her little detachable cameras, little detachable “time charges” that she placed around the church that extends the range of the suit. If I was to write a flashback that’s what I’d do.

Oh this would be so cool. You write it, I"ll geek out on it.

Lol. I really do wish I could write. I would do it.

Lol. I really do wish I could write. I would do it.

Apr 3

A horrifying prospect just occurred to me. Many of us have been scratching our heads at how far this show has gone in selling out to propping up the supposedly upcoming Section 31 show. It hasn't seemed to matter to the franchise-runners that Section 31 is a very strange setting for a Trek show or that it seems to indicate taking the brand into ever "darker" stories. They're good with their show lead being a gleeful cannibal genocidal dictator as long as she's "cool." After all, she has maternal feelings. <eye roll>


Given this, is it possible that this whole Leland and Control plot exists to set up a permanent enemy for the Section 31 show? I imagine the writers wanting a way to make Section 31 (as represented by Georgiou and Tyler) into good guys. They have to do that, right? In order to do this, the easiest (laziest) way to do this is to come up with a worse baddie for them to fight against on the new show, so they look good in comparison. Leland and/or Control could serve as this kind of permanent foil.


Time travel, knowledge of all galactic events future and past and spatial travel between locations occurring instantly have all been shoddily established by Discovery. This means our heroes Ash and Phillipa could jet around the galaxy week to week shooting down the plans of evil Control, as it tries to ferret out the lost time suit and locate the elusive sphere data.


This sounds so much like something this crew would write, I almost want to put a bet on it.

Is the Section 31 show a certainty? Whose running it? This seems like too much just to set up a different show.


All the talk about new trek is just talk until they do it.

@Daniel Falch It is. Show runners are Bo Yeon Kim and Erika Lippoldt. Neither of whom I think are lazy or unknowledgeable. I believe Erika has a PhD in Neurobiology. both wrote for Reign before coming to Discovery.

I mean, I guess technically it's not in the bag until its on film but I know they are breaking stories.

Load more replies
New Posts
  • I had missed some of the bonus content and am finally getting to your coverage of S1 ep1 Caretaker. I've really enjoyed it. I have seen the first 3 or 4 seasons back when they originally aired but haven't seen any since then. I can't say that Voyager stuck with me, it's my least favorite Trek. So my question for anyone is: What are the 5-10 best episodes of Voyager?
  • I am not the biggest Voyager fan. The series never lived up to the potential I thought it had. So my disappointment in it is all on my end as a viewer. That being said I recently watched the premiere episode again and was impressed by how good it was. The intro starts with a text crawl that looks like it came from a 16 bit video game. Its terrible. I don't think it was needed, some other contextual clue would have been better. The intro then drops us right in the action with Maquis being chased by Cardassians and disappearing. This is more action than most episodes get right off the bat. The main function of a premier is to show us the crew, the ship and the setting. Voyager does an excellent job introducing the crew. Disgraced officers, rebels and a mix of new and veteran Starfleet personnel promises for an interesting show. Captain Janeway is fully fleshed out from the get go, they did a great job making her character feel real for the audience. The cameo by Quark is also very well used, setting up a crucial friendship between Paris and Kim. They spend enough time and give us something about all of our main cast here which is a very strong start. The ship doesn't need alot of time and doesn't get it. It can't compare to the Enterprise so they don't try. It's a smart choice. The plot in how they ended up in the situation is where this gets a little thin. I actually think they would have been better served by making the alien more incomprehensible rather than a hologram that babbles. Janeway makes a difficult and understandable choice, but if I was a crewman I would be mightily pissed off. This is a strong start for the series and is the second best premier, after DS9, in my opinion. It was way lower for me prior to this rewatch, so I am somewhat surprised by Voyager here.

Claytemple Media is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to