You're viewing a single thread.
In my opinion STD is just badly written with the focus on timeline breaking technology and a Mary Sue.
There is nothing wrong with LGBT characters if they fit to the story (not just people with the superpower of being gay).Why even have gay humans? I thought the sexy point of sexy star trek sex was interspecies sex? Remember when Trip got pregnant? Riker boned the 3 fingered mitten hand doctor after he was captured? Troy and Crusher both got mind raped! Even data has sex! See, no need for this silly human on human stuff.
I read the Mary Sue link you provided but I can't figure out what character you're suggesting is "portrayed as inexplicably competent across all domains, unrealistically free of weaknesses, extremely attractive, innately virtuous, and generally lacking meaningful character flaws." (from your link).
I agree about the timeline stuff and also that the LGBT representation was excellently done and not any character's "superpower" or anything.
(Also the official initialism for Disco is "DSC" (or "DIS" on Memory Alpha) but never "STD")
"Star Trek Syphilis" it is then .
I've only just started discovery, and knowing how ST almost always has bad first seasons I'm giving it some slack. I'm not a big fan of the Klingon redesign but my main dislike is the less episodic nature of the show. That was my issue with the last seasons of ENT as well. I'll keep watching it but I do really prefer the more episodic nature with occasional multiparters.
I meant especially Michael Burnhams abilities as a human. Her short and unbelievable backstory on vulcan, her super vulcan logic where she outsmarts experts in their fields, her exceptionally fighting skills and so on.
Maybe not all checkpoints could be marked here, but I think she was written in the wrong genre.
Maybe a superhero movie (with a better backstory) would be more appropriate.
Honestly, agree.