Why the hate for Disco?

Yeah if I had to rate DIS against the other series I would put it equal to VOY, below TNG, DS9 and PIC, above ENT.

 

DSC is mainly about Burnham, not all about Burnham. A slight but distinct difference.

I think DSC is closer to TOS than DS9 too, especially in that they expect you to connect with the characters fast, and having to figure out how to think outside the box, but I think DS9 and DSC have more in common than Niners realize.

 

I don’t think Disco is like TOS at all. I hoped it would be, but it isn’t.

 

DSC is an interesting combination of DS9 and TOS, with the serialized storytelling and TOS which had a bit more of focus on Kirk and Spock, than others.

 

I don't really see a level of writing that can compare it favorably to DS9 or TOS in any capacity.

It's all in the eye of the beholder - that's why these discussions are ultimately pointless. What is interesting for one, is trash to another.To me DSC (and the rest of the Secret Hideout/Bad Robot produced stuff) is the latter, but i do not begrudge other fans what they like nor attempt to make them see it my way. Do I hope that things will change to appeal to my tastes? Of course. Until then I have reruns of 5 shows (and plenty of other well written sci-fi tv) to hold me over.

 

Why? Isn't one TOS enough?

 

It was never meant to be. Strange New Worlds, on the other hand, is.

 

Let's hope it will be. So far I have little reason to worry.

 

Kirk should be an ensign around that time, maybe we'll see a short appearance.

 

Lieutenant and already a survivor of the Tycho IV tragedy as a member of the crew of the U.S.S. Farragut.

 

That would be the honey-smelling cloud, wouldn't it?

 

Yep. From "Obsession(TOS)."

 

It's not a matter of writing. It's matter of approach.

As to the rest of your point it's a matter of preference. No Star Trek compares to another. There is a not a strong continuity of writers from TOS to TNG to DS9 to VOY all the way to DSC and Picard and LD. Each show is written based upon those writers, their vision and their desired story. That's why I find comparison a rather fruitless endeavor-TOS will be nothing like DSC in terms of production values, story approach, and writing style. When I say it is closer to TOS and DS9 it is because it has a serialized approach with a more action/adventure feel. DSC is still its own thing, and doesn't compare. Nothing does.

Nope. Nor is one TWOK.

More's the pity.

Hopefully not.

 

IMHO the core element of DS9 as a show that set it apart among Trek shows was it was a character-focused ensemble show. By late in the series, you had entire episodes focused on characters who didn't have main billing (like It's Only A Paper Moon, which was a Nog/Vic Fontaine outing).

In contrast, Discovery is pretty relentlessly focused on Michael, though it does come up for air occasionally. You can perhaps argue Kirk was an overwhelming presence in TOS as well, but he was quite often subject rather than object - he was the one the story was happening to, but the story wasn't about him. Also, the biggest let-down for me regarding the show was I was expecting character-based writing (what with the deep focus on Michael) but instead the show has continually decided to focus on plot-based writing.

 

Good.

Though Saru, Stamets and Culber, as well as Pike and Georgiou all get their time to shine. That's why it reminds me of TOS. It isn't an ensemble piece like DS9. You have different characters who come in an out, but the core remains, with Kirk and Michael, respectively. I like ensemble shows but Discovery was never an ensemble show.

 

No, there should be more TOS out there.

 

Impossible.

 

I'm not saying it could be done today, it should have been done back in the day.

 

How about a Kelvin timeline TOS?

 

Maybe. And we might not have gotten anything past it.