Two Different Reactions to STARTING a WAR-Star Trek Discovery & Babylon 5 (CLIPS)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ก.ย. 2024
- On Star Trek Discovery, Michael Burnham disobeyed orders and started a war. On Babylon 5, David McIntyre was following orders and started a war. These two characters had markedly different reactions to their roles in so many deaths.
You see David was a man racked with guilt whose mind shattered under the weight of the of his actions. She is "The Burnam" to whom the all must take a knee, "The Burnam" is always right, for "The Burnam" no action has lasting consequences
It's sad how a show made in the 90s has a better depiction of PTSD than one made in the 2020s.
Then again these new writers only know how to write soap operas.
LOL! I think soap writers do a better job than these hacks. -Mollie 🤣
The best depiction of PTSD is still "First Blood" ... the last five minutes of Stallone breaking down.
Any such mention needs to be paired with George Carlin's segment on SOFT LANGUAGE!
No way! Is that Michael York? I love him from Logan‘s Run!!! That is awesome. I had no idea he was in Babylon 5.
On another note, Michael Burnham looks like a psychopath with her eyes so wide open! It’s so bizarre that her “history“ with the Klingons involved when they assaulted and murdered her mother. But the second season of retconned that completely so that her mother was actually the greatest scientist ever, who invented a time travel suit. Michael’s mother, like Michael herself, is an angelic being! STD is such a weird show.
Not weird, just full of itself.
It was indeed Michael York -- Old Man
@bobby, it’s full of something.
The only way Burnham makes sense is if she's actively out to put the Klingons and Starfleet at War with each other.
Then like you say in S2 she finds out her mother isn't dead and kinda loses the will to kill all Klingons. I mean... Sure they killed her Dad but he doesn't rank as high on the DEI ladder of avenging.
I love Michael York but he hams the hell out of that episode.
Respect to anyone who is able to watch Discovery. I can't even bear that Burnham character for a few seconds as in this video.
"A late delivery from Avalon" was a fantastic episode, showing how involvement in war can destroy people even if they survive. And the solution to this man's affliction was so simple: To reconcile with the former enemy.
Such powerful storytelling, the like of which we are so in need of in our time.
One "officer", really an upper crewmen, greatly traumatized by following a no-lawful reason to object heat of the moment order which lead to great tragedy.
Another actually, 3rd in command(?), officer who went out of their way at several junctures of different operations to disobeying orders, even committing mutiny at one point, who never seems to show any level of guilt over the results of their actions.
Even if one gives her credit for a fleeting moment of showing guilt (which is a big stretch) it never lasts long enough to believe it as anything close to realistic -- Old Man
@@mollieandtheoldman Thing is, when in the series has any kind of remorse or reflection of actions been shown by the character? First season don't even keep her in the same universe to see the full consequences of her actions. Not only that, but by the end have the nerve to have her take the moral high ground against Starfleet.
And yes, I am old and a male who's wanted the franchise to do better since Enterprise. Nevermind Abrams/Bad Robot's butchering.
@@mollieandtheoldman what i find most distressing is her penchant for emotionality when she was mostly raised by VULCANS and yet is so emotional...i know someone who tole me 'well shes still only human', thing is i know people TODAY(as opposed to the eras of space travel in star trek in general, much less STD) who are almost as unemotional as vulcans,, besides which as we are told vulcans STILL have these raw emotion like most other bi-pedal organic beings in sci-fi, but are taught to constrain them as well and EVRYONE does a better job at it than burnham
Thumbnail looks like David is horrified at seeing them kiss
Joe Straczynski is a fellow science fiction fan who wanted to make the best show he possibly could. He did his homework to try and make the science as plausible as possible. He hired Harlan Ellison, a top science fiction writer, as a creative consultant. He wrote most of the episodes himself to make sure they were done right. Alex Kurtzman is a hack who doesn't have a clue how to tell a story and whose only interest is in making characters serve as megaphones for his social and political agenda.
JMS still FAILED ... because those earth destroyers / B5 should have TWO counter-rotating segments (might even be "one for humans and the other just a rotating mass") to counter the IMPULSE, because just like a helicopter without the tail rotor ... the "static" segments of those ships/stations would slowly start to rotate themselves.
@@Muck006 He wasn't perfect, but at least he cared enough to give it his best try.
"You can't go to prison if we are still at war." 🤣😅 The more I learn about Discovery, the more I am glad I did not watch it.
One started a war the other stole the ship and both mostly walked…. Must be nice being the children of the highest ranking ambassador in The Federation
In Babylon 5 Londo has "reservations" about the Shadows "killing 10.000 Narn" for them in "Chrysalis", forgets this when he makes them "start the war" in "The Coming of Shadows" and actually cries when the Centauri bomb Narn with mass drivers ... and you can FEEL the weight of the decision when G'Kar announces that the Narn declared war against the Centauri.
Star Trek is just STERILE in its acting and storytelling in comparison ... it is for DRONE PILOT "SOLDIERS" while B5 is for GROPOS in the mud.
also jeffery sinclaire also suffered form the battle of the line and the aftermath of that battle as well a eathforce solider who was hunted by a life form who feed off his fellow soldiers station in a world jurying the war play by dwight schultz and never did u see burnham suffer like them,which i do love babylon 5 it is my top 4 scifi show of all time to me
Dwight Schultz in "The Long Dark" as Amis is another good example of an ex-soldier haunted by trauma. And, agreed, when Garibaldi called out Sinclair for talking too many risks because Sinclair had a survivor's guilt death wish was a good arc in season 1 -- Old Man
@@mollieandtheoldman babylon5 was so good on human and alien stories i love al bester one of the great villians of scifi
Marcus Cole had survivor’s guilt as well and Delenn had guilt for her role in the war. The Centauri Emperor had enough regrets to fill a lifetime. Guilt is a major factor everywhere in Babylon 5.
Yuppers. Another three were: Ivanova after Marcus died had some guilt on how she treated him; Sheridan for cancelling the wedding anniversary meet-up right before his wife, Anna, "died" on the Icarus mission (he also forgot to tell her "I love you"); Lyta not being there for Kosh when he went his way.
I miss writing like this. -- Old Man
@@mollieandtheoldman I haven't read every comment (yet), but we mustn't forget what happened to Commodore Matt Decker in TOS.
Thanks, good clips. I may go back and rewatch Babylon 5. I wasn't all that attentive to it back in the day. Re: Discovery --- the minute Burnham killed Georgio, I knew this series was a fail. How dumb.
That first season of B5 is, IMO, still a rough watch. But there is good stuff in there. Just suck it up and push through😉 . Starting season 2 things get really good -- Old Man
@@billkerns9258 I couldn't agree more. Why in the world would someone kill off the Georgio character, and just a few episodes into the story? Insane, incompetent. Yes, they brought back Yeoh as a mirror universe character, but I'd rather see Yeoh as a starship captain in the ST universe. Fail.
@Greg_M1 Capt Georgiou wasn't much better than Mirror Georgiou. Capt Georgiou committed a war crime when she booby trapped that Klingon corpse and blew up that Klingon ship when the battle was over and they were collecting their dead. I can only imagine what kind of character she would have been had she not died shortly after that. There probably wouldn't have been much difference between her and her mirror counterpart. -Mollie
@@mollieandtheoldman True, perhaps. But, still, it was so weak and counterproductive to just kill off an anchor actor like Yeoh, despite her returning as her mirror self later. And then, there's everything else about Discovery that is so so bad. All comes down to the writing and directing.
@@mollieandtheoldman Yep, but Season 1 was different enough from the homogeneous and sanitized Berman Trek that it was a refreshing change, plus it had just enough hooks to keep me coming back.
I think to be generous you can say that Burnham was simply being curious, and taking risks, which is why they are out there.
But if you lose that gamble and you start the war then you would think that would impact your character.
You show here that it didn't affect her character. We do get a couple of times we're burning apologize vaguely for something I think once to Pike. But then you later quote her as saying that she had this understanding about Klingons implying that what you did was not a mistake.
And in season 5 apparently she said she did make a mistake although again She didn't tell us exactly what she did wrong.
It's all very stupid. And it's really the stupid writing which is contrived and emphasizes plot twists and action instead of consistent character development and ideas.
What a horrible way to start off a character from the very first episode. You laid out why, it appears to me, they didn't seem to have a plan to tell her journey. That's a big risk story telling, and they didn't think it through. It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragic -- Old Man
Impaired remorse, and bold, disinhibited, and egocentric traits masked by superficial charm. So, Michael Burnham is a pyschopath?
Yes
The constant self-defeating behaviour, which is always somehow someone else's fault, is diagnostic.
But I'd call her a sociopath, one from a sociopathic background ( the family that bails her out ), and so was 'made', not 'born'.
The difference between a sociopath and a psychopath.
This is a classic example of STD creating scenes that the writers think will get the audience's attention, but which tell NO story. The events have unreal consequences, so there is NO believable narrative.
For thousands of years, good story-tellers have shown us the true consequences of our actions, thus teaching us lessons that we appreciate for the rest of our lives.
STD teaches us nothing except that action scenes are a short-lived and ho-hum buzz.
To be fair you can say that about most Star Trek. Except DS9 had a decent track record of real consequences.
@@tancar2004
TOS has had an inspirational influence on science, engineering, invention, humanitarianism, medicine, social work, justice, exploration, writing, art, music, philosophy, ethics, and more.
It is clear that Old Trek must have inspired thousands of people, when we consider how many FAMOUS people have said so:
Stephen Hawking: scientist, mathematician, author;
Martin Luther King, Jr: civil rights leader, religious leader;
Mae Jemison: astronaut, engineer, physician;
Barack Obama: president of the United States;
Richard Oram: multi-discipline scientist, manager of LIGO gravitational wave observatory;
James Worthy: NBA basketball champion;
Aprille Ericsson: aerospace engineer (NASA);
Abdullah II: king of Jordan;
Peter Diamandis: founder of the X Prize Foundation which developed working medical tricorders (real ones).
And, of course, this is only scratching the surface.
Live long and prosper,
Dandelion Down
@@tancar2004 Tell that to Edith Keeler. ;)
@@tancar2004 DS9 had "real consequences", because it couldnt fly away from them ... like all the other ship-based-series, where "the dramatic death and destruction happened OFF-SCREEN". For this reason Star Trek is STERILE when it comes to war, because at best they show destroyed ships (the dead kids in engineering in "Wrath of Khan" are an absolute exception) and all the sets are SQUEAKY CLEAN.
Babylon 5 showed consequences through the acting, Doctor Franklin counting bodies and many prosthetic injuries.
@@Muck006In the episodes after a battle in B5, you would often see an establishing shot of the hazard platform deployed outside the station with the cleanup crew collecting up ship debris and, presumably, body parts that will continue to float around the station unless dealt with. It shows that in between episodes, those guys have been working all week.
I love Arthur.
Some Very Good Point ' s from both Side ' s Thank You ;
*points
*sides
[simple plural, no apostrophe needed]
The wisdom of the Babylon 5 story outshines the nationalistic and self-regarding posturing of Star Trek here, by being both realistic ( not real, realistic ), and about more things that flashy special effects.
The way Star Trek has a display listing the losses, deaths and destruction, rather than show the actual consequences ( the movie 'In The Beginning' shows that over 90% of humanity died because of a moment of idiot grandstanding by a ship's captain, who then escaped censure for his actions, while the gunner who fired the first shot of a losing genocidal war suffered, a war that only ended because of a prophecy fulfilled, is the more interesting and dramatic version, but has less fireballs.
That being said, by mid-Season 2, I was a big fan of Babylon 5’s space battles. They boys at a foundation Imaging came a long way in two years and the fact that the budget-necessitated change to the in-house Netter Digital didn’t impede the steadily improving effects is almost unbelievable. B5 didn’t have the money to break out the big battles that often but when they did, they were a thing of beauty.
@@sdfried4877 SADLY they still used the stupid "earthbound battle logic" ... mostly in the battle language ["right down their throats" (Severerd Dreams) is stupid for a battle in space, where energy weapons wont lose efficiency with distance] and the shape of the ships/stations and their armaments. With ship travel speeds being REALLY HIGH, it is a stupid concept to have the main guns on earth destroyers without a turret for example ... and "pinging" for a distance check like sonar doesnt really work with the same frequencies, so it would not be audible.
IMO it is a shame that the Starfuries never "got in close to a big ship" (I mean 10m close) and then happily blasted at one spot in their hull ... with no ship / station having a big number of/ANY point defense turrets (they copied the Death Star) ... that would be very effective and would not even need a tracking system to "find and attack a _cloaked_ Minbari ship".
There are two REALISTIC things that warships should have:
a) SHIELDS that are basically easily replaceable pieces that are moved in position with arms [the Star Trek disc ships are a prime candidate for such an addition, just tilt to show the narrow side to the enemy and one or two such arms rotate around the central axis of the disc]
b) ANTI-ENERGY / energy dispersing protections ... whic could be crystals or simply "chaff" (=dust) that disperses such material. Since ships move A LOT / LARGE DISTANCES, this would be more appliccanble for a non-moving station. This concept of localised defense systems is used in ROBOTECH (although it is a forcefield in that franchise.
@@Muck006 If you demand realism then no sci fi show can ever have a "naval battle" like war. More realistic weapons are accelerated asteroids from long distance or nanobot swarms.
This makes for very poor drama and the war and human drama in B5 demanded a recognizable war setting.
That Burnham/Ash kiss was the most awkward, unreal kiss ever. Par for the course with std.
Aside from Kirk and Uhura. 😂
@@sdfried4877 that doesn't count, Kirk and Uhura were being forced to kiss. Burnham and Ash were supposedly romantically involved.
@@whos-the-stiff i know. I was just kidding. It was awkward though. 😂 Any modern television expert saying what a wonderful ground breaking moment that kiss was, clearly never watched the show.
@sdfried4877 sorry, sometimes kidding gets lost in a text. Wholly agree with you though. 🖖
Watching the difference, STD is cartoonish... no, not even that. That's not fair, some cartoons have way more depth than STD. STD is something more like it was written by someone who has suffered traumatic brain injury, suffering from serious developmental issues, high of psychotropic drugs while on six days of no sleep. That might be a little harsh, but I stand by it. 🤣😂😅