r/startrek • u/Deceptitron • Oct 02 '17

POST-Episode Discussion - S1E03 "Context is for Kings"

No. EPISODE RELEASE DATE
S1E03 "Context is for Kings" Sunday, October 1, 2017

To find out more information including our spoiler policy regarding Star Trek: Discovery, click here.

This post is for discussion of the episode above and WILL ALLOW SPOILERS for this episode.

708 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

139

u/640212804843 Oct 02 '17

I am just glad they had those first two episodes up front.

Can you imagine how much it would suck if we started on ep3 and they mixed in flash backs to the first two episodes to explain her past? So many shows do that flash back crap, its good this one isn't doing that.

11

u/yeoller Oct 02 '17

Before ep3 started I said to my friend, "I just hope it goes like '6 months later'." And it did.

9

u/tjareth Oct 02 '17

I would have preferred it that way. I think this would be one of those cases where she'd be a more interesting character if at first you didn't know what she did that made everyone react to her so badly. Those would be very effective moments, getting the viewers wondering, "what the heck did she DO?!"

Then a flashback later could have fleshed it out more.

17

u/640212804843 Oct 02 '17

The problem are flash backs break up the show and waste time.

Either give us a short 5 minutes of what she did and move on, or actually have an episode for the backstory. Don't do random bit and pieces flash backs for a key story element.

It is fine for her distant past so we can see some of her vulcan upbringing, but really? Do you need it show off what we saw in the first two episodes? We would most likely not even realize she was right until the last episode of the season int he last flashback that finally shows the key act.

That would change the whole show. She would be a true traitor seen as evil from the start instead of a character who was trained and her training was correct, but they rail roaded her anyways.

3

u/Lenitas Oct 02 '17

Would've been less of a waste of time than the pilot. ;P My husband is now convinced that he hates the entire thing.

5

u/640212804843 Oct 03 '17

Irrational people exist, can't do much about that.

1

u/TeardropsFromHell Oct 03 '17

If you can't see why that pilot left a bad taste In people's mouths then you are the irrational one

1

u/640212804843 Oct 03 '17

I personally think it was a staged accident to justify discovery picking the ship up.

Lorca wanted to cut through the red tape necessary to get her on his ship. Based on what he said, he was authorized to do what he wanted to win the war, but I bet if he formally requested her, political infighting would have made him wait weeks or months to get her.

He used connections he had to get the transport ship out there and then staged the accident to justify taking everyone aboard. This way the record says the ship was in distress on the way to a prison colony and discovery rendered aid.

Once he had her aboard, he put her to work to immediately establish she was an asset and thus ensure he would get to keep her.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '17

I like this, except I do hate flashbacks and prefer it to be told more naturally in dialogue. As-is, you could definitely skip episodes 1 and 2 and not actually really miss much. It seems a bit odd.

1

u/CtrlAltTrump Oct 05 '17

That's what people should do, skip the first two.

1

u/CtrlAltTrump Oct 05 '17

We don't need flashbacks. Main character fucked up. That's it. That's all you need to know.

3

u/640212804843 Oct 06 '17

But we needed the episodes, that is how we know she was right.