▲
Deleted the bullet point under Unintentionally Sympathetic about Admiral Vance, because by now it's clear that Vance being sympathetic isn't unintentional at all.
The same guy as all those other Andrusis. Except that one.
Removed:
- Big-Lipped Alligator Moment: Leland getting stabbed through the eye in "The Red Angel" comes out of nowhere and is clearly meant to be a shocking moment, but it makes no logical sense — how did Control, at this point still an AI with no physical form, manage to create that needle-thingy inside a retinal scanner? — and isn't addressed at all in the next episode aside from Leland being its prisoner.
Just questioning the logic of a certain sequence or plot point is a Headscratcher. A BLAM is about a sequence that: Appears Out of Nowhere, is Strange In Context and Goes Nowhere. In this case, it's not really an example of any of these: It doesn't appear out of nowhere. It's established that Control is an AI that can manipulate machinery inside starships and bases. It's not really Strange In Context because AI and other external forces taking over people's brains and bodies is an existing thing in the show and Star Trek in general. And it doesn't go nowhere, because the fact that Leland gets taken over by use of the needle thing is a major plot point.
There sure could be a Headscratcher for "What is the precise method that Control used to get that needle thing into that retinal scanner?" But that's not a BLAM.
Edited by CaptainCrawdad
▲
How can the Klingons be both Unintentionally Sympathetic *and* Unintentionally Unsympathetic for the same actions? Either they were intended to be sympathetic or they weren't.
Edited by Andrusi The same guy as all those other Andrusis. Except that one.
Is it accurate to list Captain Georgiou as an Ensemble Dark Horse? That trope is for minor characters who unexpectedly proved popular (such as Airiam), while Georgiou's pretty clearly meant to be The Mentor and an important figure in Burnham's life.
Does the "win the crowd" entry here still apply? Reception has been rather mixed amongst the audience after the show actually aired the first two episodes.
There's also some question about that positive reception raised, for example, Midnight's Edge in their discussion of the first two episodes and critical response to them https://youtu.be/YpGSHYGBVOU
noted that it seems similar to Batman vs Superman and Ghostbusters 2016 in that it wasn't screened for critics, but the twitter reports of pre-screenings were positive - only for the actual works to come out and hit a mostly negative or mixed fan response.
I think it's still too early to say for sure. We've only seen two episodes, and according to Word of God the third episode is the "real" pilot which introduces more of the main cast and the actual premise. Let's wait until that one airs and see what the reaction is.
It currently has a 60% audience reaction on Rotten Tomatoes. That really isn't high enough in my opinion to say that disillusioned fans are flocking back.
While the third episode seems to have gotten a better reception than the first two, I agree it's hard to argue with raw numbers. Let's remove the entry for now.
Removed:
- Captain Obvious Reveal:
- Many of the show's fans suspected that Tyler was really a surgically altered Voq right after his first episode was released, meaning that The Reveal about his true identity being dragged out across most of the first season felt more like Dramatic Irony than an unexpected plot twist.
- For some, the fact that Lorca is actually from Mirror Universe is such, but less clear-cut than the above theory due to the existence of Section 31.
This seems to be stretching the trope too far. Captain Obvious Reveal is supposed to be about twists that are, well, obvious to any viewer. It's not for any twist that got guessed by a section of the online community. That's just I Knew It!.
I don't think it's fair to include Fanon Discontinuity here. Every series has its supporters and detractors, and Discovery isn't even halfway through its first season yet. The FD page also explicitly says "Please only post examples of the fandom as a whole disregarding an event", which isn't even close to being the case.
Hide / Show Replies
Then why is it a YMMV trope, if it has to be unanimous? It makes no sense.
It certainly applies to a lot of the people who are trashing the show.
That's true of anything, though. There are plenty of Trek purists who disregard anything that comes after TNG, or even TOS. That doesn't make them reflective of the whole fandom, or even a majority of the fandom.
It's YMMV because it's based on opinion, not an actual trope used in the media itself. Unless the Hatedom becomes a huge majority, and that Hatedom kicks it out of their collective headcanon, Fanon Discontinuity does not apply.
Edited by Mitchz95
There's a pretty damn large hatedom for Discovery, but as far as I know, they're not even necessarily on board for Fanon Discontinuity, they just don't think it's a good Star Trek and misses what makes a good one.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Why was internet backlash removed regarding Georgious fate and the killing of another asian POC? There was actually backlash regarding this.
So its inclusion is not sour grapes but a statement of fact.
Hide / Show Replies
For the record, my edit was more for the incorrect usage of unperson. Cause Spock wasn't stating that everyone pretends Discovery and its crew don't exist (indeed, Michael was widely known beforehand, so that wouldn't work), what he's suggesting is that the people in the know don't bring it up, and if someone who doesn't know the truth brings it up they avoid answering or claim it's classified or they don't know or some other reason why they can't discuss it as starfleets cover certain information up. Over time interest would fade, That's why I edited it. If you felt I was wrong, please feel free to re-insert it.