This is less a review of this episode and more a review of the entire show so far.
The biggest problem 'Star Trek: Discovery' has is, that it feels like the overarching plot idea could've been really good, but the every episode is badly executed. It's like a story that spread by people telling it to each other, and everyone who told it added something of their own, exaggerated certain plot-points to add more action, which inevitably caused plot holes or characters acting unreasonable for the sake of 'more action'.
For instance, there is no reason why the Vulcan suicide bomber from the "Logic Extremists" (there's a oxymoron for you) couldn't just have tried to shoot Sarek in the back and then set the autopilot of the ship to "fly into the next sun". Instead he had to blow himself up in an "Iron Man 3"-fashion for some reason.
The true problem: But for me the real penny dropped when Michael was in the mind of Sarek. This entire story was never supposed to be Michael's, it is SPOCK's story. This is the reason why it is a pre- quel to the old series, this is the reason why Michael is "the only human that ever graduated from the Vulcan Science Academy".
Everything Michael is supposed to struggle with, her Vulcan upbringing and her human emotions would work so much better, if her character was replaced by a pre-Enterprise Spock, a younger Spock, who is heavily torn between his human and his Vulcan side.
I believe this story, has been rewritten over and over again, on the one hand to add needless action and conflict for the sake of adding conflict, and this story has been rewritten because they replaced Spock with Michael.
Despite this the writers are trying to keep the overall course of the original plot. And that is the reason why 'Star Trek: Discovery' feels like a couple of pieces and scenes that don't seem to fit properly together, with people reacting in irrational ways to advance it.
The biggest problem 'Star Trek: Discovery' has is, that it feels like the overarching plot idea could've been really good, but the every episode is badly executed. It's like a story that spread by people telling it to each other, and everyone who told it added something of their own, exaggerated certain plot-points to add more action, which inevitably caused plot holes or characters acting unreasonable for the sake of 'more action'.
For instance, there is no reason why the Vulcan suicide bomber from the "Logic Extremists" (there's a oxymoron for you) couldn't just have tried to shoot Sarek in the back and then set the autopilot of the ship to "fly into the next sun". Instead he had to blow himself up in an "Iron Man 3"-fashion for some reason.
The true problem: But for me the real penny dropped when Michael was in the mind of Sarek. This entire story was never supposed to be Michael's, it is SPOCK's story. This is the reason why it is a pre- quel to the old series, this is the reason why Michael is "the only human that ever graduated from the Vulcan Science Academy".
Everything Michael is supposed to struggle with, her Vulcan upbringing and her human emotions would work so much better, if her character was replaced by a pre-Enterprise Spock, a younger Spock, who is heavily torn between his human and his Vulcan side.
I believe this story, has been rewritten over and over again, on the one hand to add needless action and conflict for the sake of adding conflict, and this story has been rewritten because they replaced Spock with Michael.
Despite this the writers are trying to keep the overall course of the original plot. And that is the reason why 'Star Trek: Discovery' feels like a couple of pieces and scenes that don't seem to fit properly together, with people reacting in irrational ways to advance it.
