• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

Star Trek Discovery not getting any better I fear.

Aeson

Explorer
Why watch something you don't like? Good grief, there are THOUSANDS of shows on. You have to actually PAY to watch this. What kind of masochist watches something they don't like just to then go and bitch to all and sundry about how they don't like it?
The Youtube folks will tell you it's their job as *critics* "We do it so you don't have to." I hope I never reach their level hate.


I wonder if the studios that produce the shows, and movies have any idea what fandom is. Fans will still buy merchandise, even toys no matter their age. Despite this they feel they have to change things to appeal to new audiences. I watch Star Trek because my parents watched it when I was a kid. If I had children they would have watched it too. Season 2 seems to be more appealing to the established fan base. If they continue to listen to fans, which I like to believe was done with S2, S3 will be even better.

It'll be sad to see Pike go but I still look forward to season 3. I wonder who the new captain will be. I'm not sure Saru is the one, but I'd like to see a non Vulcan alien. The captains have all been humans thus far. That's speciest. There should be more alien representation on TV.
 

Jester David

Villager
I don't want a retread Star Trek that's the same as the previous Star Treks.
Yes. How DARE I want a Star Trek show to be like Star Trek. How completely unreasonable is it that I want something advertised as belonging to an established franchise to feel like it's consistent with that franchise and not an unrelated TV show with the "Star Trek" name slapped overtop.

I also expect coffee I buy to taste like coffee and not tea. Rock music to sound like rock and not soft jazz. Hot dogs to taste like pork and not chicken.
D&D to be a roleplaying game and not a tactical miniature wargame. :p

Why watch something you don't like?
In this instance, because I'm emotionally invested in Star Trek, having been a fan of the franchise since I was eight years old, and prior to the premier of The Next Generation. Because in the past a major part of my self identity was "a Star Trek fan". Because I've wanted a new Star Trek show for over a decade and was anxiously awaiting Discovery since it was announced.
Because I want to like it. But I can't because I'm not going to lie to myself just because it's pretty and has a budget.

Again, I liked a lot of this season. I loved what they did the episode before last. What they did with Pike was amazing, and fixed a major problem with The Original Series and made his ending a truly happy one. It was touching and lovely and a great homage to the past that didn't feel too forced or much like fan service while still remaining undeniably Discovery.
But, man, after that last episode I'm really tempted to just walk away.

With two episodes left, I might keep watching. Because I hate leaving things undone. It nags at my soul. But unless the ending blows me away I'm likely done with the series. And very possibly a franchise...

You have to actually PAY to watch this.
Canadian. It's on the cable channel I already pay for. It costs me zero extra.

(I couldn't subscribe to CBS All-Access even if I wanted.)

Good grief, there are THOUSANDS of shows on.
Sure.
Name ONE other show that's a long lasting franchise with decades of history, tight continuity, and a generally consistent tone.

One other series that is equivalent in Star Trek in terms of legacy and canon.

What kind of masochist watches something they don't like just to then go and bitch to all and sundry about how they don't like it?
Because, and here's the kicker, I WANT IT TO GET BETTER. Already, based on feedback from fans, season 2 improved. I was very positive about the beginning of the season. Because it improved and they seemed to be taking criticism from the fans and adjusting the show based on that.

So why complain? Because I believe the show could get better still. Because I believe there's a happy medium that would satisfy both groups of fans.

But clearly I'm doing it wrong and should just give up right away the second something I love disappoints me, and should stop expecting quality from genre television.
 

Hussar

Legend
Yes. How DARE I want a Star Trek show to be like Star Trek. How completely unreasonable is it that I want something advertised as belonging to an established franchise to feel like it's consistent with that franchise and not an unrelated TV show with the "Star Trek" name slapped overtop.

I also expect coffee I buy to taste like coffee and not tea. Rock music to sound like rock and not soft jazz. Hot dogs to taste like pork and not chicken.
D&D to be a roleplaying game and not a tactical miniature wargame. :p
Hrm. Coffee that tastes like coffee. Would that be Kenyan, Vietnamese, Arabica, or one of the thousand variations of coffee that taste very, very differently. Hot dogs that taste like pork? Yuck. Gimme beef hotdogs any day of the week. Or goat. Goat hotdogs are actually surprisingly good. :D

/snip


Because, and here's the kicker, I WANT IT TO GET BETTER. Already, based on feedback from fans, season 2 improved. I was very positive about the beginning of the season. Because it improved and they seemed to be taking criticism from the fans and adjusting the show based on that.

So why complain? Because I believe the show could get better still. Because I believe there's a happy medium that would satisfy both groups of fans.

But clearly I'm doing it wrong and should just give up right away the second something I love disappoints me, and should stop expecting quality from genre television.
Thing is, your better is my worse. You want Roddenberry era Star Trek? Blech. First three seasons of TNG suck. And suck badly. TNG didn't get good until they ejected Roddenberry. But, if you want "classic" if that's the word, Star Trek, you've got several hundred hours of watching. Why can't I get several hundred hours of what I want to watch?

Why does "quality" mean, "things [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] likes"? I liked the first season. I liked the darker aspects. I liked that they were telling Trek stories that weren't sanitized pablum where Star Fleet is always on the side of angels. We've had decades of that. Howzabout a bit more depth of story telling where no one is always the white hats?

Your version of quality is anything but. It's a solid show, set in a believable universe with a pretty decent storyline. "Oh, but, it's not living up to thirty year old canon of Episode 86 of whateverdahell Star Trek is the "good" Star Trek because I happen to like it". It's ludicrous.

If you don't like something, great. You don't like it. But, punishing yourself by spending, well, now presuming you watched season 1 and season 2, twenty some hours watching something you don't like seems really, really strange. I will never understand fans who seem to feel they have ownership over a property. It's just mind blowing the self entitlement that fans profess.
 

Zardnaar

Explorer
Y'know, sometimes it's an advantage being so far away from all the hype machine. I saw virtually no promotional material for Star Trek. Heck, I see very little promotional material for nearly anything unless I go looking for it. Means I get to judge things based on my own views.

Nearly all the criticisms that [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] brings up really don't bother me. I don't judge shows based on other shows. I don't want a retread Star Trek that's the same as the previous Star Treks. I don't. The writers just can't win. Do something new and the haters come out of the woodwork claiming they're disrespecting tradition. Stay the path and they get hammered for being unoriginal and boring.

Why watch something you don't like? Good grief, there are THOUSANDS of shows on. You have to actually PAY to watch this. What kind of masochist watches something they don't like just to then go and bitch to all and sundry about how they don't like it?
We watch it on Netflix. We're already paying for Netflix and ran out of other sci fi shows to watch and to binge watch.

Also started watching DS9. STD looks amazing but the lighting is dark so it kind of sets the tone of the show. Not a Trekkie just treating it like a sci fi show. Seen worse seen a lot better.

It has some problems a big one being the characters, none of them are overly likeable. It's chalk and cheese say compared with DS9 where I like Quark, Odo and Dax. My wife likes Odo.

Had a decent pilot but some episodes it's been really hard to watch. Unlike say The Orville or The Expanse.

I would put it ahead of season 10 Doctor Who, the last episode was quite good, overall it's hit and miss. Sense 8 was also better.
 
Last edited:

Zardnaar

Explorer
Hrm. Coffee that tastes like coffee. Would that be Kenyan, Vietnamese, Arabica, or one of the thousand variations of coffee that taste very, very differently. Hot dogs that taste like pork? Yuck. Gimme beef hotdogs any day of the week. Or goat. Goat hotdogs are actually surprisingly good. :D



Thing is, your better is my worse. You want Roddenberry era Star Trek? Blech. First three seasons of TNG suck. And suck badly. TNG didn't get good until they ejected Roddenberry. But, if you want "classic" if that's the word, Star Trek, you've got several hundred hours of watching. Why can't I get several hundred hours of what I want to watch?

Why does "quality" mean, "things [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] likes"? I liked the first season. I liked the darker aspects. I liked that they were telling Trek stories that weren't sanitized pablum where Star Fleet is always on the side of angels. We've had decades of that. Howzabout a bit more depth of story telling where no one is always the white hats?

Your version of quality is anything but. It's a solid show, set in a believable universe with a pretty decent storyline. "Oh, but, it's not living up to thirty year old canon of Episode 86 of whateverdahell Star Trek is the "good" Star Trek because I happen to like it". It's ludicrous.

If you don't like something, great. You don't like it. But, punishing yourself by spending, well, now presuming you watched season 1 and season 2, twenty some hours watching something you don't like seems really, really strange. I will never understand fans who seem to feel they have ownership over a property. It's just mind blowing the self entitlement that fans profess.
It's because people get emotionally invested in something and franchises have a certain feel. I like D&D and Star Wars. TFA and Rebels feel like Star Wars TLJ didn't. One edition of D&D didn't do it for me.

I'm not a massive Trekkie but enjoyed the older movies, early DS9 and some of TOS.

DS9 for example it's different than TOS and TNG but is still feels like Trek. STD big problem is mostly the feel and the characters.

Change is only bad if you lose the old fans and fail to get new ones. Juries still out on STD but 3 series of trek had 7 seasons each.

Similar things happen with bands eventually they make a dud album.
 
Last edited:

Hussar

Legend
It's because people get emotional ly invested in something and franchises have a certain feel. I like D&D and Star Wars. TFA and Rebels feel like Star Wars TLJ didn't.

I'm not a massive Trekkie but enjoyed the older movies, early DS9 and some of TOS.

DS9 for example it's different than TOS and TNG but is still feels like Trek. STD big problem is mostly the feel and the characters.

Change is only bad if you lose the old fans and fail to get new ones. Juries still out on STD but 3 series of trek had 7 seasons each.
The problem is, "that certain feel" is far more in the mind of the fan than in anything real in the show. You can point to all sorts of elements that aren't part of the "feel", but, apparently, we're not supposed to look at those things. We're only supposed to like the same things and we're all supposed to keep liking the same things so the franchise can keep pumping out the same thing over and over and over again so it doesn't lose the old "fans".

Good grief.

Look, I'm a HUGE theater fan. Love it to pieces. I've seen Romeo and Juliet done a dozen different ways from traditional all the way to street theater featuring classic hot rods instead of swords. The idea that we have to keep doing the same thing over and over and over just so we can please the "old guard" is baffling to me.

You mentioned The Expanse. Fantastic show. But, let's not forget, we're only three seasons in. Now, imagine the Expanse universe has hundreds of hours of shows under its belt. (heh, no pun intended) Do you really want to keep watching an Expanse that is STILL dealing with the same politics as in Season 1?

It's like those American dramas that just keep going and going and going, like the X Files. They can never actually resolve anything because that would mean that the show would actually have to do something new. No thanks. I have zero interest in those kinds of shows anymore. Gimme solid, self contained stories any day of the week.
 

Zardnaar

Explorer
The problem is, "that certain feel" is far more in the mind of the fan than in anything real in the show. You can point to all sorts of elements that aren't part of the "feel", but, apparently, we're not supposed to look at those things. We're only supposed to like the same things and we're all supposed to keep liking the same things so the franchise can keep pumping out the same thing over and over and over again so it doesn't lose the old "fans".

Good grief.

Look, I'm a HUGE theater fan. Love it to pieces. I've seen Romeo and Juliet done a dozen different ways from traditional all the way to street theater featuring classic hot rods instead of swords. The idea that we have to keep doing the same thing over and over and over just so we can please the "old guard" is baffling to me.

You mentioned The Expanse. Fantastic show. But, let's not forget, we're only three seasons in. Now, imagine the Expanse universe has hundreds of hours of shows under its belt. (heh, no pun intended) Do you really want to keep watching an Expanse that is STILL dealing with the same politics as in Season 1?

It's like those American dramas that just keep going and going and going, like the X Files. They can never actually resolve anything because that would mean that the show would actually have to do something new. No thanks. I have zero interest in those kinds of shows anymore. Gimme solid, self contained stories any day of the week.
Its hard, D&D kinda has the same problem as you have certain expectations.

I'll use Star Wars as an example as I know the franchise a lot better than say Star Trek. I' deeper into DS9 now than what I watched back in the day but still don't know enough on Trek overall.

With any show I need to like the characters. or hate them if they are a villain. The franchise needs to pay attention to whatever made the franchise interesting to watch in the 1st place. With Star Wars a lot of it is the force, good vs evil, space battles, etc. TFA for example was a bit to formulaic but after the prequals I can understand them playing it safe. TLJ rolls around and its like they didn't pay attention to TFA or the originals. The Darkside is the quick and easy path, or you just be Rey its even quicker. Finn can't pilot in TFA, a few hours or days later in TLJ he can things like that.

So you don't need Jedi/Sith in everything Star Wars. It helps but you have a lot of room to play with and a lot of stories to tell. They also have plenty of example from the old Legends that didn't work. They could do a game of thrones type political drama set in the Star Wars Universe, they cold go back in the ancient past and have the Jedi and Sith go at it in numbers. They could do a war is hell type show a'la Tour of Duty or something focusing on pilots a'la Top Gun/Rogue Squadron. I would like them to get away from bigger and better super weapons, a new darksider, more powerful ships its really just rehashed 90's storylines of the week, its also what made Thrwan so compelling as a character (compelling enough to bring back in the new canon).

The Skywalkers and Palpatine don't have to be the most powerful force users ever but if you top them you need a good story, if its set in the past why is that force user not more famous? Basically internal consistency in that franchises universe. A decent amount of world building.

In the Expanse for example they have opened up new parts of the galaxy so they can leave the Sol system. That is a logical progression, see how it plays out.

I can use Stargate as another example. SG1 lays down the ground work. Atlantis kinda similar but they are in another Galaxy. In universe they went from a small team to an ensemble cast with no other Alien species and they are stuck in space a LOOOOONG way from home. Didn't really feel like the 1st two Stargates, there was no metaplot I could tell/care about established early on (episode 1 in SG1 and SG:A). And I didn't care about any of the characters so I stopped watching during season 2 and then the show got cancelled as I was not the only one.
 

Morrus

Administrator
Staff member
Oh, god, here we go again. Does it ever stop?

I’m think I’m just going to bow out of discussing this show and enjoy it quietly.
 

lowkey13

Exterminate all rational thought
Oh, god, here we go again. Does it ever stop?

I’m think I’m just going to bow out of discussing this show and enjoy it quietly.
If it makes you feel better, a lot of the ... criticisms ... leveled at ST: Disco (you can't make me stop calling it that!) were also slung at DS9.

Heck, I can remember when people were OFFENDED by that show for REASONS because it wasn't REAL TREK(tm).


So, the lesson (as always) is don't let the haters distract you from what you enjoy.

(Unless it's Paladins. If you like Paladins, you're just wrong)
 

Jester David

Villager
Thing is, your better is my worse. You want Roddenberry era Star Trek? Blech. First three seasons of TNG suck. And suck badly. TNG didn't get good until they ejected Roddenberry.
You're wrong there.
Roddenberry was really the big cheese for the first half of the first season. Do you remember a huge uptick when he passed the reins to a different head writer for the second half? Meanwhile, he was still there as a producer until season 5, giving feedback on scripts and such.
What changed was they brought in different head writers. That's the thing, the show didn't just get better for no reason. They had four or five different head writers over the first three seasons. But until they brought in someone good it didn't improve. The writing changes in TOS and TNG and DS9 have everything to do with good writing and good editing.

But the new writers still kept his vision and ideas. They still worked with him until he got ill.

But, if you want "classic" if that's the word, Star Trek, you've got several hundred hours of watching.
Yeah, all of it cheesy and dated and with messages and social commentary aimed at the world of twenty to thirty years ago.

Look, a different take on Star Trek is a good idea. But this is the first Star Trek show in a decade. You don't launch with something different and strange. You launch with something safe and earn the audience's trust. Then you go new directions and do new things, when you've earned the trust.
You don't start by alienating and pushing away the core fanbase.
The Discovery showrunners haven't earned that trust. They haven't shown me they can reliably handle the baseline ideal of Star Trek, so I have zero faith that they know what they're doing when they try and subvert it.

Why can't I get several hundred hours of what I want to watch?
See above.

But right now, there's an eff-tonne of dark TV shows. Everyone is doing dark. Everyone is doing post apocalypse of twisted futures. Zombies. Alien invasions. Nobody is doing optimistic. We need an optimistic reminder of the future that has messages for today.

Dark is a crutch. It's a lazy way of not having to commit to an ideal. It's a sign they're afraid of the show being able to stand on its own and so it has to look like everything else on TV.

Why does "quality" mean, "things [MENTION=37579]Jester David[/MENTION] likes"? I liked the first season. I liked the darker aspects. I liked that they were telling Trek stories that weren't sanitized pablum where Star Fleet is always on the side of angels. We've had decades of that. Howzabout a bit more depth of story telling where no one is always the white hats?
If I want dark, gritty science fiction, I can watch the Expanse. In fact, I DO watch The Expanse, in part for that reason. I recommend it. It's excellent.

If I want to watch optimistic, uplifting science fiction, I go to Star Trek. A dark, gritty, pessimistic version of the future isn't really Star Trek. Star Trek has always been about finding the positive. Even in Deep Space Nine, they were hopeful. And when they do cross a line it feels like it matters.

But... even in Discovery Starfleet is still always white hats.
Here's the thing. Star Trek Discovery is terrible as a dark show.
Dark means people doing questionable things for selfish reasons and horrible consequences for actions. But Discovery is pretty much a consequence free zone. The worst of the bad stuff being done is conveniently being done by someone outside of Starfleet (mirror double and generic evil AI). It dodges having people feel bad by not having the main characters be held responsible for the actions. There's no fallout for poor choices. And then everything works out at the end as the standard "Star Trek Reset Button" is pressed.

Discovery isn't dark. It has the illusion of darkness. It's a junior high edgelord version of dark, with lots of posturing and posing but no real substance.

There are so many better ways to tell a dark Star Trek show. But they'd actually have to KNOW Star Trek to do that.

One episode (the episode before last) was the only one that really bothered to show the fallout of actions. But they didn't follow up on that and maintain the inertia. And with two episodes left, there's not a lot of time to continue that either. There's likely be left unresolved.

Your version of quality is anything but. It's a solid show, set in a believable universe with a pretty decent storyline. "Oh, but, it's not living up to thirty year old canon of Episode 86 of whateverdahell Star Trek is the "good" Star Trek because I happen to like it". It's ludicrous.
They did it just fine in '87. And that was 20 years after The Original Series.
They looked at what worked and kept it. They looked at what didn't work and ignored or changed it. But they kept the tone and attitude. It seemed to have a strong respect for the original.
Why can't they do that again?

Heck, the freakin' Orville nailed it out the gate. And did it while managing to invent its own canon.
Why can't we get a Star Trek show that's a serious version of the Orville but with the sets and budget of Discovery?

If you don't like something, great. You don't like it. But, punishing yourself by spending, well, now presuming you watched season 1 and season 2, twenty some hours watching something you don't like seems really, really strange. I will never understand fans who seem to feel they have ownership over a property. It's just mind blowing the self entitlement that fans profess.
For the exact same reason fans get upset when their sport team has a line-up change and begins playing poorly. Or a favourite band changes their sound. Or an edition of a game changes into something you don't want to play.
You want things to evolve and grow, but it needs to be recognizable, or it loses something that drew you to that in the first place. It still needs to be enjoyable.

Fans are emotionally attached. And losing something they're emotionally attached to hurts. By definition.
Some fans do take it too far. The equivalent of stalking or emotional abuse. They take the "ownership" too far and become toxic fans.
But, at the risk of going No True Scotsman... if you're not emotionally invested, are you really a fan? Or are you just a viewer? After all, a lot of people just watched the movies, but never got into the shows, are they really fans? I'd hardly qualify everyone who watches the Batman or Marvel movies as "comic book fans". That feels like someone just watching the Superbowl: are they really a fan of football, or just watching the big event?


I complain because I think the show can/could get better. As every Discovery supporter tripped over themselves saying last season, TNG and DS9 got better as they went on. That could happen here too.
And season 2 did look better. The trailer was good, and the first couple episodes were good. But, man, that middle was just weak and full of poorly thought out ideas. And that last episode was a masterclass on unsubtle emotional manipulation and forced tragedy. And it looks like they're doing the same damn dodge as last season, by brushing off all the bad things Section 31 did to apprehend Spock as the will of an Evil AI rather than Starfleet.
 

Mallus

Hero
No, the beatings will continue until morale improves.
What do we have to do to get the criticism to improve? Harder beatings... perhaps employing some form of metallic pipe?

The thing I find both funny and frustrating about the conversation around Discovery are the fans who don't notice (or admit to noticing) the differences between the previous Star Trek series. Little things like being set on a starship (TNG vs. DS9) or the perfectibility of human nature (TOS vs. TNG).
 
Last edited:

Hussar

Legend
Jester David said:
You launch with something safe and earn the audience's trust. Then you go new directions and do new things, when you've earned the trust.
You don't start by alienating and pushing away the core fanbase.
ROTFLMAO.

I see. We're going with the "what I like is the definition of core fanbase" argument. Snort. Giggle. Gimme a break.

Hrm, most popular show on CBS's streaming service, responsible for huge upticks in sign ups, rates about 80% on Rotten Tomatoes, critically successful.

But, you hate it, so, everyone must hate it. :uhoh:

Look, I get it. You don't like it. You like the Orville. Great. We both win. You have a show you like, I have a show I like. Why can't I have a show I like without having folks like you jumping in and telling me why I'm wrong every single week?

What is this persistent need to tell people why they are wrong for liking something? It's utterly, utterly beyond me. Why waste your time?
 

Ryujin

Adventurer
Perhaps the same reason that people feel the need to post positively about a programme in a thread that was clearly and decidedly negative about it ;)
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top