What was your impression of Season 2 overall?

I agree with your assessment of the second season, for the most part. The first half I’d call good, and the second meh. But, for me, that’s a big step up from season one, which peaked at meh. So progress, I’d say.

 

Not were they always professional. But, I prefer DSC's emoting to TNG.

 

Pike reminded me Bruce Greenwood's version, except younger and with Jeff Hunter's Pike's backstory. I think they did a good fusion of the two Pikes. This makes sense in that there wasn't much of Pike to go on in "The Cage" beyond his atypical day and several in the audience are more familiar with Bruce Greenwood's version. So Pike seems fatherly to the crew. The last time we had that was with Picard. Or motherly in the case of Janeway.

Being preceded by Lorca also helped to give a sense of how Pike ticked. Whatever Lorca would've done, have Pike do the opposite.

So blending the two previous versions of the character, and directly contrasting him with a whole other character, gave us what I think of as the definitive version of Pike.

I still wish they pushed his religious upbringing a little bit more later in the season, beyond having faith in the outcome of missions because he knows he'll come out intact unless he's saving cadets.

I don't know how many people here have seen an old show called The Rifleman, but Pike here reminds me a little of the main character there too, Lucas McCain. The only time I thought "This feels more like Kirk" was when Pike asked, "Is that a smile I see, Spock?", but I think that's what they were going for in that instance.

 

^^^
FTFY

 

Discovery is Star Trek in name only. The Red Angel plot was tedious, predictable and doesn't have anything to do with Star Trek. The writing was poor, unintelligent (just "forgetting" Michael Burnham, the crew and ship? Yeah, right...) and, like the Abramsverse movies, can't bother with getting any science right. The visual design is overworked and the lack of respect for the 50+ years of Star Trek shows preceding it still annoys the heck out of me (a thing like turning the bridge screen into a window like the Abramsverse movies did).

Hopefully DSC will become a paranthesis in Trek history. So, my impression of the second season is that it was very poor. Hopegully the third, if it happens, will be better.

 

I found season 2 to be an improvement on season 1 but the whole Red Angel storyline was a bit weak.

I guess it had to be done as it was the only way to move the show to the future.

 

"IF"?

 

Call me crazy (that's why I have my username), but somehow I don't think he'll like the third season any better.

 

Normally I dismiss the YouTube commentators because all they seem to want to do is spew hate all over Discovery, but, this is one video that I actually have to agree with.

Discovery does have big, sweeping emotional moments that weren't earned and Airiam was the most glaring example of this. We saw the character several times in the background and even heard her speak in several key scenes, but to center an entire episode on her for the sole purpose of killing her off was poor writing, I'm sorry. We were given roughly 40 minutes to care about her before she died. I wanted to know more about her all along. She looked to be an interesting recurring character that I wanted to see some focus on or even make her one of the regulars. She seemed like an interesting Data-like character that could've added something to the cast of regulars.

I think part of the problem Discovery has is that it lacks a supporting cast. When I stop and think about who the main characters are, you have Burnham, Stamets, Tilly, Culber, and Saru as regulars. The supporting cast is recurring and they hardly are given any screen time. Before this season began, I didn't even know their names and, based off the scene in the first episode of the season where Pike asks for a roll call, it seemed like this season was going to address that problem by bringing them more to the forefront. I mean, hell, one of them was even a main player in the second episode.

But it didn't. And because of this, when we see them recording their goodbye messages to their families in the season finale, there was absolutely ZERO emotional weight to it.

Sure, they got a little more screentime than last season, but, not by much. The big, sweeping emotional moments seem to feature characters that we barely spent any time with or (and this is just an opinion of my own) are just uninteresting. Sorry, but, I just think Tyler doesn't work as a character. His arc in the first season, which was interesting, seemed resolved at the end and we wouldn't see him again. He had no business being in this season at all and added nothing but unnecessary complications to things that only made me hate his character. And I really don't fully understand the poorly-written on/off relationship with Michael. And that only made their goodbye scene bereft of any sentiment.



Take this moment from TNG's Family. This works for several reasons; mostly because this was Trek giving a character emotional continuity from one episode to the next. And also because up to this point, Picard was a bit of a stiff, almost emotionless character who had a life-altering experience. Picard couldn't have gone back to being the character we saw him as in the first three seasons. It all culminated in him having a breakdown. There were three seasons building to this moment.

The problem is Discovery wants to do THIS in nearly every episode.

 

I'll be honest--this season moved me to tears. Burnham's complicated relationship with her brother lends to my experiences with mental illness, and the family dynamic. Spock is essentially psychotic for the first half of the season.

Burnham has her highest moment as a Starfleet officer and that comes crashing down as the Enterprise appears. Despite howls of joy at "Eden," I thought it a low-point of the series, perhaps of Trek. Drawing these lines between belief and rejecting science drives people both from faith and Science, and Burnham's arc felt like a Hallmark character.

I thought the 100,000 years of data was tremendously well-done. They are able to kill Saru and still have him evolve. That was the first moment of tears; Burnham and Saru. The exploration spirit is alive, as they find its intent, and need of legacy, as it dies is perhaps the most fulfilling, and relatable problem. To pivot the season on the episode, showing the downside of the ultimate knowledge, is essential to exploration. It was deftly handled, and emotionally gratifying.

As Spock and Burnham interact, his rejection of her is true to his character as he summarizes her as only Spock, and a brother, can. Watching this dynamic play out with her birth mother puts Burnham in the fetal position. At which point Spock comforts her by finally playing chess, and giving her what she needs--perspective after her failure. The failure that is sympathetic as she loses her mother, and she helped Control without realizing it.

Burnham telling Spock to open himself up to friendship, deepened his inability to connect with Kirk, deepened his cynicism towards Bones.

Edit: All season, they built situations "where no one is left behind." Then, the entire crew sacrifices themselves to save all civilizations by leaving Discovery in the future, sacrificing their own. The war with the Klingons earns the resolution of L'Rell saving Starfleet ships against control, "an earned peace."

I think 950 years ahead will hamper every Star Trek show, creating more Canon. The two-part bullshit showdown, unsatisfying. But all in all, a great season. I love this show!

 

Ariam is hardly the first in Trek lore. Tasha Yar is a great example; an unearned death in the middle of the greatest series Star Trek ever did. Brining in Sela never earned that, nor did "Yesterday's Enterprise." Data and Tasha "hooked up," intoxicated, and she regretted it to the point of telling him "it never happened." Data's love life sucks which is why he testifies as season later that we were "intimate."

Don't ask me to write about the wood on "Enterprise" and "Voyager," pure storytelling of bland characters that made me feel like paint was drying. I never believed Tom Paris and his damage, Harry Kim, Robert Beltran, nor did I appreciate Trip or weapons guy enough to be alone in a shuttle with him.

My point? It's a nit-pick and a standard other Trek doesn't "enjoy." Like the hissy over the redesigned Klingons, in a show called "Discovery," that is more biologically sound, more logical for a warrior race, and we did this from 1979 to 2004 without an in-universe explanation, these fans hold standards that are a tad high.

They want consistency in order to live in the universe or it breaks the fourth wall. Consistency kills creativity. That's why we re-boot stories all the time, to free the writers from knowing Canon. This isn't a religious cult. It's a TV show, and I refuse to let a great entry be killed by nitpicks. They listen to these hacks, these professional writers. It's time to stop glamorizing the past.

It's been done before. Focus on Burnham's reaction, not the death of Tasha about to engage in a fighting tournament and give her own eulogy.

 

"It wasn't perfect, there were plot holes, "

Curious as to what you think were the plot holes?

 

They're being discussed in detail in this thread.

 

I "didn't mind" season 2 overall.

Pike and Spock were excellent, and Stamets is always a pleasure, those three characters alone made the season watchable for me. And Tilly, I love Tilly.

Tyler didn't annoy me as much this season (the beard and long hair helped), sadly the bridge crew didn't get much work except Ariam who was killed just as she got interesting. Detmer makes me feel like a schoolgirl with a crush every time shes on screen but I wish she had more to do oooooo. ..

Burnham.... I just.... I don't "hate" her but I just .... I dunno it's a risky topic but I just wish she was part of an ensemble and not the lead, she's not my favourite character I'll just leave it there.

The start of the season was "quite good", the end was "pretty bad"

Overall, it was ok, it didn't offend me in any way but I probably won't watch it again.

Disco just doesn't hit the mark for me, it's too much of a mixed bag, but hey, I have TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT. and maybe the picard show will hot home for me, but if not I'm satisfied with the 30 seasons of classic trek I already got. And I hope disco keeps going for those who do love the show.

 

I applaud this attitude so much!

 

It did feel like a forced attempt to answer all fan gripes before punting into the abyss, the punt itself an answer to the gripe about things being set before TOS in the first place.

Which, O.M.G., if that's the case NO. You do not need to literally justify every fan wanker on the internet. You will make no one happy.

I, for one, expect the next season to start out super cool before the whole thing shits the bed in the last act. The only warning will be ½ of an early episode that is unnecessary akward in an obviously fixable way.

I really, really hope they don't treat Picard like this. TNG was my Trek growing up...though I was definitely on the young side for that one.

Yeah, she's okay in small doses. In larger doses she's a little Wesley-ish.

 

It remains to be seen whether the move to the future will be a good move or not.

Hopefully it is part of a master plan rather than a making it up as they go along plan.

 

Sorry, but "making it up as they go" has been Star Trek's ultimate hallmark trait from day one, since "The cage" first failed to sell the original series. I don't see why tyhey'd abandon Star trek's defining trait now after 55 years (counting back to 1964 when GR first envisioned it).

 

I loved his solution to avoiding extras when the Kelvans invaded.

 

They are unable to plan a single season properly. A multiseason arc? Ha. No.