Finally making my way through season 1 of Star Trek: Discovery. Just finished the 7th episode ("Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad"). Halfway through it's freshman year and I've got to say it is a mixed bag. Mostly good and definitely better than Star Trek: Enterprise right out of the gate. At this point I would even dare to say it has the potential to become my second favorite Trek series (behind Star Trek: The Original Series of course). Once again Star Trek does an outstanding job in casting. It shouldn't have been a surprise considering the only time they stumbled in this regard was with the aforementioned ST: Enterprise but recent history has worked hard to teach the wisdom in hoping for the best while preparing for the worst. Michelle Yeoh was terrific and it was a shame her character died, however, it was done purposefully and well. I like they went with a shrewd (ruthless?) captain in Lorca. Jason Isaacs is fantastic. As menacing as he is heroic. Reminds me of George C. Scott in "Patton." Saru (Doug Jones) is absolutely brilliant. Thoughtful and deliberate. His tendency to err on the side of caution is the most realistic and relatable. I believe the character of Saru out McCoy's Dr. McCoy in terms of his structural purpose within the series' dynamic. That is to make the point he is far less irritating and far more likeable than Leonard McCoy was at times in The Original Series while fulfilling the same dramatic need. Things may change as I witness the rest of season 1 play out, but a problem I have with series' lead Michael Burnham (Sonequa Martin-Green) is that so far it strikes me gimmicky. The whole Vulcan and Sarek bit strikes me as unnecessary. Sonequa is a great actress, but I don't see why it was necessity to have her so tied to Vulcan (especially Spock's father). Which brings me to a negative: their use of The Original Series as a crutch. I realize they were looking to hedge their bets and provide a bridge. I just feel they could have been smarter about it. A bit subtler as the unintended consequence is they are retconning the shine off of Spock, Sarek and TOS in general. Intra-ship beaming, for example, was problematic in TOS yet not so in Discovery. It was, in fact, a dramatic point in TOS (Day of the Dove?). Now, thanks to DISCO, within that episode it is retroactively neutered. I will say, in defense of their use of Sarek, they do introduce the possibility of an interesting insight in that Sarek did not get along with either Sybok or Spock because he felt they rebelled against the Vulcan way. Yet we see here (and in TOS and TNG) that Sarek himself was hardly a conventional Vulcan himself. His sons may have pushed boundaries more boldly and forcefully than he, however, that spark was absolutely from his side of the family tree. So if that is intentional then I like it. I am a big fan of Rainn Wilson. He is excellent as Harry Mudd, however, by making him so murderous they again have retconned the bloom off the rose that was Harcourt Fenton Mudd. Neither in Mudd's Women nor I, Mudd did Harry come off as a stone cold killer. His character would never have worked or been in anyway as endearing if they had. Surprisingly (to myself anyway) I like the Klingons and the War aspect of the series. I don't get how they had cloaking technology when , once again, TOS specifically stated the Klingons got it from the Romulans during the TOS years. Critical Reception (Source: Rotten Tomatoes via Wikipedia) Well, up to and including Episode 7, I agree with the chart. As the series starts out strong then indulges in some hokiness here and there. All in all, I should add, not only is it better than Enterprise, Discovery would be a greater, more rewarding, source for theatrical movies than Jar-Jar Abrams Kelvin Universe.