I'm not sure that's true.
I liked DSC, and agree the 4th season is the best.
Then again, I thought season 2 was awesome, and no one agrees with me on that, so...
Is it time to put Star Trek to rest?
- Thread starter Dar70
- Start date
I'm not sure that's true.
I liked DSC, and agree the 4th season is the best.
Then again, I thought season 2 was awesome, and no one agrees with me on that, so...
I agree with you. Season 2 made me fall in love with DSCI'm not sure that's true.
I liked DSC, and agree the 4th season is the best.
Then again, I thought season 2 was awesome, and no one agrees with me on that, so...
Season 2 was fantastic - they learned all the right lessons from the backlash to season 1 - up to the point where they thought "oh, now we have to REALLY address the backlash" and completely fucked their new series up by throwing the whole baby out with the bathwater, and do that stupid timejump.I'm not sure that's true.
I liked DSC, and agree the 4th season is the best.
Then again, I thought season 2 was awesome, and no one agrees with me on that, so...
Like how loud do you want to scream that you don't believe in your own series' premise? Imagine they brought VOY back to Earth in the 2nd season, but when still wanted to continue with the same cast & crew going on weekly adventures...
IMO that's probably the "original sin" of the entire Kurtzman 'verse. Retooling is one thing. But why should I invest passion into a project where I see even the owners don't believe in and are willing to sacrifice literally anything to appease critics?
I Liked season 4 the best as well. It was the only season that really stuck the landing for me. (I haven't seen S5 (yet?.)) I would always be really exited in the beginning of the season and not like how they took the story, but would always be exited for the next season cause "well they wrapped this up and I like Michael and Saru so maybe next season will be better." I didn't know that core dis fans don't tend to like it. why is that?
Because it's a bit slow and boring during the middle, and many of the original cast (Saru, Tilly, Stamets) get put on the back burner, Georgiou wasn't there so all, and the storyline for the then new Booker & Michael didn't come across so well with Booker's "betrayal"... Also there's a distinct lack of action - there's no clear badguys.
Again, YMMV & opinions stray far (again it's my favourite) - but these are some of the reasons why this season is a somewhat divisive one if you liked the show for any of the reasons listed above.
I've never seen season four, is it a big step up from the previous three? I bailed in early S3, I think, it was just boring to the point of being near-unwatchable.
FWIW I thought the first half of season two was okay (albeit chiefly in a "wow, it's not as bad as the first!" way) but the entire last half with Control and such was awful, not sure if that's an indicator on whether or not it's worth me watching S4.
FWIW I thought the first half of season two was okay (albeit chiefly in a "wow, it's not as bad as the first!" way) but the entire last half with Control and such was awful, not sure if that's an indicator on whether or not it's worth me watching S4.
I didn't like control either and I liked it. It's far from perfect but it had a lot of good episodes. It's only like 10 episodes. I wouldn't say its very different from the rest of the show, at least season 3, just better.
Season 4 is my favorite and I like Season 1, less warm on 2, and very much enjoy 3 and 5, but 4 is tops in my book.
Correct, the new story would create a new canon. What I want to really avoid is the absolutely ridiculous "When will (fill in the blank) appear?" questions by fans. With Discovery Season 3, 4 and 5 good grief did it become painful. "We need to see the Klingons! Where is the Dominion!?" etc.
That's when canon becomes so annoying to me is the attitude that things need to repeat or reappear. I noted this also within the Star Trek films which seemed to have the recurring theme of Captain Kirk and crew, ENTERPRISE, Klingons and Unknown Alien as their main repeating elements.
With a franchise that says we are seeking strange new worlds, new life and new civilizations, we seem to focus on the fucking Klingons way too much. So, my interest in a reboot is to do three things: one, set a map and were things are actually to be and how far apart they are, and where they've been before. Two, set established rules of the warp drive, transporter, and weapons and not plot driven. Three, a basic timeline of events that led to Star Trek, with a date for the Eugenics Wars/World War 3, the date of First Contact and that growth.
Lay your foundation and build up on it, with different alien ideas.
It is.... fine. While watching it, it is not very different from the other DISc seasons, warts and all. The biggest difference is really that the season long arc doesn't fall apart in the end.
It's nothing revolutionary, but a solid sci-fi story, that's told from start to finish, with a few lengths in between.
a reboot, frankly, is a ridiculous idea. While the obsession with referencing canon both Wars & Trek too often fall into is annoyingly self important, this anti-canon reverse attitude i see only and from some creatives is also annoying. It's not either/or. nuance exists
They can't seem to find the nuance, and the poor intolerance of ambiguity lately doesn't bode well for navigating nuance.
I have to disagree here, even if I'm not to happy with what Star trek has been in recent years.I am beginning to think the franchise has nothing left to really offer. Well for me at least. Out of all the live action stuff over the last 7 or 8 years. Most of it has been pretty bland/bad to me. With maybe a season and a half of Disco, 1 season of SNW and 1 season of Picard. That I enjoyed to varying degrees.
Everything else I have not really enjoyed. Lower decks was just too inane for me. Only watched one ep of prodigy and they took it off streaming.
Lots of missteps imo the last 8 years. But it just seems like the franchise has run out of steam. I constantly find myself watching the older stuff or finding new scifi fantasy shows that offer something a bit different and unique. Or just plain watching more non scifi stuff now.
But after almost 50 years of some type of Trek in production almost every year (except maybe between Enterprise and the 2009 film) it's gotten pretty stale to me. There are almost 1000 episodes of Trek not to mention like 14 movies.
Many its just my age. Idk.....
But getting old doesn't explain why I love Star Wars Andor...
Star Trek should definitely not be put to rest. But it needs a re-vitalization.
Unfortunately Star Trek is currently like a ship without a captain. There are a lot of people running around and doing things but there's nothing which keeps it together, no clear direction or good ideas.
Star Trek might become like Star Wars with a lot of different spin-offs which no one relly cares about, everybody remember the six original movies.
What Star trek should need right now is a new good series!
A series like TNG, DS9 and VOY which would have great, likeable characters played by great actors and great interesting stories with an optimistic view, maybe in the 24th century about 10-15 years after VOY with continuity which could sort out some "loose ends" from those prevous series and also come up with new interesting scenarios.
A series which could bring back older fans and also attract newer fans as well.
Star trek is such a great concept and it's well-known all over the world. it's too good to be wasted.
...speak for yourself?
Star Trek and Star Wars are actually pretty similar in how they've got a lot of different series going off in different directions, jumping all over the timeline, and it's somehow the cartoons that have been the most true in spirit to the original stories.
Though I think Star Wars has been more successful with filling out the years in between and building a real history, while Star Trek has somehow done a better job of establishing a future setting. Star Wars didn't raise the bar too high there.
Though I think Star Wars has been more successful with filling out the years in between and building a real history, while Star Trek has somehow done a better job of establishing a future setting. Star Wars didn't raise the bar too high there.
I can agree on that. Personally I find the Trek Universe a lot more complex and together than the Star Wars Universe.
Star Trek has a Captain, it's Alex Kurtzman.
You just don't like him.
You're entitled to your opinion.
But it isn't Captain-less.
That's a load of garbage. I chat more about Clone Wars and Mandalorian series than the original trilogy or the prequel trilogy. The Clone Wars has a substantial following among Star Wars fans.
I personally do not like the Clone Wars and haven't for years but doesn't change what I see.
He's sort of a Ron Tracey style captain.
Ha! To be fair to Tracey, though, he only beamed down to a planet that had nearly destroyed itself, not destroyed the planet himself.
Seriously, though, I’ve been keeping an eye on people’s responses to Academy elsewhere (with thoughts towards potentially catching up once the whole season’s out) and apparently Kronos is blown up or burned away now, too? I guess not that many planets have been destroyed, but they’re big ones—Romulus, Vulcan, Mars, feel like I’m missing one or two—and seeing that they’d used to that narrative device again kind of had me thinking of when they pulled stuff like “hull plating at 60%” or whatever early in Enterprise: “Haven’t I seen this done before, do we have to go through this again?” There’s a difference—a ton of little repeated storytelling clichés in Enterprise versus a few big repeated storytelling clichés in contemporary Trek—but it’s not necessarily like the latter’s any improvement on the former.
Similar threads
