Spoilers Star Trek Discovery Season 1: Overall Review Thread

[cultcross]

All that would reasonably be needed is that it is permanently prevented from being used again, so it is an historical oddity by the time of the later shows. There would be little need to mention it any more than one would mention camel riding. The only issue for continuity is if they just stop using it because of an environmental analogue, or because of its general negative effects on the navigator. Because then the question comes up of why Voyager didn't try just one jump.

 

[Longinus]

All that would reasonably be needed is that it is permanently prevented from being used again, so it is an historical oddity by the time of the later shows. There would be little need to mention it any more than one would mention camel riding. The only issue for continuity is if they just stop using it because of an environmental analogue, or because of its general negative effects on the navigator. Because then the question comes up of why Voyager didn't try just one jump.

Or why some other species with no such ethical concerns did not develop the technology.

And it would still leave open the question why this technology is not widespread. Because it allows you to travel instantly to anywhere, and some species somewhere in the would have surely developed the tech at some point during the billions of years the universe has existed, the technology would surely have spread across the universe (or the multiverse.)

It was a terrible idea, and it was much more powerful tech than the plot needed. The ability to instantly travel anywhere was not really not needed for any of the plots. (Just like the Charon really didn't need to threaten the entire multiverse.)

But this is what this show does. The Klingon war was the same. Introduce a huge setting shattering thing that is not really even properly used for the story.

 

[Long Syntax]

Now that its first season is over with, isn't it time to stop excusing Discovery by saying "Oh, the first season of TNG was wretched too"?

James Lileks, an amusing writer since Minneapolis-in-the-1980s and a 5x-per-week blogger since 1998 or so, and obviously a longtime Trek fan, has a concise and snarky analysis of the series; scroll down to "If you will bear with me, this is the last I will say about this.": http://lileks.com/bleats/archive/18/0218/021518.html

That article was hilarious!

 

[eschaton]

Or why some other species with no such ethical concerns did not develop the technology.

And it would still leave open the question why this technology is not widespread. Because it allows you to travel instantly to anywhere, and some species somewhere in the would have surely developed the tech at some point during the billions of years the universe has existed, the technology would surely have spread across the universe (or the multiverse.)

It was a terrible idea, and it was much more powerful tech than the plot needed. The ability to instantly travel anywhere was not really not needed for any of the plots. (Just like the Charon really didn't need to threaten the entire multiverse.)

But this is what this show does. The Klingon war was the same. Introduce a huge setting shattering thing that is not really even properly used for the story.

One possibility, although lame, is the mycelial network is the Q continuum. Basically the Q realize humans have been mucking around cutting through their dimension, and decide to put a stop to it once and for all. This could fold into the science vs. faith aspect, if they initially try and pass themselves off as being gods.

 

[cbl1]

I still don't understand why those rating something a 1-3 are still around here. If I thought a show was so bad as to rate it a 1 or a 2 I certainly wouldn't keep watching and most certainly not get on a message board to discuss it.

I mean I would vote something like "The Bachelor" to me a 1 - I mean can a star trek episode really be less then a 3. And I would fair to say a whole season even if you thought of it as pretty bad I mean a 4. For instance TNG season 1 was pretty bad. There are several episodes I way say 3-4. I would probably give it a 5 maybe on the season. Not that I like it but I mean to me something has to be darn awful to give a show a 2. I mean 5 means shows promise but not hitting right. 1-2 means this show has no promise don't care anything about it.

I think if you give it a 1-2 you just don't like the whole premise of the show and probably then shouldn't be watching as you are coming into the show with an attitude that you will not like it.

 

[Hythlodeus]

I still don't understand why those rating something a 1-3 are still around here. If I thought a show was so bad as to rate it a 1 or a 2 I certainly wouldn't keep watching and most certainly not get on a message board to discuss it.

I mean I would vote something like "The Bachelor" to me a 1 - I mean can a star trek episode really be less then a 3. And I would fair to say a whole season even if you thought of it as pretty bad I mean a 4. For instance TNG season 1 was pretty bad. There are several episodes I way say 3-4. I would probably give it a 5 maybe on the season. Not that I like it but I mean to me something has to be darn awful to give a show a 2. I mean 5 means shows promise but not hitting right. 1-2 means this show has no promise don't care anything about it.

I think if you give it a 1-2 you just don't like the whole premise of the show and probably then shouldn't be watching as you are coming into the show with an attitude that you will not like it.

you don't have to watch it, to rate it low

 

[Nyotarules]

Starfleet and Federation leadership has rarely been shown to be sane.

Even the novels bear this out

 

[Nyotarules]

That article was hilarious!

Love it! 10 for the article, 7 for the first season of DISC, the main thing for me I enjoyed watching it, despite its 'roll my eyes' moment. Now that it is all over going to watching the whole franchise plus movies for the next year.

 

[eschaton]

I still don't understand why those rating something a 1-3 are still around here. If I thought a show was so bad as to rate it a 1 or a 2 I certainly wouldn't keep watching and most certainly not get on a message board to discuss it.

I mean I would vote something like "The Bachelor" to me a 1 - I mean can a star trek episode really be less then a 3. And I would fair to say a whole season even if you thought of it as pretty bad I mean a 4. For instance TNG season 1 was pretty bad. There are several episodes I way say 3-4. I would probably give it a 5 maybe on the season. Not that I like it but I mean to me something has to be darn awful to give a show a 2. I mean 5 means shows promise but not hitting right. 1-2 means this show has no promise don't care anything about it.

I think if you give it a 1-2 you just don't like the whole premise of the show and probably then shouldn't be watching as you are coming into the show with an attitude that you will not like it.

There are certainly Trek episodes I'd rate that poorly, such as Spock's Brain, Code of Honor, Profit and Lace, Threshold, A Night In Sickbay, etc. Just because I like all of Trek in general doesn't mean I like every episode of Trek - or even every season of Trek (TOS Season 3, and TNG Season 1, were almost unwatchable). But I've forced myself to watch all of Trek up until now, no matter how boring or bad i thought individual episodes were. I'm going to remain a completionist.

 

[Jadeb]

I think the poll should run from 5 to 10, so people give the show the ratings it deserves.

Or maybe the poll could run from 5 to 15, so we can show how much we love it. (Ten would still be awesome, but 15 would be like spore drive awesome. Way better than anything we've ever known before, to the point it needs to be classified forever.)

 

[Campe]

But I've forced myself to watch all of Trek up until now, no matter how boring or bad i thought individual episodes were. I'm going to remain a completionist.

I mean, I suppose that’s dedication. I guess, as someone who has give up on series including Trek (I still think there are episodes of Voyager I haven’t watched), I don’t understand why you would put yourself through something if you truly despised it.

 

[eschaton]

I mean, I suppose that’s dedication. I guess, as someone who has give up on series including Trek (I still think there are episodes of Voyager I haven’t watched), I don’t understand why you would put yourself through something if you truly despised it.

Eh. Honestly, the bad episodes are often more fun than the mediocre ones. I can hate-watch and pick them apart, or just laugh at how terrible they are.

 

[Long Syntax]

Eh. Honestly, the bad episodes are often more fun than the mediocre ones. I can hate-watch and pick them apart, or just laugh at how terrible they are.

Ahhhh, hate-watch.. I didn't know that was a thing.

 

[eschaton]

Ahhhh, hate-watch.. I didn't know that was a thing.

Wasn't that the whole appeal of MST3K?

 

[Tuskin38]

I don't know how many of you know who SFDebris is (I have seen people reference his videos once and a while) but he's started reviewing Discovery, currently up to Episode 3.

He isn't giving them scores yet, just general thoughts, and once he's reviewed every episode of the season he's going to do a retrospective video.

http://sfdebris.com/

 

[Long Syntax]

I mean, I suppose that’s dedication. I guess, as someone who has give up on series including Trek (I still think there are episodes of Voyager I haven’t watched), I don’t understand why you would put yourself through something if you truly despised it.

As I told my daughter at the beginning of her Star Trek journey - one watches all of Star Trek, in order, or one does not watch Star Trek

 

[Long Syntax]

Wasn't that the whole appeal of MST3K?

Yeah - but it wasn't my thing. I guess that's why hate-watching didn't ring a bell. However the term now goes in my back pocket for an appropriate occasion

 

[Campe]

As I told my daughter at the beginning of her Star Trek journey - one watches all of Star Trek, in order, or one does not watch Star Trek

One does not have to. One can choose to skip parts if one truly hates parts. But to each one's own.

 

[Long Syntax]

One does not have to. One can choose to skip parts if one truly hates parts. But to each one's own.

Well, of course not. You could watch one show of TNG and then a season of DS9 - whatever floats your boat. The statement was more encouragement for my daughter not to give up on episodes and skip them. If I recall the conversation correctly, I told her even horrible episodes can have important information or consequences in future episodes. If that wasn't part of my personal ethos regarding Star Trek I'm sure I would have given up on it after the first two episodes.

 

[Campe]

Well, of course not. You could watch one show of TNG and then a season of DS9 - whatever floats your boat. The statement was more encouragement for my daughter not to give up on episodes and skip them. If I recall the conversation correctly, I told her even horrible episodes can have important information or consequences in future episodes. If that wasn't part of my personal ethos regarding Star Trek I'm sure I would have given up on it after the first two episodes.

I guess that's kind of my point about hate watching. I gave up on The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones because I truly HATED the characters, the storylines and what they're doing. There are absolutely terrible episodes of Star Trek. But at its core, I still love Star Trek. I really got tired of the direction Voyager was taking, so I skipped the majority of the fifth and sixth seasons. I came back for the seventh to see how it wrapped up and didn't feel as though I missed much. I look through the descriptions of some of those episodes and they don't sound familiar. But, I love me some "Spock's Brain!" Because of the pure camp of it all. It's terrible, but I don't hate it. Some of the reviews I read for Discovery, I just wonder why people watch. If I had some of those feelings, I think I'd stop watching. Hate watching to me to the point where I'm getting heart palpitations over it? (Some of the comments I read? Makes me feel like that's the case.) I just don't get it.

But again, to each his own.