Season 2 an overall improvement?

[MakeshiftPython]

I simply think the pacing is better, the plots more engaging and the characters more relaxed.

The first instance I noticed the characters being more relaxed was during the infamous turbolift scene in "Brother", specifically Burnham showing concern over Linus' well being. It's little touches like that that make the characters come off more likable. Also refreshing coming off after a full season of Burnham wallowing in self pity. Sure she's uneasy about her relationship with Spock this season, but at least we're seeing more facets of her character which the first season didn't offer too much IMO.

 

[cultcross]

I do admit, I haven't watched any since then. I very much doubt it's improved any, though

It depends what you mean by "real Star Trek" of course, but 2.2 and 2.4 are classic Trek plots.

 

[Graham]

It depends what you mean by "real Star Trek" of course, but 2.2 and 2.4 are classic Trek plots.

I couldn't say. I've fallen for "it gets better" twice now; Scotty wouldn't approve of my going there again.

 

[BillJ]

I couldn't say. I've fallen for "it gets better" twice now; Scotty wouldn't approve of my going there again.

I think season one is about as good as a three-day unflushed turd, season two is a definite step in the right direction. Not perfect, but it is more entertaining.

 

[Gul Sengosts]

I think season 2 is definitely an improvement, at least it's about as good as early ENT now

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I definitely think S2 has been an improvement over S1 so far, in that I've only disliked one episode (the Klingon mess) this season. But that's not unusual for a Trek show to improve in its second season. Hopefully it continues to get better.

 

[XCV330]

A beard growing had to occur. Tyler and Culber stepped up and grew them out.

 

[middleagednerdgirl]

I enjoyed Season 1 immensely, although I did not like the ending. I am enjoying Season 2 immensely as well. Season 2 is more like past Trek and it is less challenging to watch in a lot of ways, which I mean to be both a positive and negative statement simultaneously. It is more fun and less exhausting. Less Klingon subtitles, oh thank you. And I didn't need the plot to twist sharply and bite itself on the ass EVERY week. The show is still trying to surprise us but I am glad it's been toned down a bit. I think the producers have also hit a better balance between an ongoing plot and stories that are more isolated while still feeding into the overall arc. What I miss about Season 1 is the way it pushed the envelope by being darker and more adult. I know a lot of people felt that was "not Star Trek" but I am not in that camp. I experienced it as identifiably Trek, but a more grown-up version that I found absolutely thrilling. I suspect I will get my dose of ambiguity and sensuality from Michelle Yeoh (whoever persuaded her to do this has my eternal gratitude) but "perfect" for me would be something in between Season 1 and Season 2 in tone. I also miss Jason Isaacs, the other actor I couldn't tear my eyes away from last year. Anson Mount is charming and it works for me, but he isn't in the same league and the character is not remotely as interesting. Count me among the multitudes wishing for Prime Lorca in Season 3.

 

[Lord Garth]

Something interesting about Season 1 and 2. So far, I gave S1 more 10s, while with S2, it's been more 8,9,8,9, insert a 7 and 10 here.

I feel like Season 1 had higher highs -- which is great since we have mushrooms -- while Season 2 will ultimately turn out to be more steady -- which is weird because it's wackier. Wacky and steady aren't normally things I think of that go together, but here we are.

It's like the difference between TNG Season 3 and 4 where in that case, S3 also had higher highs but S4 was steadier.

 

[LizStargaryen]

Something interesting about Season 1 and 2. So far, I gave S1 more 10s, while with S2, it's been more 8,9,8,9, insert a 7 and 10 here.

I feel like Season 1 had higher highs -- which is great since we have mushrooms -- while Season 2 will ultimately turn out to be more steady -- which is weird because it's wackier. Wacky and steady aren't normally things I think of that go together, but here we are.

It's like the difference between TNG Season 3 and 4 where in that case, S3 also had higher highs but S4 was steadier.

I feel the same way.

The serialized nature of s1 meant that I watched it 3 times during the hiatus between seasons. Sure, I knew it was flawed, and the Mirror Universe and Klingon War resolutions were rushed and trite in spots, but it definitely felt like one continuous story (with some eps being standalone, like Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad, and Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum). Improvements in the writers' room could've solved some of the issues, but I do miss some aspects of s1. It was like watching a 17 part movie.

My favorite TV Trek before DSC was the Dominion War arc of DS9 and seasons 3-4 of ENT. Everything else? I can rattle off a dozen eps or more from each series that I regularly rewatch, but you don't get the rush of a marathon.

I appreciate character moments and storytelling that builds upon what's happened previously. In the era of streaming TV, that's what a lot of the audience expect, not just "the masses." (I also love The Expanse, among other SFF shows.)

S2's rewatchability will depend upon how the Red Angel arc is resolved. Right now, it's seeming a bit disjointed. Which means it's good, but not "something new." I hope the DSC team continues to take risks and not overreact to fans.

 

[Jadeb]

^i don’t really care about serialized v. episodic, but I do care deeply about the character work, and that was an area where I felt season one fell down hard, from the non-handling of Culber’s death to the stupid Lorca twist that undid the season’s best character beats. Season two has been a big improvement for me.

 

[BillJ]

That last episode really brought down my "feel good" feelings about season two.

Guess we'll see where it goes from here.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

^i don’t really care about aerialized v episodic, but I do care deeply about the character work, and that was an area where I felt season one fell down hard, from the non-handling of Culber’s death to the stupid Lorca twist that undid the season’s best character beats. Season two has been a big improvement for me.

Though I don’t care for the twist and resolution with Mirror Lorca, I definitely noticed on rewatch the indications of him bullshitting about throughout the first half of the season that made me appreciate Isaacs’ performance even more. I really hope he comes back as OUR Lorca just because I like that actor. Would be interesting to see him being confronted with the traitor smear that Starfleet has since used to cover up Mirror Lorca’s true origins.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I like season 2 better than 1 so far overall. They're figuring themselves out.

One thing I'm realizing I love about Discovery is that it's the first Trek that the Captain is not the main character.

 

[Qonundrum]

To be fair, people pay for Netflix shows too. This is the world of streaming where nothing is merely “free” like over the air broadcasting. It’s certainly cheaper than having to pay for overpriced cable subscription packages.

The good old days when one could get enough channels for $90/mo, with box at no additional charge, instead of the rental for the modem nowadays.

BillJ already pointed out the cost of sufficiently fast broadband plus number of services, so it is conclusively more expensive compared to back then. It's been pointed out before.

So has the reality of sponsors. A company pays a studio money to help make a show. In return, airtime is given to the company to show a product being sold. That's one reason why brand name butter costs more than the store-brand generic. Or other products. Or why Netflix costs had to go up, to pay for each $8 million installment of DSC when the same money could have paid for 2 or 3 other shows. Just think, Grace and Frankie could easily have had more than twice as many episodes per season instead...

I do feel that season 2 is an improvement.

However, I don't think that being "more in tune with the 80s/90s/00s Trek" is in and of itself a marker of improvement. I don't like the idea of being tied down to that particular time of the Trek franchise or holding it as some kind of golden standard. They should always strive to improve rather than being stuck in the 90s.

Kor

Especially as, after season 1, TNG tried to get away from being stuck with 60s Trek. Even season 1, it's clear they did a shakeup. But the callbacks with original Enterprise and shuttle models littering various sets for no reason except "Callback are cool!", remaking "The Naked Time" so poorly, and so on... way too distracting for a show needing to find its own feet than leech off of it so extensively.

 

[galad2003]

I was disapointed that season 1 was mirror universe and now season 2 is section 31. The two worst plotlines in trek for me.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

I think the characters all got used to each other and formed friendships that feel deserved and genuine. They got to know each other the same as we got to know them. It all feels less like an introduction, and the focus is more on the wonders of space - something that to me feels very much like classic Trek.

Also, I love Tilly and Stamets. I am partial to the adorkable ones, and seeing them actually look out for each other and refer to each other as friends warms my heart.

I suppose those are less improvements but just plain old development. That's probably because I liked the show from the beginning, but now, I'm beginning to love it.

 

[Jedi_Master]

That last episode really brought down my "feel good" feelings about season two.

Guess we'll see where it goes from here.

I agree it was a less than great episode, but it wasn't terrible. I just want more Saru/Tilly/Linus/Pike/Reno stuff.
I think that the TOS format I loved so much could easily be adopted by Pike, Saru, Tilly, and Reno - with a nice dose of Stamets/Culber and Mirror Georgieau occasionally chewing some scenery.
I am still confused as to what Burnham's actual role is on the show. The only time she seems to work is when she is playing off of Michelle Yeoh. Otherwise she is a tepid bore.

 

[BillJ]

I am still confused as to what Burnham's actual role is on the show. The only time she seems to work is when she is playing off of Michelle Yeoh. Otherwise she is a tepid bore.

The show still feels underbaked. Like they are throwing stuff at the wall and hoping it sticks.

 

[Jedi_Master]

The show still feels underbaked. Like they are throwing stuff at the wall and hoping it sticks.

I disagree with the "underbaked" I think that the writers and producers simply can't figure out what to do with their obstensible "main character" and have to find ways to focus on the far more interesting and significant "secondary" characters without upsetting the apple cart.