I Just Watched Discovery

2

Comments

  • I was a bit apprehensive before I started watching as I knew it was focusing on Burnham and was not sure what it would be like (considering all the other Treks were ensemble and each had at least one ep where they were main focus) but after watching it I enjoyed it very much and was not surprised by how season 1 ended.

    Roll on season 2
  • WebberoniWebberoni ✭✭✭✭✭
    Flay wrote: »
    Initially i disliked it, just because I didn't want to see THIS kind of story again. I like my Trek idealistic ;) In TNG it was very interesting (Borg story) because it was kind of new, DS9 did it absolutely best with the Dominion, in Enterprise it got annoying with the Delphic Expanse story arc, and here we are again in Discovery. The enemy doesn't negotiate and is hell-bent on destroying humanity and we have to do WHATEVER to survive/win.

    However it's actually quite interesting and entertaining and has lots of "real Trek" moments in it, they're just harder earned than usual ;) So yeah, it's good!
    And why the hell doesn't Saru have the "inspiring" trait?!

    Forget inspiring, I've always wondered why Saru doesn't have the "survivalist" trait!
  • Webberoni wrote: »

    Forget inspiring, I've always wondered why Saru doesn't have the "survivalist" trait!

    He and Cornwell should definitely have that trait!

  • edited November 2018
    Well, I'm happy the OP enjoyed but STD is an abomination.

    Most of the people responsible for that are already out of CBS, eventually, it will be canceled by the utterly low number of viewers and how costly it becomes to CBS and NETFLIX, and removed from the canon and Star Trek once more will be something akin to intelligent plots and well-developed characters.

    And of course without RADARs in space...

    gg9w239k3j3r.jpg

    A really enjoyable moment from an excellent episode, “Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad” the Harry Mudd / Time Travel episode.

    Disco isn't over yet, but while it isn't perfect, I already like it more than either Enterprise or Voyager (which IMO both suffered from franchise fatigue).
    Overwhelm and devastate, that's the way to get power and to hold it, and I mean to do that. - Colonel Green, who led a genocidal war early in the 21st century
  • edited November 2018
    It definitely suffers from the current requirement that everything, particularly sci-fi/fantasy, has to be overly dark and ~edgy (I blame Game of Thrones for this and for the 10-episode seasons that have become the norm), but not nearly so much as others and at least they didn’t marvel-ize it too much with a bunch of jokes and laugh breaks that undercut any possible drama.

    That said,
    having Saru’s Face Feelings™️ for dinner made me 🤢
  • Ishmael MarxIshmael Marx ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have only seen DSC episode 1. It bothered me in several respects (but no need to rehash what has been said before by others). I'm reading this thread with interest because I'd like a) to find a reason to someday watch all of DSC, and b) because, as pointed out by @(HGH)Apollo, I want it to have sufficient success to spawn another show (someday) that might be more compelling to me. One that is NOT behind a stupid pay wall.

    If another one is ever produced (notwithstanding whatever is planned for the Picard elder-years show), I sincerely hope they stop messing around in the TOS era. Too many ways to run afoul of that lore. Between the real-life advancements in tech, and with CGI effects, there is simply no way a modern show can realistically claim to be from the same era as TOS. Let's move forward in time and see what the galaxy looks like 100 years after TNG/DS9/VOY.
  • Enjoyed the plot twists of season 1, but could pass on the TV-MA stuff. Looking forward to season 2. Favorite episode so far? "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad."
    Agree with you..
  • WaldoMagWaldoMag ✭✭✭✭
    One quick thing I want to point out is the fixation on Trek as ensembles. Just because TNG through ENT were ensemble series doesn't mean every Trek series must be one. I'm wholeheartedly in agreement that the lack of development of characters is a deficiency of Disco S1, but we were told up front that it was about Michael Burnham and was told from her point of view.

    Also, fandom needs to get honest with itself about having retroactively bought into this narrative of TOS having been an ensemble series. It wasn't. It was always about Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock, and eventually, Dr. McCoy. It's important that Nichelle Nichols and George Takei made visible the African-American and Asian-American communities on TV, and that Walter Koenig showed that the U.S. and Russia could, in fact, meld, and I don't mean to minimize the significance of their presence. But it is also simply untrue that they were ever intended as equals to Kirk and Spock.

    As best I've worked out, that narrative emerged in the 1970's at conventions--where fans were being asked to content themselves with supporting cast actors because Shatner and Nimoy weren't coming. And I get it. A con promoter has to sell the legitimacy of the Guest of Honor, and that meant playing up the importance of supporting cast actors, and it dovetailed neatly with the "all working together" doctrine being preached at those shows. But I think in light of Disco that it's time we let go of that revisionism and start to talk about TOS's structure having been what it really was: A main cast trio with a supporting quartet. (Or quintet if you care to include Majel Barrett-Roddenberry.)

    Learning from DB. What happened to Scotty😉🖖
  • IvanstoneIvanstone ✭✭✭✭✭
    One quick thing I want to point out is the fixation on Trek as ensembles. Just because TNG through ENT were ensemble series doesn't mean every Trek series must be one.
    I wouldn't consider any of the ST shows to be ensembles. Each had a distinct lead character (mostly the captain) and it was a toss-up who got the best treatment. There are plenty of episodes where every supporting crew got a chance to shine but Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway and Archer probably got the most screen time. Certain crew who were distinctly more interesting probably got more episodes than others. The Doctor was probably the best example of that.
    VIP 8 - 160 Crew Slots - 402 Immortals
  • TaskerTasker ✭✭✭
    I absolutely hated the show until about episode 8. The one where Ash and Burnham have to deal with a terrified Saru actually felt like Star Trek, and I enjoyed the rest of the season’s Mirror arc... only to be disappointed with the triteness of the season finale.

    I understand the hate it gets. Burnham very much is a Mary Sue, almost to the point of the textbook definition and Star Trek origin of the term. The writers have, at best, played fast and loose with canon. Some of that’s understandable, but just as understandable is people being upset with it. I actually like the look of the show and the new take on old tech: the production design is probably the main thing that brings me back.

    Season 2 will probably make or break the show. Looking at pictures of Millennial Spock, I’m not optimistic. But I will give it a chance and hope for the best.
  • IvanstoneIvanstone ✭✭✭✭✭
    Tasker wrote: »
    Burnham very much is a Mary Sue, almost to the point of the textbook definition and Star Trek origin of the term.
    In what way? She was a character on the fast track to be Captain. All of the other Captains have been pretty exceptional individuals.
    VIP 8 - 160 Crew Slots - 402 Immortals
  • 5000 Quatloos5000 Quatloos ✭✭✭✭✭
    Tasker wrote: »

    Season 2 will probably make or break the show. Looking at pictures of Millennial Spock, I’m not optimistic. But I will give it a chance and hope for the best.

    ROTFL. Please, please, please, please let this be his Timelines crew card name. Please.
    Accepted. Mark them, Galt.
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    I signed up for the free trial of CBS all access Thanksgiving weekend. I wanted to give Discovery a chance.

    In short: I liked it.

    Yes, the Klingons looked odd. Yes, the tech was too high-tech. Yes, they inappropriately and needlessly inserted the F-word. But it is still worthwhile and good for watching.

    I think people get caught-up with the style difference between shows. This one has an over-arching story line and a main character to follow. These are modern story structures and don't affect the Trek-ness of Discovery.

    Discovery still holds the basic Trek ideals. When a character goes against the ideals, that character discovers how bad it is and how good the ideals are. That's actually the point of the season storyline.

    I liked it, but still like Enterprise and DS9 better. (Though I feel it fair to say it is better than Voyager.)

    They really did a good job on the part I highlighted. Several times characters referring to the laws of the Federation as the rules we live and die by and refusing to bend or compromise those rules, laws, and beliefs was a key part of what I liked. Saru even saying something like "We live and die by the law of the Federation" or words to that effect.

    I got the Blu-Ray over the Thanksgiving holiday. Finished the last episode and put the first disc back in. I binged it TWICE that weekend back-to-back!!!!!!
    The first official Campaign starts on Scott's birthday, y'all!!!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    ByloBand wrote: »

    Yeah, Janeway is awesome, Chakotay was cool until he traded in his Maquis credentials for archaelogoy, Paris was always interesting, Torres and Seven were well developed, and the holo doc was great until he started singing operas.

    Chakotay was the only character that I found rather boring. He had almost no character arc at all, which might be the reason. But I loved all of the others, including Kes and Kim (well, Kim wasn't so interesting, objectively, but I still liked him :D ).

    Kim seemed to get better after the episode where the Voyager split into two vessels and two crews. Maybe Kim B was better than Kim A?
    The first official Campaign starts on Scott's birthday, y'all!!!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    For the record, I never said Voyager was bad. I simply said I liked Discovery better. Someone has to be at the bottom. Also, my point of the thread was not against Voyager, but for Discovery. It is far better than I has heard. I suppose it helps that I watched the whole season over 4 days. Also, to be fair, I have not seen every season of Voyager. I will finish that next and possibly re-evaluate.

    And this leads to so many pointless arguments. What a person likes better than something else is totally SUBJECTIVE. There is nothing wrong with liking one series over another. But, if you say you like "A" more than "B", too many people who like "B" better than "A" think you are insulting "B".......
    The first official Campaign starts on Scott's birthday, y'all!!!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    I liked Disco but did not love it. However, I feel like it will be better evaluated as an entire series vs season-by-season. It is much like DS9, which has some ups and downs within seasons but when viewed as a complete story is so much better than the other series (IMHO). TNG probably had the most "top 10" episodes, but the character arcs in DS9 were more thorough.

    Voyager, and again my opinion, is the show of missed opportunities. I chose my moniker because the character of Suder best exemplifies that; how cool would it have been to have him as a Garak-esque recurring character, testing the crew and Janeway at every turn, challenging thier beliefs and the "right thing to do" when his psychosis and almost Hannibal Lecter mentality can show them other paths to achieving goals?

    Anyway, digressing a bit . . . once Discovery starts answering questions about the technology and starship design (I like 1 theory, but I won't go into it here) and Klingon appearance and other seeming contradictions, and when we see the full arc of tbe story, then we can judge and compare.

    "Reliant" will have an episode that mansplains the Klingons looking different in Season Onethan any other Star Trek show, including how they look in Season Two.......
    The first official Campaign starts on Scott's birthday, y'all!!!
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, I'm happy the OP enjoyed but STD is an abomination.

    Most of the people responsible for that are already out of CBS, eventually, it will be canceled by the utterly low number of viewers and how costly it becomes to CBS and NETFLIX, and removed from the canon and Star Trek once more will be something akin to intelligent plots and well-developed characters.

    And of course without RADARs in space...

    Clearly you have not seen how many stores are sold out of Discovery season 1 on blu-ray. It is doing quite well and you should hope it does well even if you dislike the show. If trek shows do not do well then more trek shows will not be made. New trek shows that you might like. Also, it has just been one season. That is way too early to write it off. The other trek series had issues in their first season as well. Give it a second chance in the second season, you will not be disappointed.

    CBS has several titles trademarked/copyrighted, including "Reliant" and "Ceti Alpha V" that appear to be future Trek shows......

    The first official Campaign starts on Scott's birthday, y'all!!!
2
Sign In or Register to comment.