It's interesting because the other shows all had 24 episode seasons, here as discovery and presumably the other new shows coming out are working with the shorter "game of thrones" style seasons. There isn't really any "filler" episodes with discovery, and it's even at the point where many bridge officers are glorified extras as there is no time to give them any stories. It creates a different feel imo, on shows like TNG, DS9 and Voyager I feel like you really "knew" the characters, but the shorter seasons some may argue makes for more compelling narrative.
Since we’re only up to Episode 4 that can be discussed without spoiler tags, I just added one to the title. I hope that’s a fair compromise.
There may be no exclusive standalones in Discovery, but many episodes are clearly plugged into the season-long after the fact. The Sound of Thunder could easily have been a story about exploitation and observing the Prime Directive. Indeed, Beimler has submitted such a story proposal for TNG's third season. Of course, you could compare any of the long-form stories attempted in Star Trek with Discovery's two seasons: The Circle Trilogy, the seven-episode Occupation Arc, the nine-episode Final Chapter Arc, the Xindi War arc, the Augments Arc, the Kishara Arc, or the Babel Arc.
Discovery for me is very much, watch it once and enjoy it (for the most part). Where as the other series have the rewatch factor, many episodes of TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager I can watch over and over again, I’m yet to find that with Discovery. After the seasons have finished, it’s a very empty feeling. I don’t find that I’m interested in the characters, at all. I have a few favourites, Saru, Dr Culber and Staments, but Michael (the lead) is just “meh” to me. This isn’t supposed to be a bashing post, I want to like Discovery, I do very much enjoy the visuals but the story telling and character building has been very weak IMO. Even more so now season 2 has ended. I am very much looking forward to Picard, however. Hopefully we get to see a nice blend of new interesting characters in with a few golden oldies.
Nostalgia kinda renders these kinds of comparisons moot, IMHO. Everyone loves the version of something they grew up with, first and foremost. There are gonna be fans who saw Discovery first, think eveything before is too dated and think Series XII is utter crap (although probably less than with previous Treks, owing to Trek's current distribution model)
I agree with the above comment that STDisco just doesn't have rewatch value. It's like once the plot happens, then it's all done, and that's it. The episodes and seasons are like James Cameron's "Avatar" in that way... I saw it once and had a blast, but I have never, ever had the desire to go back and watch it again. I find other modern network TV shows to be similar, i.e. "Agents of SHIELD" and the Arrowverse. The only episode of STDisco that I feel like revisiting some time is S2 "If Memory Serves." Kor
Not always true, but often enough for many. Even then, go back far enough and there's a point where I'd rather sit through a modern rendition of Romeo & Juliet over going back in time and sitting in an audience 500+ years ago... Agreed that those seeing only the new entry, assuming they like it, might belittle the old. Or might dislike it might belittle the old anyway. Or they might give it a chance and find something that transcends the dated issues (whether it be the looks or the occasional dialogue). Series XII - of Red Dwarf? Can't be for Doctor Who, that's not out yet and is still being filmed, and it's individual speculative supposition if it's going to be good enough. Unless you mean Season 12 from the classic era? Can't be relating to Star Trek, its seasonal structure is not a linear progression as such and none of its incarnations to date has made it to a 12th season and even the spinoffs aren't so tightly wrapped to the progenitor from which they sprang. Unless the distribution is in the UK, which still makes little sense as it's not a British show and in each territory seasons or series are kept to the region they're in (Hence Doctor Who classic era blu-rays given American terminology "Tom Baker season one" instead of "Season 12".) That and DS9 season 2, or TNG season 3 depending on how "Series ___" is ordered (OMG and not including DSC's not yet made or released third year, which also leapfrogs after every other Trek show made thus adding another spanner... never mind if "The Cage" is, as a one-off pilot, its own independent season and I decided "NO" because all this is convoluted enough already... )
That's the nature of modern serialized storytelling. It's not just Kurtzman Trek, it's about 70-80% of the current television out there. The positives are that you can... theoretically... explore the major characters much more thoroughly, and create more deeper, extensive worldbuilding. It's "bingeable" TV. But as already mentioned, it takes away the 're-watch' factor. Once you're done with a show you move on to the next one and never come back. ... Unless the show is done really, really well. (I know someone that has watched all seasons of Breaking Bad four times!) I'm not a "Discovery vs. The Orville" guy - I enjoy them both and don't see why people feel they HAVE to choose- but I do enjoy The Orville's semi-episodic/semi-serialized format more. The episodes for the most part are their own thing similar to old school Trek; but the actions, experiences and relationships carry over to the next episode and so on. So while there's no season-long story arc, the episodes do build on each other. It's kind of the best of both worlds (no pun intended). But the main thing is that the episodes are re-watchable. There's a variety of other network shows right now that follow the semi-episodic/semi-serialized format if you want to look beyond sci-fi.
I have to disagree that serialization kills rewatchability. Both BB and Lost are on my “Frequent rewatch” list. Not to mention Good Place and Silicon Valley. I haven’t rewatched Disco yet but plan to. I think the thing about new shows that kills rewatchability is when they lack moments of levity to balance all the heavy drama. Like, I doubt I’ll rewatch Westworld until right before the final season starts. I guess that might be an issue with Disco. It’s hard to compare but somehow with all the differences Disco gives me that “Star Trek” feel in a way the Abramsverse doesn’t. It feels like a modern extension of the entity of “Star Trek” to me at least so it’s no problem to compare characters and episodes across gens.
Simple: we compare them in terms of relatively timeless prestigious industry awards, taking into account categories and nominations vs awards actually won.
how to compare.. TOS-VOY are in 4:3 Enterprise: 16:9 HD Discovery is in Cinematic 2:1 there. I hope that helps. you can compare now.
Too different timelines. Water & oil. Keep them separate. The new will fade, the old has and will remain.
In 1987 the new-that-would-fade was Star Trek: The Next Generation. 30 years later, it's making a comeback in the form of Star Trek: Picard. Never say never.
Discovery is the 4th best Star Trek series and objectively in the same universe as the earlier Treks. As much as I'd like to take the Star Wars prequels out of canon, there's just no argument besides my opinion of their quality. Same with you and Disco.
We're still changing our perceptions of the other shows to this day. TOS is being criticized more and more as time goes on for its overt display of outdated values. TNG has gone from being the "new favorite" to being more heavily criticized for its static nature, less engaging stories, and lack of dramatic tension. DS9 has made a journey from being the "cult favorite" of a smaller sub-section of the fanbase to now being much more broadly appreciated and accepted due to its more mature themes and serialized storytelling. VOY is gaining popularity in streaming, especially as nice "comfort food Trek" as opposed to being constantly maligned as a weaker cousin of TNG. Even the movies are being re-evaluated. Fans seem MUCH more forgiving of films like TMP and TFF these days than in the past. I think given all this, we can be assured that Discovery and (soon) Picard will be judged, as always, when they first air, and be harshly judged against expectations and nostalgia. Later, fans will evolve and change their opinions based on the times and based on their own nostalgia.
It depends on how well the serialization is done. I can go back and watch just about any random episode of Mad Men and find that the story stands strongly on its own, and I pick up new things from it every time. Not so with a lot of the serialized stuff on network TV, where it seems that the whole purpose of an episode is just to forcibly get to the next episode in an hour of frenzied action. And when the end credits roll, and I ask myself what just happened during the episode, all I can really come up with is "we got to the next episode." Kor
To the serialization point, I agree that it's hard to rewatch. For example, DS9 was a great Star Trek show, but I simply have never, in over 10 years, brought myself to engage in a re-watch. I just don't have the kind of time in my life to watch 170-180 hours of television. And, I'm the type of person who would want to re-watch the entire thing if I'm going to do it at all...so I'm not sure I will ever watch DS9 again. Although, the recent "What We Left Behind" documentary may be changing my mind...... I feel almost the same exact way about "24" with Kiefer Sutherland. I loved that show...I've never seen any season more than once. Just can't go back to invest that kind of time.
You have to be like bamboo. Strong but able to move with the currents. If you have one exact idea about which way it should be, then you're only going to be satisfied if the wind happens to be blowing your direction. If you're too entrenched in your position, then the minute the wind blows in the other direction and you don't get your way, you'll snap like a twig.