Star Trek Discovery...best first season of the franchise?

Go into any series forum, and you'll have a poster who might ask "Did this series have the best first season?" or "Did this series have the best first season besides TOS?"

If someone posted "Did ENT have the best first season (since TOS)?" in the ENT Forum, I wouldn't go in there posting "Is this thread a joke?" Because I know there are people who actually believe it, such as yourself. And I have the courtesy to give them their space. What would you think if I wondered if your opinion was a joke? You wouldn't take very kindly to it.

 

Exactly. I don't understand the desire to keep returning to the past.

 

The Usual Suspects will try to twist this into "No we're not!" I can see their canned rebuttals coming from a mile away.

 

As can I. I have this vain desire to understand their point of view yet there never ever seems any sort of overlap with what I am enjoying with Trek...

 

And herein lies the fault of your argument. Those two questions are not the same. The latter concedes the commonly held belief (Not just among Star Trek fans, but the general public and critics.) that TOS1 stands as one of the greatest seasons of television ever. It was revolutionary, unprecedented in its influence, and maintained a remarkable level of consistency for the time it came out - which, given some of the background and behind the scenes shenanigans, was nothing short of miraculous. And so much of its iconography has become cornerstones in not just Star Trek, but the whole pop culture zeitgeist. It's not just the best first season of Star Trek. It is the best season of Star Trek period - in as an objective way as any such thing could be.

For all I care, you could take all of the other 30 or whatever seasons and toss them into a Bingo tumbler and get what you get.

But that's all immaterial really. As the OP presents a list all the episodes ranked by subjective scores pooled into an aggregate. A list that suggests Binary and Past is Prologue is on the same level as Balance of Terror. I mean let's take a step back a moment. And try to inject a little rationality and reason.

I barely remember Binary enough to comment on it enough other than creepy Riker being creepy Riker. But I did give WPIP high marks. I went back and looked and this is what I said about it:

https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/sta...-past-is-prologue.292532/page-3#post-12341345

But that's emotional after the fact reaction. Not in the context of Star Trek history.

And I think my quote there is germane to my greater issue. I don't treat enjoyment value and quality as being one in the same. They are not mutually exclusive and yet I think when judging something within a larger context should be treated as such. Do I think Disco is entertaining? Hell yes. (Not so much Picard.) Do I think it's good? Eh.

And I also don't think it's in the shows - or the franchise's - best interest to ignore the glaring issues and be content with "Well I like it anyway." Because the streaming market is about to become way more competitive in the coming months, especially with COVID having a lasting effect on production. (I think other networks are going to speed up their streaming output over broadcast.)

Disco had two things going for it that 'covered up' the poor writing: the amazing cast (which is still true) and its production or visual pazazz. The problem with the latter, though, is that Mando just lapped it big time. And Disney isn't stopping there. Eventually, if Star Trek doesn't keep up, it's going to begin to feel quaint again. And the security blanket of CBSAA won't be enough.

If they don't want to get lost in the shuffle, they really need to start writing better code.

 

I learned a long time ago to mentally translate "best" to "favorite" whenever someone says it. So whenever I see threads like this, I just think "That's just normal forum stuff." Any forum.

And I'm just backing the person who's on my side. Once again, not uncommon "forum of a series" stuff. I don't agree with him on everything, but I agree with him here, so we're wearing the same jersey. Okay, not quite. Technically I put PIC S1 over DSC S1, but that's really just splitting hairs. We're part of the same team, so that makes him my guy.

I record a lot of varsity sports, so that mentality rubbed off on me, but I've found it works pretty well when applied to here.

EDIT: My filter also automatically translates "This is the worst!" to "I just don't like it!"

In more extreme cases (I'm not applying this to you), I translate it into "I just don't like it and I'm going to make sure everyone knows it until they're sick of it! And then I'll keep going because I know they're sick of it, but I want to do it anyway!" Certain people here, that's totally within their wheelhouse and they've been gleefully doing it for years.

Though, once again, it's a forum thing. And every forum has someone who's "That Person". I just don't get why someone would willingly choose to be "That Person". Especially if they've been on the other side of it in another forum in the past. They know better because they know what they're doing and they know how they're coming off. But they still want to do it anyway. That makes them even worse.

 

When we can all agree on a clear, objective, set of criteria for a show being "good" I'd be more interested in having the debate.

Till then I'll keep giving new things a try and do my best to be open minded about them.

 

I fell like it's unnecessarily combative to frame this as "sides." (As you also do here.) This isn't Social Justice, it's just people wanting television they can enjoy and having different ideas about what that entails.

Myself, I just can't wrap my head around the idea that DSC or PIC are satisfying or "good" television. It's not an issue of it being "different" from BermanTrek, I'm fine with different, I'd like Trek to evolve, but not at the cost of becoming a sloppy mess. I'm of the opinion that a lot of the premium cable/streaming dramas modern Trek is trying to be like are pretty terrible, filled with bloat, badly paced and structured, and boring to boot. (An example: I dropped HBO's His Dark Materials adaptation after four episodes for those reasons; I'm not invested in the His Dark Materials franchise, I'm not a fan of it, I just wanted some good TV and didn't find it there.) So I'm not thrilled to see Star Trek trying to be more like them; I don't know what I'd like but I know it isn't more Berman style and it's also not what we have right now.

Really, if DSC and PIC weren't labelled Star Trek I'd have dropped them both a long time ago. I suspect both I and your aforementioned "usual suspects," instead of holding Trek to some unusual impossible standard, are actually cutting it way more slack then they would otherwise if it weren't Trek. I know I am; I keep hoping it'll transform into something I enjoy , or that somehow it will "click" for me.

 

It's OK if it is not enjoyable, Star Trek or not. Drop it if it isn't enjoyable.

But, I don't think I'm being more gentle with DSC or PIC because "Star Trek." Certainly I was not so forgiving with VOY or ENT or even TNG. I'm way more picky about my viewing habits now and haven't gotten in to a lot of "premier TV" because it doesn't appeal at all.

 

There are two problems here:

1. The Usual Suspects don't think DSC or PIC can do anything right. At best, they'll admit they did something right through clenched teeth.

2. If I gave it more slack "just because it's Star Trek", then answer me this: Why wasn't I defending VOY, ENT, or the Abrams Films the way I do DSC or PIC? I'll tell you why: I actually like DSC/PIC better than VOY/ENT/JJ. I've been here on-and-off for over 20 years. How I've reacted to each of these versions of Star Trek has been documented or, in the case of pruning, at least witnessed.

 

This.

 

I'm not saying you're doing that, I'm saying -- despite appearances -- the people highly critical of DSC/PIC are doing that, because otherwise they/I would have just stopped watching by now. It's only my willingness to give Trek a long, long leash that's keeping me watching. You read my point backwards.

 

Star Trek doesn't deserve a longer or shorter leash than any other property, in my opinion. I know that might be blasphemous to some, but just because I'm a fan of a franchise doesn't mean I keep watching because "Brand Name."

Yes, there are others who do so. But, for all my education, I struggle with the big old "Why?!" question. It simply isn't worth it to me to not enjoy something and think it will somehow get better. The list of shows I have given up on is longer than the ones I have actually completed.

 

This is how I would've reacted if it were just Discovery and not Star Trek: Discovery (i.e. Star Trek never existed). I wouldn't have sought the series out. But if someone who knows my tastes recommended it to me, I would've given it a look. The first two episodes would've impressed me enough to keep watching, then "Context Is For Kings" would've gotten me hooked. Just like what actually happened when I really did watch it. (Minus anyone recommending it to me. I watched it from the start.)

I think certain people -- not all -- do the exact opposite of give DSC slack just because it's Star Trek. I think they're harder on it because it's Star Trek. If it wasn't Star Trek, they'd have seen one episode, if that, then moved on. They wouldn't like the series but that's where it would stop. But because it's Star Trek, they feel obligated or compelled to watch and then will trash whatever DSC (or PIC) does that they think it shouldn't be doing. Something they wouldn't have cared about before is now an affront to all Star Trek they like or suddenly decided they now hate less. These aren't fans. They're anti-fans. They're not crazy for the show, they're crazy against the show.

But. If they were watching the show, I could see them hanging around and talking about it. Okay, fair enough. What I don't get is someone hanging around to trash a show they've stopped watching. Hanging around trashing a show they supposedly stopped watching two years ago. That's when I start thinking there's something else going on. Can someone do that? Sure. But just because they can doesn't mean it doesn't look more than a little bit off.

And of course there are people who are critical of the show but genuinely want to like it or genuinely want it to improve. And they're sticking around in hopes of that.

So there are different levels of people and not one size fits all. I look at it case-by-case.

 

Indeed and for those people I truly hope that they can find some good in it.

But, and I mean this sincerely, it would be helpful to celebrate the things enjoyed rather than lament what might have been.

 

I’m glad I’m not alone! It took me a while to be OK admitting that I not only like DSC but prefer it to Voyager, Enterprise and the Kelvin films. For a while online the only acceptable “party line” seemed to be to trash it with as much hatred and bile as one could muster. Like I saw some *seriously* angry posts from people! In the social media age proportional response is often lost — a thing is either the greatest thing in history or, more likely, the worst travesty ever to be inflicted upon mankind. I enjoy DSC, flaws and all, in a way I never liked the last couple of Berman spinoffs and I don’t care who knows. I don’t think my standards have slipped since the late 90’s. Maybe the opposite. All I know is that i look forward to weekly Trek in a way I haven’t since DS9 ended.

 

It had the most solid feel but many TOS episodes hold up despite the plywood look so storytelling isn't about how grand it looks... then again, good stories make expensive sets feel even more authentic, look ad a lot of DS9...

But the content I'd seen had been a mixed bag; a few good scenes and a few horrendous ones. Being a prequel and dipping immediately into the mirror universe and other Trek tropes, it's hard to claim this show wasn't aimed at existing fans.

Still, Mirror-Lorca being an infiltrator was better than all of DS9's excursions into Mirrorville...

And as much as Burnham's got the well-acted line of “Violence brought respect, and respect brought peace”, that line is debatable in terms of when in Vulcan lore it was used... and the line is generally reserved for sci-fi as spoken by the evil dictator trope anyway. Maybe Burnham is from Mirrorville? Seems too straightforward a scene... in a show that's otherwise as remarkably straightforward as a hammer... (Most shows do have their moments of that, showing less evolution in scripting... just more runarounds and faster pacing.)

 

Actually, if you used any logic, you'd see my ratings actually completely disprove your inaccurate statement..

RAMA

 

Yes, it's my opinion, never claimed otherwise. In fact, the title has a question mark, since anyone contribute their opinion.

It's not only watchable in my book, I've rewatched it several times, which was a worry of mine...repeat viewing with a serialized story. I needn't have worried.

I loved the Mirror universe angle, it was planned from the beginning as an integral part to the season. We got a chance at some political commentary and we got a few really good, franchise "best of" moments. I would agree, that if I were writing the episodes, I'd have only used 3 mirror universe episodes, because the sole weak point of the entire first season was the finale, and yes it should have included more Klingons for the wrap-up.

The classic episodes from Discovery season 1 include:
1. Context is for Kings: An episode I appreciate even more now than then, it's unsettling, and really underscores the new flavor of this new series. Throw in the ending, where Lorca topples Burnham's preconceptions in a wonderfully executed visual sequence, we have a masterful classic.
2. Into the Forest, I Go: After two somewhat ok episodes, the mid-season finale was a revelation: a tightly plotted cliffhanger with a great mix of character drama and action.
3. Despite Yourself: A Mirror Universe episode that finally is better than the original TOS episode. It took 52 years! Fantastic in every way.

Picard: I admin several of the largest contemporary Trek groups on FB, and frankly your opinion on the "consensus" is not even close to what I've experienced. So no.

Well, we all know Dennis has certain issues about not being invited to work on new Trek, so his opinions aren't really important. Suffice it to say I don't think anyone takes them seriously.

Again, Season 1 DSC for it's "terrible writing" scored both a Hugo and Peabody nom and has an extremely capable writing team. Fan ratings I've seen in non-compromised ratings sources put the season quite high on the scale. So to me the evidence suggests that your opinion is not the prevailing one.

RAMA

 

WHY would anyone disagree with me? I'm very sensible.

So the very first "offical" comment from anyone was Chabon, who said 4 ship types. This was changed to 1 ship type with variations. I've counted 3 variations and posted the evidence. What's the problem here? None of course.

Yes, I liked the fact we actually saw a new ship type in the fleet, while DS9 used the same old designs. You can also zoom in to the Picard fleet and see a good amount of detail, which you cannot do with the DS9 fleet. So yes, I find it to be better, especially since it was not at the center of an entire battle episode, but just seen for a few seconds. Again, I see no problems here? Stop making problems where there are none, tyvm.

OK, the default position of those online with ZERO argument usually winds up being what you just stated, ignoring both the more complex drama and storytelling style. Additionally, as I pointed out to someone barking up the wrong tree on FB, there was almost no "pew pew" in DSC season 2 for the first 9 episodes, and season 1 of DSC had less firepower than equivalent war episodes of DS9. So much for that spurious argument.