So what?? Worf was basically "growling Klingon guy" at first.
Spoilers General Disco Chat Thread
- Thread starter Lord Garth
- Start date
The current era of shows have less than half the amount of episodes to have their characters shine than the previous eras of the franchise. Makes it a little bit harder to really care about them or immerse yourself in that universe.
Can't deny that. Its a shame because *I believe* there was potential here. Connor looks like he could pull his weight.
You might be confusing quantity with quality. If the writers are doing their jobs right, you should care in under an hour. In WNMHGB, you cared about Kirk, Mitchell and even Kelso. OTOH, they had twenty plus episodes to make me care about Yar. When she dies towards the end of season one of TNG, my reaction was “hey they killed a regular, that’s unusual.” By the time season two rolls around, it was “Tasha who?”
I still cry over Tomlinson's death.
I'm not confusing the two, because while I agree that you can care about characters in a single episode, the universe/world of a series needs some breathing room and time to be lived in. Plus, a lot of the characters like Gary Mitchell were lead guests of their episode, so they were going to get focus anyway. Even Kelso, continuing with your example, had multiple scenes that were well used and made you like him.
I do agree with you about 'if the writers do their jobs right', which clearly the DISCO writers weren't. Otherwise, as an example, I would have actually remembered there was another doctor in sickbay that was in 1/3 of the episodes of the entire series... a fact someone in this thread (or perhaps another, some of the discussion points are overlapping a lot) reminded me of their very existence when discussing if Culber was ever clearly established as the CMO. Considering how much I DO remember about shows I watch, that's quite telling about the quality of their writing.
You forgot but others didn't. Happens with a lot of characters. Especially if they're not "main."
Feeling lived in isn't a matter of quantity. A two hour film can feel lived in, while a decade long tv show can feel just as hollow in year ten as it did in year one.
You are FAR more likely to get more worldbuilding and a feeling of living in that world with a series running years than a two hour movie. Not saying it never happens because there ARE movies that can do this, but that's more the exception than the rule.
We each have our view on this, so I'm going to move on from the quantity/quality thing.
Going back more to the topic: bottom line... the DISCO writers were NOT good. They failed on multiple levels. Easily the worst written series in the franchise.
I might agree with you on PICARD season 2, the worst season of the franchise. (Though until that aired, DISCO season 2 was the worst. So, close call.)
Season 3 of PICARD... definitely disagree. Despite a few issues, it's FAR superior than any of DISCO's seasons. It's not even close.
Until SEC31 showed up, PIC3 was at the bottom of my list. It's pretty much all of DISCO's flaws with callbacks and the TNG cast added.
Last edited:
For all my critiques of DSC during all five seasons at least none of those years or story arcs matched PIC Season 2 for pure, eye-rolling dreck value.
I like Discovery and Picard. I know. Right? Pretty crazy.
I like them too. I've watched both series relatively recently for the first time. I binged watched them.
They're the same show.
It's why I like them!They're the same show.
yepIt's why I like them!
You enjoy different versions of Trek made by different writing teams? Madness
Similar threads
