I really don't see much "fanwank" in the show... and as another poster indicated, there's a balancing act there; the alternative is to do as the first couple seasons of TNG did and pretend there was no previous Trek continuity to tie in with. DSC's creators obviously ruled that out from the start, so it makes sense to make references to existing aspects of the fictional universe. What bits in particular have seemed gratuitous or annoying to you?
I think you're onto something here. It was indeed bound to be a tricky balancing act for DSC's creators — trying to come across as "authentic" Star Trek while also offering something new and different. Thinking about it in terms of content vs. style, as your comment does, makes me think that in a lot of ways they've chosen exactly the wrong trade-offs.
What I would have liked to see (and I think it would have worked for audiences, but others can speak for themselves!) was something much closer to previous iterations of Trek in terms of style — something that evoked the on-screen look and feel and tone of TOS, in particular; something that would leave no doubt, the minute you saw it, that you're in the Star Trek universe, although of course with present-day production values — combined with a bolder sense of experimentation in terms of storytelling content.
(There are lots of officially licensed Trek novels out there, after all, where the authors are required by licensing rules to constrain themselves to the boundaries of canon, that nevertheless take creative chances to tell stories unlike anything we've ever seen on screen. That's the approach I'm talking about. Indeed, more than a few of them might have been worth adapting into a series.)
Instead, what DSC seems to have done — and I'm not sure who to blame here, the original showrunners and writers, or their replacements, or CBS execs, but regardless — is the exact opposite of that. They've changed a lot of the stylistic trappings... the makeup, the ship designs, the uniforms, the lighting, even trivial things like the Terran Empire logo, and also introduced elements that seem out-of-place like holographic comms, intra-ship transporters, bridge windows, etc.... so in a lot of ways the show just doesn't look or feel like Star Trek, to the extent that a lot of fans are still insisting it must be a reboot. But in terms of storytelling, they've actually stayed fairly formulaic... not necessarily Trek formula per se, at least in the sense that things are serialized rather than episodic, but certainly familiar television formulas and tropes, rather than anything really innovative and groundbreaking in terms of science-fictional plots and themes.
I see what you're trying to say here, but it's complicated by the fact that S4 really was the only good season of ENT, the one that broke away from the mold of recycled Berman-Braga storytelling.
Interesting. You're clearer here than BillJ upthread about what you see as the fan service aspects... but I'm not sure I agree. The Sarek connection, the use of Mudd, and other little character bits, all seem to me like perfectly fine building blocks. (Okay, I'd agree that going to the MIrror Universe could have waited.) These things contribute to, or at least don't interfere with, telling interesting stories. OTOH, the conflicting tech levels are indeed a good example of stylistic elements that do indeed clash with audience expectations for no good reason.
That I can certainly agree with. In a lot of ways they seem to be straining at gnats while swallowing camels.
Completely agreed there, too. I'm not a big Star Wars fan either, but I do have to give that franchise credit for very effectively (re)capturing the authentic look and feel of the originals in the new sequels (okay, Rogue One was technically a prequel), whatever one may think about the storytelling.
