Enterprise is a better show than Discovery

[GulBahana]

Your tastes are your tastes, but please don't make assumptions about the rest of us. I'm not even a fan of the Kelvin Films. I tolerate them.

I'm not gonna deny the reason why I like season 3 of Picard because I started as a TNG fan. What you start with, and the age you were at the time, is a factor in entertainment tastes. I'm not gonna puff my chest out and pretend I'm above it. I like some Discovery episodes here and there, but I like Strange New Worlds, and Enterprise, better.

 

[Soong-type Android]

If they had approached Enterprise the way they approached Discovery, i.e. take risks, go for broke, upend expectations, it may have been *even less* popular, but it could have been a great show.

I think Enterprise had a lot of studio interference, down to the design of the ship with a saucer because they wanted a traditional looking Star Trek ship and including transporters, phasers, tricorders and other technology viewers are familiar with as well as the "temporal cold war" concept. They never really took advantage of what the 22nd century setting had to offer.

 

[Tuskin38]

I think Enterprise had a lot of studio interference, down to the design of the ship with a saucer because they wanted a traditional looking Star Trek ship

Allegedly the higher ups wanted them to use the Akira design with zero changes.

Also boy bands on the Enterprise, and familiar technology (I.e. the transporter) was not allowed to malfunction and kill someone.

 

[gvn2fly]

That's interesting, because the complaints about the fourth season were that it was too slow and people spent too much time talking about their feelings. Doesn't exactly sound like "over the top" pace and action to me.

From my observations, I a lot of people could never get over the fact that it doesn't "look" like Star Trek. People could not move past the different aesthetic and design choices that did not always appear like they came from the Star Trek franchise. I have read many posts during the years of people even saying they liked Discovery as a show but they didn't like it because it didn't "feel" like Star Trek. But many of these people likely like Picard season 3 because it "feels" like a return to Star Trek (same characters, similar set design as legacy Trek - but when you take a look at the plot it still has a lot of action in the plot and a season wide plot about a threat to the Federation like Discovery has had multiple times and that people have complained about when it comes to Discovery. Suddenly a season wide threat to the federation plot is ok when it comes to Picard)

 

[fireproof78]

From my observations, I a lot of people could never get over the fact that it doesn't "look" like Star Trek

Indeed. The aesthetic is most important.

 

[Lord Garth]

From my observations, I a lot of people could never get over the fact that it doesn't "look" like Star Trek. People could not move past the different aesthetic and design choices that did not always appear like they came from the Star Trek franchise. I have read many posts during the years of people even saying they liked Discovery as a show but they didn't like it because it didn't "feel" like Star Trek. But many of these people likely like Picard season 3 because it "feels" like a return to Star Trek (same characters, similar set design as legacy Trek - but when you take a look at the plot it still has a lot of action in the plot and a season wide plot about a threat to the Federation like Discovery has had multiple times and that people have complained about when it comes to Discovery. Suddenly a season wide threat to the federation plot is ok when it comes to Picard)

Oh, I'm holding the sides of my face in the other forum.

Funny thing is, I like PIC Season 3 (a little bit) better myself. Just not for the reasons they do. I like that PIC can tap into 21 seasons of Star Trek in a way that Disco can't. That makes the two series different enough for me so that they don't feel redundant.

 

[Sci]

Started in the summer of 1995 when I got into both TOS and TNG through reruns on WUAB out of Cleveland. That fall, DS9 Season four and VOY Season Two started. I've been watching Star Trek ever since. I absolutely don't find DIS "over the top" and consider it a worthy successor.

 

[gvn2fly]

Indeed. The aesthetic is most important.

I do think they went too far in changing things for the early season of Discovery. But I was mostly there for the stories, and I found most of them entertaining. At that time I also didn't think we would ever get anything that resembled the Berman aesthetic again so I could either enjoy the show for what it was (which I mostly did) or not get over things looking different. There are people out there who will *never* be able to get over new Trek not being a 90s style syndicated TV show anymore.

 

[JamesRye]

I'd agree with the OP, but mainly because Discovery chucks the baby out with the bath water. It reimagines too much and is far too fantastical for my tastes. Magic mushrooms, time crystals and the Red Angel suit are just a few things, which don't require me to suspend disbelief (as the transporter or warp engines do) - but which fall into the realms of fantastical nonsense. Tell me it's not Prime timeline and I would have a better time with it. At least season 1 had a consistent tone, DSC season 2 was a mess, Season 3 was an extended TNG two parter and so help me, I couldn't make it through Season 4 - so can't even comment on that.

The acting in Discovery I would say is better. Scot Bakula brought none of the warmth and charisma that he exuded as Sam Beckett and the less said about the dreadful supporting cast the better. The exceptions would be the character of Trip Tucker and Jolene Blalock - who was over-sexualised. Enterprise certainly had those cringey decontamination scenes that have not aged well.

 

[Tuskin38]

Magic mushrooms

They’re no more magic than dilithium crystals are. Or space borne organisms, or species being able to cross breed with almost no medical intervention.

The mushrooms aren’t magic. They’re alien, they’re connected to each other via subspace ‘roots’, and that’s what the spore drive uses to travel, those roots. It’s just another layer of subspace. It’s explained in the series. It’s no different than transwarp, or slipstream or the Vasudwaur under space.

 

[JamesRye]

They’re no more magic than dilithium crystals are. Or space borne organisms, or species being able to cross breed with almost no medical intervention.

The mushrooms aren’t magic. They’re alien, they’re connected to each other via subspace ‘roots’, and that’s what the spore drive uses to travel, those roots. It’s just another layer of subspace. It’s explained in the series. It’s no different than transwarp, or slipstream or the Vasudwaur under space.

Yeah, there's been a ton of dodgy science in Star Trek. I just find the spore drive to be completely preposterous as a concept (but that's just me). I also struggle with the red angel suit. Does this really seem like something that could have been created even in the 24th Century? And it's powered by a time crystal, and it can provide enough oxygen to the occupant and you can fly through space and atmosphere in it? If this were a brand new sci-fi show in its own universe, there’d be nothing to complain about. But can’t claim something is part of an established universe without annoying the fans unless you are going to play within the established concept of that universe. Something that someone has finally realised as we see Picard Season 3 trying to right the ship and being lauded by a lot of people for it!

The episode that I hate the most in all of Star Trek is Enterprise's 'Dear Doctor', which is fundamentally flawed and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of Evolution. Really, truly awful, Evolution is not a game where you 'level up'. Threshold is just so laughably terrible that I give it a pass!

The Spore Drive as a one off 'high concept' would be acceptable to me. But basing so much of the series around it, really (for me anyway) stretched plausibility to breaking point. How Culber was brought back to life made even less sense. There's a tiny bit of science included from the real Paul Stamets, but its a huge stretch to go from a mycelium network stretching 4sqkm on earth to a universe spanning network. Then there's the nonsense with the Tardigrade, which is nonsense. Tardigrades are not 'gene hungry' and cannot incorporate DNA from other species. This idea was taken from a 2015 paper that was instantly debunked:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/steven...akes-massive-science-blunder/?sh=7c0f3a471b37

 

[fireproof78]

Does this really seem like something that could have been created even in the 24th Century?

Yes, because time travel is something utilized by multiple cultures across multiple ways. Why is a time crystal a bridge too far, while something like the Guardian of Forever, the Sarepidion gateway, or other such devices outside the realm of possibility?

I don't say this to be confrontational, since I know suspension of disbelief is a fine line for everyone.

Something that someone has finally realised as we see Picard Season 3 trying to right the ship and being lauded by a lot of people for it!

Except they're not. They are just using the trappings but telling a similar style story as Season 1. The "right the ship" is more "we're rocking to port now instead of starboard."

 

[Lord Garth]

Shoot it in '90s style, set it immediately after TNG/DS9/VOY, come up with technobabble explanations for even the wonkiest stuff (people are forgetting how bad the technobabble got during late-TNG and VOY and what it was used to justify), make the cast 100% straight, and make Burnham either black or a woman but not both, have stories not go on for anything more than a two-or-three-parter, and then watch how their opinions of DSC would change. Most important: Rhys has to have an episode devoted to himself.

 

[gvn2fly]

Shoot it in '90s style, set it immediately after TNG/DS9/VOY, come up with technobabble explanations for even the wonkiest stuff (people are forgetting how bad the technobabble got during late-TNG and VOY and what it was used to justify), make the cast 100% straight, and make Burnham either black or a woman but not both, have stories not go on for anything more than a two-or-three-parter, and then watch how their opinions of DSC would change. Most important: Rhys has to have an episode devoted to himself.

They would just find other things to complain about, probably like "why is the person who is not even a main character getting an episode. We don't need to know everything about the bridge crew we want to see more of the main characters" LOL

 

[Noname Given]

From my observations, I a lot of people could never get over the fact that it doesn't "look" like Star Trek. People could not move past the different aesthetic and design choices that did not always appear like they came from the Star Trek franchise. I have read many posts during the years of people even saying they liked Discovery as a show but they didn't like it because it didn't "feel" like Star Trek. But many of these people likely like Picard season 3 because it "feels" like a return to Star Trek (same characters, similar set design as legacy Trek - but when you take a look at the plot it still has a lot of action in the plot and a season wide plot about a threat to the Federation like Discovery has had multiple times and that people have complained about when it comes to Discovery. Suddenly a season wide threat to the federation plot is ok when it comes to Picard)

And now the TNG/ Berman era fans know exactly how many TOS fans felt at the beginning of TNG in 1987. It didn't look or feel like the Star Trek we had from 1966-69.
^^^
But it was what was going to be Star Trek going forward into the late '80s and '90s. So as the fan you could either try and find something to like in it and accept it for what it was, or go back to watching TOS reruns and pining for the [then)old days of Star Trek.

 

[SG-17]

I just hate the Klingon designs so much. At least the Berman Era/Picard designs aren't that far off from the TOS Movie designs.

Everything else visually different is fine with me.

 

[fireproof78]

And now the TNG/ Berman era fans know exactly how many TOS fans felt at the beginning of TNG in 1987. It didn't look or feel like the Star Trek we had from 1966-69.
^^^
But it was what was going to be Star Trek going forward into the late '80s and '90s. So as the fan you could either try and find something to like in it and accept it for what it was, or go back to watching TOS reruns and pining for the [then)old days of Star Trek.

This right here. I get it, that the Berman era had it's run but it's not the only way to do Star Trek. I can either gripe to my partner that her cooking isn't like mom's or I can find something to enjoy.

These are big damn interstellar empires. Why does everything have to look the same?

 

[Lord Garth]

My takeaway from them is basically: "I'd like Discovery better if it was everything it's not!"

And my answer to them is basically: After 55 episodes, and other options, if you're still watching, that's on you.

 

[Ragitsu]

Uglami.

 

[Tuskin38]

Uglami.

Why are you saying the Russian word for corners again?