It's complicated. Season 2 corrected some mistakes of S1, Pike was the biggest positive thing in S2, and I think people liked and anticipated that they will show Enterprise bridge. S2 had way less violence than S1, and CGI is much better. On the other side, writing is still pretty weak and while they did have a few great episodes, the rest of the episodes stand way lower than those good ones. For example, good ones are 6, 7, 8 and the rest is 2, 3, 4. Biggest problem is that writers don't know what they want to do with Discovery. There is very little of exploration, very little of space anomalys, very little of technical stuff about the ship. Those are the things that people liked in previous Treks.
Season 2 is all about anomalies. Red bursts: Anomalies. Red angel: anomaly. Unknown future metal squid: anomaly (it doesn't bob about with the grace and dignity of Nomad, but no matter). Giant Sphere thingy: Anomaly. And they explored their way to those things. When they do technical stuff aboard ship the cries of "too much technobabble" arise. As a DS9 fan, I can't say I craved exploring something new each week, though when it did happen, that was cool. And I'm not really sure how often trek been exploring. TOS an ENT explored more than most. TNG had a lot of visits to previously explored worlds, diplomatic missions, etc, for a ship supposedly on an extended voyage exploring the unknown. VOY should have been an exploration show but spent so much time dealing with known entities like Kazons, Ferengi, Insane Starfleet Captains, Klingons, and Borg that it never felt that way and was instead more TNG.
I disagree with Frakes. The beard hasn't grown yet. The real test will be Season 3 when Pike isn't around anymore. Season 2 was enriched by his presence and its ties to TOS. I completely disagree with him about Burnham/Sonequa. Easily the worst part of the series for me. Season 2 is better than Season 1 and has had some great moments. None of them reliant on Burnham. Discovery is comparable to TNG in that it had a terrible first season and a much improved second. Will it finally grow the beard in Season 3? Time will tell.
It'll be interesting to see how season three plays out if they strip off the TOS training wheels and move to the 28th century.
That's true, but most of those had been for the sake of underlying story. Because the story requires it later - here it is. It's not for the sake of exploration.
How many trek episodes have there been where the anomaly mcguffin was not for the sake of the underlying story?
Large majority of the previous episodes were stand alone episodes with introduction, main plot and resolution. In Discovery if it's anomaly, it won't be resolved in the episode. And if it does resolve it's connected to main character somehow. It's not just some random space anomaly.
Yeah that's a good way to put it. It's pretty clear that the trauma of losing her parents combined with growing up as an outsider in an alien and emotionally repressed culture has done quite a number on her. And that's a history that can be a bit hard to identify with at times, since she seems to fluctuate so often between coolly logical and super emotional. But honestly even if it's not always easy to get a solid read on her character, Sonequa's performance is always so strong that I still find her compelling as hell to watch anyway.
Honestly I've never been as bothered by that aspect. This isn't just some random, below decks officer we're talking about, but a high ranking bridge officer with a unique and infamous history that would naturally make her a key player in a lot of big events. And plus I like seeing that it wasn't just the various Captains of the Enterprise who played a huge and pivotal role in the history of the Federation, or who had a hand in saving the galaxy multiple times.
Actually, they appear to know what they want to do. It’s just that it’s not the same exact thing that older Trek did—something for which I am exceedingly grateful but which leaves others unsatisfied. C’est la vie.
If Frakes grows one like this, between seasons 2 and 3, I'm gonna be a little worried about his directing capabilities for 3rd season episodes:
Well I don't her being a junior officer. Stargate had this same issue between O'Neil and Hammond and lets not forget Sisko started off as a commander. She can still be a hero but I think you need at least one other character who is her equal importance. Kirk had Spock and Picard had Data. Lorca was kind of like that and I personally don't think Pike filled that role well because he deffered way to much to her and nothing he did really felt important until he saw his future which is strange because you would think he would more passionate about finding Spock like Burnham, and nobody else on the show has really had their role elevated either from where it begin. I think TIlly and Stammets could very much cary a bigger load. Maybe even Saru. What we get though is TIlly gets all the best lines in every episode and gets to be both everyman and comic relief. Stamets and Saru though felt vet absent during great chucks of the episode. If they are going to get a bigger role you can't bring in an new person to sort of take that second role on the show. I think the show that needs a story taking place off the ship that doesn't have Burnham around but is also a big part of the season. Perhaps they could have their own Dukat and Weyoum this season where you constantly cut over to what next seasons bad guys are doing. Tried it with the Klingons but those characters just weren't interesting. I was thinking Burnham could even be missing from the first 2 or 3 episodes so we really get to see these characters stand on their own and then when she shows up it becomes a twist to whatever season arc they will do. Jason
I agree with some of the critiques of Burnham's character - or lack thereof in any sort of well-defined manner. Though this season has increasingly made it clear that some of the traits which the first season treated like they might be positive traits (like her 'know it all" status and her shoot from the hip decision making style) are actually liabilities. Spock even calls her out on her shit from time to time. If only Pike actually did as well when she was being openly insubordinate. The problem this season though is Michael has no definable growth as a character. Yeah, her relationship with Spock has been salvaged over the last several episodes. But why exactly did that happen? Did she realize she was wrong about anything? Has she changed her approach with him? It sure doesn't seem so based upon what we see onscreen. Basically it reminds me of a lot of the back half of the first season, where the writers mistake "bad things happen to Michael" for depth of characterization.
One thing I have noticed about Burnham is her most interesting realtionships are not with any of the crew but her family. Not a huge fan of new Spock but when they are together they kind of work. I like the scenes between Sarek and Amanda and I really liked the episode when she meet her real mom. If they do go to the future it means no more Spock and family so they will need to replace that. I hope to see more of her mom. I wouldn't even mind her being a series regular. If new Spock proves one thing is when and if they create a new character they need one who is willing to cal her out when she is doing something shitty. Most of her realtionships with the crew is about shared trust and love and respect. Which is kind of boring but also a kind Starleet thing as well. She is kind of Vulcan like with her emotions so they could really use a Dr McCoy character. One thing I would like this show to do next season is start building some more internal conflict. More scenes between Stammets and Jet Reno. Those two need more screentime and also scenes together butting heads. Burnham could use a good foil but who also isn't treated as a bad guy. Jason
There is a problem with Riker's statement, that it isn't applicable at this point yet. Yes, I liked a lot season 2 vastly more than season 1, so I would tend to agree with him. But! Season 2 isn't finished yet. Who know what they are yet going to do? By all accounts, it looks like they'll have a finale that is equally as crammed and has to deal with as many loose plot threads as season 1's. For TNG, it was easier to say "it got better", because it was a collection of self-contained stories. If 10-15 of them were over, and vastly improved, it was easy to say "This season, as a whole, has grown the beard". DIS on the other hand is one, continuing story arc. Yes - the standalone episodes were IMO much better than before. But we don't know yet how the main arc is turning out, and that is, like, 80% of the show. If they competely drop the ball there - and they DO have the risk, with pushing to resolve everything in one single, finale episode, and a bunch of horrible theories about what is going to happen swirling around - I's be cautious. This friday we can say weather or not DIS "has grown the beard". Not earlier.
One other thing to consider is with the number of episodes TNG did per season compared to what this show is doing it means we are basically just in the early parts of TNG season 2 when comparing episode count. Of course their is always a mistake in comparing shows to each other in this kind of way. Some show are brilliant out the gate and by the time they get to season 3 they have nothing interesting left to do. I will say that by going to the future if they do it that it is a great idea in that after 2 seasons I feel like that is when you want to start making changes just to keep things fresh. I hope they even go further and destroy the ship and we get a new ship in season 3. Also they need to continue to add new characters to the mix each season. After season 3 I even think they will need to kill one of the core characters or make a huge change to them. Jason