News DSC Season 2 Premiere Reviews

[Tuskin38]

Well after having seen the first episode of season two I'm less than bowled over and have no idea what the point of it all was?
JB

Why am I not surprised?

 

[johnnybear]

I like to be consistent if nothing else!
JB

 

[Mudd]

Audience reviews.

 

[Tuskin38]

View attachment 7864

RT audience reviews are not very reliable.

Anyone can post a user review without actually proving that they've seen the show. People can just spam negative or positive reviews for the hell of it.

 

[The Habs Fan]

Did you even watch the episode Serveaux?

"Audience reviews" are ridiculous lately, especially when it comes to franchises with toxic fandoms. You have a group of Trekkies who think: "if this gets bad reviews, they'll cancel the show and make the Star Trek I want and release it on Netflix."

I propose we "spam" rotten tomatoes and IMDB with the ratings we rated the episode with in the discussion thread as that is a better representation of how good the episode actually was.

In fact we have almost the same amount of ratings in this forum as the rotten tomatoes page and the results are completely different.

 

[donners22]

Audience reviews.

Most of which seem to have little to do with the episode itself.

Their motivations seem all too obvious.

Identity politics and SJW's have destroyed yet another show and series I grew up to love
...
take a hard look at what at star trek audience actually want, loose the SJW themes that alienated the core viewership
...
CBS, how about you hire people who actually LIKE Star Trek, and have no social agendas to push.
...
PC garbage.
...
Please stop injecting PC liberal agendas into old classics
...
Stop the SJW BS
...
I also don't like the STD agenda driven writers
...
This is a terrible example of a SJW driven script

 

[Tuskin38]

Just like I thought, no valid criticism at all.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

View attachment 7864

Audience reviews.

NOPE

 

[Noname Given]

View attachment 7864

Audience reviews.

Yeah, yeah - as the Oville's ratings plummet; all the butthurt TNG fans review bomb.

 

[Mudd]

Most of which seem to have little to do with the episode itself.

Their motivations seem all too obvious.

Only if you cherry-pick the reviews that you think prove your point.

Season 2 is just as bad as season 1. Unoriginal, unexciting, crap. Hilarious to see their desperate attempts to drum up some interest in the show by very slightly addressing some fan concerns. Too little, too late.

Took most of season one to tolerate Michael while finding easy enjoyment of most all the other characters notably the fine Lorca and Michelle Yeoh. So I was looking forward to the new season, what a letdown. Michael limits as an actor have appear more apparent, not sure why but it is way too focused on her character. I appreciate it is s I fi but this show has lost all lsense of reality. It just seems stupid and dumbed down nowhere near as bad as Guardians of the Galaxy but along those lines. The ?adolescent dialogue and OTT action scenes are obviously designed to tap into the less discerningviewers. I can enjoy a broad range of sci fi programs and enjoyed almost all the spin off series of Star Trek which always managed to stay above the mundane. This one doesn?t. Also enough of the political correctness and condescending speeches we might be scI fi nuts but we are not in the stupid category and can think for ourselves without having it spelled out for us. Pity it could have been good because the first series certainly was.

Explain the "obvious motivations" there.

Oh, yeah, the writers didn't like it. That's obvious.

 

[Tuskin38]

Only if you cherry-pick the reviews that you think prove your point.

You're doing the same thing

 

[donners22]

Only if you cherry-pick the reviews that you think prove your point.

Explain the "obvious motivations" there.

Oh, yeah, the writers didn't like it. That's obvious.

The cherries are so abundant; it's hard to avoid them. Even one of the two you cite whines about "political correctness" , and the other is so generic as to be meaningless.

On the other hand, you have a thread at the top of this board with a similar number of votes to that page. The vast majority enjoyed it, and are able to articulate their reasons for doing so. Likewise, those who didn't are able to explain why.

I find those opinions - whether positive or negative - far more significant than most of those "reviews" you cite .

 

[CorporalClegg]

Only if you cherry-pick the reviews that you think prove your point.





Explain the "obvious motivations" there.

Oh, yeah, the writers didn't like it. That's obvious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

 

[CorporalClegg]

Oh. And I really like this one:

Everyone's favorite Star Trek fan fic is back. And it's as terrible as ever. CBS, just take the loss, and put you effort into making Section 31 good. That's my advice.

Disco is 'fan-fic,' but a Section 31 series a perfectly good idea. Not fanwanky at all.

 

[Mudd]

The cherries are so abundant; it's hard to avoid them.

Not really. Two hundred-some reviews. You picked the ones that let you undercut strangers' motives.

On the other hand, you have a thread at the top of this board with a similar number of votes to that page. The vast majority enjoyed it...

Psst...this is a Star Trek board. Board full of Star Trek fans. Self-selected enthusiasts.

Discovery doesn't know what it wants to be, seemingly because it's making every attempt to distance itself from the source material whilst paradoxically trying to associate itself with it.

If you're easily distracted from uninteresting plots and characters by 90% of the budget having been put in sets and visual effects, you'll probably like it, but there isn't much depth to it and the characters are tolerable at best, but at worst you'll get irritated by stupid decisions and an overwhelming urge to make Michael Burnham an action hero. I half expect her to rip off her uniform to find a big letter "S" and a red cape, to fly in and save the day, which she does every 10-15 minutes.

If you want to play a good drinking game, have a shot whenever Michael Burnham saves the day, resolves a situation no one else can, lectures someone, or otherwise do things with the other mere mortals die for attempting. It gets very annoying once you notice it.

Discovery lacks any of the hallmarks of good Star Trek, or good science fiction for that matter. Aside from the fact they are on a space ship it could be set in any of the Marvel films. It's kinda like a live action video game, but where your avatar has a mind of it's own and keeps reminding you that you're too stupid to play.

I would guess that none of the writers are fans of Star Trek, or have any interest in science, philosophy or futurism. It seems pretty clear that it's being written by committee who decide on a bunch of action sequences to spend most of the budget, and then try to fit a plot around the rest where every shot has to use over the top production techniques to distract from mind numbing dialogue.

I've no idea why they decided to do this to Star Trek, which has endured for decades for all of the reasons this isn't Trek. I don't imagine anyone who worked on previous Trek shows would have anything positive to say about it aside from those who worked in post production, but a show can't and won't survive on that alone.

That's as articulate as anyone posting here in support of the show.
The numbers are what they are.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Articulate maybe.

But "Discovery lacks any of the hallmarks of good Star Trek." Is nebulous and arbitrary.

And "I would guess none of the writers are fans Star Trek or having any interest in science" is dismissive sophist's hand-waving.

There's nothing quantitatively critical. It's all loaded langue meant to invoke - say it with me - conf bias.

 

[The Habs Fan]

Not really. Two hundred-some reviews. You picked the ones that let you undercut strangers' motives.




Psst...this is a Star Trek board. Board full of Star Trek fans. Self-selected enthusiasts.


That's as articulate as anyone posting here in support of the show.
The numbers are what they are.

Again... did you even watch the episode or did you make up your mind based on reviews posted to Rotten Tomatoes?

200 hundred reviews on a website mean nothing to CBS compared to the millions around the world who watch the show every week. But sure.. keep posting the negative reviews that confirm your opinion. Your loss.

 

[Uhura's Song]

Most of which seem to have little to do with the episode itself.

Their motivations seem all too obvious.

I love reviews like that. It proves the commenter was too stupid to notice Trek has always taken on political/social topics. Tolerance. Acceptance. Equality. Words over war. Diplomacy over dumb@$$es. That is the core of Trek, and humanity in Roddenberry's future.

 

[Roald]

View attachment 7864

Audience reviews.

Really? Seriously?
There’s a genuine positive consensus towards the season opener and you want to disprove that with RT audience scores..? Scores and ratings that are so painfully obvious the result of organized downvoting..? What are you even trying to prove with this..? Most of us are going ape-shit over ‘Brother’, but here you are with -of all things- the RT audience reviews.... Really? Seriously..?

 

[nutshell]

Of course unsurprisingly, AICN has a negative review...

Herc is a tool.