Star Trek: Lower Decks - No Small Parts

[cloudkitt]

His point about the TYPE of added depth that retroactively improved Mariner's character is right on the money and incidentally describes the problem with so many recent protagonists.

[Thebestoftherest]

I do like how they unintendedly acknowledge the problem with Exocomps morality, since when we first see them they wanted to sacrifice themselves to save the ship, here not so much so it is a question of morality.

[CharlesPhipps]

I do like how they unintendedly acknowledge the problem with Exocomps morality, since when we first see them they wanted to sacrifice themselves to save the ship, here not so much so it is a question of morality.

Peanut Hamper really screwed herself as the worst she'd get for not agreeing to the suicide mission would be probably a mark on her record.

[griffeytrek]

His point about the TYPE of added depth that retroactively improved Mariner's character is right on the money and incidentally describes the problem with so many recent protagonists.

The point that they finally arrived at with Mariner is Michael Burnham done right. She certainly feels like less of a cartoon character than Mikey Spock.

[MightyDavidson]

I do like how they unintendedly acknowledge the problem with Exocomps morality, since when we first see them they wanted to sacrifice themselves to save the ship, here not so much so it is a question of morality.

Peanut Hamper really screwed herself as the worst she'd get for not agreeing to the suicide mission would be probably a mark on her record.

And given that she can beam herself away with literally a thought, the odds of her dying during that mission seem really slim.

[CharlesPhipps]

His point about the TYPE of added depth that retroactively improved Mariner's character is right on the money and incidentally describes the problem with so many recent protagonists.

The point that they finally arrived at with Mariner is Michael Burnham done right. She certainly feels like less of a cartoon character than Mikey Spock.

I'd argue Michael Burnham's biggest character problem is the Janeway problem writ large.

1. Is she a cold and emotionless human raised by Vulcans?
2. Is she a radical rebel who has nothing to lose?
3. Is she an idealistic by the book Starfleet officer?
4. Is she a warm and caring best friend?
5. Is she now a space smuggler?
6. Is she now the captain?

They're always changing Michael to try to get her in with the audiences, unaware you have to just let the character be liked or not based on their merits.

[McAvoy]

His point about the TYPE of added depth that retroactively improved Mariner's character is right on the money and incidentally describes the problem with so many recent protagonists.

The point that they finally arrived at with Mariner is Michael Burnham done right. She certainly feels like less of a cartoon character than Mikey Spock.

I'd argue Michael Burnham's biggest character problem is the Janeway problem writ large.

1. Is she a cold and emotionless human raised by Vulcans?
2. Is she a radical rebel who has nothing to lose?
3. Is she an idealistic by the book Starfleet officer?
4. Is she a warm and caring best friend?
5. Is she now a space smuggler?
6. Is she now the captain?

They're always changing Michael to try to get her in with the audiences, unaware you have to just let the character be liked or not based on their merits.

Don't forget that apparently she has a voice in the Federation Council somehow.

There is one thing about changing a character like they did with Sisko going from a generic commander (Starfleet wise, not as a widower) to a soldier or warrior captain.

Or going from Dax trying to be a old person with centuries of wisdom with a young body to Jadzia being a fun person with Dax there providing the wisdom as needed.

Michael is just all over the place.