This scene absolutely melted me. Superb writing by the writers this season and they did a wonderful job depicting Ni'var and what a Romulan / Vulcan society would look like.
"Why should we believe you?"...mmm your right. If only there were someone nearby who could perform a technique that could literally see inside a person's mind? Say a mind meld for instance? Ohhh wait there is an entire planet of people who could do that!
Yes but they could still tell if a person is being truthful or not. Spock has even found out truth from people who are actively trying to hide it. (Lt. Valeris)
@@rayzermaniac5218 I didn’t think it was about her being truthful. I thought it was about proving her point. She kept saying they had proof but they didn’t care. They didn’t see why they should help. And burnham couldn’t get the point across. She was so clouded emotionally I think reading her mind would have been a mess. They might just called her insane . They sometimes think that about humans when they don’t get our emotional complexity when they see our lack of logic (or Did I get that from a fan fix? 😬)Once mom helped, I think it was better but burnham was right to give up since they have too many other issues for them to come to a clear agreement. Great drama regardless.
Now that the show has been unshackled from the burden of the time period it was set it, it's really starting to come into it's own. It was always a massive mistake to set it when they did.
I fully agree this is the Star Trek story telling we love to see. This is the setting Discovery should have been in from beginning. My biggest issue until 3rd season has been it was just set in the wrong time.
Absolute candor is the way of the Quowat Milat. Their job as advocate is to cut through bullshit in order for a person to speak truthfully in this way they seem to be like a lawyer/therapist making both parties more honest. It's harsh but I like it
This is why defendants rarely take the stand in a criminal court case. They don't know what the other side will ask about. This is like a Vulcan version of a hearing. A verification might have been too much for the vulcans to handle.
she represents the other point of the spectrum from where Spock occupies his. i bet you that Spock's distance from his Humanity is the same distance as Michael's is from her Vulcan-ness. besides, she is human; her mother herself said that she was never Vulcan, despite internalizing certain aspects of the culture.
She suppressed her emotions originally, but her time with Georgiou on the Shenzhou was her embracing her humanity, as explained in the second episode of the show
Yes, she was trying to focus on starfleets intent while ignoring her own motives and self interests. That was clouding her argument I think. Once her mom confronted her in this, Michael illustrated how her belief in star fleet guides her through her doubts. So her behavior and seemingly chaotic past could be linked logically to her actions and why the nivar could trust her and thus starfleet.She laid it out for them. “I’ve been through hell and through it all, starfleet was the thing I always believed in and the one constant I will fight for and this is why.” I loved this scene. Or I just really identified with the characters doubts and imposter syndrome. 😁
@@Mxyzptlksac I wonder how a space version of Game of Thrones would work out? Politics, stab, shoot, kill, power grab, usurp, and taking out entire planets maybe interesting. Game of Thrones had a lot of family dysfunctions.
Consider Star Trek: The Next Generation. Picard had a rocky relationship with both his dad and his brother. Riker and his father were barely on speaking terms. Troi was constantly feuding with her mom. Although they were never in the same episode, we learn that Ishara Yar was angry at her sister Tasha for leaving their planet. Despite his best efforts, Data couldn't get along with his brother Lore. Family dysfunction was certainly a big part of the New Generation.
Michael's mom seems to use her "relationship" with her daughter as a tool more than anything else - a means to justify the ends. At the beginning of the episode, the mom implies that Michael can trust her inexplicably and then uses the trust against her, even if for good reason. Then a few episodes later, she asks her as a "daughter" to help her stop a murderer who she believes, despite all evidence, has good intentions. I believe their dynamic is summed up to what her mom told Michael when they first met, "I let go of my daughter a long time ago (paraphrasing here)." In my opinion, they're merely two people aware of the fact that they are biologically related; and as much as they want that to mean something more familial, it doesn't. Time, or the loss thereof, has misshapen their bond.
@@Szten The "everything is dire" is certainly something also present with Star Wars and the overly dramatic is part of that and over-the-top but the performance of the Vulcan mother here ending with the subtle hint of pride in her daughter, I thought, was really well done. And MB being petulant, well, that's her character, so it's still that.
@Space Thing I must have misunderstood as I don't watch the show; the woman standing next to MB, appearing and sounding like a Vulcan while talking about wishing a different upbringing for MB is not her adoptive mother? Are you talking about species or kinship? The woman in this scene calls her daughter here ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yGfAmpmIAxE.html Not a Vulcan? Noted, thanks!
The one thing I don’t understand is some species like the Vulcan aren’t suppose to show emotion yet often when they talk they seem like they are trying not to be emotional. I sometimes like this show and sometimes do not as it picks and chooses when it wants to follow the material set in stone before it was written
Vulcan's have very strong emotions but Surak taught that to avoid the vicious wars of the past they had to suppress their emotions and embrace logic. So it makes sense to me that we will see flickers of emotions when they are trying to suppress them.
Thats always how it's been. Vulcans experience emotions very strongly, but have a culture built around trying to suppress them. You can see this multiple times in the original series with spock breaking from his usual stoic attitude in certain moments.
Star Wars has been trash for years, it didn’t just start with Disney, lol or did we forget Episodes 1-3? In fact I’d argue that they’re actually better under Disney, particularly if we’re just speaking on the Mandalorian.
@@biohita I'm not saying you can't have crying in a star trek episode, what I'm saying is it's so overused in std that it loses any emotional impact, plenty of previous star treks dealt with dire situations, Voyager was 70k light years from any back up, DS9 was on the front lines of a losing war and enterprise encountered a technologically superior species that wanted to abosrb them. There's different ways to convey emotion other than crying every time things go tits up or you made a mistake. I'm not saying you can't have crying in a star trek episode, the first time Sisko discovers the wormhole, the wormhole aliens spend the entire episode interrogating about his past in order to understand the concept of time, and as the episode goes on, both Sisko and the audience realise that his life isn't linear as he never moved on from his wife's death and constantly exists in that moment he lost her, That was an impactful moment because it fleshed out the character and allowed him to evolve. The constant crying in STD is nothing more than a political message to the audience that says its ok for people to be open with their emotions and to not be embarrassed to cry, again that's fine if they mixed it in with other emotions and really explored all of the crews motivations, but they don't, it's just Burman, crying over and over again every fucking episode whenever she happens not save the day, and even when she saves the day she still fucking cries.
You know with all this adolescent angst, they can't really get anything done. Conflict is needed for written drama. Personal conflict and external conflict (like fighting a Gorn, beating Khan, or dealing with Balok's superior ship to go back to the origins for an example). The older shows (most of nighttime TV) kept the personal angst to about 20% of the conflict. The point, which supports realism, is to put your angst, rivalries or grudges aside to get the objective job done, save the galaxy or just save the protagonists. Those that can't are insane and doomed like Khan. This writing flips the ratio. 80% personal subjective angst and 20% objective conflict. That is the soap opera formula, where it takes months to just resolve a day's events. Worse than that, the personal angst is adolescent and played like that of a cafeteria with the mean girls table, the jocks, the gay table, the nerd table, the teachers lounge, and a set of girls adrift not really welcomed at any of the tables. The second season, using Pike, at least brought the conflict ratio back to 50:50 or maybe 40:60. This season seems to have it back to where it was in season 1. 80:20. There are different ways to entertain, so I'm not saying the old shows were better for all audiences. They however were better for most, as viewership has proven. Story arcs that take a year or more are fine, but the simple mission just takes too long for a pasttime like watching a show. It becomes an obsession like watching a soap and realizing it had taken an entire year to resolve an auto accident or mere divorce hearing. Binge watching is soap watching.
why is it most actors since nimoy cannot do a good vulcan character??..all of them are showing emotion when speaking..making me laugh, painful to watch
Establishing credibility in the most ham fisted and inappropriate way imaginable. All of these points shouldve been covered at the beginning of rhe discussion.
Star Trek Discovery, Season 3, Episode 7, Unification III. Background, the previous 2 seasons, the first season of Star Trek Picard specially the episode Absolute Candor, and the episodes Unification I and II from Star Trek The Next Generation, which in turn depends on The Original Series and movie 6, The Undiscovered Country. This is one of those episodes that really require a knowledge of the story that can't be answered with just a "what's going on here is..."
Its interesting that three of the founding members of the Federation are no longer apart of the Federation. The question Discovery's crew should be asking is why should they trust this Federation
That’s what makes it so great to me. I was pissed at mom AND Burnham and I hurt for Michael. I really identified with the fears of “not doing it right”. Reaching for our purpose without a clue of how to get there.
Hahaha!!! No. Mary Sue’s have no weaknesses or vulnerabilities. This scene spends several minutes showing those weaknesses. Discovery has the most flawed set of characters (outside DS9) in Trek. She is no Mary Sue. She is important. And she overcomes many of her weaknesses. But that’s not a trait of the Mary Sue. They’d never have such weaknesses to overcome.
@@paulwalker3758 How many different ways is this Mary Sue? Her mother is the opposing "counsel" not a Romulan as previously stated therefore she gets someone who knows her background and has to own up to stuff a neutral one wouldn't. The whole thing is predicated on her knowing BS "ancient challenge rules" of the Vulcan Science Academy made up for the episode that make no sense. Further it is very well established in TOS that no human had ever attended much less graduated from the Vulcan Science Academy prior to Spock. Yet her ridiculous argument somehow sways the planetary leader and she is given the data despite being thoroughly beaten. MARY SUE!
@@KenS1267 you have not described a Mary Sue. And yes, the Qowat Milat are all Romulans and all female.... apart from the male Romulan we spend most of the time with in Picard. Also she was “bound” to Burnham because her battle was hopeless (again from Picard’s setup). Neutrality wasn’t required. Truth was. Truth (like facts) are not neutral. And your argument (while outlining weaknesses in the show) does not describe a Mary Sue. Here is the definition: “A Mary Sue is a fictional character who is so perfect as to be unrealistic. A Mary Sue is a character who has no weaknesses, who performs heroically and perfectly in every situation. This sort of character is usually considered to be a form of wish-fulfillment on the part of the author, and is a sign of an amateur writer. The term Mary Sue is derived from fan fiction of the 1970s, most specifically, a story called A Trekkie’s Tale. Paula Smith published this story featuring Lieutenant Mary Sue in a fanzine.” Note that there is *no* situation since the show’s beginning where Burnham has been made to look perfect. In many ways Picard is more of a Gary Stu (male version) as to many he seems like an idealised captain. But he does have flaws - just less than Burnham. For a real Mary Sue, check out Rey in The Force Awakens and The Rise of Skywalker. She was not a Mary Sue in The Last Jedi due to different character work. This is possible as the back story doesn’t define a Mary Sue.
Damn, you've been watching old trek with their old, perfect captains? Coulf have those been any more badly wtitten and acted? The subtitles should just be "Gary Stu" GARY STU!
