GuyFleegman

Right, I said it's "not bad," hardly a ringing endorsement. It had some good ideas and concepts but it also has a lot of flaws, which is why it's quite unfortunate that it's the best Discovery ever managed.

My problem with season 4 wasn't that it was slow, but that it was uninspired and by-the-numbers. I had worked out that the DMA was a "stepping on an anthill" situation by... episode 4, maybe? 5 at the latest. So then I got to watch one of the oldest tropes in sci-fi unfold for 8 more episodes, played completely straight. Yawn.

I'd rather watch the B-plot from S01E06 of Babylon 5 to experience that particular story again. That way I'd be done in an hour.

Yes, exactly. Season 1 knew what it wanted to be. When it was over, I remember thinking "alright, not bad, I'm excited to watch this show grow the beard."

But it never did. In retrospect, Season 1 is the strongest season the show had to offer. Each subsequent season got a little worse as plots got more confusing, themes got more muddled, and no breakout characters emerged to carry the show through an abundance of narrative turmoil and worldbuilding strangeness. But above all else, seasons 3 and 4 are just boring. I don't care about the crew or their mission. The most interesting characters are consistently the outsiders: Pike, Vance, Rillak. I'll be watching season 5, but mostly out of a sense of obligation and morbid curiosity.

As much as I like SNW, it's still not quite the show I've been waiting since 2005 for: seven curious officers on a ship called Enterprise set in the mid-25th century. I worry that SNW has robbed us of the opportunity to see the classic formula set in the immediate post-TNG era... even though that seems to be what season three of Picard was explicitly setting up.

account from "An instance dedicated to nature and science"

asked to provide evidence for claims

refuses

Cullen

Seems like he's talking about... Twilight?

It doesn’t. The episodes just get longer and more boring as the show progresses. The cancellation isn’t exactly a mystery.

""""loudly declare""""

Adira tells Stamets their pronouns, and Stamets says "okay" approvingly. That's it. That's the full extent of what you are calling a "big deal."

You understand that even in a society where everyone is allowed to "just be," accidental misgendering is still going to happen and corrections will still need to be communicated, right? Marco misgendered Nico on their first appearance, so Nico must have corrected him. You are effectively arguing that enby representation is only acceptable if actual conversations about gender occur off-screen.

A "multi episode story arc"? You mean these 90 seconds? The only way this bit of character and relationship development could be less "heavy handed" would be if it didn't happen at all.

but as someone else pointed out it's still not super common for gay characters, especially male characters, to be shown as being romantically involved, which can be jarring when you're not used to it. Dunno, it's weird.

Yep, many people still struggle with it. What do you think it would take to change this?

That's not a particularly unique perspective, many Trekkies choose to process Star Trek as "historical documents." There's a movie about it.

What I don't understand is why you've assigned this theoretical camera crew the intent of "get the camera on the gay dudes, stat" when "get the camera on the relationship between the two main characters" is a much simpler explanation. There are entire episodes dedicated to Odo & Kira, Paris & Torres or Trip & T'Pol relationship drama. Stamets & Culber screen time pales in comparison, and at least Stamets & Culber have some chemistry.

It’s 24XX, who the hell is still getting bent out of shape about homosexuality 400 years from now?

I'm pretty lukewarm on Discovery, I've seen all of it but most episodes only once, so maybe I just don't remember it. Who got bent out of shape over Stamets and/or Culber being gay?

That’s true, it could have been worse. She could have been as stupid as she is ugly.